Interrogation and Torture
In the Roman civilization torture was used mostly as a means of entertainment in the form of gladiator fights, and throughout history torture has been used as punishment by the state the senate, the public, and even the church. In the 17th and 18th century torture had its fall and that was thought to be the end of the era of harsh physical torture. However Since 2001 there has been a rise in torture.
Im sure everyone knows what an interrogation is. To some of you an interrogation looks like this (plays video).And so obviously this is how an interrogation should not be done this conversation goes absolutely nowhere and raises more questions than answers, the exact opposite of what an interrogation is supposed to …show more content…
These countries use torture as punishment and interrogation for their detainees, in many of these countries torture is used as a means of preventing terrorism. It has been proven that torture is actually not an effective form of interrogation. It does not work and above all it is inhumane and it is a violation against human rights.American torture of their detainees is actually a recruiting tool used by Al-Qaeda operatives. Much of the debate on torture involves moral and ethical concerns but these arguments are irrelevant if torture doesn 't work in the first place.The strongest argument in favour of torture is the so called 'ticking bomb ' scenario. Alan Dershowitz gave a good summary of it in the San Francisco Chronicle in …show more content…
This scenario supposes we have the right person in custody, it presumes he has the right information, it presumes there isn 't a better way to get this information, and above all it presumes torture is an effective way of getting this information.
What 's interesting is that many members of the military and intelligence communities are actually unsure of the effectiveness of torture.
Ali Soufan, a former FBI special agent with experience interrogating al-Qaeda operatives, pointed out in Time magazine that:
“When they are in pain, people will say anything to get the pain to stop. Most of the time, they will lie, make up anything to make you stop hurting them. That means the information you 're getting is useless.”
Ali soufan wasn 't the only one to make this assessment many former intelligence people have expressed a similar argument, The US Army Training Manual 's section on interrogation, suggests that:
“…the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to
In the Roman civilization torture was used mostly as a means of entertainment in the form of gladiator fights, and throughout history torture has been used as punishment by the state the senate, the public, and even the church. In the 17th and 18th century torture had its fall and that was thought to be the end of the era of harsh physical torture. However Since 2001 there has been a rise in torture.
Im sure everyone knows what an interrogation is. To some of you an interrogation looks like this (plays video).And so obviously this is how an interrogation should not be done this conversation goes absolutely nowhere and raises more questions than answers, the exact opposite of what an interrogation is supposed to …show more content…
These countries use torture as punishment and interrogation for their detainees, in many of these countries torture is used as a means of preventing terrorism. It has been proven that torture is actually not an effective form of interrogation. It does not work and above all it is inhumane and it is a violation against human rights.American torture of their detainees is actually a recruiting tool used by Al-Qaeda operatives. Much of the debate on torture involves moral and ethical concerns but these arguments are irrelevant if torture doesn 't work in the first place.The strongest argument in favour of torture is the so called 'ticking bomb ' scenario. Alan Dershowitz gave a good summary of it in the San Francisco Chronicle in …show more content…
This scenario supposes we have the right person in custody, it presumes he has the right information, it presumes there isn 't a better way to get this information, and above all it presumes torture is an effective way of getting this information.
What 's interesting is that many members of the military and intelligence communities are actually unsure of the effectiveness of torture.
Ali Soufan, a former FBI special agent with experience interrogating al-Qaeda operatives, pointed out in Time magazine that:
“When they are in pain, people will say anything to get the pain to stop. Most of the time, they will lie, make up anything to make you stop hurting them. That means the information you 're getting is useless.”
Ali soufan wasn 't the only one to make this assessment many former intelligence people have expressed a similar argument, The US Army Training Manual 's section on interrogation, suggests that:
“…the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to