Other civilized countries don’t. When you put someone in a position where they know they can stop pain by telling you what they want to hear, it degrades the quality of the intelligence. There are much better means that are used covertly (chemical coercion most notably) when necessary.
I might not have a personal background in intelligence, but I took several intelligence classes with a retired U.S. Navy Intel Captain (CORRECTED) during my undergrad, so I’m hardly ignorant about intelligence practices or the issues at hand.
There’s a difference between deporting someone to their homeland, and arresting someone IN their homeland and incarcerating them.
(E: P.S., I’m fine with not deporting illegal immigrants who are willing to become citizens, so long as they have not committed other crimes.)
(E: P.P.S., Legally speaking, you’re wrong about it depriving them of their rights under the Constitution.)
You’re a fucking moron. You just don’t get it. I’ve said it several times, so have other people, but you just don’t fucking get it.
The fact that they’re imprisoned does not mean that they’re a terrorist. It means that someone arrested them and said that they might be a terrorist. That’s why we have trials - whether civilian or military, a trial by jury, or otherwise, we have trials so that the evidence can be presented and a person can defend themself against allegations.
I’m fine with locking up terrorists. The more terrorists we lock up, the better! But for every SUSPECTED terrorist we apprehend, we should try them, to ensure that the terrorists are legally detained, and that people who are not terrorists have a chance to defend themselves against false charges!
Yep. You can’t “win” an argument. I am not conceited enough to expect you to change the way you feel because of what I think.
I’m just pointing out that as far as I can understand, based on the wording of our constitution, holding anyone without trial except during a time of rebellion or invasion is a clear violation of our Constitution.
You can win an argument, when someone is willing to consider other points of view. “We’re safer because we lock up anyone named Ali who’s in the wrong place at the wrong time,” is not logic. It’s emotional garbage about how safe someone feels. We’re talking about the lives of other human beings, and our justice system.
I will not dignify their cringing, spineless, egocentric garbage with any kind of equal treatment. We’re talking to people who think it’s good that we’re imprisoning innocent people for the better part of a decade because it makes them feel better about their odds of being blown up by a terrorist, even though there’s no real effect.
You guys have completely missed the point from the argument that we are trying to make.
We want to see terrorists picked up and sent to prison.
We are not against them being interrogated, but torture should not be used.
We just think that if you are going to hold some one in a prison, which is what this government is doing then they should go through a legal process and sentenced.
For those who were mistakingly placed there, and there have been people put there by mistake, this would quicken the process to get them out.
By you two telling us that the rule of law does not apply here and that we can openly torture them for information you have become a larger threat than even a terrorist. Because the more people that think like you the more danger our Constitution will be under.
It will not be long before someone who thinks like you will take the small step and apply your reasoning on the American people. Effectively destroying our Constitution and our American way of life.
Buildings can be rebuilt, lives can be remembered, but do not allow your fear and anger to shield your eyes from the true threat that terrorism brings, and that is for us to lose ourselves.
Remember the root word of “terrorism” is “terror” and you are letting them win by allowing terror to change us.
