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.