ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags jesse ventura , torture , waterboarding

Reply
Old 21st April 2017, 08:31 PM   #161
TraneWreck
Philosopher
 
TraneWreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,999
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
If someone being tortured will say anything to get the torture to stop, why wouldn't they say the truth?
They may (and in fact, likely aren't) in possession of the knowledge the interrogators want.

If any of us could be made to witness even a half dozen instances of the millions upon millions of people screaming out the truth in the midst of some horrific torture only to have their abuser not accept the answer and keep going...

Quote:
And as far as non-torture yielding higher quality information, we have many examples of the police eliciting false confessions without the thumb screws. Now, if the answer to that little factoid is that the police were not conducting the interview properly, and that's why they got a false confession, then I'd say the same about a bad torturer - if they are getting bad information, they are doing it wrong.
The work on this topic shows that it's the coercive setting (including the behavior of the interrogator) that causes the false confessions. There isn't a skillful way of applying coercion; it's the coercion, itself, that makes the process unreliable.

Quote:
A better way to view the topic is as a scale of incentives and matching the right incentive to the person in front of you. Threats of incarceration or a plea deal might work for one but not for the next.
As long as torture and coercion are removed from your pallet, I can agree with the general principle.

Last edited by TraneWreck; 21st April 2017 at 08:42 PM.
TraneWreck is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 08:36 PM   #162
Pacal
Muse
 
Pacal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 801
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
If someone being tortured will say anything to get the torture to stop, why wouldn't they say the truth?

And as far as non-torture yielding higher quality information, we have many examples of the police eliciting false confessions without the thumb screws. Now, if the answer to that little factoid is that the police were not conducting the interview properly, and that's why they got a false confession, then I'd say the same about a bad torturer - if they are getting bad information, they are doing it wrong.

A better way to view the topic is as a scale of incentives and matching the right incentive to the person in front of you. Threats of incarceration or a plea deal might work for one but not for the next.
They might not say the truth for a range of reasons but historically the big problem has been that the truth that the torture victim has stated may not be the "truth" that the torturer wants , or thinks is in fact "true". So the torture continues until the torture victim utters the torturers "truth".

Last edited by Pacal; 21st April 2017 at 08:37 PM.
Pacal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 09:08 PM   #163
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 16,346
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
There are good records from World War II regarding the torture that was done by the Germans and Japanese to learn military secrets, and one will find that the data they obtained was of little, if any, practical value once it was obtained.

Also, there is the more recent Senate report on the use of torture during the Bush Administration and they could not even find one case where torture provided any data of any real value.
It might be naive to think that all instances of torture during those wars and into modern times has been comprehensively documented and then later shared. We don't know if the greatest fruits ever brought from torture have even been documented and publicly discussed. Torture is so horrific that we should expect it to not be freely discussed by any party be they torturers or victims. We may even expect or not be surprised by outright dishonesty from all parties as well.

It should be illegal. But that doesn't mean it won't still be used for as long as humans are human. A torturer doesn't give a damn about what the studies seem to reveal and they don't give a damn about the law. It happens behind closed doors and nobody is taking pictures. There is nothing there to be leaked.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2017, 02:48 AM   #164
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 61,142
Sorry if I didn't keep my word yesterday about posting more examples, but the forum was down. I'll try to see if I have time today.
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2017, 03:28 AM   #165
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,136
Originally Posted by Pacal View Post
They might not say the truth for a range of reasons but historically the big problem has been that the truth that the torture victim has stated may not be the "truth" that the torturer wants , or thinks is in fact "true". So the torture continues until the torture victim utters the torturers "truth".
Then what is the point of torturing at all? Seriously. If the result is meant to be, "I got him to say what I wanted him to say" then why do it? Don't the torturers know what's going on?
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2017, 03:36 AM   #166
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,136
Originally Posted by TraneWreck View Post
The work on this topic shows that it's the coercive setting (including the behavior of the interrogator) that causes the false confessions. There isn't a skillful way of applying coercion; it's the coercion, itself, that makes the process unreliable.
I don't see how you can avoid it. For two reasons. The first is that coercion is subjective - methods deemed psychologically sound for one "victim" might not be for others. An example might be arrest and detention itself as psychological pressures. I've been arrested and interviewed (I lawyered up quickly) and there was a real pressure to "come clean" and make it all go away. Then there are things like polygraphs and the "we know you did it" ploy.

