Comments for Teenage kicks: torture memos and a failure to connect

Comment by Sparky

Sparky — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 14:28:36 +0100

Sparky said:

The familiar 'ticking bomb' scenario is seriously overplayed as a 'decisive' argument in favour of torture.

It simply doesn't stand up. First of all, if someone has the dedication (or perhaps the delusion) to believe that a cause is worth dying for, and is willing to do so why should suffering pain be seen as a sure-fire way of breaking them? It is entirely possible that they would see this as a means to an end.

Secondly, it is ridiculous to suggest that accurate information will be extracted in any case. A victim of torture will say whatever they believe their torturer wishes to hear. They'll plead guilty to stealing the moon if asked to do so.

Thirdly, our cultures (both UK and American - and probably the rest of the world too) are crammed with stories about heroes who, 'when cruelly tortured by our evil enemies', did not crack. Yet torture is then suggested to us as an infallible means of gathering information. If the western 'good guys' can withstand it, why not the rest of the world?

And finally, I would like to point our that all of these arguments are moot. Torture involves hurting people, mentally and physically. It is a clear breach of their human rights, and so (in my opinion) cannot be justified.

This is the point the CIA have never understood. Even if torture generated accurate information it could not be justified.

Not for a ticking bomb,

Not to gain a confession,

Not for anything.

Comment by imhotep

imhotep — Mon, 11 May 2009 04:04:52 +0100

imhotep said:

John T's letter to "The Telegraph" supporting torture is full of
inaccuracies and distortions, -- wilfull, or not (?). He supports the torture of Khaled Sheikh Mohammed -- he says the CIA agents
who tortured him had no other choice if they wanted to find the truth
they were supposedly after. It has now been revealed he was waterboarded 183 times -- a fact which reveals the real motive
and mindset of his torturers -- sadism & vengeance, not finding the truth.

If he'd confessed freely, he'd have "just" got a life sentence, says John T
( what's the "T" for, one wonders ?? ).Don't know where this idea of his comes from, but JT then insists it was "important" to know exactly how he'd plotted 9/11. But in reality, even before he was arrested,
he'd already detailed the story to an Al Jazeera journalist who
wrote a full length book based on the interviews and his own research,
which is the only way to get at a rounded, indepth account and
understanding of 9/11. Other writers have written even more voluminous
-ly about 9/11's entire prelude, process and aftermath, also without using
torture on informants & witnesses.

But when he was tortured in this CIA/ american way of reaching the truth,
Mohammed responded not with the truth but with a whole network of lies about other people --which is tbe result torturers will always get, because
they always make clear what exactly they want to hear. Like many others thru history, Mohammed has been highly inaccurate in his torture-i
induced testimonies.

JT says Mohammed would have been executed in countries where Al
Qaeda "runs riot". "Countries" ? Or does he mean Pakistan,
where al Qaeda is NOT "running riot" even in any single area.
Or does he confuse Al Qaeda with the Taliban ? If he means Iraq, Al Qaeda can be said to be powerful in Mosul, one city, and neighborhoods of Baghdad.

Being flippant or sweeping with the truth is half as bad a way to arrive at
it as torture.

Comment by imhotep

imhotep — Fri, 08 May 2009 02:25:27 +0100

imhotep said:

After he'd entered manhoodi & emerged from his first battle, the young warriorTecmseh of the Shawnee Nation, after silently seeing a white prisoner tortured to death, said, "Never again will I be party to torture. Nor will I consider as my friend anyone who is."

Tecumseh never broke this vow all his life, even as he led The Nations in total war against the white invasion. Today i see even someone who styles himself the "Cherokee Kid" justifying torture. Another one says Khaled talked because of torture. First, the only source for any real truth or information is never torture, but SOLID INVESTIGATION. Second, those people who argue torture must be used to find tbe truth reveal a GREATER truth -- that the peoples of the world refuse to talk willingly to the Western invasions / occupations or reveal their truths to them . This betrays the West's total isolation IN ALL its wars. Go on torturing, & find out -- WE REFUSE TO TALK TO YOU.