Bush vetoed a bill that would limit the sexcapades (sexual abuse, etc) of the intelligence agencies. The bill would make the intelligence treat prisoners as well as the US Military Manual specifies.
Congress is going to continue to try to override Bush’s veto.
Do you think the perverts in the US Intelligence Agency lobbied Bush to allow them their fun? Or do they provide him with DVDs of it for his late-night entertainment?
If you worked for a US Intelligence agency, would you feel comfortable doing sex-torture?
Looking at it from the Intelligence perspective, if the information the person has can save a thousand lives (let’s say that our man is on the inside the Takfir wal-Hijra), what would you do to extract information out of him if he’s not cracking with your standard physical “interrogation”?
Sex-torture is a route that I’d take only when all other options have been exhausted. One could parallel it with pepper spray–it could work, but chances are against it.
Except it’s been proven numerous times that torture is ineffective for gaining information. It usually just gets the person to tell you what you want to hear even if it’s completely made up. On top of that when you are trying to get information from someone who doesn’t actually have the information you can torture them until the cows come home and it won’t gain anything other than violating the person.
Torture is an ineffective method of gaining intelligence.
Okay, so you don’t do torture. The problem still remains–a member of a terrorist organization holds vital information to the the lives of a thousand “innocent” people. If not torture, how would you extract the information?
Well, seeing how waterboarding is not nearly as morally compromising as sex-torture, I’d say yes. However, seeing as how the CIA doesn’t submit to my whimsicals, the question really shouldn’t be put to me.
In the fight to defend our so called western values, we seem to be falling over ourselves to justify sacrificing our western values “in the cause”. Man is a rationalising animal, not a rational one.
Somehow, it is “justifiable” to subject the enemy to degrading sexual abuse - yet if the enemy puts a captured western soldier on TV, that is a breach of his human rights.
Good question. I’d also be interested to know how often, if ever, there has been a ticking-bomb situation of the kind used to justify torture, except in TV dramas.
For all those who use weasel words to suggest that water-boarding or whatever is not torture, I would like to see them subjected to it for a while. A good place to start would be Bush and friends - there are a great many questions I think the public would like to put to them.
this is just my opinion and we all know what opinions are worth, but these are the same people who are bombing our men, young men who wont be able to live the rest of there lives out. and these our the same people who beheaded innocent people. i say we string em up by there balls.
Ummmm… if you havn’t noticed, we’re doing the same thing to them… not just the soldiers but the civilians too.
And we were the invaders. We bombed them first. Seldom do people not retaliate (sp) after being bombed.