But in any case, I would think the rule would be that confessions have to be backed up by corroborating evidence, whether or not torture is used. The underlying idea being that whatever system is using coercive means is doing so to arrive at the truth. If they aren't, that's a separate problem from the effectiveness of torture.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2017, 05:35 AM   #167
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 61,142
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Then what is the point of torturing at all? Seriously. If the result is meant to be, "I got him to say what I wanted him to say" then why do it? Don't the torturers know what's going on?
I think some here may be conflating torture itself with various objectives of the torturers. It's true that some people torture for the hell of it, or to get false confessions, or for other nefarious reasons, but that doesn't speak to the efficacy of the torture itself.
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2017, 11:32 AM   #168
Tony Stark
Philosopher
 
Tony Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 8,332
The CIA knew that torture was ineffective.

Quote:
In 1997, following a Freedom of Information Act request by the Baltimore Sun newspaper, the CIA released two interrogation manuals, both of which explain the use of physical and psychological interrogation. The first manual is entitled: KUBARK, Counterintelligence Interrogation, dated July 1963.39 The second is dated 1983 and entitled: Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual.The latter manual explicitly refers to the ineffectiveness of coercion: ‘Experience indicates that the use of force is not necessary to gain cooperation of sources. Use of force is a poor technique, yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say what he thinks the interrogator wants to hear.’ Notwithstanding this assertion, both manuals detail the use of psychological techniques and physical coercion that can be used to obtain ‘needed information from subjects.’

These manuals provide a useful means of assessing claims regarding the effectiveness of coercive interrogation. For example, to bolster their argument, Bagaric and Clarke state, ‘Humans have an intense desire to avoid pain, no matter how short term, and most will comply with the demands of a torturer to avoid the pain. Often even the threat of torture alone will evoke cooperation.

The CIA manuals by contrast, emphasize the limitations of coercive methods. The KUBARK manual states, ‘In fact, most people underestimate their capacity to withstand pain ... In general, direct physical brutality creates only resentment, hostility, and further defiance.’ The manual also notes that there are some people able to withstand pain to a much greater degree than others. Of particular relevance to a terrorist with deeply embedded religious or political beliefs, the manual states, ‘Persons of considerable moral or intellectual stature often find in pain inflicted by others a confirmation of the belief that they are in the hands of inferiors, and their resolve not to submit is strengthened.’ Both manuals emphasize the importance of creating rapport during interrogations and the need for control, professionalism, and patience on the part of the interrogator.

Another problem with coercive interrogation, which raises serious concerns regarding its reliability, is that of false confessions or information. The KUBARK manual makes specific reference to this problem:
Intense pain is quite likely to produce false confessions, concocted as a means of escaping from distress. A time-consuming delay results, while investigation is conducted and the admissions are proven untrue. During this respite the interrogatee can pull himself together. He may even use the time to think up new, more complex “admissions” that will take still longer to disprove. KUBARK is especially vulnerable to such tactics because the interrogation is conducted for the sake of information and not for police purposes.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu...Interrogat.pdf

So why did they change their minds? Was there new evidence that suggested they were wrong before and that torture was effective?

No of course not, right wingers are driven by fear and don't really care about facts/evidence. They were terrified of another 9/11 and torture being effective sounds right to them. And that's all it took for them to decide that they should torture captured terrorists. No matter that the CIA already knew from experience that torture isn't effective. Or the fact that it is a war crime.

Turns out the CIA was right before. Even though they tortured a bunch of terrorists including the mastermind of 9/11, they didn't get any useful information as a result. But it would look really bad for them to admit that they did this for no gain at all, so they had a very strong incentive to just lie and claimed it worked as intended. So that's what they did. They were exposed as liars. But lots of people still believe that the CIA torture program was worthwhile because that's what they want to believe.

Last edited by Tony Stark; 22nd April 2017 at 12:33 PM.
Tony Stark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2017, 12:32 PM   #169
Tony Stark
Philosopher
 
Tony Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 8,332
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Then what is the point of torturing at all? Seriously. If the result is meant to be, "I got him to say what I wanted him to say" then why do it? Don't the torturers know what's going on?
It might not be their intention to get false confessions but that doesn't mean it won't happen. They may be convinced that someone knows something they don't. The subject tells the truth but the torturer believes it to be a lie and so they torture him until he breaks and tells them something. The torturer thinks the torture worked even though the opposite is true.

