[ QUOTE ]
Here are three
Here are 4 more
This guy also caused a pretty big stir
[/ QUOTE ]
Wait, so "innocent until proven guilty" applies to suspected foreign terrorists but it doesn't apply to government operated anti-terrorist organizations?
I see heavy usage of different forms of the words "allege," "investigate," and "accuse" but no usages of any form of the word "proof."
[ QUOTE ]
For example, the prisoners would be stripped naked and forced to watch videotapes of other prisoners who, in turn, had been ordered to sodomize each other.
[/ QUOTE ]
Forced to sodomize each other? Did they force feed them Viagra to make them get erections? I don't know about you, but I'd find it pretty impossible to get it up if I were being forced to have sex with a man... even more impossible on camera.
[ QUOTE ]
The guards would throw the prisoners’ Korans into the toilet. They would forcibly shave the prisoners.
[/ QUOTE ]
Boo hoo.
[ QUOTE ]
Some among the British detainees – Moazzam Begg and Feroz Abbasi – have been held in total isolation for well over a year.
[/ QUOTE ]
What? You mean they tortured them by
leaving them alone???
Also please note that I'm talking about torture for the extraction of immediately relevant information. The terms "a year" and "immediate" are not compatible.
IF these allegations are proven to be true, and these people, or others, were tortured just for fun, then I fully agree with prosecution or disciplinary action against those responsible...
even if they are confirmed to have terrorist ties.
I
DON'T believe in torturing a prisoner just because you're bored or just to be an ass.
I
DO believe in torturing a prisoner to extract necessary information when all other avenues have failed.
Hypothetical situation:
Osama bin Laden is captured and knows every single detail about a terrorist attack that will take place in the next 14 days. We politely ask him to tell us. He says no.
Do we a) Say thanks anyway and then send him off to his deluxe prison suite, or b) Start breaking things?