Cia's Detention And Interrogation

Mahatma Gandhi, the preeminent leader of the Indian independence movement states “You can chain me, you can torture me, you can even destroy this body, but you will never imprison my mind.” This is important because torture is brutal on the body and mind. The article “Torture’s Terrible Toll” by John McCain is more convincing then the article “The Case for Torture” by Michael Levin because McCain provides more logical reasoning, he adds his own personal experience of being a captured prisoner during the Vietnam War, and he creates an emotional bond with people around the world. Through more logical reasoning McCain Argument is more valid than Levin.

Malcolm Nance, has personally experienced waterboarding and uses ethos and logos to emphasize his experiences. From his experiences in the military, Nance, who was at the Pentagon during the 9/11 attacks and has been part of the SERE program since 1997, has come to several conclusions as to why waterboarding is ethically and logically wrong. His reasons include that, logically, waterboarding is a form of torture used intentionally. They allow use of it on their enemies; but despite it being controversial, America’s judicial system has persecuted outsiders who have used it against Americans. It is also used as an unethical way to obtain information from enemy prisoners of wars, but that does not always guarantee that all of the information is of any use and or reliable.

About two years ago, a C.I.A. torture report was released, the subject on detainees captured after September 11, who were suspected to be linked to the attack. One of the more famous detainees, Majid Khan, who had been afflicted with Al Qaeda, was captured in 2003 and was held at Guantanamo Bay since 2006. He says that the interrogators waterboarded him twice, was moved among series of C.I.A. operated “black sites” over some months, and the torture still continued. He was beaten repeatedly, hung from a wooden beam for three days, and shackled and starved. He was even submerged in an ice bath, the transparent ice burning his skin like fire, slowly numbing his body.

The Case for Torture Wins Torture is it morally acceptable? Many have debated this argument but I would like to bring up two main conflicting view points from Michael Levin, and Marzieh Ghisai. Michael Levin is a Jewish law professor who wrote The Case for Torture where he advocates where torture is acceptable in some circumstances.

Should President Logan have allowed CTU to interrogate Prado behind closed doors? I think no, primarily because any sentient being that is put under an extreme amount of mental or physical stress and pain will do anything possible to remove themselves from that situation. In this paper, I will argue why it is morally impermissible to torture by explaining the unjustifiable and unethical elements and why President Logan was right to not allow the interrogation. Torture, first and foremost is morally impermissible because it is unjustifiable.

This paper will discuss how to balance out civil liberties and security in intelligence activities; mainly surrounding the topic of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2002. With this topic and its perceived downfalls, identifying how to make both sides work efficiently will be discussed. Discussion When asked the question of “how can the United States balance civil liberties and security in intelligence activities?” the thought of the USA PATRIOT Act comes into mind; for two reasons. The first one is it caused a enormous uproar in the community after it was enacted based upon the fact it was perceived to infringe on civil liberties.

These camps are overcrowded and underfunded, leading to terrible living conditions for the teenagers. Moreover, the fact that the government can designate someone for unwinding without their consent raises serious ethical concerns about individual rights and government accountability. The lack of government accountability is yet another prominent ethical issue in the novel. The government in the book has the power to designate anyone for unwinding, and there is no clear system of checks and balances to ensure that this power is not abused.

Annotated Bibliography-“How effective is torture in obtaining information?” “Brown Note” Myth Busters. Discovery channel. Artarmon 16 Feb. 2005. Television.

Neither one of the circumstances was ethical at any point and had been publicized by the media for its explicit type of interrogation methods as well as sadistic behavior. In particular, Phil Zimbardo has argued that the study shows that strong situational forces can override individual differences in personality and moral values. In Abu Ghraib, soldiers were inserted into the role of prison guards and began to sadistically torment prisoners there and at other detention sites in Afghanistan and Iraq. Many of the specific acts of humiliation were similar to those that transpired in the Stanford Prison Experiment, according to Zimbardo. This theory has been challenged by allegations by Seymour Hersh, in the New Yorker, that these soldiers were in fact acting under direct orders of their superiors as part of a top secret Pentagon intelligence gathering program authorized by Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld.

Many people state that they would be resistant to the ideas expressed by Milgram and Zimbardo and that they would stay true to personal conviction, but yet situations like Abu Ghraib still arise. As Fromm would seem to agree with, people should take a step back and ask why they commit to the actions they are performing, and justify it to their own

Applebaum has plenty of evidence to back up her claim that physical torture is not effective, and there are many other ways to obtain information. While the fear-encouraging and questioning elements are potent to many who are afraid of terror committed against them, but when the overwhelming sentiment of Levin’s argument is being compared to the logic and ethical points of Applebaum it is clear to see the superiority of her argument. Although Levin would advocate for physical torture in extreme situations, one must expect extreme consequences. Physical torture is rarely effective, violates rights, and damages a whole nation’s credibility. This is why physical torture should not be

In Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture”, he uses many cases of emotional appeal to persuade the reader that torture is necessary in extreme cases. There are many terms/statements that stick with the reader throughout the essay so that they will have more attachment to what is being said. Levin is particularly leaning to an audience based in the United States because he uses an allusion to reference an event that happened within the states and will better relate to the people that were impacted by it. The emotional appeals used in this essay are used for the purpose of persuading the reader to agree that in extreme instances torture is necessary and the United States should begin considering it as a tactic for future cases of extremity. One major eye catching factor of this essay is the repetitive use of words that imply certain stigmas.

In Michael Levin's The Case for Torture, Levin provides an argument in which he discusses the significance of inflicting torture to perpetrators as a way of punishment. In his argument, he dispenses a critical approach into what he believes justifies torture in certain situations. Torture is assumed to be banned in our culture and the thought of it takes society back to the brutal ages. He argues that societies that are enlightened reject torture and the authoritative figure that engage in its application risk the displeasure of the United States. In his perspective, he provides instances in which wrongdoers put the lives of innocent people at risk and discusses the aspect of death and idealism.

This is similar to our CIA society today, For torture to happened it can not happen on U.S soil. It must happen some place else.

There are ethical issues that need to be recognized in interrogation which are, the use of false evidence, the use of torture, and deceptive promises. Starting off an interrogation, police will usually comfort a suspect by giving evidence that is not true, with the intention to make the suspect end up voluntarily confessing. Giving false evidence has a number of planning’s. One with the officer telling the suspect that he or