[justcurious55]

So for my college writing 1 class I was given an assignment to write an argument either for torture or against torture. Writing is not my strong point at all. The assignment is due tomorrow so any feedback before then will be especially appreciated but I know I'll have plenty more essay due in the future so any advice at all that I might be able to apply to future assignments would be great. It's supposed to be MLA format. I know my in text citations aren't properly formatted here, they're more notes for me so that I know where I got info from and I can format them when I get back from work tonight. And I lost the rest of the formatting when I copy and pasted it from the word document. I know its long, the longest paper I think I've ever had to write. I would really appreciate it if anyone has time to read it and give me some feedback. I know you guys will be honest with me (my boyfriend says its great but I'm not convinced) :) thanks

Torture

Torture has recently become a hot topic in American politics. It's no longer clear what America's policy or feelings toward torture really are. 51% of Americans want the government's enhanced interrogation techniques to be reviewed, but 55% of Americans feel that torturing suspected terrorists in the past was justified (Gallup Poll). The truth is, torture can never be justified. In this essay, I will demonstrate why torture cannot be justified. I will explain what torture is, what enhanced interrogation techniques have been recently used by the American government, what democracy is, and how torture is detrimental to society, and especially detrimental to democracy.

Democracy is commonly over simplified and defined as rule by the people. A true democracy is really a much more complex system filled with checks and balances to ensure fair and equal treatment. While the fair and equal treatment protected by democracy is intended for the citizens living in the democracy, it is hypocritical not to extend fair and equal treatment to anyone that comes in contact with the democracy.

Torture is defined by Britannica Encyclopedia as “the infliction of severe physical or mental pain or suffering for a purpose, such as extracting information, coercing a confession, or inflicting punishment (”Torture"). Torture is defined by the American government as “physical pain…equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death (Gonzales)." According to the International Criminal Court (ICC)," "Torture" means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions; (art. 7)" In the Alberto Gonzales memo the American government tries to defend its use of torture by pointing out that the ICC does not clearly define what "severe" means. Since the ICC does not clearly define "severe" the government uses the dictionary definition of the word "severe". The dictionary defines "severe" to mean "inflicting physical discomfort or hardship or inflicting pain or distress ("Severe"). Based on these definitions, it is obvious that the American government is attempting to make the words “torture” and “severe” mean something much more extreme than they actually do.

To understand why the American government’s enhanced interrogation techniques that were used under the Bush administration are clearly torture it is important to understand specifically what the techniques are. In 2009, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) used the Freedom of Information Act to make a fax sent to the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) public. This fax details the enhanced interrogation techniques. This official report explains that there are three categories the techniques can be separated into: conditioning, corrective, and coercive techniques (5).

Conditioning techniques are: nudity, sleep deprivation, and dietary manipulation. Forced nudity is humiliating and degrading, its dehumanizing. Sleep deprivation is more than just forcing a detainee to stay awake. The detainee is shackled, and sometimes diapered, in a vertical position and there seems to be no guidelines on how long a detainee may remain shackled and/or sleep deprived. Sleep deprivation is known to cause a number of physical problems including memory and cognitive impairment, heart failure, stroke, and psychiatric illness (Breus 1). Dietary manipulation is the third conditioning technique described. The detainee is not completely starved but it is accurate to say that the detainee is deprived of healthy, nutritiously balanced meals. The official faxed report explains that the detainee is to be fed Ensure Plus, a liquid dietary supplement, at regular intervals. Anyone who has ever drank Ensure, or other similar dietary liquid supplements is well aware that the label warns against using the product as a sole source of nutrients and recommends that it be used to replace no more than one meal a day.
The second category the fax describes is the corrective techniques: insult slap, abdominal slap, facial hold, and the attention grasp. The fax sent to the Justice Department’s OLC describes when to use these techniques during the interrogation. In an official memorandum for John Rizzo, the acting general counsel of the central intelligence agency in August 2002, the corrective techniques are described in better detail. For the insult slap, the interrogator is supposed to slap the detainee across the face with their fingers spread, between the bottom of the earlobe and tip of the chin. The abdominal slap is the same finger spread slap as the insult slap, except for its across the abdomen. The interrogator is to use both palms on either side of the detainees face to hole their head immobile. For the attention grasp, the interrogator pulls the detainees face closer to their own. These techniques alone would generally not be considered torture. The reason these techniques are considered torture is because of the context they are used. It is made clear repeatedly throughout the document that they are used while the detainee is nude and/or has been sleep deprived and/or has been subjected to dietary manipulation. To use any of these techniques on a nude detainee adds to humiliation and increases mental pain and suffering. To use any of these techniques on a detainee that has been sleep deprived can only increase the likelihood of any serious health problems sleep deprivation is known to cause. Finally, the third category that is described are the coercive techniques: walling, water dousing, stress positions, wall standing, and cramped confinement. It’s warned in the fax to the Justice Department’s OLC that walling and stress positions have to be limited because muscle fatigue will make it impossible for detainees to hold the positions after a while. There are no specific guidelines mentioned for water dousing. It’s highly encouraged to be used in combination with other techniques, except for cramped confinement. Cramped confinement is to be used alone, “because of “the unique aspects (p 9).” There are two types of cramped confinement- the large box and the small box. In the large box, the detainee should be able to sit or stand, in the small box the detainee should be able to sit. Detainees can be left in the large box for up to eighteen hours or left in the small box for two hours at a time. The memo for John Rizzo states
“Cramped confinement involves the placement of the individual in a confined space, the dimensions of which restrict the individual’s movement., the confined space is usually dark…For the larger confined space, the individual can stand up or sit down; the smaller space is large enough for the subject to sit down.”
In at least one instance, the interrogators deliberately placed a detainee, Abu Zubaydah, in cramped confinement with insects because they knew he had an extreme fear of them (Rizzo p 3).

