-
Information Architect
This guy can't be serious! (torture should be legalized)
Alan Dershowitz, an American Civil Rights and Criminal Defense lawyer, argues that America should recognize that torture has its place in investigations, and should legislate to make the practice accountable.
...
BLITZER: Alan Dershowitz, a lot of our viewers will be surprised to hear that you think there are right times for torture. Is this one of those moments?
DERSHOWITZ: I don't think so. This is not the ticking-bomb terrorist case, at least so far as we know. Of course, the difficult question is the chicken-egg question: We won't know if he is a ticking-bomb terrorist unless he provides us information, and he's not likely to provide information unless we use certain extreme measures.
My basic point, though, is we should never under any circumstances allow low-level people to administer torture.
...
"I'm personally opposed to torture because I think the slippery slope is too steep and too dangerous," says the Harvard law professor.
"But I'm also a realist. Torture is occurring as we speak in the United States of America and abroad. We are not torturing people to death. We are not torturing them promiscuously. But we are torturing. And it's happening because we think we can save lives by doing it."
He continues: "If you accept that premise, the debate becomes a very different one. Is it worse to do it secretly with deniability as we're doing it today, or to create a legal system where you have to go to a judge ... where you have to make a judge get down into the dirt and sign a warrant authorising torture with accountability? My own belief is that in a democracy, accountability is always better."
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/5/23/161741/806
We're in the 21st Century, correct? Because this sounds more like the mid ages.
Fredi
-
Senior Member
no, it sounds human. we all like to espouse that civilized people dont do this type of thing, but civilized humans are the only species that do this exact type of thing. I dont know the argument in question in its entirety, but I believe what he is calling for is transparency and an acceptance of reality, in lieu of the current denial we seem to surround ourselves in just to sleep better at night. I dont know if this is right or wrong, what i do know is that torture does happen every day, some of you never grew up around it, some of us did. Some still do.
Overall it is a weird agument to be having, I will have to think about my stance on this one....Im off to look for links....
-
Information Architect
Legalizing torture would be like legalizing rape. There's no fundamental difference. The two are psychologically the same. Should we legalize rape, then, if the "right circumstances" existed? If it would be of a use for the nation or someone with the right connections?
Not to mention that the US has signed an international law against torture.
Fredi
-
Senior Member
I think dershowitz and others who are having this argument are not talking about legalizing the kinds of torture that you are thinking. Again, I dont know enough about what particular types of torture they are suggesting, since there are already some that are allowed by MOST countries. Not all torture is completely physical and brutal, it can take many forms.
i dont think they are going to bring back the iron maiden, rack and quartering....
-
Didn't do it.
On one hand, I feel he has a point: if this is something that we are going to be doing, it's better to have it out in the open and known. I'd rather that all cases of torture by my country are documented (and hopefully regulated and over seen by some third-party) than to have them occur in secret and have our government lie about it. Hopefully it would only be granted with some type of penalty, say time in jail, so that it would not be used without a sacrifice.
On the other hand, I feel like this would be cheating. We are supposed to be a nation respectful of holding human rights, an idea which is supposed to be universal to all people. As soon as we start making exceptions to our moral principles, they become meaningless. It'd be like saying you can't randomly stop and search people on the street without just cause, except for people wearing sun glasses or T shirts with 'No Fear' on them (or whatever criteria) because they are more likely to be carrying a concealed weapon with intent to do harm. After all, it might save lives. You won't know until it's done, and by that point, you can't undo your actions.
Also, there a big problem with getting info from torture; extreme duress will make some people confess to just about anything. All information gathered from torture is immediately suspect, and there's no way to verify the info except to follow it through to it's conclusion, which may mean wasting valuable time and resources on a wild goose chase. If I were strapped to a board being slowly drowned while people asked me where the bomb was, I'd tell them the first place I could think of.
Hush child. japangreg can do what he wants. - PAlexC
That was Zen - this is Tao.
