Guest Peeves Posted February 11, 2012 Report Posted February 11, 2012 A conflict?A dilemma. Certainly an interesting exercise that Canada seems to taken a position on as follows. "CSIS may use information from torture in ‘exceptional’ cases": Vic Toews http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/07/csis-torture-exceptional-cases/ The question sounds the same? Andrew Coyne makes a point of the distinction. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/02/10/andrew-coyne-in-defence-of-using-evidence-from-torture/ Truncated, read the entire short article in link above.^ ......" but that is not the issue that confronts us in the controversy that has consumed Parliament for much of the past week: whether it is ever permissible to make use of information obtained by torture in other countries, as security forces were instructed in a recently unearthed government directive. To be clear, the general policy that Canadian security agents are, in the ordinary pursuit of their duties, forbidden to knowingly use evidence obtained by torture remains in effect. The directive instructs that “in exceptional circumstances,” where the threat is urgent and there is not time to verify that the information received was not obtained by torture, they may nevertheless make use of it. It still wouldn’t be admissible as evidence to convict someone in court, but it might be used, say, to evacuate a railway station. Isn’t this just the “ticking time bomb” argument again? No. The fallacy there, remember, was that you could not know in advance whether by using torture you would find the ticking time bomb. But in this case the situation is the reverse: you’ve been handed the ticking time bomb, and are wondering if torture was the source. And if it was, well, the torture has already occurred. Someone else has already crossed that bright line. They could not know in advance what information their prisoner possessed, and as such were not justified in using torture to obtain it; but since they have done so, you are now in a position to judge its value. You’d still want to be careful how you used it, for the reasons discussed. But would you really just ignore it altogether? Really? Not convinced? Let’s leave the ticking time bomb scenarios out of it. Suppose, rather, we were talking about some life-saving medical advance. But suppose that this, too, was derived from torture. Actually, we do not need to suppose: exactly such a dilemma has confronted modern-day medical researchers with regard to the hideous human experiments carried out by the Nazis. These were almost unimaginably barbaric, and generally worthless: pseudoscientific rubbish, performed with as little regard for scientific rigour as for human decency. Yet here and there, for example in the field of hypothermia, they seem to have yielded some genuinely useful data: information that could save lives. Are we obliged to discard that information altogether, because of its tainted provenance? Of course, there’s an important difference in the two situations: the Nazis are no longer with us, whereas today’s practitioners of torture are very much in action, in countries around the world. It is legitimate to be concerned that Canada’s willingness to use the information they produce would, in effect, create a “demand” for torture (though I rather doubt the supply would dry up in our absence) or indeed open the door to the sort of nod-and-wink outsourcing of brutality we have seen before. That would certainly be a concern if it were generally the practice to use such information, but it cannot be ruled out even in the more circumscribed policy the government has adopted. Still, unless we are prepared to say that, having received word of a plot to, say, blow up a plane over Montreal tomorrow, we would do nothing with it on the off chance that it might have been obtained through torture, I think we have to live with that possibility." Postmedia News Quote
dre Posted February 12, 2012 Report Posted February 12, 2012 Pretty simple. You act on the information, but you also issue Canada wide arrest warrants for all officials of the torturing government, shut down our embassy there, and do whatever you can to help bring them to justice. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 12, 2012 Report Posted February 12, 2012 Pretty simple. You act on the information, but you also issue Canada wide arrest warrants for all officials of the torturing government, shut down our embassy there, and do whatever you can to help bring them to justice. How noble. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest Peeves Posted February 12, 2012 Report Posted February 12, 2012 Pretty simple. You act on the information, but you also issue Canada wide arrest warrants for all officials of the torturing government, shut down our embassy there, and do whatever you can to help bring them to justice. I agree that you should indeed act on the intel. but, the regime in the cross hairs might be a trading partner or NATO member. China...Turkey or Mexican war against uh? drugs I think rather you register a formal 'uh uh! naughty -naughty'rebuke and a subtle thank you. Quote
eyeball Posted February 12, 2012 Report Posted February 12, 2012 How noble. Makes you wanna puke doesn't it? It must pain you to be aligned so closely to a nation with such a queasy ethos towards security. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 12, 2012 Report Posted February 12, 2012 Makes you wanna puke doesn't it? It must pain you to be aligned so closely to a nation with such a queasy ethos towards security. Not at all....that's just how reality smells. Haven't you ever ridden horses? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
olpfan1 Posted February 12, 2012 Report Posted February 12, 2012 (edited) Yes, act on any information you're given because it is your ass if you don't act and something bad happens. I honestly can't believe there are people who say they shouldn't act. If it were their jobs you're damn straight they would have a different view on this. Edited February 12, 2012 by olpfan1 Quote
Guest Peeves Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 Yes, act on any information you're given because it is your ass if you don't act and something bad happens. I honestly can't believe there are people who say they shouldn't act. If it were their jobs you're damn straight they would have a different view on this. I can ..maybe understand a reluctance of a government to in any way support torture. I also would like 'torture' defined. Like porn, it's much in the eye of the beholder. To some never turning out a light, or water boarding is and to some it is not. Is playing loud music 24-7 torture? I also try putting my self in a scenario where I don't give a damn about the parties rights and ask what would I personally do for information. Say a kidnapper, known pedophile-murderer took my child but I caught his/her partner, to what extent would I (you) go to gain info. to save the kid? Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 To what extent? you do what you have to do or live the rest of your life knowing you could have done something about it Quote
Guest Peeves Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 To what extent? you do what you have to do or live the rest of your life knowing you could have done something about it 'zactly, and without compunction or recriminations. So I can hardly be sanctimonious as some like to proclaim their noble selves. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.