It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Torture me enough & I'll tell you I'm a terrorist...or a shoehorn!!

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 02:26 PM
Ok...this is in response to the tremendous Channel 4 (UK TV channel) called Torture. It showed in as much detail as possible what methods our Governments are undertaking to apprehend, incarcerate and illicit confessions from 'Terrorists'; it also subjected 8 volunteers to 48 hours of a 'mild' form of the methods undertaken in Abu Gharib and Guantanamo.

I doubt that it will be shown in the USA.....

This has got to be said: How much torture could YOU withstand before you would admit that you belong to al-Qaeda?

...that you know of plans to bomb and destroy strategic targets to create as much fear in the indigenous population and the 'Western' world as a whole...

...that you were involved in plots to kidnap, maim, torture, rape, kill, carry information, weapons, be used as a suicide bomber, be a tool of Islam against the Infidel West....anything the Moslem Brotherhood want... much would it take?

I absolutely hate and abhor the use of terrorism to achieve a socio-political change. The spread of fear and terror that this instils in a population just breeds more resentment against the terrorist and undermines their objective. It creates a situation where ignorance and prejudice becomes acceptable and in fact, desired by many....but when a Military Complex subjects people to the range of methods that are available to them in order to extort confessions of guilt, terrorised becomes terrorist...

From the Dark Ages until the 18th Century(?), 10's of 1000's of innocent people were imprisoned without trial and many put to death after being subjected to the most horrendous crude, brutal and violent forms of torture...for being 'Witches'....most confessed. But how many of them were actual real-life witches???

Now we have 'clean', precise, bio, neuro, physio targeted torture. What's the difference? It is still designed to elicit a confession of guilt, regardless of innocence.

How much physical, mental even spiritual abuse does it take to 'create' a terrorist?

Far better informed people out there may flame me about this topic or possibly ignore it completely...but the question has got to be asked and answered.

What could you take?

....if this subject has already been covered...I apologise in advance...

Peace Out

posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 03:41 PM
If they are true American patriots then they won't lie to the 'torturers' if they are innocent. If they do say they are guilty and they aren't, they are lying to their country (treason) and deserve whatever comes to them anyways.

posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 04:12 PM
Red Dragon, I have to disagree. Anytime that detention and torture are applied for any length of time, the subject can be broken and made to say whatever it is that his accusers/tormentors want to hear. Every person has their own breaking point, and to judge someone guilty of treason for something they said under long term physical duress is ludicrous.

However, the other side of the coin is that the true, dyed-in-the-wool terrorist is willing to actually die in the pursuit of his or her goal, and that means that he or she is highly unlikely to give up any information whatsoever until that duress is applied with sufficient force. So what's the answer?

In my opinion, the only recourse is to make every imaginable effort to verify that the persons being detained are being held with cause and that there is ample and tangible evidence that they hold information needed.

Torture has been misused throughout the centuries, but it has also saved lives in the long run. If the guy knows where to find the people who are planning terrorist actions, and the only way to get the information is to make him stand in one place holding heavy buckets for 10 hours, or even if the method involves a car battery or a cattle prod, if it saves lives, then I think it needs to be done.

posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 04:15 PM
I was being sarcastic with the above and I think any kind of torture is wrong no matter the circumstances. What I'd like to know is this: why aren't we allowed to drug the people with truth serums? That doesn't sound that bad to me tbh.

posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 07:03 PM
The problem with truth serums, to my knowledge, is that they don't really work. Sodium pentathol, for example, is an anaesthetic, and while the patient may be prone to suggestion under its effects, it's little more effective than a fifth of Scotch. Other compounds have been tried; '___', according to some researchers, began as an experimental truth drug and was later co-opted as a possible mind control tool. PCP has been alleged by some researchers to have been developed initially for much the same purpose.

The issue is, even with the drug that prevents the subject from lying, you still have to get them to talk.


log in