-
poet and narcisist
i bet that if it becomes legal, it's going to be the next hit in Real Tv shows "Big brother: torture edition"
Televized tortures would be something that people would prefer rather than watching "Friends". Men are somehow twisted nowadays.
-
Under the influence
I think he is right, people are getting tortured now, why not make it formal so anyone cant just torture anyone else.
That means that they couldn't torture someone just for fun, or because they hate them, it would be for information, and the more information to save my life, the better.
-
Senior Member
Should we legalize rape, then, if the "right circumstances" existed?
Military intelligence agencies already practice this on female agents. The soviet union had the most female agents because with rape being the primary form of torture, they were able to train their spies to whithstand it and survive without compromising other agents instead of being tortured like their male counterparts, who had a much less success rates in not giving up the goods.
-
Senior Member
Well alot depends on what type of "torture".. is denying someone sleep Torture? is making someone stand in a "stress postion" Torture? Sensory Depravation? We may be in the 21st Century, but the Terrorist Extremist we are fighting against aren't in the same catagory as us, and the International Laws against Torture were never designed with modern Terrorism in mind. When someone can get some WMD and kills thousands or hundreds of thousands at a time. Or as 9/11 showed you don't even need WMD to kill thousands. And one of the only ways to effectively battle Terrorism is Intelligence.. which means getting the information accurately and timely from the terrorist.
-
Lunch is for wimps.
Re: This guy can't be serious! (torture should be legalized)
you got it. the century with suicide bombers, abortion doctor killers, biochemical weapons in the hands of extremists, and fundametalists who don't have a problem killing anyone who they consider the infidel.
-
Senior Member
Also, there a big problem with getting info from torture; extreme duress will make some people confess to just about anything. All information gathered from torture is immediately suspect, and there's no way to verify the info except to follow it through to it's conclusion, which may mean wasting valuable time and resources on a wild goose chase. If I were strapped to a board being slowly drowned while people asked me where the bomb was, I'd tell them the first place I could think of.
/agree...
This is why the pudding is in the threat of torture, not in the torture itself...the german kidnapping case is a good example of the weight a threat can carry.
-
Senior Member
Originally posted by japangreg
On one hand, I feel he has a point: if this is something that we are going to be doing, it's better to have it out in the open and known. I'd rather that all cases of torture by my country are documented (and hopefully regulated and over seen by some third-party) than to have them occur in secret and have our government lie about it. Hopefully it would only be granted with some type of penalty, say time in jail, so that it would not be used without a sacrifice.
On the other hand, I feel like this would be cheating. We are supposed to be a nation respectful of holding human rights, an idea which is supposed to be universal to all people. As soon as we start making exceptions to our moral principles, they become meaningless. It'd be like saying you can't randomly stop and search people on the street without just cause, except for people wearing sun glasses or T shirts with 'No Fear' on them (or whatever criteria) because they are more likely to be carrying a concealed weapon with intent to do harm. After all, it might save lives. You won't know until it's done, and by that point, you can't undo your actions.
Also, there a big problem with getting info from torture; extreme duress will make some people confess to just about anything. All information gathered from torture is immediately suspect, and there's no way to verify the info except to follow it through to it's conclusion, which may mean wasting valuable time and resources on a wild goose chase. If I were strapped to a board being slowly drowned while people asked me where the bomb was, I'd tell them the first place I could think of.
Cheating? we are at war which could cost us thousands of lives.. this isnt' a video game.
Theirs certain techniques that get better results then others.. and for Intelligence to be good it's collaborated and checked. Course depending on how much time they have. Was looking for a article i had read but can't find it.. but one of the things that got the best results, was just 'scaring' someone.. not doing anything physical, but scaring them into talking. That usually works short term, but then the person gets to a point where they accept their faint and fear doesn't work anymore. Even drugs don't produce consistant results, and physical pain like u pointed out, usually gets the person to tell whatever just to get the pain to stop. Sensory Depravation also works pretty good..
-
Information Architect
Please give me a huge rolleyes. I must be an alien in a human costume as I can't agree with 90% of the above posts.
