Freedom From Torture Case Study

Torture is something that is known as wrong internationally. Torture is “deliberate, systematic or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons acting on the orders of authority, to force a person to yield information, to confess, or any other reason” (World Medical Association, 1975, pg.1). There is a general consensus that there is a right to be free from any kind of torture as it can be found in many different human rights treaties around the world. The treaties show that all of the thoughts about torture are pointing away from the right to torture someone no matter what the case

In “The Case for Torture”, philosophy professor Michael Levin attempts to defend using torture as a means to save lives is justifiable and necessary. Throughout the article, Levin provides persuasive arguments to support his essay using clever wording and powerful, moving examples. However, the essay consists heavily of pathos, fallacies, and “What if?” situations that single out torture as the only method of resolution, rendering the argument hypothetical, weak, and unreliable for the city of San Jose as a whole community to follow.

The subsequent case study, prepared by James P. Pfiffner, Torture and Public Policy, (2010) analyzes the torture and abuse of war prisoners by United States military personnel in Abu Ghraib, Iraq, and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, following photographs of the abuse spread around the world in the fall of 2003. Pfiffner points out that the United States Military, Secretary of State Donald Rumsfield, and President George W. Bush assumed a role in the events leading up to the exploitation, even though it has never been corroborated that President Bush or Secretary of State Rumsfield directly condoned the abuse.

Interrogational torture is one of the many tough ethical questions that people debate about in the United States. Is it right or is it wrong? Many believe that the United States does not practice intense interrogational acts such as torture. Many people have fought to abolish any form of torture while many fight to keep some forms of it to help keep the peace. Whether you believe in it or not, torture is and will always be an ethical dilemma that comes up.

Following along with the ticking time bomb scenario or any other future terrorist attack, many opponents of torture like to argue, how do the investigators really know the person they have in custody is for sure the terrorist who knows where the location of the bomb is or any other information that is needed. What if that isn’t the right person and the one who is in custody is being tortured but is completely innocent. The way that technology is improving and advancing from day to day, the idea of being wrong is very rare (Torture). Before investigators and researchers take the time to arrest the terrorist and get them in custody, they do precise investigations to make sure they are right. They will not take into custody and torture the person

In “The Case for Torure” Michael Levin executes poor grammar, inadequate evidence, and ridiculous ideas to voice his opinion. The grammar is what is to be expected from a high school student, not that of a philosophy major. His facts are insufficiently backed up, and he provides no evidence, or rebuttals whatsoever. The entire paper is more of an opinion than an intelligent argument.

The CIA, or Central Intelligence Agency, has been the subject of government mystery for years. With so many unknown secrets, it is no wonder that mistrust and controversy have joined the mysterious aura surrounding the organization. One such controversy that has drawn much attention in recent years is that associated with the CIA's Interrogation Program. Numerous reports have been and are still continuing to be released on the program, specifically on the torture utilized. Torture in itself is a sensitive issue, even more so when combined with an already suspicious government agency. These reports have therefore divided the public on the question: should the CIA face prosecution for torture in the Interrogation Program? Due to the fact that

Mohamed al-Kahtani was a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay who endured numerous disgusting and truly horrifying acts of torture. Being seduced by prostitutes and female officers, told to act like a dog and forced to crawl on his hands and feet while barking, and forced to urinate himself are just a few examples of the type of life prisoner’s at Guantanamo Bay are living. They are held in solitary confinement, while all day and night their lights in the rooms are kept on. Each day prisoner’s are tortured. Whether it is psychical or emotional torture, it is occurring all round the camp. Prisoner’s being tied down and forced to listen to extremely loud rock music for and extended period of time is one of the tactics used

Under American influence, Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian citizen contained in the prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was tortured to an extent where his whole body was burned. Binyam is just one example of the claims of torture found in the Guantanamo Bay prison, otherwise known as “Gitmo”. Many of the Gitmo detainees are men who made most, if not all, Americans fear them after their attacks on September 11, 2001, but after reports of abuse, George W. Bush and Barack Obama have promised to close down the Guantanamo detention facility.

Torture in Prisons should be enforced due to the fact that the criminals would get what he/she deserves and it would pry out information the criminal could be hiding. There are all kinds of statistics of criminal activity that go along with lying and how they get themselves out of lie detector tests. They need to get what they deserve.

After the US lead invasion of Iraq many priests were kidnaped, tortured and killed. In November 2006, Father Douglas Joseph, an Iraqi Catholic priest was kidnapped and a high ransom was demanded by his abductors. For several days he was tortured as the church tried to negotiate payment of a ransom with his captors. He suffered multiple injuries including two broken vertebrae from his spinal cord, and his face and knees were smashed using a hammer.

Michael Levin author of the article The Case for Torture argues that the general public should change its negative views on torture and that it is justifiable in order to save the lives of innocent bystanders who did nothing wrong. In his given example, he claims that the mass murder of millions of innocent people by a terrorist justifies the use of torture to stop such a barbaric act. When a terrorist has clearly intended to harm the lives of millions, why is it not justified then, to inflict pain on the terrorist, with the motive of wanting to protect the lives of many more innocent people? Well because every single person is born with human dignity and rights, and no matter what somebody thinks they do not have the right to torture anyone regardless of what that person has done or will do. It does not matter what someone threatens to do; it does not make any since how someone can think that torturing someone else to prevent even the most horrible acts is “right” by any means. It’s morally unacceptable.

In extreme cases is torture justifiable? In the article The Case for Torture, Michael Levin believes that torture is morally mandatory and insist that torture should be used to prevent future evil. Levin provides different types of scenarios in which he refers to the violence of certain crimes defending the clearing of the constitutional rights of individuals. Levin appeals to fear as a way of rationalizing these scenes where the rights of the individual should not hold for the greater good of the society. Michael Levin fails to address any questions that may be raised against his arguments, and instead focuses on the fear of the hyperbolic

One of the biggest problems of the previous government was human rights abuses. The penentiary system had torture and abuse of prisoners problem torture and abuse. As dramatic and terrible the prison abuse was, it it needs to be viewed in general context. A problem of the previous government was their repressive tactics. At the beginning, they had a zero tolerance towards corruption that was popular, however, it turned to zero tolerance of anything. Minor crimes could land you in jail with a lengthy times. The government encouraged brutal approach by law enforcement.

Torture, irrational detention, and severe limitation on freedom of expression, association, and religion remain accustomed in Eritrea today. Gender discrimination is the unfair treatment or unequal protection of rights of a certain gender, usually women (Gender+Discrimination). The country of Eritrea faces the central issue of unequal rights of women and gender minorities. Unequal rights in Eritrea include treating women poorly, in a country that has declared gender disparity against women unconstitutional, and depriving women of their natural rights. Although the government has created multiple laws that protect the natural rights of women and specifically state that gender disparity is illegal in the country of Eritrea, people within the country continue to treat women unfairly and defy them of their natural rights (Africa. African Development Fund). The direct and indirect impact of gender discrimination against women and children are unmeasurable. However, statistics state that gender discrimination burdens society economically, socially, and politically. If women are continued to be treated unfairly, poverty will continue, the country will remain third-world, and social isolation will continue to create the hierarchy of men over women.