Wednesday, January 10, 2007

David Hicks (2)

David Hicks claims he has been tortured while being held as a P.O.W. at Guantanamo Bay.
I looked at the web site of Amnesty International who have a campaign supporting David Hicks.
A.I. are specifically objecting to Hicks being tortured. I believe torture is wrong, (not for any humanitarian grounds) because it has no purpose other than to cause a prisoner suffering. The use of torture during the Spanish Inquisition proved that confessions gained from torture are worthless. I always like to think of myself as a rational person and considering this issue rationally rather than emotionally, the conclusion is that torture is pointless. If you know that someone will confess to anything after torture, then it is a pointless exercise. That was obvious to the perpetrators of the Spanish Inquisition. Even though my gut instinct tells me otherwise, I have to consider the efficacy of torture and I doubt is has any useful purpose. Then again, I know of at least 30 million people who would love to have a go at torturing Osama bin Laden if he was captured - no moral dilemma here.
The U.S. constitution has been violated where U.S. citizens held in Guantanamo Bay do not have access to legal representation. Hicks is not a U.S. citizen. Hicks is a P.O.W. as far as I can tell.
The right to a trial has been denied, but I think a right to a trial is also irrelevant. Hicks is effectively being held as a P.O.W. The war on terror is being waged right now so he cannot be released until the war is over. (as per rules of engagement).

3 comments:

none said...

I agree completely. Torture is pointless and I don't know why they bother. Maybe they think they know something we don't.

How good is 5 year old information anyway?

Kirsten N. Namskau said...

I agree with you...absolut... but we unfortunately have some sadists around in the world.... Somebody want to torture and somebody want to be tortured.
I have often asked myself, where is the limit and what is the difference when torture is called submissive/ sadistic sex in a relationship and when it takes place during a war???
Maybe they both actually liked it??
When does it become torture and when is it to be looked at as a pleasurable act between two people?

I had a post about it earlier. "The mirror of life"

Lexcen said...

Kirsten, I think the distinction is quite clear, S&M (kinky sex) between two consenting adults is their business. Torture as a military/police procedure or psychopath/sadist tormenting their victim is not the same thing. I wouldn't confuse the two.

Labels