Has U.S. Interrogations Actually Saved Lives (part 2)

Last summer I asked:

It’s almost a year later, has any new evidence been unearthed? I am interested if the “pro-torture/enhanced interrogation” camp has ever produced anything concrete they would view as evidence to support the idea that it saves lives.

(Please note: I am not interested in hearing how difficult such evidence might be to get, I am not interested in a general debate on the morality of these techniques, or how they were used or prosecutions or anything like that. All I’m interested in is evidence of efficacy.)

The details aren’t out, but Cheney has claimed on the record that he has personal knowledge of such information.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/20/cheney-calls-release-memos-showing-results-interrogation-efforts/

Kind of beside the point if you ask me – it is still illegal/abhorrent if it works.

"George Tenet writes in his memoir, “At the Center of the Storm,” about the CIA interrogation of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:

"I believe none of these successes [in foiling terrorist plots] would have happened if we had had to treat KSM like a white-collar criminal – read him his Miranda rights and get him a lawyer…

“From our interrogation of KSM and other senior al Qaeda members . . . we learned many things – not just tactical information leading to the next capture. For example, more than 20 plots had been put in motion by al Qaeda against U.S. infrastructure targets, including communications nodes, nuclear power plants, dams, bridges and tunnels.”

(quotes are from an editorial in the Wall Street Journal )
Tenet may not be an unbiased source, of course. But I doubt if there will ever be any objectively verifiable evidence.

Thanks for the answers all. I don’t consider Tenet’s quotes relevant, as he doesn’t link the info to interrogation techniques (and I believe others have said that everything he spilled was from traditional techniques). As for Cheney’s - I’ll believe in his evidence when it’s presented.

Any others?