The actually happened with the CIA program. The CIA often believed that detainees knew info that they didn't. KSM sent them on a wild goose chase for a sleeper cell of black Muslims in Montana.
Tony Stark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2017, 12:44 PM   #170
TraneWreck
Philosopher
 
TraneWreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,999
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I don't see how you can avoid it. For two reasons. The first is that coercion is subjective - methods deemed psychologically sound for one "victim" might not be for others.
Absolutely. This is why it's a vexing problem in the law enforcement community. It's an imperfect science.

Brendan Dassey, for example, cracked under circumstances that would in no way be coercive to a mentally competent adult.

Just because it's a tough issue does not mean that we can do better in a large number of situations.

Quote:
An example might be arrest and detention itself as psychological pressures. I've been arrested and interviewed (I lawyered up quickly) and there was a real pressure to "come clean" and make it all go away. Then there are things like polygraphs and the "we know you did it" ploy.
There is a lot of law on what interrogators are allowed to say. Again referencing the Dassey case, it was that lying that got him to admit to a hundred things he clearly didn't do (and, it turns out, didn't happen for the most part).

One of the current standards states "use of trickery and deceit can be permissible (depending on the totality of circumstances) provided that it does not shock the conscience of the court or community." There is, of course, plenty of case law to specify the meaning of those terms.

Quote:
But in any case, I would think the rule would be that confessions have to be backed up by corroborating evidence, whether or not torture is used. The underlying idea being that whatever system is using coercive means is doing so to arrive at the truth. If they aren't, that's a separate problem from the effectiveness of torture.
See, that's the problem - most false confessions go in the opposite direction: Police have the evidence and force the suspect to admit their part.

One thing that absolutely works is the taping - preferably video taping - of interrogations. It's important in determining whether information is coming from police or suspects. When you watch the tapes or read the transcripts of the Dassey interrogation it's very clear that the cops are introducing facts, not Dassey -

Was there a knife?
Yes.
You're lying to us.
I mean, no.
What else was there?
I don't know.
Yes you do, was there a gun?
I think so?
Are you sure?
Yes?

Confession.
TraneWreck is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 08:27 AM   #171
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,042
Originally Posted by Cainkane1 View Post
I've been taken to task about my opinion that waterboarding is not torture. I came to that conclusion for two reasons it does not leave permanent scars and no physical impairment.

Ok I stand corrected. Jesse Ventura says it is and he should know.

https://youtu.be/wgarV13g6QM

One person here said I advocated torture to save lives and while that opinion is a subject for argument I have to cave in and admit water boarding is indeed torture.
If those were/are your criteria I suggest you have someone try out an electrically conductive urethral catheter on you.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 10:15 AM   #172
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 10,772
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
I do that all the time. No need to apologise.
OK. Thanks.

Quote:
Well if your objection applies to all forms of intelligence gathering, it can't be used specifically as an objection to torture, can it?
Excuse me, but my objection most certainly does not apply to all forms of intelligence gathering.

There are numerous ways that intelligence can be obtained without torture. Reading newspapers, watching TV shows, talking to people, diplomatic reports, satellite photos, electronic intercepts, and so on.

And all though these methods do have there problems, but they have been shown to be far more effective at obtaining good information as opposed to the use of torture.
__________________
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 10:45 AM   #173
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,493
Originally Posted by TraneWreck View Post
Absolutely. This is why it's a vexing problem in the law enforcement community. It's an imperfect science.

Brendan Dassey, for example, cracked under circumstances that would in no way be coercive to a mentally competent adult.

Just because it's a tough issue does not mean that we can do better in a large number of situations.



There is a lot of law on what interrogators are allowed to say. Again referencing the Dassey case, it was that lying that got him to admit to a hundred things he clearly didn't do (and, it turns out, didn't happen for the most part).

One of the current standards states "use of trickery and deceit can be permissible (depending on the totality of circumstances) provided that it does not shock the conscience of the court or community." There is, of course, plenty of case law to specify the meaning of those terms.



See, that's the problem - most false confessions go in the opposite direction: Police have the evidence and force the suspect to admit their part.

One thing that absolutely works is the taping - preferably video taping - of interrogations. It's important in determining whether information is coming from police or suspects. When you watch the tapes or read the transcripts of the Dassey interrogation it's very clear that the cops are introducing facts, not Dassey -

Was there a knife?
Yes.
You're lying to us.
I mean, no.
What else was there?
I don't know.
Yes you do, was there a gun?
I think so?
Are you sure?
Yes?

Confession.
Maybe it is time to modify Miranda so that cops have to presume the suspect is engaging in optimal legal strategy. So, cops cannot ask to search (presumption suspect is exercising his or her refusal to search) and cannot ask questions without a lawyer present.
BobTheCoward is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 11:59 AM   #174
DragonLady
Illuminator
 
DragonLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,459
Quote:
Maybe it is time to modify Miranda so that cops have to presume the suspect is engaging in optimal legal strategy. So, cops cannot ask to search (presumption suspect is exercising his or her refusal to search) and cannot ask questions without a lawyer present.
Yes! I'm beginning to believe a great many people are sitting in jail because they were trying to be honest and helpful -but only helped themselves into cells, whether guilty or not.

Personally, I think it should be illegal for LEO of any kind -including informants- to lie to anyone. If they can't get what they need through honesty and the same upright behavior we expect of everyone else, then they are not able to get what they need at all.
__________________
http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499

“She would be half a planet away, floating in a turquoise sea, dancing by moonlight to flamenco guitar.” ~ Janet Fitch

The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One
DragonLady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 12:41 PM   #175
TheGoldcountry
Illuminator
 
TheGoldcountry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,297
We are going off on tangents. As far as the OP goes, a lot of former soldiers, officers, sailors, etc. are against torture for obvious reasons.

As far as LEO coercion- someone brought up Brendan Dassey. Anyone who has seen that video can see how manipulated he was. Horrific. Psychological torture can be applied by people who don't even know what they are doing at the time.
__________________
I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'm still pretty sure that you're wrong. -Akhenaten
I sometimes think the Bible was inspired by Satan to make God look bad. And then it backfired on Him when He underestimated the stupidity of religious ideologues. -MontagK505
TheGoldcountry is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 01:38 PM   #176
Tony Stark
Philosopher
 
Tony Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 8,332
Originally Posted by DragonLady View Post
Yes! I'm beginning to believe a great many people are sitting in jail because they were trying to be honest and helpful -but only helped themselves into cells, whether guilty or not.

Personally, I think it should be illegal for LEO of any kind -including informants- to lie to anyone. If they can't get what they need through honesty and the same upright behavior we expect of everyone else, then they are not able to get what they need at all.
That would make undercover/sting operations impossible.

Is it really such a bad thing that if someone hires a hitman to kill his wife, the hitman might turn out to be an undercover cop ? I fail to see the problem.

Anyway, the whole point of having police is that they have the power to do things that the rest of us can't
Tony Stark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 02:21 PM   #177
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 61,142
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
Excuse me, but my objection most certainly does not apply to all forms of intelligence gathering.

There are numerous ways that intelligence can be obtained without torture.
Ok Crossbow I think you just lost track of the conversation here.

My point was that your objection i.e. that you have to verify the information gained through torture, applies to other forms of information gathering as well -- meaning that you have to verify information gained through other means also.
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 03:15 PM   #178
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 10,772
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Ok Crossbow I think you just lost track of the conversation here.

My point was that your objection i.e. that you have to verify the information gained through torture, applies to other forms of information gathering as well -- meaning that you have to verify information gained through other means also.
Sorry, but you are the one who has lost track of things.

I never said that information gleaned through torture had to be verified. Instead, I said that information gleaned through torture should be verified if it is possible to do so.

And then I went on to say that if the information gleaned through torture can be verified, then that rather implies that the torture was not needed in the first place.

Also, I said that in intelligence work one always tries to verify the information collected if it possible to do so, even if non-torture means were used to obtain the information in question.

I do hope that this makes sense now.
__________________
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 04:02 PM   #179
The Greater Fool
Master Poster
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 2,949
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
Sorry, but you are the one who has lost track of things.

I never said that information gleaned through torture had to be verified. Instead, I said that information gleaned through torture should be verified if it is possible to do so.

