Merged Senate Report on CIA Torture Program

[bit_pattern]

I was listening to AM radio host this morning who's fairly left-leaning. He wondered "is sleep-deprivation really torture"? I wonder that too.

Do you have any conceptual idea of what being awake for seven days straight does to the mind?

I had a crystal meth addiction in my younger days and, believe me, it really is torture.

 

[RandFan]

I was listening to AM radio host this morning who's fairly left-leaning. He wondered "is sleep-deprivation really torture"? I wonder that too. Playing loud music for hours on end? The police are allowed to lie during interrogations. Is "official lying" a form of torture? Is the good-cop bad-cop routine torture? Do we have to act like saints? Who draws the line on what "torture" is? Is it like pornography: you know it when you see it?

I have acute insomnia. Insomnia is known to cause people to commit suicide.

What do you mean by "act like saints"? Why can't we give people due processes and proscribe cruel on unusual punishment?

A legal definition of torture

 

[Fudbucker]

I have acute insomnia. Insomnia is known to cause people to commit suicide.

So have breakups with girlfriends. People kill themselves over bad real estate deals. I'm guessing that "insomnia" is pretty low on the list of reasons why people kill themselves. Maybe you have evidence that shows otherwise?

Maybe I would kill myself if I was rectally fed and had to listen to Eminem for 24 hours straight, but I rather doubt it. It would take a lot more than that.

The police are allowed to lie during interrogations and suppose they told you it was your DNA at the crime scene. The thought of being wrongfully convicted might lead you to kill yourself. Is that torture?

What do you mean by "act like saints"? Why can't we give people due processes and proscribe cruel on unusual punishment?

If we have a high-level Al Queda target, and the only option is to either let him go or launch a missile from a drone, do we need to give him "due process"?

A legal definition of torture

"Torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions."

There are problems with that definition. If the person has "committed an act" and we punish them with ten years prison time, won't that, by definition cause severe mental suffering? What if the person attacks a guard and other inmates and has to be confined to his cell for months? Is that torture?

If we lawfully sanction sleep deprivation, does that let us off the hook because it's a "lawful sanction"?

None of this is cut-and-dry. It's an extremely grey area. I don't like us water-boarding people. But if we can prevent another 9/11 by playing constant heavy metal music and turning the lights off and on at irregular intervals, I'm not convinced it's A) torture or B) the ends don't just justify the means.

 

[Upchurch]

You have utterly misconstrued my argument. To such an extent actually that I think you're being dishonest. I will repeat it here to show how unjustified your comment is (particularly your ETA comment):

You can repeat your words all you like, it is still not an argument that supports your claim that the ticking time bomb scenerio justifies torture. At best, it is an attempt to move the goalposts from an indefensible claim because now, instead of trying to demonstrate that torture would provide the information needed to stop the bomb, you've shifted to a political correctness argument that torture really isn't torture.

As far as I'm concerned, if we prosecuted people who water boarded others in WWII as war criminals, that firmly places it in the category of "torture".

 

[marplots]

That doesn't mean that it could never work.

Practice makes perfect!

 

[I Am The Scum]

I don't like us water-boarding people. But if we can prevent another 9/11 by playing constant heavy metal music and turning the lights off and on at irregular intervals...

Do you have any other fantasies you'd like to share with us?

 

[jaydeehess]

By the way, here are some actual arguments I've heard in favor of torture on these very forums:

* The Coalition is fighting a just war, therefore any measures we take in fighting this war are justified.
* We are not using more extreme methods, like the beheadings that ISIS is carrying out.
* Even if the prisoner is willing to lie or say anything to get the torture to stop, it's better to get one true statement out of that than nothing at all.
* 9/11 proved we have to take the threat of terrorism seriously, and be willing to do whatever it takes to prevent another such attack.
* The people who carried out excessive torture methods that resulted in the deaths of prisoners were punished appropriately, so no harm done.
* The terrorists we are torturing would not care about due process if they captured a Coalition member, so why should we care about due process for them?
* We can safely assume that any prisoners captured on the field of battle are enemy combatants, therefore it's okay to torture them.
* These terrorists would kill innocents without batting an eye, so why should we shed any tears for them? Why show them any sympathy?
* It's just my opinion that torture works, just like people have different opinions about which movies they like. And I have a right to my opinions.


Well, I can't think of any way to refute such sound logic. Can you?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Force_That_Gives_Us_Meaning

war seduces entire societies, creating fictions that the public believes and relies on to continue to support conflicts.

The quote is from the wiki article but does the book an injustice in that it barely scratches the surface of the text.
At first I thought the book would be boring but it is compelling, frightening and oh so obviously correct.
The enemy is less than human, the soldiers of the home country virtuous,. The enemy commits atrocities, the home country soldiers are justified in any and all manner of fighting the enemy.

 

[Fudbucker]

Do you have any other fantasies you'd like to share with us?

I don't know why it would be a fantasy. People have confessed to murder just from standard police interrogation techniques.

 

[jaydeehess]

We have met the enemy

 

[RandFan]

So have breakups with girlfriends. People kill themselves over bad real estate deals. I'm guessing that "insomnia" is pretty low on the list of reasons why people kill themselves. Maybe you have evidence that shows otherwise?

