What is "Your" Position on Torture?

[ThomWV]

Poll question: What is "Your" Position on Torture?

I don't care what you think the Government's position on torture might be. What is your personal position on torture.

[Double T]

1. Information obtain while torturing can NEVER be reliable...........

if anyone in the WH had an ounce of intelligence, they would know that.

[Kierkegaard]

2. I second that.

People will say ANYTHING to get you to stop hurting them. Torture as a method to extract information is a complete failure. It's a lose-lose situation.

[IChing]

3. My position was with my legs tied at the knees and ankles

forcing me to sit on a short stool or chair which is angled forward (so that it is impossible to sit in a comfortable, stable position), and then tying my arms and legs behind me to the chair, while also covering my head with a bag and possibly subjecting me to extremely loud noise, such as music. I am then left in this condition for extended periods of time. Sleep is not allowed for the duration.

THIS IS A LEGALLY ALLOWED WITH OUR GOVERNMENT NOW.

[Double T]

7. When will torture start to be used on American citizens?????

[IChing]

13. The Burge torture cases in Chicago

Police Commander Jon Burge and homicide detectives of Areas 2 and 3 Police Headquarters in Chicago, Illinois, were charged with torturing nearly 200 African American men between 1972-1991. Admissions by detectives, eye-witness accounts and other evidence have indicated that Burge and his men “systematically tortured individuals during interrogations, also proves that officers throughout the chain of command were aware of the torture and condoned its practice,” Ritchie quoted in a summary of the case she provided to RAW STORY.

Evidence provided in the Burge cases paint a picture not unlike what has emerged from the Abu Ghraib scandal, or allegations relating to abuse by US authorities at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and other US detention facilities in the Middle-East.

The techniques detailed in the Chicago torture cases included “electrically shocking men’s genitals, ears and lips with a cattle prod or an electric shock box, suffocating individuals with plastic bags, mock executions, and beatings with telephone books and rubber hoses,” according to court documents.

No one has been convicted in any of these cases because of the statue of limitations. Some have even been promoted, with the exception of Burge, who was fired but continues to receive a police pension despite the confirmation by internal investigations of horrific atrocities committed against African American men under his care.

An internal report prepared by the city of Chicago confirms accounts of prisoner confessions having been elicited by torture. Subsequent judicial reviews of the 193 known cases have found that Burge and his detectives violated Article I of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and Punishment, (Hinton v. Uchtman, 395 F 3d 810, 822-23>>>>

Raw story:http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Report__0713.html

[Dhalgren]

4. Torture should be illegal, period. No exceptions.

The "ticking bomb" scenario is a good case in point. If a government officer or civilian, for that matter, feels it is necessary to torture someone because of the circumstances, then they should be arrested and charged for that crime. It would be up to a judge and jury to determine what, if any, legal requirements were called for. We simply cannot legalize torture because of some kind of circumstantial expediency. Murder is also a good example of this issue. If I or anyone - government official or not - kill someone, it is deemed a crime until a court says otherwise. I fail to see why torture should be an exception.

[Sir Jeffrey]

9. Exactly...

they're using an "extreme hypothetical" to justify using torture as standard operating procedure.

[bryant69]

5. It depends on how broadly or tightly you want to define torture

Saying "No lunches until you tell us what we want to know" could be seen as a form of torture - and one could argue that action is a slippery slope down to no food at all, etc.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[magellan]

8. That's just wrong

Are they getting breakfast and/or dinner or are they being outright starved till they talk? Two very different things, and Article 3 covers cruel treatment like the latter.

[bryant69]

10. The implication of my statement was that yes

they are getting breakfast and dinner. Just no Lunch.

This issue is annoying because you are only allowed to have one position. There's only one answer. "Torture is bad" saying anythign else but "Toture is bad" is the sign of someone who is pro torture.

Bryant

[magellan]

17. No, don't let people define you with one statement

First, there's no slippery slope in your scenario unless a person has no sense of right and wrong or enjoys hurting people and breaking the law. A person like that would be pro-torture, though they might not acknowledge it consciously as such.

And I don't know how others have treated you, but I try to avoid judging people based on a quick statement...which is why I asked you to elaborate. :)

[treestar]

16. Torture is defined in International Law in a non-frivolous way.

Your definition is just frivolous.

[flordehinojos]

6. torture is never okay.

but only in the sadist's mind does it become okay. only in the school yard bully does it become okay to beat up on a lesser one. only in the cowboy mentality is harassing anyone the cowboy sees as less powerful or fast at the draw than he, okay. only in the bushes world is torture, abuse, power and control ever okay. and that is, as keith olberman said, the way of the truly powerless and of the true coward.

[FoxOnTheRun]

11. If you want fake confessions by innocent people for being Al-Qaeda

you need it badly

[EnviroBat]

12. Incarceration is torturous in and of itself.

Loss of freedom would seem like torture to me anyway.

[treestar]

14. The purpose of torture is never to get information

And the idea that Al Qaeda people, who are presumably willing to kill themselves, would give up information under physical threat is ridiculous.

The purpose of torture is to satisfy some sick perversion of the torturer. No one could legitimately take that job and be just doing it because it "has to be done."

[DoYouEverWonder]

15. No, nay, never

Is that clear enough?

[nolabels]

18. Only acceptable for lying cheating politicians and tin pot dictators

Mostly if we could get those little bastards under control there might little need for all of this B.S. called warfare and the torture that follows it hand in hand :D