And then I went on to say that if the information gleaned through torture can be verified, then that rather implies that the torture was not needed in the first place.

Also, I said that in intelligence work one always tries to verify the information collected if it possible to do so, even if non-torture means were used to obtain the information in question.

I do hope that this makes sense now.
This is, of course, wrong.

If you are looking for an item, and I tell you were the item is, verification is finding the item where I told you to look. Without that information, you would wouldn't have the foggiest idea where to look.
__________________
- "Who is the Greater Fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the Fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 04:26 PM   #180
TraneWreck
Philosopher
 
TraneWreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,999
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Maybe it is time to modify Miranda so that cops have to presume the suspect is engaging in optimal legal strategy. So, cops cannot ask to search (presumption suspect is exercising his or her refusal to search) and cannot ask questions without a lawyer present.
It's a balancing game. Go too far towards suspect rights, you hamper investigations. Go too far towards allowing cops to steamroll suspects, you end up with innumerable innocent people in prison.

Right now the pendulum has swung way over towards law enforcement's side. It can move back without going all the way.

Also, as long as everything is properly documented, it can be sorted out at the trial level.

Last edited by TraneWreck; 23rd April 2017 at 04:29 PM.
TraneWreck is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 05:38 PM   #181
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 10,772
Originally Posted by The Greater Fool View Post
This is, of course, wrong.

If you are looking for an item, and I tell you were the item is, verification is finding the item where I told you to look. Without that information, you would wouldn't have the foggiest idea where to look.
Sorry, but I do not understand what you are finding to be so wrong. I said, that intelligence data will be verified if it is possible to do so.

By your own example, you are supporting just what I said.
__________________
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 05:50 PM   #182
The Greater Fool
Master Poster
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 2,949
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
Sorry, but I do not understand what you are finding to be so wrong. I said, that intelligence data will be verified if it is possible to do so.

By your own example, you are supporting just what I said.
here is what you said:

Originally Posted by Crossbow
And then I went on to say that if the information gleaned through torture can be verified, then that rather implies that the torture was not needed in the first place.
Let me walk you through it...

I refused to tell you where the item was. You tortured me, I told you were the item was. You verified the information by retrieving the item.

The information was not available in any other way. Without torture, you had nothing.

You said that if it could be verified after torture, it implies the torture was not necessary. This is wrong. Without the torture, you would not have known where to look, period.
__________________
- "Who is the Greater Fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the Fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']

Last edited by The Greater Fool; 23rd April 2017 at 05:54 PM.
The Greater Fool is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 06:31 PM   #183
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 61,142
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
Sorry, but you are the one who has lost track of things.

I never said that information gleaned through torture had to be verified. Instead, I said that information gleaned through torture should be verified if it is possible to do so.
Now you're just nitpicking. Have to. Should. Come on. The point is that people verify the information they get, both from torture and more savoury means. Do you agree?

If so, then it's not unique to torture -- in fact it's true no matter where your info comes from -- and thus your objection is irrelevant.

Hell, you didn't even admit that you went wrong in your last post by completely reversing what I said.
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 06:59 PM   #184
DragonLady
Illuminator
 
DragonLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,459
Quote:
That would make undercover/sting operations impossible.
I'm starting to think that they should be impossible.

Quote:
Quote:
Is it really such a bad thing that if someone hires a hitman to kill his wife, the hitman might turn out to be an undercover cop ? I fail to see the problem.
Seems to me there's far too often a form of enticement involved, even if it's just the kinds of psychological pressure that's been brought up upstream.

Just a little "encouragement" to buy more drugs so it becomes a felony, or a bit of "kind suggestion" that leads to taking a step that might not otherwise be taken.

To my thinking LEO should have to be able to stand up as pillars of the community and be expected to provide the shiny example of good behavior the rest of us are expected to uphold, and that starts at the most basic level -taking away the lies and misleading actions.
__________________
http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499

“She would be half a planet away, floating in a turquoise sea, dancing by moonlight to flamenco guitar.” ~ Janet Fitch

The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One
DragonLady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 07:46 PM   #185
beren
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 844
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Now you're just nitpicking. Have to. Should. Come on.
Words have meanings.
Why not say what you mean and avoid these issues you keep having ....
__________________
Drive-by snark artist.
Deep thinker as long as I can do it quickly with minimal effort.
Band wagon pile-oner
beren is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 08:09 PM   #186
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,493
Originally Posted by TraneWreck View Post
It's a balancing game. Go too far towards suspect rights, you hamper investigations. Go too far towards allowing cops to steamroll suspects, you end up with innumerable innocent people in prison.