The purpose of these techniques is to psychologically break down detainees so that they give up information on terrorist plots and other terrorists. The problem with using torture to gain information is that people don’t always know things. According to an investigation published by the New York Times, officials at Guantanamo Bay estimated that only about a dozen out of nearly 600 prisoners actually knew any useful details about Al Qeada’s inner workings. That same investigation also found that while some of the little bits of information gained from detainees proved to be helpful in investigating terrorism, no major attack or plots were ever prevented because of the information gained (Golden, Van Natta).

Another problem with information obtained through torture is determining whether the information is at all accurate. According to the biography of Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed, he was interrogated almost daily about Al Qeada. The interrogators repeatedly showed him pictures of people, asking who the people were and what they were plotting. Mohamed had no idea who any of the people were. He began making up stories about the pictures and the people in them to avoid being tortured any more (ACLU).

People support torture for various reasons. Two of the most common arguments for supporting torture are that it is necessary for gaining information and/or that the ends justify the means. Experience shows that torture is not typically necessary to gain information. According to Army Col. Stuart Herrington, nine out of ten people can be persuaded to talk without any of the harsh techniques described in any of the recent government memos. Col. Herrington is a military intelligence specialist who conducted interrogations in Vietnam, Panama and Iraq during Desert Storm, and who was sent by the Pentagon to assess interrogations in Iraq (Applebaum).

Alan Dershowitz justifies torture with his “ticking time bomb” scenario, essentially arguing that the ends justify the means. He argues that in extreme cases, such as a ticking bomb, when a captive has information that could be used to stop the bomb and save lives, torture is justifiable and should be permitted. In reality, the ticking bomb scenario almost never actually happens though. If the scenario did actually happen, there is still no guarantee that any information gained would be accurate or helpful. A person being tortured could give inaccurate information deliberately, which would lead to investigators wasting time and being unable to prevent a terrorist act. A person could also give inaccurate information by simply making things up to stop further torture. This would also lead to wasting time and not being able to prevent an act from being stopped. Even if accurate information is given, there may not be enough time for investigators to use the information to prevent an act.

Americans are divided over whether the use of torture is justified. Just over 50% of Americans feel that the harsh tactics used on terrorist suspects was justified. 58% of people from that same survey reported that they had been following the story very closely (Gallup). They don’t report where they are following the story from. Just looking at the headlines, its easy to say torture was justified. American news focuses on suicide bombers, terrorist kidnappings, and how many Americans and civilians have been killed through terrorists acts. The men detained in Guantanamo Bay are described as evil, the reports are intended to terrify audiences. Then there’s the other side of the story. Men like Moazzam Deghayes, Rahul Ahmed, or Bisher al-Rawi. There stories don’t make headlines on networks like CNN or Fox. You have to go on sites like aclu.org to even find out they exist and then to YouTube to find independently filmed interviews.