I'm at a loss as to why you think these examples justifies anything. Suicide is an extreme response. That you think these things are otherwise benign does not make it so. Not sleeping is very traumatic.

Maybe I would kill myself if I was rectally fed and had to listen to Eminem for 24 hours straight, but I rather doubt it. It would take a lot more than that.

No. I've been up awake for more than days at a time. 24 hours is easy. I do that all of the time. Try staying awake for 80 hours.

The police are allowed to lie during interrogations and suppose they told you it was your DNA at the crime scene. The thought of being wrongfully convicted might lead you to kill yourself. Is that torture?

I've no idea how this can justify anything.

If we have a high-level Al Queda target, and the only option is to either let him go or launch a missile from a drone, do we need to give him "due process"?

This is a fantasy used to justify inhumanity. This wasn't the reason the CIA tortured people.

 

[RandFan]

We have met the enemy

Agreed.

 

[bit_pattern]

People have confessed to murder just from standard police interrogation techniques.

You mean you can get confessions and intelligence from standard interrogation techniques without engaging in torture?

 

[jimbob]

I have acute insomnia. Insomnia is known to cause people to commit suicide.

It has also lead to death in rats

Abstract

Ten rats were subjected to total sleep deprivation (TSD) by the disk apparatus. All TSD rats died or were sacrificed when death seemed imminent within 11-32 days. No anatomical cause of death was identified. All TSD rats showed a debilitated appearance, lesions on their tails and paws, and weight loss in spite of increased food intake. Their yoked control (TSC) rats remained healthy. Since dehydration was ruled out and several measures indicated accelerated use rather than failure to absorb nutrients, the food-weight changes in TSD rats were attributed to increased energy expenditure (EE). The measurement of EE, based upon caloric value of food, weight, and wastes, indicated that all TSD rats increased EE, with mean levels reaching more than twice baseline values.

 

[fishbob]

You do realize that the count is of the number of times water was poured onto his face for a time lasting less than 5 seconds, right? It's not of actual waterboarding sessions. And I'm not defending the methods which were used in this case.

I have only argued two things here:

(1) The people responsible for authorizing torture and carrying it out probably should not be prosecuted, or even vilified; and

(2) The moral absolutists who claim that torture is never justified are either illogical or intellectually dishonest.

1 - I disagree. Especially the guy who thought rectal hydration with pureed lunch was a good idea. I want that guy out of our society. Actually, I want him to be Dick Cheney's bedside attendant during Cheney's next hospitalization. Imagine the lively conversations they could have. Moral support too. And lunches. I suspect that hospital food might be more palatable using Mr. Puree's methods.

2 - Apart from completely unrealistic hypotheticals, why? And what do you do with the people who carry out the torture when they return to civilian life? Do you want to live next door to that guy? We can look up the sex offenders so we can be on the lookout, but what about the water-board specialists and our buddy with the blender?

 

[The Don]

I don't know why it would be a fantasy. People have confessed to murder just from standard police interrogation techniques.

Some of them were even guilty

 

[anglolawyer]

Ironically, the invasion of Iraq was fully consistent with international law. In any case, international law has always been something that applied only to little guys. It has never had any force for the big powers (note the veto power in the Security Council). Russia's actions in Ukraine provide a nice example. The way to hold other countries to their treaty obligations is to impose economic or military sanctions for breaches. Moral suasion doesn't work in geopolitics. It's all barter at that level.

So the US has its fingers crossed when signing treaties?

In fact the U.S. has agonised about the defintion of torture in the lead up to the EIT programme, suggesting a proper appreciation of the importance of appearances at least. The fact the programme was secret does tend to suggest somebody knew they were misbehaving.

Whatever, it seems you are as or more cynical than me. We should get along.

 

[anglolawyer]

*sigh* I won't sidetrack this thread, but will simply observe the above quote highlights a long-standing aspect about the strategic bombing campaign during WWII, namely, that it is often misprepresented. Few, it seems, understand or are aware of the technological, operational, and logistical constraints which influenced and shaped it, nor the degree to which that campaign had measurable and considerable direct and indirect effects on the economies of the nations struck by that bombing effort.

All the better for the argument I was making. Thanks for your support.

 

[RandFan]

Might makes right?

 

[anglolawyer]

Might makes right?

If you are replying to me, no, not that. I was arguing with sun master that we were the good guys in WW2 notwithstanding there were some not so good things, among which I mentioned carpet bombing and the poster above corrected me and said that was in fact a good thing too so I thanked him for strengthening my argument.

 

[3point14]

Might makes right?

When one's military is larger than the next umpteen combined, when the polititians don't care and the populace buy into the jingoism in enough numbers to keep on keeping on without bringing their leaders to account then what the hell is anyone going to do about it?

The US will carry on waving it's flag of 'freedom' and 'liberty' while harbouring those who have shattered international law and indulged in or ordered torture.

Nothing will change, no-one will be prosecuted and people like you and me when the US next decides to invade a country to impose it's own particular brand of firey, painful, democratic freedom, will cry 'hang on, but they have no moral authority' and be ignored.

So, yes, might makes right in that there's bugger all that can (and will) be done about it.