There was a very good reason to make torture ilegal, anyway if they are terrorists or not. (Not to mention that there will be a lot of cases for sure where they would not torture a terrorist, but a person that was at the wrong place at the wrong time, remember that death row scandal?)
And there where a lot of studies that proved that you get much more false informations with torture then real informations.
Fredi
-
Senior Member
then if that is your stand, instead of BIG rolling eyeballs show us these "studies" and make your arguement as to why it should be 100% illegal. Right now to me, it's all nice and dandy to be on the moral side and the legal side.. but we are at war, and being morally correct isn't going to mean a heck of a lot if we lose. When you have one side willing to do whatever it takes to win, and the other side doing it's best to be Politically Correct, if anything it's making the war last even longer.
-
Information Architect
You can't win against terrorism in a war. (Ok, you can, but only if you destroy anyone that thinks differently then you ... better don't try or you will be soon the only one on this planet)
Fredi
-
Didn't do it.
Originally posted by Hellsbellboy
Right now to me, it's all nice and dandy to be on the moral side and the legal side.. but we are at war, and being morally correct isn't going to mean a heck of a lot if we lose.
Neither will compromising our principles we are supposed to be fighting for in the first place. If we are so much better than those who torture and kill for the progression of their beliefs, if that is why we want our way of life to prevail, then we have to be better than them.
It's not a matter of being moral correct, it's a matter of being true to what you say and what you expose. If we are the beacon for human rights and decency, then dang it, let's be it. If we start saying we're putting our morals on hold until the real threat is past, what weight do those morals really have? That would be just trying to be 'morally correct'. Walking the walk would be doing it.
Hush child. japangreg can do what he wants. - PAlexC
That was Zen - this is Tao.
-
Dershowitz has been talking about this since 9/11 (may have even written a book, not sure).
I think his main argument in favor of torture, that he alludes to in the quote but does not elaborate on, is the "Ticking Bomb Scenario".
He argues that if we know that there is a bomb set to go off, and in order to prevent it, we must torture someone to get the information, then we should do it. The argument being that it is better to kill or torure one person in order to save many lives. He's not in favor of just legalising torture...only in very specific instances.
For example, if a terrorist is about to set off a bomb, presumably no one would have a problem if a cop shot and killed that person before he could set the bomb off. Similarly, if we have to torture a terrorist to get the information necessary to stop the same bomb, we should.
I think that it is much harder to be against that argument, then the idea of a general legalisation of torture (which he's not for).
Adam
-
First, know that the U.S. has been actively and routinely torturing people in South America for a number of decades.
Then, understand that the statement being quoted is an emergency "if you have to torture one man to save a thousand" situation.
Now, ask yourself: why not allow limited, traceable, accountable methods that could save the lives of hundreds, thousands of people.
-
Retired SCORM Guru
FYI Alan Dershowitz isn't known for being what most people would call a reasonable, credible man.
"What really bugs me is that my mom had the audacity to call Flash Kit a bunch of 'inept jack-asses'." - sk8Krog
...and now I have tape all over my face.
-
supervillain
but what about the other side? I don't really recall too many posts about when Milosevic and company were doing "ethnic cleansing" in Kosovo, nor have I seen any posts about about the ongoing ethnic cleansing and killing in Sudan.
It happens, and the second some knuckle-head in the US or UK says something about it, it's suddenly a topic of discussion.
In Sudan and Kosovo, they received orders to loot, pillage, and rape the women. That's about as "ordered" and authorized - by a leader, or general - as you can get. And it sounds a lot like the Vikings of days.
Torture... yeah, our constitution protects against cruel and unusual punishment. And I'd hate to see that right revoked. But in the case of non-Americans, I don't see the same outcry when they do it.
See my above mentions for specific ones.
I don't agree with that dude, don't get me wrong. But if you're going to be outraged, at least be even-handed with it, and show your outrage on all forms of what's upsetting you.
sorta like supporting PETA but keeping your mink fur coat because "it's pretty"...
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|