Moazzan Begg’s story is heartbreaking. Instead of seeing his daughter start school or hearing his son’s first words, he describes watching another shackled prisoner being beaten until he was eventually killed. His view of America has been “shattered” he says. He no longer sees America as heroic, the way America is so often portrayed in the media. Begg’s was detained for three years. To this day, he still is unsure of why he was detained. He was never charged with any crime of given any explanation. He was in Afghanistan helping to set up a school for girls when he was detained. Omar Deghayes was detained for five and a half years. He also does not know why he was detained. He had come from law school in England to study Afghanistan’s legal system. He described his eyes being poked by a guard- he is now blind. He also spoke of the sexual abuse that happened in Guantanamo Bay. He told how men were sodomized with sticks or hands, just to break them down. He talks about being hit with some sort of electric gun and the guards laughing. He describes leaving as “broken physically, broken psychologically.” Bisher al-Rawi is also a British resident. He spend four and a half years in Guantanamo Bay. He was also never given any explanation for his detainment. Before he was detained he enjoyed extreme sports like skydiving and had been trying to open a peanut-oil processing facility in Gambia. He described solitary confinement as a place where one could “lost their mind.” He felt he had to relearn how to function in society after being released from Guantanamo Bay. Rahul Ahmed and Shafiq Rasul were detained after attending a friend’s wedding in Pakistan. They are British residents as well. They certainly don’t look like the “worst of the worst” they were made to feel like. They compare being held in Guantanamo Bay to rape, they say being asked to describe it is like asking a recently raped woman to describe the experience. They say they don’t hate America, but their view of America and Americans has certainly changed. (American Civil Liberties Union, No Indefinite Detention Without Charge or Trial)

America and democracies reputations have been tarnished because of the torture performed by the American government. President Obama’s promise to close the Guantanamo Bay prison is only the very first of many steps that will have to be made to save America’s image of itself. The fact that federal judges are finally reviewing prisoners’ cases is another small step. But the fact that so many of the detainees are being found to have been unlawfully detained by the United States government is shameful. Only time and drastic changes in policies and practices will be able to bring back America’s good reputation.

[cdad]

It's a good paper. Part of what may have been missed is that there are 2 different classes of people that are going through different sysytems. There is the law breaker and there is the enemy combatant. The law breaker is entitled to maranda rights etc. The enemy combatant is not. That is the only parallel I see missing in what you have written. Otherwise good stuff.

[justcurious55]

I didn't even find anything on that. Are you talking about in guantanamo bay? Or in general American prisons? I only found things about the combatants in guantanam bay, but maybe I didn't look hard enough. Thanks for the feedback.

[cdad]

The current debate was around enemy combatants. But even our own police use some forms of passive torture to gain admissions. One is Geneva Convention and other is a civil matter.

[justcurious55]

I hadn't even thought about the civil matter. We've been focusing so much on torture on terrorist suspects and Guantanamo bay in class I hadn't thought about that. But that's a good point. Thank you.

[Wondergirl]

I've put my suggestions (sentence structure, etc. only) in boldface:

Torture

Torture has recently become a hot topic in American politics. It's no longer clear what America's policy or feelings toward torture really are. Americans are split: 51% want the government's enhanced interrogation techniques to be reviewed, and 55% feel that torturing suspected terrorists in the past was justified (Gallup Poll). The truth is, torture can never be justified. In this essay, I will demonstrate why this is true. I will explain what torture is, what enhanced interrogation techniques have been recently used by the American government, what democracy is, and how torture is detrimental to society, and especially detrimental to democracy.

Democracy is commonly over simplified and defined as rule by the people. A true democracy is really a much more complex system filled with checks and balances to ensure fair and equal treatment. While the fair and equal treatment protected by democracy is intended for the citizens living in the democracy, it is hypocritical not to extend fair and equal treatment to anyone that comes in contact with the democracy.

Torture is defined by the Encyclopedia Britannica as “the infliction of severe physical or mental pain or suffering for a purpose, such as extracting information, coercing a confession, or inflicting punishment (”Torture"). Torture is defined by the American government as “physical pain…equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death" (Gonzales). According to the International Criminal Court (ICC), "Torture" means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions" (art. 7). In the Alberto Gonzales memo the American government tries to defend its use of torture by pointing out that the ICC does not clearly define what "severe" means. Since the ICC does not clearly define "severe," the government uses the dictionary definition of the word "severe". The dictionary defines "severe" to mean "inflicting physical discomfort or hardship or inflicting pain or distress ("Severe"). Based on these definitions, it is obvious that the American government is attempting to make the words “torture” and “severe” mean something much more extreme than they actually do.

To understand why the American government's enhanced interrogation techniques that were used under the Bush administration are clearly torture, it is important to understand specifically what the techniques are. In 2009, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) used the Freedom of Information Act to make public a fax sent to the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC). This fax details the enhanced interrogation techniques. This official report explains that there are three categories the techniques can be separated into: conditioning, corrective, and coercive techniques (5).