Right now the pendulum has swung way over towards law enforcement's side. It can move back without going all the way.

Also, as long as everything is properly documented, it can be sorted out at the trial level.
I don't see it as a pendulum. If the optimal suspect defense exercise is simply exercising your rights, and the primary police strategy depends on people waiving their rights, then police should be stripped of their power to get suspects to waive their rights. I don't care how it affects criminal justice.
BobTheCoward is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 08:52 PM   #187
DragonLady
Illuminator
 
DragonLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,459
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I don't see it as a pendulum. If the optimal suspect defense exercise is simply exercising your rights, and the primary police strategy depends on people waiving their rights, then police should be stripped of their power to get suspects to waive their rights. I don't care how it affects criminal justice.
I agree.

It's just another way the LE is causing more pain and trouble than many of the suspects and criminals.
__________________
http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499

“She would be half a planet away, floating in a turquoise sea, dancing by moonlight to flamenco guitar.” ~ Janet Fitch

The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One
DragonLady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th April 2017, 02:20 AM   #188
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 61,142
Originally Posted by beren View Post
Words have meanings.
It's clear that Crossbow thinks we have to check the information, so complaining that I used that works instead of "should" is just a distraction. We're not robots. The slight change in meaning shouldn't have been a problem, but I suppose pointing out the change instead of carrying on the conversation allows us to avoid... carrying out the conversation because it's uncomfortable.

Quote:
Why not say what you mean and avoid these issues you keep having ....
How about you deal with your own issues?
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th April 2017, 05:45 AM   #189
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 10,772
Originally Posted by The Greater Fool View Post
here is what you said:



Let me walk you through it...

I refused to tell you where the item was. You tortured me, I told you were the item was. You verified the information by retrieving the item.

The information was not available in any other way. Without torture, you had nothing.

You said that if it could be verified after torture, it implies the torture was not necessary. This is wrong. Without the torture, you would not have known where to look, period.
OK then, I think that I see what it is that you are driving at, so allow me to respond ...

Your scenario still does not show anything that I have not already stated.

After all, I am sure that torture can be used to determine all sorts of unknown facts about a certain person such as the name of their favorite pet, where the Christmas presents are hidden, how any times a husband has cheated on his wife, and so on.

But so what if such facts are determined?

If one is using torture to obtain information about his enemy, then while such details may be quite interesting they are also quite useless details.

Also, I have already stated that while torture can work to obtain data about one's enemy, but that torture is a very poor way to collect such data since by the time the person in question is apprehended, tortured to the point where they provide the data, and then the data is distributed to the right people who can make use of the data, then usefulness of data collected through the torture is almost always of no real value.

At least that is the way torture has worked for collecting data in all of recorded human history and I do no see any reason why thing will change now. In fact, I do not know of even one case where data produced by torture has had any real impact on the course of military history.

I said that if the information obtained through torture could be verified, then that rather implies that the torture was not necessary. I still fail to understand why you keep insisting that the statement is incorrect.

I think that what you are doing is simply looking at one of my several postings on this issue and responding to just that one posting. Therefore, I request that you read all of my postings on this issue and I do expect that you will find that we are actually in good agreement with this issue.

Thanks much.
__________________
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th April 2017, 05:53 AM   #190
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 10,772
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Now you're just nitpicking. Have to. Should. Come on. The point is that people verify the information they get, both from torture and more savoury means. Do you agree?

If so, then it's not unique to torture -- in fact it's true no matter where your info comes from -- and thus your objection is irrelevant.

Hell, you didn't even admit that you went wrong in your last post by completely reversing what I said.
Are you just trying to be dense?

I flat out said that all intelligence data (which includes intelligence data that is produced via torture) should be verified if it is possible to do so.

So what the hell is your problem with that simple statement? Intelligence services have operating that way ever since there was such a thing.
__________________
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th April 2017, 05:57 AM   #191
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 61,142
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
Are you just trying to be dense?
There's really no need to this, but if you want to dance, I'll be happy to oblige.

