KiriPedia KiriPedia The Free Encyclopedia of John Kiriakou's World

Ticking time bomb scenario

The hypothetical case — an imminent attack only the captured terrorist's confession can prevent — used to justify the CIA's post-9/11 enhanced interrogation program; characterized by John Kiriakou as fictional and not corresponding to any real-world case.

The ticking time bomb scenario is the standard hypothetical case advanced in defense of coercive interrogation methods, including the Central Intelligence Agency’s post-September 11 enhanced interrogation techniques. John Kiriakou characterizes the scenario as a fictional construct that “is only in the movies — it’s never happened in real life. It just doesn’t.”[1][2]

The scenario as posed

In the canonical version of the hypothetical, the United States has just captured an enemy combatant — for example Abu Zubaydah — and has reason to believe an attack of catastrophic magnitude is imminent (in the post-9/11 framing, Osama bin Laden’s public statement that he was planning “something that would dwarf 9/11”). The detainee refuses to cooperate. The interrogator is presented with a forced choice:

What do you do? Do you waterboard him? Do you sleep-deprive him? Do you put him in a cold cell? Do you beat him? Do you put cockroaches on him? Do you put hummus up his ass? What do you do?[2]

Kiriakou’s three-part refutation

Kiriakou rejects the scenario as a justification on three independent grounds:

  1. It is illegal. “First of all, all of it’s illegal.”[2]
  2. There is no real ticking time bomb. “There really is no such thing as the ticking time bomb. That’s only in the movies. It’s never happened in real life. It just doesn’t.”[2]
  3. Torture does not produce timely intelligence. “When you’re torturing somebody, they give you everything they think you want to hear just to get you to stop torturing them. And so then it’s going to take six months for the analyst to sort through it to figure out what’s true and what’s bullshit. And by then the bomb’s gone off anyway.”[3]

Operational consequences in the real CIA program

Statements obtained from Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri are inadmissible at trial because the CIA tortured the statements out of them. The result, Kiriakou argues, is that the United States “continue[s] to hold them illegally without charge, or we let him go. The bottom line here is the CIA royally fucked this up.”[4][5]

See also

References

  1. Dalton Fischer Podcast, 2023-11-2607:19 on YouTube · Transcript
  2. Dalton Fischer Podcast, 2023-11-2607:52 on YouTube · Transcript
  3. Dalton Fischer Podcast, 2023-11-2608:23 on YouTube · Transcript
  4. Dalton Fischer Podcast, 2023-11-2608:54 on YouTube · Transcript
  5. Dalton Fischer Podcast, 2023-11-2609:28 on YouTube · Transcript