Conditioning techniques are: nudity, sleep deprivation, and dietary manipulation. Forced nudity is humiliating, degrading, and dehumanizing. Sleep deprivation is more than just forcing a detainee to stay awake. The detainee is shackled, and sometimes diapered, in a vertical position and there seems to be no guidelines on how long a detainee may remain shackled and/or sleep deprived. Sleep deprivation is known to cause a number of physical problems including memory and cognitive impairment, heart failure, stroke, and psychiatric illness (Breus 1). Dietary manipulation is the third conditioning technique described. The detainee is not completely starved, but it is accurate to say that the detainee is deprived of healthy, nutritiously balanced meals. The official faxed report explains that the detainee is to be fed Ensure Plus, a liquid dietary supplement, at regular intervals. Anyone who has ever drunk Ensure or other similar dietary liquid supplements is well aware that the label warns against using the product as a sole source of nutrients and recommends that it be used to replace no more than one meal a day.

The second category the fax describes is the corrective techniques: insult slap, abdominal slap, facial hold, and the attention grasp. The fax sent to the Justice Department's OLC describes when to use these techniques during the interrogation. In an official memorandum for John Rizzo, the acting general counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency in August 2002, the corrective techniques are described in better detail. For the insult slap, the interrogator is supposed to slap the detainee across the face with fingers spread between the bottom of the earlobe and tip of the chin. The abdominal slap is the same finger spread slap as the insult slap, except for it's across the abdomen. The interrogator is to use both palms on either side of the detainee's face to hold his head immobile. For the attention grasp, the interrogator pulls the detainee's face closer to his own. These techniques alone would generally not be considered torture, but are considered as such because of the context in which they are used. It is made clear repeatedly throughout the document that they are used while the detainee is nude and/or has been sleep deprived and/or has been subjected to dietary manipulation. To use any of these techniques on a nude detainee adds to humiliation and increases mental pain and suffering. To use any of these techniques on a detainee that has been sleep deprived can only increase the likelihood of any serious health problems sleep deprivation is known to cause. Finally, the third category is coercive techniques: walling, water dousing, stress positions, wall standing, and cramped confinement. It's warned in the fax to the Justice Department's OLC that walling and stress positions have to be limited because muscle fatigue will make it impossible for detainees to hold the positions after a while. There are no specific guidelines mentioned for water dousing. It's highly encouraged to be used in combination with other techniques, except for cramped confinement. Cramped confinement is to be used alone, “because of “the unique aspects" (p 9). There are two types of cramped confinement- the large box and the small box. In the large box, the detainee should be able to sit or stand; in the small box the detainee should be able to sit. Detainees can be left in the large box for up to eighteen hours or left in the small box for two hours at a time. The memo for John Rizzo states, “Cramped confinement involves the placement of the individual in a confined space, the dimensions of which restrict the individual's movement...the confined space is usually dark…For the larger confined space, the individual can stand up or sit down; the smaller space is large enough for the subject to sit down.”
In at least one instance, the interrogators deliberately placed a detainee, Abu Zubaydah, in cramped confinement with insects because they knew he had an extreme fear of them (Rizzo p 3).

The purpose of these techniques is to psychologically break down detainees so that they give up information on terrorist plots and other terrorists. The problem with using torture to gain information is that people don't always know things. According to an investigation published by the New York Times, officials at Guantanamo Bay estimated that only about a dozen out of nearly 600 prisoners actually knew any useful details about al Qaeda's inner workings. That same investigation also found that while some of the little bits of information gained from detainees proved to be helpful in investigating terrorism, no major attack or plots were ever prevented because of the information gained (Golden, Van Natta).

Another problem with information obtained through torture is determining whether the information is at all accurate. According to the biography of Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed, he was interrogated almost daily about al Qaeda. The interrogators repeatedly showed him pictures of people, asking who the people were and what they were plotting. Mohamed had no idea who any of the people were. He began making up stories about the pictures and the people in them to avoid being tortured any more (ACLU).

People support torture for various reasons. Two of the most common arguments for supporting torture are that it is necessary for gaining information and/or that the ends justify the means. Experience shows that torture is not typically necessary to gain information. According to Army Col. Stuart Herrington, nine out of ten people can be persuaded to talk without any of the harsh techniques described in any of the recent government memos. Col. Herrington is a military intelligence specialist who conducted interrogations in Vietnam, Panama and Iraq during Desert Storm, and who was sent by the Pentagon to assess interrogations in Iraq (Applebaum).

