Gerry Conlon was tortured for information during the troubles (wartime) and was sentenced to 15 years on the back of the info obtained...and yes he was in fact picked up off the street like some random Joe, his only crime was being an Irishman without an alibi (even though it turned out he did).dayarath wrote:
I'm not talking about picking a random joe up from the street and torturing them into admitting some stuff. I'm talking about war time.Braddock wrote:
I believe it was Tarantino who said that if you torture someone for long enough they'll tell you they started the Chicago fires but it doesn't fucking necessarily make it so.
And what do you say to an innocent person you've accidentally tortured? Sorry?
Read the book Bravo Two Zero? if I were on the other end I'd put those wires on their balls and have them talking in seconds. You can't afford to lose time in such a situation and you need all the information you can get.
there's your no rules world.
What can you say to an innocent person you tortured?
I would only allow to torture those of which it's obvious they did something and you need to know something. Torture isn't for yes and no questions it's for detailed information you want to know. If you already know the information and he only needs to say yes, why torture - that is unnessecary.
Disregarding the fact that torture is inhumane but in some situation nessecary.
unlucky and not supposed to happen, what else can I say.Braddock wrote:
Gerry Conlon was tortured for information during the troubles (wartime) and was sentenced to 15 years on the back of the info obtained...and yes he was in fact picked up off the street like some random Joe, his only crime was being an Irishman without an alibi (even though it turned out he did).
inane little opines
I do understand where you are coming from with it Braddock, but you also have to understand shit does happen. You have to look at when people fuck up they don't like to admit it. Kinda like the Count of Monticristo.Braddock wrote:
Gerry Conlon was tortured for information during the troubles (wartime) and was sentenced to 15 years on the back of the info obtained...and yes he was in fact picked up off the street like some random Joe, his only crime was being an Irishman without an alibi (even though it turned out he did).dayarath wrote:
I'm not talking about picking a random joe up from the street and torturing them into admitting some stuff. I'm talking about war time.Braddock wrote:
I believe it was Tarantino who said that if you torture someone for long enough they'll tell you they started the Chicago fires but it doesn't fucking necessarily make it so.
And what do you say to an innocent person you've accidentally tortured? Sorry?
Read the book Bravo Two Zero? if I were on the other end I'd put those wires on their balls and have them talking in seconds. You can't afford to lose time in such a situation and you need all the information you can get.
there's your no rules world.
What can you say to an innocent person you tortured?
I would only allow to torture those of which it's obvious they did something and you need to know something. Torture isn't for yes and no questions it's for detailed information you want to know. If you already know the information and he only needs to say yes, why torture - that is unnessecary.
Disregarding the fact that torture is inhumane but in some situation nessecary.
It happened to three other people besides him too, they also locked up seven of his relatives (including his dad who died in prison and his 14 year old cousin). Unlucky is not good enough I'm afraid, what happened to them was as bad as any act of terrorism.dayarath wrote:
unlucky and not supposed to happen, what else can I say.Braddock wrote:
Gerry Conlon was tortured for information during the troubles (wartime) and was sentenced to 15 years on the back of the info obtained...and yes he was in fact picked up off the street like some random Joe, his only crime was being an Irishman without an alibi (even though it turned out he did).
SgtHeihn does say it, it's not supposed to happen but I will allow torture when I deem it nessecary, though making sure that your target actually has anything to do with what happened is a good first step that they might've forgotten in the situation you described.Braddock wrote:
It happened to three other people besides him too, they also locked up seven of his relatives (including his dad who died in prison and his 14 year old cousin). Unlucky is not good enough I'm afraid, what happened to them was as bad as any act of terrorism.dayarath wrote:
unlucky and not supposed to happen, what else can I say.Braddock wrote:
Gerry Conlon was tortured for information during the troubles (wartime) and was sentenced to 15 years on the back of the info obtained...and yes he was in fact picked up off the street like some random Joe, his only crime was being an Irishman without an alibi (even though it turned out he did).
