Jump to content

Conservatives Quietly OK Info Gained through Torture


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Not just reasonable but logical and natural.

Not ethical mind you, but still just the normal thing you do when you have information.

I suppose this is true.

If I was a paranoid nut and installed a keylogger on the family computer to get my wife's login information. That's unethical (I think illegal too?).

But if I found out that a child that I thought was mine, wasn't. I'd still use the info.

Context is very appropriate. The context of this(not just any) Conservative government putting this through is less palatable. Especially given the nature of their actions as a whole.

Edited by MiddleClassCentrist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How are we? We're not the ones using the thumbscrew......

Ok, maybe not following the same procedures but it is the same principle.

I have a problem with that. I think it is a slippery slope.

And they can say that this will only be the case in extreme cases but....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If all of you are so giddy about using this kind of information, then why wait for other countries? Why dont we just start torturing folks ourself? I mean.... you would all be making the same arguments.

You're right. They're not defending Canada's behaviour; they're defending the behaviour of regressive and oppressively violently regimes. We see where their sympathies really move.

I think they should advocate openly for Canada to use torture more directly. I'm interested in seeing who the snivelling cowards and moral relativists really are.

Go ahead and ditch your values over something less likely to kill you then a lightening strike. :lol:

Yes, surely we don't have to go over the discredited "ticking time bomb" hypothesis yet again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why Ignatieff was toast!

Only fools believe accurate intel comes from torture....

After nearly 10 years , its resulted in bad intel and the executions of many innocents and the imprisonment of many guards "just doing there job".

That said, governments have always received intel through torture..

That doesn't mean its accurate intel.

Perhaps the biggest joke and most embarrassing day for Colin Powell was at the UN presenting false and inaccurate information received through torture.

He deeply regrets and is embarrassed to this day about it.

John McCain has been firm and steady ....

Torture creates sadists.... not intel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. It seems most are onboard with the questionable accuracy of evidence achieved by torture. Makes sense to me!

However, nobody seems to want to argue with me about evidence obtained with errors in procedure. So far, at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, nobody seems to want to argue with me about evidence obtained with errors in procedure. So far, at least.

I agree so there's nothing to argue. Barring critical evidence because of a loophole is ridiculous.

Reasonable suspicion to investigate while pursuing another legal action should be enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using information gained under torture is not the same as torturing someone to get information yourself or having someone else do your dirty work for you.

You may have good reason to believe information got under torture or you may not. To disregard information you have good reason to believe is accurate just because it was obtained under torture by someone else would be stupid and irresponsible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. It seems most are onboard with the questionable accuracy of evidence achieved by torture. Makes sense to me!

Actually what most are not on board with is torture.

However, nobody seems to want to argue with me about evidence obtained with errors in procedure. So far, at least.

In a thread that highlights evidence obtained by torture...I guess arguing for even more official latitude would feel like an ewww moment for most humane beings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using information gained under torture is not the same as torturing someone to get information yourself or having someone else do your dirty work for you.

It sure feels like it does.

You may have good reason to believe information got under torture or you may not. To disregard information you have good reason to believe is accurate just because it was obtained under torture by someone else would be stupid and irresponsible.

I think it would also just create a demand for more evidence obtained the same way.

Edited by eyeball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. It seems most are onboard with the questionable accuracy of evidence achieved by torture. Makes sense to me!

However, nobody seems to want to argue with me about evidence obtained with errors in procedure. So far, at least.

Ya thats because you have everyone on IGNORE.

:lol:

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sure feels like it does.

I think it would also just create a demand for more evidence obtained the same way.

So what. If you come into possession of some information that could save lives, do you ignore it because it may have been gained from torture? If someone says they have some information that could save lives, do you refuse to hear it because it may have been gained under torture? Where do you get off thinking your personal ethics are more important than some other innocent person's life?

To bad real life isn't so black and white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where do you get off thinking your personal ethics are more important than some other innocent person's life?

It's our government's ethics that are at question here and I trust them about as far as I can spit.

To bad real life isn't so black and white.

No and that being the case I'll take my chances and ignore it thanks. I think there will be more innocent lives put at risk in the long run by going down Harper's road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's our government's ethics that are at question here and I trust them about as far as I can spit.

No and that being the case I'll take my chances and ignore it thanks. I think there will be more innocent lives put at risk in the long run by going down Harper's road.

Problem is you are taking chances with other peoples lives if you ignore it. That's pretty damn selfish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem is you are taking chances with other peoples lives if you ignore it. That's pretty damn selfish.

Since there's no reason to suppose that innocent poeple don't get tortured, and give false information to stop the suffering; and since there's every reason to suppose that guilty people who are tortured also would give false information to alleviate their suffering...that throws a wrench into it.

to put it generously.

