http://www.samefacts.com/2006/09/torture/true-confession/ Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts. Sun, 14 Mar 2010 22:34:52 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://www.samefacts.com/2006/09/torture/true-confession/comment-page-1/#comment-18221 Pometacom Sat, 09 Sep 2006 07:12:09 +0000 http://samefacts.dreamhosters.com/2006/09/uncategorized/true-confession/#comment-18221 It seems that even stretched to its utmost, the torture methods approved by DOJ and used could only be justified under an "extreme clear and present danger", ie. that investigators already knew a bomb was somewhere in a building that was set to go off within a few minutes and needed to know exactly where the bomb was located. This was not the case here. The US was on a long-term fishing expedition for any and all information they might be able to obtain from those they captured and tortured. And anyways, these methods are horribly unreliable precisely because of their severity. The subject ends up saying whatever he thinks his torturers want to hear him say so as to make the torture stop. Thus, any information or statements gained must then be vetted and corroborated through all other types of information just to weed out what may be true and what is just plain false. These methods are also fairly useless in a highly compartmentalized structure like al Qaeda appears to be, ie. that members are purposefully provided very limited information so as to prevent them from revealing much if ... well ... tortured. Mr. Kleiman's points are all well made and I appreciate his taking the time and energy to do this. It seems that even stretched to its utmost, the torture methods approved by DOJ and used could only be justified under an “extreme clear and present danger”, ie. that investigators already knew a bomb was somewhere in a building that was set to go off within a few minutes and needed to know exactly where the bomb was located. This was not the case here. The US was on a long-term fishing expedition for any and all information they might be able to obtain from those they captured and tortured. And anyways, these methods are horribly unreliable precisely because of their severity. The subject ends up saying whatever he thinks his torturers want to hear him say so as to make the torture stop. Thus, any information or statements gained must then be vetted and corroborated through all other types of information just to weed out what may be true and what is just plain false. These methods are also fairly useless in a highly compartmentalized structure like al Qaeda appears to be, ie. that members are purposefully provided very limited information so as to prevent them from revealing much if … well … tortured.
Mr. Kleiman’s points are all well made and I appreciate his taking the time and energy to do this.

]]> http://www.samefacts.com/2006/09/torture/true-confession/comment-page-1/#comment-18220 Grumpy Sat, 09 Sep 2006 03:51:50 +0000 http://samefacts.dreamhosters.com/2006/09/uncategorized/true-confession/#comment-18220 Finally, a moral defence of torture is not a legal one; at best it could motivate a decision not to prosecute the crime. I always say, Torture is a crime; a ticking bomb is a mitigating factor at sentencing. Finally, a moral defence of torture is not a legal one; at best it could motivate a decision not to prosecute the crime.
I always say, Torture is a crime; a ticking bomb is a mitigating factor at sentencing.

]]>