shit happens.
inane little opines
Yes it is, and hopefully they take the parties to court and sue the shit outta them. What happened to him could have been worse, they could have just made him vanish.Braddock wrote:
It happened to three other people besides him too, they also locked up seven of his relatives (including his dad who died in prison and his 14 year old cousin). Unlucky is not good enough I'm afraid, what happened to them was as bad as any act of terrorism.dayarath wrote:
unlucky and not supposed to happen, what else can I say.Braddock wrote:
Gerry Conlon was tortured for information during the troubles (wartime) and was sentenced to 15 years on the back of the info obtained...and yes he was in fact picked up off the street like some random Joe, his only crime was being an Irishman without an alibi (even though it turned out he did).
As someone who has relatives who were locked up in similar circumstances during the troubles I will not accept the same type of system being allowed to operate in what is supposed to be a free, accountable and civilised society. Terrorists believe their methods are justified by the end goal, if you question the methods they will probably just tell you "shit happens"...that's exactly what the security services are doing.dayarath wrote:
SgtHeihn does say it, it's not supposed to happen but I will allow torture when I deem it nessecary, though making sure that your target actually has anything to do with what happened is a good first step that they might've forgotten in the situation you described.Braddock wrote:
It happened to three other people besides him too, they also locked up seven of his relatives (including his dad who died in prison and his 14 year old cousin). Unlucky is not good enough I'm afraid, what happened to them was as bad as any act of terrorism.dayarath wrote:
unlucky and not supposed to happen, what else can I say.
shit happens.
Who do you think you are to decide that bad luck is a good enough excuse for 15 years of these men's lives being taken away? That is horribly insulting.SgtHeihn wrote:
Yes it is, and hopefully they take the parties to court and sue the shit outta them. What happened to him could have been worse, they could have just made him vanish.Braddock wrote:
It happened to three other people besides him too, they also locked up seven of his relatives (including his dad who died in prison and his 14 year old cousin). Unlucky is not good enough I'm afraid, what happened to them was as bad as any act of terrorism.dayarath wrote:
unlucky and not supposed to happen, what else can I say.
Guildford 4, Birmingham 6 clearly demonstrate why evidence obtained by torture is inadmissible in convictions - but I got tickets for Tyrone against Wexford this Sunday at Croker YEHOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Did you not get the memo IG? Apparently "shit happens" and torture is still necessary and acceptable.IG-Calibre wrote:
Guildford 4, Birmingham 6 clearly demonstrate why evidence obtained by torture is inadmissible in convictions - but I got tickets for Tyrone against Wexford this Sunday at Croker YEHOOOOOOOOOOOO!
when people are dying and lives are at stake, torture is nessecary. but as I said you must identify your target, picking up someone off the street and torturing them is absolutely a crime and the people who do this should be punished, nevertheless the methods - as cruel as they are - will need to be used in some situations and can save lives.Braddock wrote:
As someone who has relatives who were locked up in similar circumstances during the troubles I will not accept the same type of system being allowed to operate in what is supposed to be a free, accountable and civilised society. Terrorists believe their methods are justified by the end goal, if you question the methods they will probably just tell you "shit happens"...that's exactly what the security services are doing.
honestly I'd find it hard how you can torture anyone who isn't clearly identifiable as being part of the party that's opposing you (I.E, POW's.) That's really inhumane.
Last edited by dayarath (2008-08-26 14:48:51)
inane little opines
Well, what the fuck you want them to do? Make a time machine and take it back? Yes, it does suck that 15yrs of his life were taken, but their is nothing that can be done or said to bring them back. Him being picked up and framed for a crime he didn't commit is probably the worst case of bad luck I have ever heard of.Braddock wrote:
Who do you think you are to decide that bad luck is a good enough excuse for 15 years of these men's lives being taken away? That is horribly insulting.SgtHeihn wrote:
Yes it is, and hopefully they take the parties to court and sue the shit outta them. What happened to him could have been worse, they could have just made him vanish.Braddock wrote:
It happened to three other people besides him too, they also locked up seven of his relatives (including his dad who died in prison and his 14 year old cousin). Unlucky is not good enough I'm afraid, what happened to them was as bad as any act of terrorism.
