Perspectives: Torture report turns heads and tales

Perspectives: Torture report turns heads and tales
Our agencies must be held accountable for torture
by MATT BROWN, Multimedia Director.

On December 3, 2014, the Senate Torture Report was cleared for public release, and the United States took a deep breath.

Now before I let out my hot air, it should also be noted that the United States did, in fact, agree to the Geneva Conventions I-IV bans the use of “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture” (Article 3:1(a)).

Okay. Exhale.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-C.A., began the report stating that the document, “examines the CIA’s secret overseas detention of at least 119 individuals and the use of coercive interrogation techniques—in some cases amounting to torture.”

May I add the distinction between “torture” and “coercive interrogation techniques” is a bit hazy.

According to the report, “The committee reviewed 20 of the most frequent and prominent examples of purported counterterrorism
“successes” and that “each of those examples was found to be wrong in fundamental respects.”

The examples were so wrong that, “in some cases, there was no relationship between the claimed counterterrorism “success” and any information provided by a CIA detainee during or after the use of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques.”

Not only was the CIA lying about the effectiveness of their methods, but also about the methods themselves.

Records showed that interrogators didn’t escalate the methods, or even attempt normal coercion, but “in many cases the most aggressive techniques were used immediately, in combination and nonstop.”

This method has no effect. For the tortured, it is in their immediate best interests to stop the pain for a short period: if they are capable of lying they will do so. Take the example of Abu Zubaida, when he was subjected to torture techniques by the C.I.A, his information soon proved to be false or useless.

During an interview with Chuck Todd on Meet the Press, Todd pressed Vice-President Dick Cheney (who utilized, ordered and defended torture methods in Iraq and Afghanistan) about Gul Rahman, who was “chained to the wall of his cell, doused with water, froze to death in C.I.A. custody. And it turned out it was a case of mistaken identity.” Cheney later acknowledged that, “25% [of detainees] turned out to be innocent.”

How, and why has this been allowed to happen?

The Geneva Conventions only apply to prisoners of war. They do not apply to terrorists, which are defined as those who commit violent acts that are intended to create fear (and by those definitions, the CIA). The Convention Against Torture only applies on a country’s own soil, which is why torture of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay is legally acceptable.

How convenient?

Every human life is unique and should be rewarded with respect. The concept of autonomy, somebody being in control of their own life, is a major part of our concept of what it is to be free.

There needs to be meaningful, and appropriate punishments handed down to the agents responsible for these war crimes. If not, the world will see how much we allow our agencies to get away with. Even then, the world can already see how much pain and suffering our agencies are willing to commit in the name of “freedom.”



 
Torture is sometimes essential for national security
By GABRIELLE MARTIN, Staff Reporter.

Torture for the sake of fun is disgusting. Torture for the sake of revenge is repulsive. Torture for the sake of gaining information that could save lives, while not pretty, is understandable and acceptable. That being said, there are also forms of torture that I find more acceptable than others; I believe that mental torture techniques such as sleep deprivation, sensory bombardment, and humiliation techniques would be more effective and acceptable than physical torture for two main reasons.

First of all, the information is more reliable when a person is mentally tortured rather than physically. When someone is waterboarded they often become hypoxic (their brain isn’t getting enough oxygen.) This can cause the prisoner to not be able to give you any information, let alone valuable information. In addition, someone undergoing physical torture will say basically anything to make the pain stop.

However, mental torture is geared more towards breaking someone down to the point of almost wanting to give you the information. Sleep deprivation can cause a person to become so tired that the mind wanders and isn’t as closed off. I’m sure we’ve all experienced being so tired that we say something we wish we hadn’t simply because we weren’t thinking straight; but, creating a good lie can be quite difficult when overly exhausted.

Another reason that I view this interrogation technique as acceptable is because many elite branches of the armed forces go through sleep deprivation as part of their training. The Navy SEALS have what is commonly referred to as “Hell Week” where over a period of five and a half days, they are allowed only four hours of sleep. During this time they are also put through rigorous tasks. If we are putting our armed forces through sleep deprivation for training purposes, I can see no problem with putting terrorists through sleep deprivation for interrogation purposes.

I find sensory bombardment such as playing loud music, propaganda, or strobe lights over extended periods of time acceptable because I think it really would just create a headache and be annoying more than cause actual pain. Playing propaganda can also cause a person to doubt their own beliefs, which could lead to them giving away key information.

While it may seem shallow, I see nothing wrong with humiliation techniques such as being forced to wear a diaper or forced nudity. The point is to degrade someone to the point where they questions their self-worth and therefore their beliefs.

The second reason that I find mental torture more acceptable than physical torture is because physical torture can create medical problems that prevent people from giving information. I already gave the example of people subjected to waterboarding becoming hypoxic.

No; torture is not ideal. However, sometimes it is the most efficient way of gathering information in a timely fashion – information that could save lives.