Some helpful links:
Is torture ever justified?
Global Policy Forum
(2008 Articles) http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/un/prisonindex.htm
Harvard Human Rights Journal
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss14/nagan.shtml#Heading55
Human Rights Watch, The Road to Abu Ghraib
http://hrw.org/campaigns/torture.htm
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss14/nagan.shtml#Heading55
Human Rights Watch, The Road to Abu Ghraib
http://hrw.org/campaigns/torture.htm
BBC Definitions of Torture
Does Torture Work?http://archive.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/06/21/torture_algiers/print.html
PRISONER ABUSE: PATTERNS FROM THE PAST: National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 122 Cold War U.S. Interrogation Manuals Counseled "Coercive Techniques" Cheney Informed of "Objectionable" Interrogation Guides in 1992 "Inconsistent with U.S. Government Policy" National Security Archive Posts CIA Training Manuals from 60s, 80s, and Investigative memos on earlier controversy on human rights abuses
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB122/index.htm
GWU: The National Security Archives: The Interrogation Documents, Debating U.S. Policy and Methods
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB127/
Videos watched in class:
Video: Manfred Nowak, UN Special Rapporteur on Torturehttp://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/video-and-audio/video-manfred-nowak-20080624
PBS The Torture Question
7 comments:
today in class i compleltey re-assesed the moral compass of mankind. but as i did so, i found myself in a huge predicament...can torture be justified? is it okay to push one's physical and mental boundaries inorder to prevent harm to many others? but in doing so, a snowball effect of questions began filling my head. Most of them we covered, such as: can we be 100% sure a person has useful information? or, can you weigh one human life against another? Besides making my head hurt, i came to a fork in the road, and i didnt know where i was. i have never at the least condoned torture, thinking how i would feel in that situation. but now i am forced to think...how different could my life be if someone wasn't tortured? i feel that the point in the power point about, everyone is doing it, so by having our state not, would we all be put at a higher risk in this world? If everyone else is throwing their moral compass out the window, to further uphold their duty to civilians of their state, shouldn't we? But as such an example as a super power, using the sudan case as an example, other nations look to the US and follow. So maybe we should lead by example, and find other ways from preventing harm.
but until we do, i am so throroughly confused on this whole topic of torture. and having 5 bagillion definitions doesnt help.
Is torture ever justified?
before reading the articles last night and today i stood by the fact that there was no reason to ever harm another person in order to obtain information (or at any other time for that matter). i guess i understood that our political tactics are a reality that i had to face but i never felt like i would need to question those beliefs. although i still do stand by that, alan dershowitz's arguments for tortue made a lot of sense. if we are going to use torture why not make it less underhanded? while the nature of torture is underhanded and secretive i think that if the us in particular really felt that they haaaddd to use torture and wanted to make it more democratic and legal then that would be something to think about seriously.
what i found most interesting were the huge cultural aspects of torture. in my mind torture was purely physical and had little to do with the situation or beliefs of the victim. in gitmo and abu graihb (sp) cultural nuances were exactly what the torturers were looking for. fear of dogs,nudity, and blatant sexuality- all things which are particularly offensive for or an inherent fear of for muslim cultures. this to me is even worse than physical abuse. its your identity and your beliefs something that beyond all doubt should not be violated being violated in the worst possible way.
okay
i didnt answer the question at all i just realized buuuut thats what i have to say sorry!
Everyone keeps talking about "raising awareness." Which is great. People need to be aware of what is going on in the world. But raising awareness is nothing if action doesn't accompany it. The problem with raising awareness is that the awareness raiser tends to do her part, pat hereself on the back, and think, yes, mission accomplished. And then expects those whose awareness has recently been rose to do something. But instead of doing anything, they only raise awareness also. So yes, many people are aware of the problem, but everyone figures that someone else will do something about it.
So what's the point? Well, we should aways educate ourselves and others on what is going on in the world, but we can't stop there thinking job well done. We're too complacent and have to make it our business to not only learn and teach but take action -- donate money, write letters, travel, whatever. Raising awareness is a good start, not an end goal.
I thought today's classes were really intense and in some ways depressing.
The world keeps changing. We need new laws for the new system of international relations in our world. The promises made in the Geneva Convention are too old and often abused. Officials can say "we are following the Geneva Convention" when none of the suspects are even protected by the laws cause they are now labeled as "terrorists"--while citizens blindly believes in the impressive job the gov. claims it is doing. People keep saying globalization! globalization! everyone has access to the information in this world! now...but is that true? While information are now more accessible through the internet, so are movies, music and other sorts of entertainment. So it doesn't necessarily mean an average citizen is getting more informed of what's happening in the world. Ignorace is such a scary thing. Well, ignorance and indifference.
It also hit me as how the "torturers" are also being tortured, mentally. They were commanded to go to a site as information gatherers; however the orders they received put them in a situation in which they become sadists and mentally ill not by their own choice but because of the development of the human nature in the certain circumstances. The people who can make a difference, or... the people who won't make a difference are intellectuals who drink coffee and read magazines in their offices everday. The torture will continue if everyone's indifferent to it.
>>I'm so pumped for our individual projects though; I think they're all going to be great.
These readings and classes on the subject of torture have really been eye opening to me.
i have never really thought about it before, so now learning about it has made me think. We have been looking at arguments for and against torture and i am unsure where i stand.
You can torture someone for information but how do you know who to torture? Would the people committing the acts of torture really have the high profile people they need, the people with the most useful information?
If these people are caught in the field fighting then it is highly unlikily that they do. You do not see the leaders of the USA fighting, so it is highly unlikely that they are going to capture the people that they need this way.
But there is also the argument that you can torture one person to save many more. Then you have to figure out what the life of one person is worth. This is difficult, even though it is done every day, such as with life insurance. But is this right?
By torturing people it is still a human rights violation, but is it neccessary? It's not as if all other HR's are followed either, many are violated, but where should this stop?
I know i would feel wrong harming another person, so how do other people do it? is power that important?
Is torture ever justified? Well I believe interrogation, which may involve some threateneing methods of extracting information, is justified when there is known information to be had from the individual in custody. I would consider this to be a nearly ideal situation for an interrogator to be inI understand this must rarely occur, it is probably suspected to occur more than it actually does. If it is a matter of national security I support the use of perhaps harsh interrogation techniques becasue protecting one's citizens is a nation's top priority, at least it should be.
I was just checking the news on Yahoo and found an intersting article. Apparently Osama bin LAden's former driver, Salim Hamdan, was being held at Guantanamo Bay. He was subjected to 50 days of sleep deprivation at the prison camp. This abuse is considered to be the worst he suffered during his time at Guantanamo. His trial involves him being charged with conspiracy as well as providing material assistance to terrorists. If he is proven quilty he will face life in prison. The link is provided below:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080714/us_nm/guantanamo_hearings_hamdan_dc
Post a Comment