White House Defends CIA's Use of Waterboarding in Interrogations
I couldn't believe that this was real. The White House defended the notion that almost drowning a person to get them to talk is acceptable. Fratto defended waterboarding, which is a form of torture, in the event that "an attack might be imminent". Parts of the U.S. are still under high risk for terrorist attack. Does that mean that any day is a day for interrogation? I'm glad that congress is investigating this further.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
So what you are saying is that you value the rights of those who would do us harm more than the innocent American? Waterboarding may be painful and uncomftrable, but that is the point. Giving terrorists plush accomadation's is not going to make them talk, not to mention they do not deserve it. Furthermore if we are not talking about U.S. citizens, they should have no Constitutional Protections. If waterboarding one man means saving thousands of innocent people, that is something I am willing to live with.
It's not so much an issue of Constitutional protections - rights of detainees and/or the accused may differ outside of the US, but that doesn't mean they don't exist - as it is of human rights, international law/treaty violation, and criminality associated with acts of war. All of which are potentially pretty serious, regardless of one's personal opinion over the role and appropriateness of torture in the "War on Terror".
It seems hard to take a stance on this issue. On the one hand I don't support the idea of torture and on the other if someone is a threat to many innocent lives I would want to get any information they had to try and protect those innocent lives. Nothing is probably going to really change, tactics wise, for interrogating terrorist suspects, its just whether we find out or not.
Hard to take a stance on this issue? REALLY?! I have family members in the military and cousins over in Iraq right now. If we defend waterboarding our "enemies" what is to stop them from using the same techniques on our POW's or detainees? There are better and more HUMANE ways of getting information out of these prisoners. I don't think that anyone is asking for or defending "plush" accomodations. The United States is not very popular internationally as it is. What do you think violating treaty negotiations is going to do for our credibility? Many experienced intelligence agency and military interrogators have even come out against this technique saying that a confession coming from someone who is under the impression that they are dying is not a reliable source. It frustrates me that this is even a topic of discussion or controversy.
Post a Comment