And was I the one that imprisoned him? No, it was one of your Superior European governments. Guess the US isn't the only one that do it.
By the way the judge who sentenced them to 15 years said he would have had them executed if hanging were still allowed.SgtHeihn wrote:
Well, what the fuck you want them to do? Make a time machine and take it back? Yes, it does suck that 15yrs of his life were taken, but their is nothing that can be done or said to bring them back. Him being picked up and framed for a crime he didn't commit is probably the worst case of bad luck I have ever heard of.Braddock wrote:
Who do you think you are to decide that bad luck is a good enough excuse for 15 years of these men's lives being taken away? That is horribly insulting.SgtHeihn wrote:
Yes it is, and hopefully they take the parties to court and sue the shit outta them. What happened to him could have been worse, they could have just made him vanish.
And was I the one that imprisoned him? No, it was one of your Superior European governments. Guess the US isn't the only one that do it.
Very bad luck wasn't it...the same thing happened to six other innocent Irish people in a completely separate incident by the way - see how a system that is built on questionable tactics can easily lose the run of itself?
Happened all the time during the troubles. Back then being Irish was enough of a suspicion for being interned without trial and subjected to all manner of torture. The climate back then was no different to the 'war on terror' now tbh, the only difference now is Irishmen have been replaced with Muslims.dayarath wrote:
when people are dying and lives are at stake, torture is nessecary. but as I said you must identify your target, picking up someone off the street and torturing them is absolutely a crime and the people who do this should be punished, nevertheless the methods - as cruel as they are - will need to be used in some situations and can save lives.Braddock wrote:
As someone who has relatives who were locked up in similar circumstances during the troubles I will not accept the same type of system being allowed to operate in what is supposed to be a free, accountable and civilised society. Terrorists believe their methods are justified by the end goal, if you question the methods they will probably just tell you "shit happens"...that's exactly what the security services are doing.
honestly I'd find it hard how you can torture anyone who isn't clearly identifiable as being part of the party that's opposing you (I.E, POW's.) That's really inhumane.
Torture tactics are also a fantastic recruiting driver for the enemy and validates the views of extremists (in their minds).
OK, he was tried on a bs charge, the Judge didn't know all the facts. Shit does happens.
Torture, sucks, but it still happens. It will always happen. Join Amnesty International.
What else you want us to say on here? Braddock, you are right, torture doesn't work?
Torture, sucks, but it still happens. It will always happen. Join Amnesty International.
What else you want us to say on here? Braddock, you are right, torture doesn't work?
shit happens, that's all you can say. They lost 15 years of their life and there is no way you can repay them. Do you want to scrap the entire idea of torture off the list of tactics that can be used in war time? not going to happen.Braddock wrote:
By the way the judge who sentenced them to 15 years said he would have had them executed if hanging were still allowed.
Very bad luck wasn't it...the same thing happened to six other innocent Irish people in a completely separate incident by the way - see how a system that is built on questionable tactics can easily lose the run of itself?
Should these tactics be limited to actual soldiers of the opposition? IMHO, yes, or to people who are obviously part of said opposition. terrorists make this harder though due to blending in in the population.
no system is perfect, there's always a hole and you are extremely unlucky if you fall through it. In this case the hole being corrupt people.
Last edited by dayarath (2008-08-26 15:05:45)
inane little opines
Surely you can see that the 'war on terror' provides a convenient way of having 'war time' all of the time and hence allows for the rules to be bent and broken ad infinitum?dayarath wrote:
shit happens, that's all you can say. They lost 15 years of their life and there is no way you can repay them. Do you want to scrap the entire idea of torture off the list of tactics that can be used in war time? not going to happen.Braddock wrote:
By the way the judge who sentenced them to 15 years said he would have had them executed if hanging were still allowed.
Very bad luck wasn't it...the same thing happened to six other innocent Irish people in a completely separate incident by the way - see how a system that is built on questionable tactics can easily lose the run of itself?
Should these tactics be limited to actual soldiers of the opposition? IMHO, yes, or to people who are obviously part of said opposition. terrorists make this harder though due to blending in in the population.
no system is perfect, there's always a hole and you are extremely unlucky if you fall through it. In this case the hole being corrupt people.
Can anyone tell me when the 'war on terror' will ever end? Is 'terror' going to 'lose' at some stage of the conflict or something?
So, the true issue comes out.Braddock wrote:
Surely you can see that the 'war on terror' provides a convenient way of having 'war time' all of the time and hence allows for the rules to be bent and broken ad infinitum?dayarath wrote:
shit happens, that's all you can say. They lost 15 years of their life and there is no way you can repay them. Do you want to scrap the entire idea of torture off the list of tactics that can be used in war time? not going to happen.Braddock wrote:
By the way the judge who sentenced them to 15 years said he would have had them executed if hanging were still allowed.
Very bad luck wasn't it...the same thing happened to six other innocent Irish people in a completely separate incident by the way - see how a system that is built on questionable tactics can easily lose the run of itself?
Should these tactics be limited to actual soldiers of the opposition? IMHO, yes, or to people who are obviously part of said opposition. terrorists make this harder though due to blending in in the population.
no system is perfect, there's always a hole and you are extremely unlucky if you fall through it. In this case the hole being corrupt people.
Can anyone tell me when the 'war on terror' will ever end? Is 'terror' going to 'lose' at some stage of the conflict or something?
edit: I'm done with this thread.
Last edited by SgtHeihn (2008-08-26 15:15:57)
When they've had their balls busted, and that when the people of those countries finally see that supporting/harbouring these groups is of no benefit to them at all.Braddock wrote:
Surely you can see that the 'war on terror' provides a convenient way of having 'war time' all of the time and hence allows for the rules to be bent and broken ad infinitum?dayarath wrote:
shit happens, that's all you can say. They lost 15 years of their life and there is no way you can repay them. Do you want to scrap the entire idea of torture off the list of tactics that can be used in war time? not going to happen.Braddock wrote:
By the way the judge who sentenced them to 15 years said he would have had them executed if hanging were still allowed.
Very bad luck wasn't it...the same thing happened to six other innocent Irish people in a completely separate incident by the way - see how a system that is built on questionable tactics can easily lose the run of itself?
Should these tactics be limited to actual soldiers of the opposition? IMHO, yes, or to people who are obviously part of said opposition. terrorists make this harder though due to blending in in the population.
no system is perfect, there's always a hole and you are extremely unlucky if you fall through it. In this case the hole being corrupt people.
Can anyone tell me when the 'war on terror' will ever end? Is 'terror' going to 'lose' at some stage of the conflict or something?
Wishful thinking, the war on terror could easily be applied to other scenarios and enemies even if the Hezbollah's and Al Qaeda's of this world are crushed. Your argument for extraordinary methods being tolerable during extraordinary circumstances might have stood up if not for the fact that the US now fight wars against abstract and vague enemies and hence no longer fight within regular timeframes and circumstances.M.O.A.B wrote:
When they've had their balls busted, and that when the people of those countries finally see that supporting/harbouring these groups is of no benefit to them at all.Braddock wrote:
Surely you can see that the 'war on terror' provides a convenient way of having 'war time' all of the time and hence allows for the rules to be bent and broken ad infinitum?dayarath wrote:
shit happens, that's all you can say. They lost 15 years of their life and there is no way you can repay them. Do you want to scrap the entire idea of torture off the list of tactics that can be used in war time? not going to happen.
Should these tactics be limited to actual soldiers of the opposition? IMHO, yes, or to people who are obviously part of said opposition. terrorists make this harder though due to blending in in the population.
no system is perfect, there's always a hole and you are extremely unlucky if you fall through it. In this case the hole being corrupt people.
Can anyone tell me when the 'war on terror' will ever end? Is 'terror' going to 'lose' at some stage of the conflict or something?
How's the war on drugs going, did they win yet?
No they're not.Dilbert_X wrote:
You know, people outside the US are humans too.And just how many US citizens have been picked up on the street for no reason whatsoever and denied due process?
He was talking about it happening inside the US, genius.
NopeDilbert_X wrote:
There certainly are.I mean, it "actually happens all the time", so I'm sure there are TONS of examples.
threats against his life (sometimes with guns drawn) = Torture
NopeDilbert_X wrote:
specific threats against family members = Torture
Yes. Hence, why I said only one of those situations was torture.Dilbert_X wrote:
physical beatings = Torture
If you consider threats to be torture, then kids participate in torture sessions daily, what with their threats against each other.
And, just to keep you honest, you mixed my response to Spearhead about the US with Braddock's characterization of what happened in N. Ireland. Pretty sure you don't have any evidence of the US government pulling US citizens off the street and doing those types of things to them. Additionally, Spearhead made it pretty clear that he meant innocent people getting convicted, not innocent people being taken off the streets, "tortured", and held. At least try to maintain the context of people's words.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
The part people seem to be missing in Gorilla's post is that you don't just take what is obtained via interrogation (regardless of method) at face value. You compare the answers to known, verified facts. You compare to information obtained via other interrogations and other sources and methods. You don't just take what you get from that one person, in that one interrogation and run with it. If the person is giving you bullshit, it's usually detectable when you do corroboration with other information.Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
I'm not saying what he says about effective methods aren't true. I'm saying he makes ridiculous assumptions.God Save the Queen wrote:
he knows a lot more about the subject than anyone on here honestly.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Unfortunately what seems 'obvious' often turns out to be total bollocks.Dayarath wrote:
I would only allow to torture those of which it's obvious they did something and you need to know something.
Getting a bit ahead of yourself aren't you? Better wait until you're at least 18 before you start authorising torture.Dayarath wrote:
I will allow torture when I deem it nessecary
Sounds like torture is redundant to me, it hardly sounds like life or death seconds away from armageddon.You compare the answers to known, verified facts. You compare to information obtained via other interrogations and other sources and methods. You don't just take what you get from that one person, in that one interrogation and run with it.
If there's time to do all the above then the whole 'we must have the intel now or people die' argument doesn't really wash.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2008-08-27 06:08:31)
Fuck Israel
Still better than the 'lets see what happens then bitch about why nothing was done afterwards' angleDilbert_X wrote:
If there's time to do all the above then the whole 'we must have the intel now or people die' argument doesn't really wash.
Last edited by M.O.A.B (2008-08-27 10:57:56)
I'm not talking about torture, I'm talking about interrogation. Torture is a method used in interrogation, but it's not the only method. Regardless of the method used, you compare what the one being interrogated gives you to what you get from other sources. That way you corroborate both what the one being interrogated said, as well as the other source. Once the one being interrogated shows a good track record of verifiable info, you can start giving more credence to what they tell you. SOP.Dilbert_X wrote:
Sounds like torture is redundant to me, it hardly sounds like life or death seconds away from armageddon.You compare the answers to known, verified facts. You compare to information obtained via other interrogations and other sources and methods. You don't just take what you get from that one person, in that one interrogation and run with it.
If there's time to do all the above then the whole 'we must have the intel now or people die' argument doesn't really wash.
As for the timeliness argument: That was primarily applied early on, soon after 9/11 when we didn't know how AQ operated or what (if anything) they had planned as a follow-up. Here, it is applied as a hypothetical, to see if there ever could be a scenario where torture would be acceptable. That is one such scenario, as implausible as it may or may not be.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular