Should the CIA be exempt from US laws prohibiting the use of torture?

[Channman 2]

>...torturing/dumping you at sea etc, you in this scenario?

I'm to fast on my feet. besides they be throwing me into my invironment, I live in the water. But it would take me awhile to walk back to shore with that damn weight on my foot.

Might be able to tumb a ride from a passing Sub.

[kallend 1,683]

Quote

Quote

It was proposed by a Republican so is not likely to exist in order to curry votes for Democrats.

I believe any non-value added proposal is to curry votes for "Incumbants". Once they get in power, they all want to keep it. I think most of the conflict in Washington is for show, polarize the populace, and it's easier to create strategy to pull in votes to stay in office for as long as you can.

This one is great as it doesn't involve redistributing funds to 'buy' votes like the more hotly contested ones. It will purely curry emotional votes. And all they have to do is bluster and argue and not change a thing. We see more of these as the fiscal positions of the parties converge and they try to polarize completely on social issues. it's the path of least resistance.

The little conflict that is real is likely about each person increasing their little bit of power over the others. But they've pretty well polarized to the 50/50 point, so that isn't changing for some time.

Maybe they're decent enough human beings despite being politicians that they believe that their country should not condone torture.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,476]

>I said that I thought the greatest value in exempting the CIA from a
> law banning torture is the pschological advantage. Nowhere did I
> ever say I supported physical torture. In fact, I said exactly the
> opposite.

This seems like legalizing rape so that women will be more careful, and not wear sexy dresses so "they're asking for it."

We have shown that, left to our own devices, we will torture people. The White House has already employed various strategies to exempt the US from the international laws concerning torture. It's time we made it clear to the world that we don't accept torture from ourselves or anyone else.

[ReBirth 0]

Quote

Subjectivity of law - that bit is just philosophical self stroking, you're better than that

Not at all. Name one law that EVERYONE can agree with. There aren't any. Because if there were, there would be no need for that law.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Maybe they're decent enough human beings despite being politicians that they believe that their country should not condone torture.

that's one theory -

(but of course the only decent ones are in one party or the other - depending)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Subjectivity of law - that bit is just philosophical self stroking, you're better than that

Not at all. Name one law that EVERYONE can agree with. There aren't any. Because if there were, there would be no need for that law.

I agree with your comment here, now we can all pat ourselves on the back for being clever and return to the other discussion (which was my point in that comment)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[ReBirth 0]

Torture is bad, mmmkay? Kids......don't torture.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Torture is bad, mmmkay? Kids......don't torture.

If you were running for Senate, I'd vote for you.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[ReBirth 0]

I'm kinda crazy, but I ain't nuts!

[Lefty 0]

I'd be very interested in seeing how everyone who condemns the use of torture would react if they were put into a real-world situation where they had responsibilities to something besides their delicate senses of self-righteousness. I guarantee fingers would be broken if I had a suspect with information about a threat against either my family or subordinate soldiers, consequences be damned. I'll bet money that most people on these boards would do the same. Like it or not, the CIA is a part of the government charged with keeping us protected from threats, and they will torture when neccessary even if it means legal trouble for them.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[SudsyFist 0]

Quote

Passing a law that makes it illegal removes an effective tool interrogators need.

Please allow me make a few somewhat informed statements:

1. Torture is not an effective tool interrogators need. We've been over this time and again: torture is far less effective at producing reliable data than the documented and compliant interrogation methods we currently use.



2. Having a CIA exemption to this law is not an effective tool interrogators need. Two big reasons come to mind:
   • There are already international laws in place prohibiting torture, and yet we still somehow manage to use intimidation techniques quite well. (EDIT: There is no psychological advantage whatsoever to a CIA exemption of this law.)
   • The bulk of interrogations are occurring at the tactical level, conducted by uniformed military units reporting to field commanders. If this is "an effective tool interrogators need," what about them?


3. Largely due to the spike in demand for interrogators sparked by the invasion of Iraq and the War on Terror, USAICS has had to make a lot of concessions to push through the massive numbers of interrogators needed. They're doing the best they can with what they've got to provide adequate training, but the fact remains that the experience level (maturity, etc.) of the interrogators we currently have actually conducting interrogations (as opposed to supporting those conducted by senior personnel) in the field is much lower than ideal, not to mention many candidates have been graduated whereas they'd have been reclassed if it was only a few years earlier. They're having to grow up fast in a live environment: huge potential for issues.
   
   Simple hypothetical example: a battle with insurgents inflicts several casualties on US forces, including a platoon leader. An insurgent is captured and brought in for interrogation. The company commander to whom the fallen LT reported accompanies the escort, and advises the wet-behind-the-ears interrogator that he better, "fuck him up good. He killed one of my LT's." To look the CPT in the eye and say, "No, sir," and conduct the interrogation professionally takes a some serious military character, and the newbs are much less likely to stand their ground than, say, a seasoned NCO.
   
   This is a real concern here, and due to the dual chain of command (administrative vs. operational) with which MI support often has to contend, top-down regulation of activities is usually most effective in ensuring policy is followed. Note that this doesn't necessarily have to be an edict from Congress.



4. Instead of fighting for what's right and best to enforce policy and maintain mission effectiveness, the politicians are having their usual field day with this, partisan games, power grabs, and all.

[billvon 2,476]

>I'd be very interested in seeing how everyone who condemns the
>use of torture would react if they were put into a real-world situation
> where they had responsibilities to something besides their delicate
> senses of self-righteousness.

Indeed, those are the situations that put your true beliefs to the test. Are you willing to sacrifice your values for some temporary safety, or relief from fear? If so, then those values aren't very important to you.

>I guarantee fingers would be broken if I had a suspect with
> information about a threat against either my family or subordinate
> soldiers, consequences be damned.

How about necks broken? Children killed in front of their parents? People beheaded? Electrodes on genitals? Young kids raped? Is anything OK as long as your cause is good, as long as it stops the mythical next 9/11?

>I'll bet money that most people on these boards would do the same.

Depends on how strong their principles are. Some people's principles are strong enough that they will not break them even for their own benefit, or the benefit of their friends/family.

[IanHarrop 37]

Quote

Should the CIA be exempt from US laws prohibiting the use of torture?

(The question obviously being generated by today's reports that it is the wish of the current administration that the CIA is exempt and thus permitted to torture people - at least under US law in any case).

Just to add my voice to the chorus.

NO the CIA should not be exempt from US or International laws prohibiting the use of torture.

If the USA starts torturing anyone then it's open season on US troops or other personnel captured by anyone else.

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

I find it strange that people want to hold the USA up to standards that no country in the world lives up to.

And I find it strange that many people do not expect the USA to hold itself up to standards that we as a nation set for ourselves.

I'd rather not lower the US down to the standards of the rest of the world. "Everyone else is doing it so why can't I?" I wouldn't tolerate that from my kid, much less policy-makers.

What is right is right even if nobody is doing it. What is wrong is wrong even if everybody is doing it.

I'd like the US to remain the shining light.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[SudsyFist 0]

Quote

"What is right is right even if nobody is doing it. What is wrong is wrong even if everybody is doing it."

I'd like the US to remain the shining light.

Fuck YEAH!

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

"What is right is right even if nobody is doing it. What is wrong is wrong even if everybody is doing it."

Some would call that a true 'cowboy' attitude.

(nicely put BTW)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Nightingale 0]

The US has already definied torture:

From the UN Convention Against Torture, which was negotiated by Reagan, signed by the US on April 18, 1988 and ratified by the US senate on October 21, 1994 .

Article 1a: For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.

The United States' reservation: That with reference to Article 1, the United States understands that, in order to constitute torture, an act must be specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering and that mental pain or suffering refers to prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from: (1) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering; (2) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality; (3) the threat of imminent death; or (4) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality.


You can read it here: http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/cat.htm

[IanHarrop 37]

Quote

Quote

"What is right is right even if nobody is doing it. What is wrong is wrong even if everybody is doing it."

I'd like the US to remain the shining light.

Fuck YEAH!

Quote

I'd like the US to remain the shining light.

I think that ship has sailed

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

(3) the threat of imminent death; or (4) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality.

It sounded ok right up until it got into 'threats' that weren't actions. (the 'mental' torture aspect). With that it's pretty coddly. I swear, I'm gonna turn down the thermostat just a bit further unless you talk.

And what's with the 'public official bit? By that UN definition, you can poke red hot irons into someone's eye to get a confession and it's not torture - provided it's not done by, or with the consent of, a public official.

Pretty crappy, even for the UN.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 2,476]

> I find it strange that people want to hold the USA up to standards
>that no country in the world lives up to.

Looks like we're teaching the Iraqi government more than just how to bicker:

----------------------------------------
News of the American casualties came as a prominent Sunni Muslim party called for an international investigation into allegations that detainees were being tortured in an Iraqi Ministry compound.

The facility allegedly held more than 160 detainees -- some who showed signs of apparent torture.
----------------------------------------

Is that really the sort of 'shining light' we want to spread throughout the Middle East?

[ReBirth 0]

Come on Bill, they were torturing each other long before we got there. Remember, that's why we invaded and toppled Hussein, because of the way he treated his citizens. It's ok for them to torture now though, because this new government is friendly with us.

Friends + Torture = Good

[pirana 0]

Why bother with torture? It's so messy, and unreliable, and there's this whole ethics arguement.

Two words: Truth serum. Works like magic.

Unless people consider that torture too.

Anybody who has been put out SLOWLY with sodium pentathol knows that a person has absolutely no will power while under a certain level of it's influence.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[SudsyFist 0]

Quote

And what's with the 'public official bit? By that UN definition, you can poke red hot irons into someone's eye to get a confession and it's not torture - provided it's not done by, or with the consent of, a public official.

Here:

Quote

a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.

In the U.S., commissioned officers are appointed by the President, and operate under "official capacity." I'm not a lawyer, but I seem to recall that NCO's are delegated this authority from commissioned officers. And my impression is that most conventional military organizations around the world implement similar delegation structure.

I think this clause effectively distinguishes, "torture," from, "abuse." But it's just a somewhat educated guess.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Unless people consider that torture too.

They'll write it into the definition next revision. It's a right to privacy torture. It'll be put next to right to free health care torture, and right to hot coffee torture.

didn't you know?

{I don't know where I'm going with this, It's just a really slow day at work}

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[jdhill 0]

Quote

Isn't the CIA primarily interested in foreign intel gathering?

If you were a nice American citizen wouldn't the FBI be torturing/dumping you at sea etc, you in this scenario?

By the book, yes... but I've heard stories about these "black helicopters"...

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke