Comments on: The case for torture warrants http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/09/07/the-case-for-torture-warrants/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: pyanitsa http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/09/07/the-case-for-torture-warrants/#comment-37258 Thu, 08 Sep 2011 01:02:20 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10264#comment-37258 “The tragic reality”, Dershowitz, is that you are unbalanced. Go back to Harvard Law School. Begin again – at the beginning.

]]>
By: CDN_Rebel http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/09/07/the-case-for-torture-warrants/#comment-37242 Wed, 07 Sep 2011 22:24:19 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10264#comment-37242 How can we listen to the biggest constitutional sham-defence lawyer in history and a self-professed zionist apologist on his views of torture? The man is sick, and it’s sad that Reuters would publish his lunacy.

]]>
By: vinlander http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/09/07/the-case-for-torture-warrants/#comment-37238 Wed, 07 Sep 2011 21:46:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10264#comment-37238 America should NEVER torture, and if it costs us lives, then it is a principle worth dying for. Or are we no longer a nation prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice for what is right?

]]>
By: coyotle http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/09/07/the-case-for-torture-warrants/#comment-37237 Wed, 07 Sep 2011 21:17:00 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10264#comment-37237 It is too bad that the WWII veterans are all gone. We knew back then that torture only yields what the interogator wants to hear. The well trained and informed in the intelligence service know this too. There is no emperical data to show that torure reliably and consistently yields actionable information. In fact covert operatives are trained to give up disinformation(false) if it is likely to peak an interogtors interst and keep them alive. This is one of the values of the spy{Art of War, Sun Tzu}. Condoning torture is not who were, but evidently are now.

As long as there are those(Sociopaths) who get enjoyment from such behavior torture will continue to be implemented when political leaders are willing to employ such people and their craft. Our political leaders and public servants are largely adult children of mediocrity(upbringing, education and intellect). All of our institutions have failed us. We as a People increasingly find it dificult to exercise logic and rational thinking, as if they were both a bad thing. This is why we have resorted to disproven and desperate measures, even at the highest reaches of society.

It was Eisenhower who said “Another global war is unthinkable. There aren’t enough bulldozers to burry the dead”. He also stated that he would he would disregard and discredit those who argued for pre-emptive war. Yet that is precisely what our government did when it invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. Like Bush said “We gotta get ’em over there before they come here”. In view of the United States being the remaining super power after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the notion that war should be used as a tool to achieve a political end was advocated by William Crystal, Dick Amritage, Condoleza Rice, Paul Wolfowitz and many other prominent politicans in the late 1990s. All of them and more were appointed to the Bush II cabinet. This manifest was and should still be available for all who care to read it on the web at the “Project for the New American Century”(PNAC). Herman Goering advocated the same policy and stated so at his opening remarks at the Hague when entering his plea to the charges of war crimes in 1945.

]]>
By: 1AmericanGuy http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/09/07/the-case-for-torture-warrants/#comment-37236 Wed, 07 Sep 2011 21:01:49 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10264#comment-37236 The bottom line is this: the “ticking time bomb” example that Bill Clinton and Professor Dershowitz love to cite is their own academic creation. It’s never existed in reality. To date the United States has never learned of an imminent life-threatening situation that has led to the detainment of someone for whom information would need to be gathered (extracted). The torture that the United States has done occurs after an act of terrorism, not immediately before an act of terrorism is about to happen. I do agree with Bill Clinton that nobody should be above the law, as I think most people do, which is why Dick Cheney should be carted off to The Hague and indicted on war crimes charges.

]]>
By: paintcan http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/09/07/the-case-for-torture-warrants/#comment-37226 Wed, 07 Sep 2011 18:23:35 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10264#comment-37226 Mr. Dershowitz: Claims that there is empirical evidence that torture gets results and cites the Philippines incident to discover a plot against the Pope and airlines. “The recent US water boarding of al Qaeda suspects is claimed to have provided useful information but it does not say how many fruitless attempts at torture failed to get anything at all. The victims may be damaged for life – may be falsely accused of having information they don’t, the legal system itself can be corrupt, decadent and vengeful or just sloppy. Public officials lie – with or without legal authority. And courts can be bought. You argue that the public should accept that democracies are peculiarly suited to act responsibly while inflicting torture and that somehow no other type of government is. “Non-lethal” torture could mean the the victim is placed on life support equipment for the rest of their natural life as well.

Democracies never seem to believe that about their own governments. They are not based on such faith in the competence of public officials.

Now you argue to empower them in the guise of legitimate process to do what so many would like to do anyway.

All you may be doing is adding the scream tract to the defense of the nation and do just what the Catholic Church and many other civil authorities did to defend their points of view. And they can still be wrong in points they are trying to defend or claims,like Galileo’s, that they want to bury.

You claim torture can be used almost surgically. But surgically does not mean flawlessly. Would the falsely accused get to sue for damages? And what if the victim takes a principled stand – shows enormous strength of character and stamina (Braveheart style – the man was guilty of insurection in the eyes of the British) and doesn’t want to cooperate with people he might only hate?
What if the victim dies?

And you say that the democratic system is better than the rest? Why? A despot could be as reliable regarding the use of torture as a democracy. He might even be willing to compensate for mistakes more quickly than a complex and bureaucratically layered court system. It wouldn’t require very expensive attorney taking years to settle his claim if he wasn’t so throughly compromised by the non lthal treatment that he didn’t die prematurely.

Doctors may not torture their patients – why should states have the right? And wouldn’t Physicians would have to participate in the macabre ritual?

You ignore article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. “no one shall be subjected to torture or the cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”. The US is a founding signatory.

]]>