In the former case(s), it raises its own ethical questions, doesn't it?

Hell, I'd bet money that it happen quite frequently; the countries that most often commit torture are not generally known for their adherence to accountability for government wrongdoing.

And we're not talking primarily even of people who have been tried and convicted...they're tortured on the auspices of "intel." We've all heard of the Afghan cases where people were awarded money for offering up names. So, the abuses and corruption and lies are self-evident...and innocent people are tortured.

And then we justify it in the name of...wait for it..."protecting the innocent."

The disconnect is more than profound; the train is right off the rails.

S'what happens when people start justifying the very worst aspects of human behaviour.

I'm surprised so many people reflexively trust the torturers, honestly. They're as bad as any sociopaths, and their authority does not decrease their culpability.

Edited by bleeding heart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since there's no reason to suppose that innocent poeple don't get tortured, and give false information to stop the suffering; and since there's every reason to suppose that guilty people who are tortured also would give false information to alleviate their suffering...that throws a wrench into it.

to put it generously.

In the former case(s), it raises its own ethical questions, doesn't it?

Hell, I'd bet money that it happen quite frequently; the countries that most often commit torture are not generally known for their adherence to accountability for government wrongdoing.

And we're not talking primarily even of people who have been tried and convicted...they're tortured on the auspices of "intel." We've all heard of the Afghan cases where people were awarded money for offering up names. So, the abuses and corruption and lies are self-evident...and innocent people are tortured.

And then we justify it in the name of...wait for it..."protecting the innocent."

The disconnect is more than profound; the train is right off the rails.

S'what happens when people start justifying the very worst aspects of human behaviour.

I'm surprised so many people reflexively trust the torturers, honestly. They're as bad as any sociopaths, and their authority does not decrease their culpability.

There is no reason to think that innocent people don't get tortured but it is highly unlikely that an innocent person could cook up information that would fool skilled interrogators. But that isn't the point when it comes to using information. The fact is, torture does work, that is why it is used. Every intelligence agency operates on a need to know basis because it is taken for granted that a person will talk under interrogation and the less they know the better.

Any information wouldn't be treated in a vacuum but with consideration of its source, how it was obtained and how it relates to other intelligence you may have. If you obtained information from any source that lead you to believe innocent people were going to be killed and you did nothing about it, you should be put up against a wall and shot because you would be an accomplice in that crime if it took place. It is not for you to pronounce a death sentence on innocent people because of your airy fairy principles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you say so...

...ditto.

No, what do you say? If you were given a piece of believable information that a bombing was going to take place and it came from a source that is known to use torture at times, what would you do? It is your decision alone, you don't get someone else to make it for you according to your principles. If you did nothing, would you be prepared to live with the consequences of your inaction if the bombing took place?

Not ditto, I have no desire to play God with others lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, what do you say? If you were given a piece of believable information that a bombing was going to take place and it came from a source that is known to use torture at times, what would you do? It is your decision alone, you don't get someone else to make it for you according to your principles. If you did nothing, would you be prepared to live with the consequences of your inaction if the bombing took place?

Yes I would.

Not ditto, I have no desire to play God with others lives.

I have no desire to play the Devil's advocate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Derek L

Ok, maybe not following the same procedures but it is the same principle.

I have a problem with that. I think it is a slippery slope.

And they can say that this will only be the case in extreme cases but....

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t condone it as a “preferred method” of obtaining information as physical torture, by and large, is ineffective (and namely sadistic) in the vast majority of cases, as proven by the Nazi’s for the most part……..

A more apt approach, also pioneered by the Luftwaffe & Gestapo, is mild Psychological “torture”, again, an approach taken on captured British, American and Canadian aircrew, in that the interrogator would feed them, give them smokes, talk about baseball and generally “befriend” the prisoner, all the while said prisoner would know there was a possible threat of violence lingering in the air………

This approach (and variations of) has been adopted by Western Military/Intelligence/police agencies……Think of all those cop movies/shows where you see the “good cop, bad cop” routine…….Or the reported methods used in Gitmo, one hand a prisoner could be water boarded, deprived sleep and blindfolded with a black hood, on the other, the facility also accommodates Muslim religious practices, hands out Korans, complies with Islamic dietary considerations and garners first rate medical and dental care on the prisoners………

With that being said, I still don’t see a problem if some other agencies obtained information useful to Canada by means of physical torture……….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,742
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    CrazyCanuck89
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • paradox34 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • DACHSHUND went up a rank
      Rookie
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      First Post
    • aru earned a badge
      First Post
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...