Oh, more torture stories please
Two interesting developments in the torture debate:
Britain’s top court bans “torture evidence”
By Michael Holden
LONDON (Reuters) – Britain’s highest court ruled on Thursday that information obtained using torture anywhere in the world was unacceptable as evidence in the British judicial system.
Human rights groups said the ruling sent a clear signal to governments around the globe, who are wrestling with accusations they have benefited from information obtained by torture.</i>
and this:
Qaeda-Iraq Link U.S. Cited Is Tied to Coercion Claim
By DOUGLAS JEHL
WASHINGTON, Dec. 8 – The Bush administration based a crucial prewar assertion about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda on detailed statements made by a prisoner while in Egyptian custody who later said he had fabricated them to escape harsh treatment, according to current and former government officials.
The officials said the captive, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, provided his most specific and elaborate accounts about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda only after he was secretly handed over to Egypt by the United States in January 2002, in a process known as rendition.</i>
This is why (among other compelling reasons, such as the whole “inhumane” thing) that you don’t torture people. It doesn’t work.