Alan Dershowitz justifies torture with his “ticking time bomb” scenario, essentially arguing that the ends justify the means. He argues that in extreme cases, such as a ticking bomb, when a captive has information that could be used to stop the bomb and save lives, torture is justifiable and should be permitted. In reality, the ticking bomb scenario almost never actually happens though. If the scenario did actually happen, there is still no guarantee that any information gained would be accurate or helpful. A person being tortured could give inaccurate information deliberately, which would lead to investigators wasting time and being unable to prevent a terrorist act. A person could also give inaccurate information by simply making things up to stop further torture. This would also lead to wasting time and not being able to prevent an act from being stopped. Even if accurate information is given, there may not be enough time for investigators to use the information to prevent an act.

Americans are divided over whether the use of torture is justified. Just over 50% of Americans feel that the harsh tactics used on terrorist suspects was justified. 58% of people from that same survey reported that they had been following the story very closely (Gallup). They don't report where they are following the story from. Just looking at the headlines, it's easy to say torture was justified. American news focuses on suicide bombers, terrorist kidnappings, and how many Americans and civilians have been killed through terrorists acts. The men detained in Guantanamo Bay are described as evil, and the reports are intended to terrify audiences. Then there's the other side of the story -- men like Moazzam Deghayes, Rahul Ahmed, or Bisher al-Rawi. There stories don't make headlines on networks like CNN or Fox. One has to go on sites like aclu.org to even find out they exist and then to YouTube to find independently filmed interviews.

Moazzan Begg's story is heartbreaking. Instead of seeing his daughter start school or hearing his son's first words, he describes watching another shackled prisoner being beaten until he was eventually killed. His view of America has been “shattered,” he says. He no longer sees America as heroic, the way America is so often portrayed in the media. Begg was detained for three years. To this day, he still is unsure of why he was detained. He was never charged with any crime of given any explanation. He was in Afghanistan helping to set up a school for girls when he was detained. Omar Deghayes was detained for five and a half years. He also does not know why he was detained. He had come from law school in England to study Afghanistan's legal system. He described his eyes being poked by a guard; he is now blind. He also spoke of the sexual abuse that happened in Guantanamo Bay. He told how men were sodomized with sticks or hands, just to break them down. He talks about being hit with some sort of electric gun and the guards laughing. He describes leaving as “broken physically, broken psychologically.” Bisher al-Rawi is also a British resident. He spend four and a half years in Guantanamo Bay. He was also never given any explanation for his detainment. Before he was detained, he enjoyed extreme sports like skydiving and had been trying to open a peanut-oil processing facility in Gambia. He described solitary confinement as a place where one could “lost their mind.” He felt he had to relearn how to function in society after being released from Guantanamo Bay. Rahul Ahmed and Shafiq Rasul were detained after attending a friend's wedding in Pakistan. They are British residents as well. They certainly don't look like the “worst of the worst” they were made to feel like. They compare being held in Guantanamo Bay to rape. They say being asked to describe it is like asking a recently raped woman to describe the experience. They say they don't hate America, but their view of America and Americans has certainly changed. (American Civil Liberties Union, No Indefinite Detention Without Charge or Trial)

America and other democracies' reputations have been tarnished because of the torture performed by the American government. President Obama's promise to close the Guantanamo Bay prison is only the very first of many steps that will have to be made to save America's image. The fact that federal judges are finally reviewing prisoners' cases is another small step. But the fact that so many of the detainees are being found to have been unlawfully detained by the United States government is shameful. Only time and drastic changes in policies and practices will be able to bring back America's good reputation.

[justcurious55]

Thank you for the suggestions wondergirl!

I have a question about "its" vs "it's". I was taught in high school that there is never an apostrophe after it. I don't remember the reason, just that I was told not to put it there. So I stopped but I always thought it was weird since it contradicted what I was taught when I was younger and taught to use apostrophes for contractions. Were my high school teachers wrong?

[cdad]

Here is the answer.

Ref:

ITS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You will see the difference for the spelling.

[justcurious55]

Thanks califdad

[Wondergirl]

I have a question about "its" vs "it's". I was taught in high school that there is never an apostrophe after it. I don't remember the reason, just that I was told not to put it there. So I stopped but I always thought it was weird since it contradicted what I was taught when I was younger and taught to use apostrophes for contractions. were my high school teachers wrong?

Your teacher in h.s. was wrong (or you missed part of the lesson). No wonder people get confused if that is what's taught!

its = possessive pronoun (The kitten loves its new toy.)

it's = it is (It's time we turned over a new leaf.)

Also, it's hers, not her's; theirs, not their's; ours, not our's.