Insight From a Reader
A reader responds to the post on how fictional dramatic portrayals of torture have insinuated themselves into the current presidential race. Not just eloquent but spot on:
In real life the problem is that you typically don’t know what you don’t know, so there is no such tension. [Indeed, if the Bush administration were a Wagnerian opera, “how can we do meaningful review when you don’t know what you don’t know?†would probably be the leitmotiv.] If torture is permitted in the hypothetical “ticking time bomb†scenario, then one starts to perceive every terrorism investigation as a ticking time bomb. Indeed, the entire “war on terrorism†can be framed as a giant ticking time bomb scenario … and in a sense that’s the only scale at which one can be readily know that there is a ticking time bomb. Thus, the more relevant question isn’t whether torture should be used in the “ticking time bomb†scenario that is usually hypothesized as a thought experiment, but whether it should be used as a routine matter in terrorism investigation.I think this question must consider whether using torture as a routine matter is consistent with American ethical norms and whether torture has a proven record of effectiveness in interrogation. On both grounds, the answer seems to be ‘no.’
Stay informed
Sign up to be the first to hear about how to take action.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.