OK then a question for you.

The British intelligence service catch a suspected Al-Qa'ida member.
They believe, he is a very high ranking member, who holds information about a forth coming terrorist attack on the UK.
This attack, if it happens, has the potential to kill hundreds, of people in one of our major cities.

Now during the questioning of this suspect, under the terms of the Geneva Convention, he tells the people asking the questions to FCUK off.
Now because of the Geneva Convention, there is nothing more that can be done.

Now what do we do?

How imminent is this terrorist attack? Keeping in mind that this facility has been open for 7 years.

And if these people are brainwashed to the point of suicide attacks then what is the point of torture.


And, supposedly, we're not barabarians in the west.

Its imminent, as in the next two weeks.
Forget Gauntanamo Bay. This is a suspect caught in this country.



Not everyone is mentally strong.



Who says?

The answer to this is simple.
Force him to eat my wife’s cooking and watch recordings of Big Brother.

He will soon be begging for a flight to Guantanamo Bay for a bit of water boarding.

And what about the people who admit to things they haven't done under torture just to make it stop?

If enemies of ours believe they are going to be tortured when captured it is only going to make them fight harder.

another very valid point I wish I had thought of

A very simple question to the liberal softies on here. Like Guess W ho I believe that by any means possible terrorist attacks must be stopped in war and this is a war sadly but true innocents get caught up in it, this is not justifying it but stating a fact. The main reason for the war on terror was the 9\11 unprovoked attack by muslims hence the invasron of Afghanistan. If the terrorists think they may get tortured whether or not it happens the message must be clear anyone that thinks we should be analysing them are in my mind somewhat deluded if they think it makes us safer.

you started off by saying a simple question, but I can't see a question in there.

Re torture..

I once saw a television programme called "Karachi Cops". It was a fly-on-the-wall documentary following the Pakistani Police.

They had a suspected car thief in custody who wouldn't confess. So they made him stand with his arms outstretched and every time he lowered them he was struck with a riding crop type instrument.

Eventually he confessed and the "interrogating" officer looked at the camera with a wry smile and declared, "see, I told you he was guilty".

I nearly cried with embarrasment.

I agree with your summary but I don't think interrogators of terrorists are after that type of answer. I would assume that they want more detailed information that can be cross referenced and corroborated. The dangers are:
1) They try to force the answer that they seek.
2) The terrorists have pre prepared and deeply engrained fall back stories.

Interrogation is a science of techniques from the brutal and physical to the sophisticated psychological and "chemical". Interrogators have to be highly skilled to get true answers.

What you saw in "Karachi Kops" clearly fell under 1)

I think you've been reading the Daily Mail to much

AJ seeing as you asked what my question was which I appear to not have posted, quite simply in order to avoid a potential terrorist attack do you agree that all means possible should be used to get information if there is a suspicion that someone knows the information or to wait until an attack is done then criticise the security services for not acting on it in the first place.

I cannot believe the amount of folk that are way to lenient on terrorism its not a game folk get killed by the hundreds in attacks.

By the way I read the mirror it gives me something to reflect on

No.

Society has to have boundaries.

If you give people carte blanche to do as they like, then they end up becoming extremists themselves.

Torture does not work, it's counter productive.

So AJ you are prepared to have innocent folk killed because we should be nice to terrorists, no wonder we are seen as a soft touch, I agree to a point re boundaries but terrorists have no boundaries and should be treated with all tools available.

I have no qualms about someone suffering if it means for an example avoiding a repeat of London, Madrid bombings.

We might as well all just bend over to let the terrorists and followers well and truly shaft folk.

How do you know they are guilty?

How do you know they are a terrorist?

Cracking misquote by the way.

I suppose I also said we should give them sweeties?

Some light reading:

[urlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2302-2005Jan11.html[/url

[urlhttp://www.philosophers.co.uk/cafe/provocations20.htm[/url

Interesting articles, but they are written by professionals who are trying to "sell" their point of view. It would be interesting to see similar thoughts from those with the opposite view.

I think we need to understand that there is a big difference between torture and interrogation with a blurring of the edges where the two meet.

I wonder if terrorists use torture?

The point I am trying to make AJ is if the police or security services get reliable that is if anything is totally reliable that a terrorist plot is under way whether at very early stage or advanced then all means neccessary should be used to gleam information, whether you call it interrogation or torture to me is neither here or there.

Mind games such as sleep deprivation and the like are mental torture are you saying we should not even try this or just give them a pat on the back saying oh well at least we asked.

How do you know that?
Non of us, have any idea of the info, the Americans and us have got out of Guantamo Bay.
We don't know, how many lives have been saved, because of the info they have got.

As Dreamer has pointed out, torture isn't just beating people senseless.

Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's counter productive.

Exactly, and knowing the Americans, if they had got anything worthwhile out of it, we would know by now.

And I have to ask, if it is a success, why is it closing next year?

Its good to have a debate like this. AJ recently the usa and the uk have foiled and arrested folk relating to terrorist plots are you really believing that if we asked those involved nicely they would spill the beans on others that may be part of any plot, if so you are in a different world to me. Out of curiousity is one of your favourite songs white flag by dido

that last comment is, quite frankly, insulting, smiley wink or not.

But it doesn't surprise me.

I know where AJ is coming from; if we are supposed to be 'better' than the terrorists, we shouldn't be sinking to their level. Yes, terrorists do evil things, that's why they are the bad guys! We, on the other hand, are trying to occupy the moral high ground, so we can't admit to doing bad stuff.
But, I'm pretty sure there's all sorts going on on our behalf, that we never find out about. Probably just as well...

[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/14/newsid_3985000/3985287.stmwelcome to the real world[/url

A US military spokesman, Major-General Raymond Odierno, said the operation was launched soon after a tip-off from a member of Saddam Hussein's own extended family.

There was a $25m reward offered by the US authorities for information leading to his capture.

A similar reward was claimed for revealing the whereabouts of Saddam Hussein's sons, Uday and Qusay, who were killed in a raid by US forces in the northern city of Mosul in July.