Comments on: Torture ruling a victory for free speech http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2010/02/10/torture-ruling-a-victory-for-free-speech/ Wed, 16 Nov 2016 01:37:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Lesia http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2010/02/10/torture-ruling-a-victory-for-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-9944 Sun, 14 Feb 2010 15:35:47 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=5835#comment-9944 Tortured until proven innocent? Its easy to say
torture people for the good of the country, until
you are one of those people it happens to.

People will say anything to make the pain stop, countries
who use torture already have a internal problem that is
more serious than the terrorist can do, they have already made us abandon our humanity.

People who torture terrorists are just a sliver away
from justifying how to apply to whoever does not agree with their goals, nobody was magically tortured, it had to go down a long list of military personnel.

But as soon as their identities might come out it becomes a international secret. Can’t have the kids knowing that daddy/mommy beat a human all day at work without even charging him for a crime.

These people who tortured this individual and others should be prosecuted, because torture is a crime or it used to be {sarcasm}.

]]>
By: Il Americano http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2010/02/10/torture-ruling-a-victory-for-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-9897 Fri, 12 Feb 2010 17:08:44 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=5835#comment-9897 No key intelligence has been exposed! What has been revealed is culpability for torture. I have seen no details emerge that reveal details of any security operations beyond the simple torture of this unfortunate man. The argument that covering up the simple fact that torture occured is somehow essential to state security is spurious at best, cynical and corrupt at worst.

Men who participate in torture are criminals, and should not be allowed to hide behind false claims of state secrecy. If they don’t like being hauled into court, they have nothing but their own criminality to blame!

]]>
By: PercyPants http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2010/02/10/torture-ruling-a-victory-for-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-9887 Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:36:48 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=5835#comment-9887 Everyone, individuals and governments, has a right to some secrets, the world and society could not operate in a climate of total openness and honesty. The issue really is twofold – accountability and trust. In the end, your sins shall find you out – we are all accountable at some point, but for Governements and government departments we do need the accountability to be somewhat more immediate. It’s not beyond the wit of man to create structures that generate that accountability, while retaining the necessary levels of secrecy. The problem is more at the moment that there is zero trust in either the elected or paid officials of government, which exaggerates the demand for openness and accountability. In a climate where those we chose to govern us have been seen to cheat on their expenses to the point of criminality, and to demonstrably fail to understand why the nation sees this as immoral, there is little hope of any degree of trust in the immediate future. Sadly, none of the main parties seem as yet to understand the depth of the nation’s repugnance, nor the need for remediation of the morality, rather than the process.

]]>
By: Ian Shepherd http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2010/02/10/torture-ruling-a-victory-for-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-9881 Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:50:42 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=5835#comment-9881 Great news – we can now all be blown to bits by Islamic Militants happy in the knowledge that at least we haven’t hurt the poor darlings.

]]>
By: Ian Kemmish http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2010/02/10/torture-ruling-a-victory-for-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-9880 Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:29:06 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=5835#comment-9880 I think the situation is a lot more complex. We live in a world where the interests of those who make a career out of human rights are no longer necessarily aligned with the universal promotion of human rights.

I didn’t know who Clive Stafford Smith was until, on Radio 3’s “Private Passions”, I heard him describing death row appeals in the US. Here was a man who was as proud as any politician of his ability to manipulate people’s opinions through dissimulation. When an activist is happy to “censor” his true position, beliefs and motivations in order to subvert a distasteful yet democratically arrived at system of capital punishment – isn’t the pot of activists every bit as black as the kettle of civil servants?

On the case in point, that of Binyam Mohamed, the mere fact that Mr Stafford Smith was representing him meant that my instinct was to flatly disbelieve every press release he issued. Does that situation help anyone?

The sky wasn’t falling until yesterday, and no Elysium awaits us tomorrow.

]]>