US Military, SERE, Warned Against Torture in 2002 - New England Patriots Forums

***apple strudel*** · 04-25-2009, 09:58 AM

So the torture apologists have said that it's not torture if we do it on our own troops. We know we stopped torturing regular troops because it was too demoralizing. What about the JPRA and SERE, though?

Quote:

The military agency that helped to devise harsh interrogation techniques for use against terrorism suspects referred to the application of extreme duress as "torture" in a July 2002 document sent to the Pentagon's chief lawyer and warned that it would produce "unreliable information."

So the guys who are experts on the subject refute the 2 major talking points: 1) it is torture, and 2) it doesn't produce reliable information.

Now wait, what about the "save US from impending attack" scenario that's meant to scare us into not thinking any more?

Quote:

"The requirement to obtain information from an uncooperative source as quickly as possible -- in time to prevent, for example, an impending terrorist attack that could result in loss of life -- has been forwarded as a compelling argument for the use of torture," the document said. "In essence, physical and/or psychological duress are viewed as an alternative to the more time-consuming conventional interrogation process. The error inherent in this line of thinking is the assumption that, through torture, the interrogator can extract reliable and accurate information. History and a consideration of human behavior would appear to refute this assumption."

So SERE says you guys are wrong, the CIA says you guys are wrong, nobody thinks it produces real information, and the time lines that Cheney suggested show that it does have been shown to be lies. And the Bush administration ignored experts on the subject (surprise!).

You didn't have a leg to stand on before, you've got nothing now. So who will step to the plate and continue to defend it?

2002 Document Referred to Extreme Duress as 'Torture,' Warned of Techniques' Unreliability

***patsfan13*** · 04-25-2009, 10:26 AM

Well the results proved the speculation in this report wrong. Reality trumps speculation...

as always abortion is torture.. worry about innocent babies and not mass murderers

***apple strudel*** · 04-25-2009, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

Well the results proved the speculation in this report wrong. Reality trumps speculation...

as always abortion is torture.. worry about innocent babies and not mass murderers

SERE is wrong? In spite of all the evidence you'll take Cheney's fake timeline over the experts?

***Harry Boy*** · 04-25-2009, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apple strudel

SERE is wrong? In spite of all the evidence you'll take Cheney's fake timeline over the experts?

Cheney has a Birth Certificate.........

Patriot_in_NY · 04-25-2009, 11:51 AM

I bet SERE would also include your incessant droning on about this topic fall under the definition of torture as well.

***Patters*** · 04-25-2009, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

Well the results proved the speculation in this report wrong. Reality trumps speculation...

as always abortion is torture.. worry about innocent babies and not mass murderers

I have yet to see any credible reports that torture works, but the more important point is that proving torture works does not prove that torture is necessary.

***apple strudel*** · 04-25-2009, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patriot_in_NY

I bet SERE would also include your incessant droning on about this topic fall under the definition of torture as well.

OK, I laughed. It would also be more proof that torture doesn't work.