My questions were answered by Mike Ritz. He is a former military interrogator who teaches not only interrogation but how to resist torture.

1. I think people are sometimes confused about the terms interrogation and torture. Could you please describe in your own words what the interrogation is and what the torture is?

It's no surprise that people would be confused by the legal definition of torture when policies set forth under the Bush administration has interpreted the Geneva Conventions to suit what they mistakenly thought were advantageous leniencies in the definition of torture for the purpose of gathering human intelligence.

Interrogation is the art and science of extracting the most pertinent information in the shortest amount of time.

The now infamous Bybee Memo concludes that "an act to constitute torture as defined in Section 2340, it must inflict pain that is difficult to endure. Physical pain amounting to torture must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death. For purely mental pain or suffering to amount to torture under Section 2340, it must result in significant psychological harm of significant duration, e.g., lasting for months or even years. We conclude that the mental harm also must result from one of the predicate acts listed in the statute, namely: threats of imminent death; threats of infliction of the kind of pain that would amount to physical torture; infliction of such physical pain as a means of psychological torture; use of drugs or other procedures designed to deeply disrupt the senses, or fundamentally alter an individual's personality; or threatening to do any of these things to a third party."

I think torture is creating additional physical or psychological trauma which supports an environment of coercion. Captivity is a stressful experience based on the nature of what it is. It is psychologically damaging for prisoners and captors as well as counterproductive to the interrogation process to create an environment where prisoners are forced to fabricate intelligence in order to relieve their pain and suffering.

Establishing rapport has proven time and time again to reap better results in the short term and in the long term over the use of abusive tactics.

2. Do you think torture was use regularly at the Guantanamo Bay and/or in the secret prisons of CIA?

I do. I refer you to a book called, "The Torture Question" by Alfred McCoy for a general view of CIA practices.

3. What makes somebody an excellent interrogator?

People skills. The abilities to effectively communicate, read and manipulate body language, act, empathize. And above all else...the absolute recognition and confidence in the fact that every person...every single one...wants to be understood and tell his/her story, i.e. validate the actions they've taken and who they are. And the obvious, but often overlooked - The interrogator must ask questions effectively and thoroughly as well as speak and understand the source's language.

4. What is the most important element in the preparation before the interrogation of somebody? To have as much info about person as it is possible?

Preparation in interrogation takes many forms and is highly dependent on the individual cases and circumstances of the interrogation, but ideally, the interrogator should speak the language of the source (prisoner), should be able to anticipate the potential information the source possesses as well as his/her likely cooperation. The interrogator must be educated in the subjects that will likely be discussed and the interrogator should have the opportunity to see the source functioning in his/her environment outside of the interrogation room.

5. Is it possible to describe generally how to face interrogation successfully? What kind of person is most difficult to break?

One must recognize that everyone wants to be understood and tell his/her story and then focus rapport building around the source's motivations reading and using body language to gauge areas of stress for the subject and to manipulate the source's perspective. But that's only part of the answer...just as critical is the need for the interrogator to ask the right questions at the right time with thorough follow up and appropriate knowledge of the subject matter and the source's language. Sounds easy, doesn't it?

The most difficult source to "break" is the one who hasn't broken yet.

6. It is common situation in the movies. Somebody knows something for example about the bomb that will explode in one hour. They interrogate him with the use of physical force to win the info about the bomb. If it would be a real case and it is absolutely necessary to win the info what would you do?

I haven't been in that situation and I think those situations are incredibly rare. However, regardless of the law, I'd like to think that if I were in a situation where I was absolutely sure that my pressuring of an individual through force would save lives that I'd be willing to break the law, gather the information which would save those lives, and throw myself on the mercy of the court. Yet, I want to point out, that if I or anyone obtains information through the use of force, there is absolutely no way we can be sure the source has told us accurate information until we actually react to that information by taking action. I can't read a person's body language or accurate stress levels if I'm applying the stress -- the practice of physical techniques hinders my ability to read my source and makes it incredibly difficult and impossible in most cases to no what follow up questions to ask and/or to judge whether the source is being truthful or deceptive.