Torture being debated

[Karlin]

The use of torture is finally being debated openly.

US Ambassador to Venezueala Lino Gutiérrez said yesterday that torture should be a matter of discussion in democratic societies, just as a debate is raging back in his country[USA] over a proposal to allow the government to exempt covert agents outside the Defence Department from a ban on torture.

link below

First, they had to admit that there is times for it.
EG - when one bomber in a group is obviously on his way to do damage and therefore guilty, they can torture him to get info about the other bombers' targets that will save lives.

That was the theme of Commander in Chief last night [yes, I watch telee]. THey actually DID it too. They tortured a bomber until he gave the others up.

This, despite Madame President saying that "it is usually false information when gotten under torture", and that
"if we do it to them, they will do it to our citizens"

Those two underlying ideas behind "its not worth it" for torture have been discarded by the USA army . Its worth it, apparently - getting poor info that endangers Americans thru torture. They do it as much as any nation.

Not to me. That story last night was obviously cooked up to get Americans onside with Bush if torture charges against him are laid.The TV bomber-guy told the truth, but in reality they don't. There is not going to be less torture if he tells the truth, and he dies anyway.

Torture is one of the greatest sins any man can committ, whether ordered to or not.
I would be tortured before I would torture.

It is not justifiyable to me, but there is a debate about "sometimes it might be okay"

http://www.buenosairesherald.com/the_world/note.jsp?idContent=219559

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Rather than starting another torture thread.......will tuck this in here. (hope you don't mind)

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10786.htm


goes all the way to the top.


(btw: what is there to debate???)

 

[Reverend Blair]

btw: what is there to debate???

There really is nothing to debate. People under torture will say anything to get the torture to stop. They will lie, even if they incriminate themselves.

More to the point though, the US is signatory to both the Geneva Conventions and the International Convention Against Torture. If they torture people, then they have broken international law and should stand trial for their crimes.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

btw: what is there to debate???

There really is nothing to debate. People under torture will say anything to get the torture to stop. They will lie, even if they incriminate themselves.

More to the point though, the US is signatory to both the Geneva Conventions and the International Convention Against Torture. If they torture people, then they have broken international law and should stand trial for their crimes.

seems that we have seen how much respect the u.s. has towards International law and Geneva conventions etc. These (according to the shagging bush regime.......apply to every nation but the u.s. The u.s. finds a way to manipulate the law so as to be excempt.......even if it has to deny its existence. ( as some did about international law....) Think we are dealing with a crazed and dangerous minset. *u.s.

the fact that they would even consider "debating" torture .....puts them on the same level as some third world country that is lawless.,crude , barbaric ...... :evil:

 

[jimmoyer]

That was a good analysis, Karlin.

And Rev, Amerika has it coming for not understanding the rules forbidding torture. A trial would be a good education for us.

Perhaps a national trial for the citizens to walk through all the debates of psychological and political and military insights is truly a necessity for our own education.

These posts on this board has turned me in favor of it.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Amerika has it coming for not understanding the rules forbidding torture

oh, I think that america knows exactly what those rules are. It just chooses to ignore them or modify them to suit its own purpose. Ignorance will not wash in this case.

If the u.s. did not understand the rules about this.....why would they be so vocal about condemning it in other nations???


hypocritical S.O.B.s :evil:

 

[jimmoyer]

I meant understanding the depth of a mistake sinking to depravity accomplishes nothing and understanding that is a good reason for that law forbidding torture.

We understand what the law says. I was referring to understanding the reasons behind it and why it should apply to us.

You pounced (that's okay) on one of my many poorly written sentences.