Quote:
I flat out said that all intelligence data (which includes intelligence data that is produced via torture) should be verified if it is possible to do so.

So what the hell is your problem with that simple statement?
I told you the problem I had with it. You used it as an objection to torture, specifically, when it's clear that it applies to ALL forms of intelligence-gathering: you need to check your information. You should. You must. You have to. Whatever wording you want to use comes back to the same thing: torture isn't unique in that regard. Your objection is therefore irrelevant.
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th April 2017, 06:39 AM   #192
TraneWreck
Philosopher
 
TraneWreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,999
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I don't see it as a pendulum. If the optimal suspect defense exercise is simply exercising your rights, and the primary police strategy depends on people waiving their rights, then police should be stripped of their power to get suspects to waive their rights. I don't care how it affects criminal justice.
I don't entirely disagree. My objections would be to the damage practically implementing this would do - the first time some really bad dude was allowed to get away because police couldn't interrogate a tangential figure, there would be so much uproar that we'd end up with electrodes and iron maidens in every police district.

But conceptually, I think I'm closer to your position than our current standard.

Fundamentally, all of these rules largely effect poorer less savvy folks as regardless of what police are allowed to do, wealthier people more familiar with the system will exercise their rights and be able to afford attorneys.
TraneWreck is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th April 2017, 07:02 AM   #193
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 10,772
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
There's really no need to this, but if you want to dance, I'll be happy to oblige.



I told you the problem I had with it. You used it as an objection to torture, specifically, when it's clear that it applies to ALL forms of intelligence-gathering: you need to check your information. You should. You must. You have to. Whatever wording you want to use comes back to the same thing: torture isn't unique in that regard. Your objection is therefore irrelevant.
So, ...

I suppose the summary is that when I say that all intelligence data should be verified, if it is possible to do so, then I am wrong for saying so.

However, when you say that all intelligence data should be verified, if it is possible to do, then you are correct for saying so.

Therefore, all that I have to do is figure out this Moebius Strip logic and then everything will be just peachy. As such, I will make sure to let you know when, and if, such a thing ever does occur.
__________________
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th April 2017, 07:10 AM   #194
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 61,142
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
I suppose the summary is that when I say that all intelligence data should be verified, if it is possible to do so, then I am wrong for saying so.

However, when you say that all intelligence data should be verified, if it is possible to do, then you are correct for saying so.
I find it very interesting that you called me dense when you seem to be incapable of understanding a simple principle that I've repeated several times by now.

The summary isn't that at all. If it were, we'd both be right. The summary is that your objection doesn't apply only to torture, and so the need to verify the information is not a downside to torture, because you still need to verify the information if you got it through non-torture.

Seriously, this isn't rocket science.
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 10:29 AM   #195
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 61,142
Terribly sorry about the delay, by the way. I said I'd check for examples of torture working but through distraction and laziness I keep putting it off or forgetting. The little I checked kept bringing up the CIA thing, which aren't good enough to qualify as a definitive conclusion anyway.

So, tell you what, I'll retract my claim for now, and the next time this topic comes up, I'll look it up before opening my big mouth.
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 11:45 AM   #196
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 10,772
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Terribly sorry about the delay, by the way. I said I'd check for examples of torture working but through distraction and laziness I keep putting it off or forgetting. The little I checked kept bringing up the CIA thing, which aren't good enough to qualify as a definitive conclusion anyway.

So, tell you what, I'll retract my claim for now, and the next time this topic comes up, I'll look it up before opening my big mouth.
Thanks much for the concession.

If you do not mind taking a bit of advice from me, I have been looking off on on for years regarding the use of torture in collecting valuable intelligence data, and there really just is not any such data. I expect that the reason why is simply due to the fact that torture is actually a poor way to collect such data.

Like I said before, by the time the person is apprehended, then delivered to the torture site, then the torture is applied, then the data collected, and then the the data has been distributed to the people who actually need it, then the data collected is almost always of little to no use. At least that is how it has worked out in all of recorded history.

Even though popular fictional dramas (such as that TV show 24) often show torture to be quite valuable in obtaining that badly needed bit of data which makes all the difference at the critical moment, but the reality of the situation is quite different indeed.
__________________
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:23 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.