Torture Again

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
The story behind the raid begins four years ago, when prisoners being interrogated under torture at Guantanamo Bay betrayed the ‘nom de guerre’ of a courier used by Bin Laden

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382860/Osama-Bin-Laden-dead-Abbottabad-raid-ended-10-years-defiance-Obama-watched.html#ixzz1LzGt3DJJ

What do you think?

Who'd a thought heh.........The Bins getting taken out on a Bank holiday Monday in Pakistan..................

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
The story behind the raid begins four years ago, when prisoners being interrogated under torture at Guantanamo Bay betrayed the ‘nom de guerre’ of a courier used by Bin Laden

What do you think?

well apart from the fact that the Daily Mail story is claiming as fact many details that are manifestly still up in the air (i.e. different in every news outlet)...

It is/was inevitable that evidence gained during torture at 'gitmo' would be used in the investigations/operations of the us military. How much it helped this particular operation is one of the as yet undefined details.

However, this does not mean that the torture is/was justified or useful.

There is no way of knowing if this information would/could have been obtained without torture, and we don't know how much inaccurate information was given under duress (the 'they'll say anything under torture bit).

Coupled with the damage to relations with the Islamic world (and frankly anyone who cares about human rights) and the (also unknown) number of people radicalised by the mistreatment of prisoners, the gains are wiped out by the losses.

Also the US finds it can't now give these men a fair trial and (if found guilty) imprison them justly, as any evidence will have been gained in part under torture and is thus inadmissible.

So now the US is stuck never able to comply with international human rights laws (or its own to be frank) because they can't just release those they know/suspect of terrorism but can't try them in a civil court because the evidence would be disallowed.

Mainly I am just surprised that the Mail didn't try to classify the raid as something that causes/cures cancer or manage to get in a reference to princess Diana (who definitely didn't cause cancer).

Moral of the story. Torture bad, Daily Mail worse. Read something else.

EDIT: removal of random italics