One stop interrogation & interviewing resource

[Jedburgh]

Sorry, Outlaw 7 - but at this point I still don't get anything substantive from your post other than "its all about me".

The reason that Strategic Debriefers often fail on the crossover is that they were never taught the approaches...

Untrue. I am talking about 96C/97E/35M - who were all originally trained in interrogation, but then spent time away from the field working strat debrief instead. By the time they returned to the tac side, they had forgotten all the skills for operating in the different context and were unable to relearn effectively at the unit. And there is no "vice-versa", for at least the past three decades any 96C/97E/35M about to work the strat debrief mission has to attend the course first.

....plead with Army interrogators to get onboard with rapport/cultural use in their interrogations. The use of culture has been the core center of Strategic Debriefing for literally years.

Even admitting the faults that do exist with interrogation training at the basic level, rapport and culture have always been a central feature of the course. Even in the good ol' Cold War days, students were taught and encouraged to use such aspects to exploit PWs who were members of ethnic minorities within the Soviet Union. It is much more prominent in current training.

....a few Army interrogators assigned to the JROC-B in 1973 and into the 80s, but due to their lack of fluency in their language skill sets even coming straight out of DLI they never performed Strategic Debriefing and were put into the Collection Management side of the house.

That is a load of crap. Sure, that may apply to some, but I personally knew and worked with some outstanding and very fluent non-native speakers of East-Bloc languages who extensively worked the strat debrief mission during the time period you speak of.

....way to many HUMINT failures from too many poorly trained interrogators.

True. The quality of training and lack of selection has been extensively discussed on this board. Try looking for it and join in the discussion substantively.

I am attempting to show a methodology that both works, addresses the concerns voiced by the Intelligence Board's paper on educing infomation and definitely side steps the need for enhanced techniques.

Thus far you haven't done any of that. All you've done to this point is tout your personal position with several questionable claims. Try talking less about yourself and more about methodology and context.

[Ken White]

Outlaw7:

1. The actual ASI for Strategic Debriefing did not come into the Army system until the course was developed out of major input from JROC-B. There was defintely no ASI in the 70s until the course was developed.

That may be but strategic debriefing has been around for many years and has been conducted by civilians, contractors, 96Cs, 11F3s, 11F4Ss, MPs and others before that time -- not least on all the DPs post 1945. Oh, and all the Lodge Act enlistees...

I am attempting to show a methodology that both works, addresses the concerns voiced by the Intelligence Board's paper on educing infomation and definitely side steps the need for enhanced techniques.

That may also be true and you may have the best thing since Bourbon was developed but you are not making a good case for it...

You also didn't address why NTC stopped you from further training...

jmm99:

Ken because he will never grow up

Yea, verily. Hit 18 long ago, had fun, stopped there.

Jedburgh:

Sure, that may apply to some, but I personally knew and worked with some outstanding and very fluent non-native speakers of East-Bloc languages who extensively worked the strat debrief mission during the time period you speak of.

I too know a few who were Lodge Act enlistees and later in SF and that was in the very early 60s, so their debriefing service had to be in the 50s. One large, smart Lithuanian ex Wehrmacht Spieß who could con you out of your first born comes to mind...