Guantánamo Bay detainees to be compensated

[DeletedUser]

[clt]16 Guantánamo Bay detainees to be paid compensation by UK government to the tune of £40,000,000 in total for alleged torture. The Tories say they inherited this from the previous government and not settling now will cost £50 million and tie up servicemen who should be out stopping terror. Those who agree with the payout say two wrongs don't make a right and we should be a beacon for human rights. What do you think?[/clt]

 

[DeletedUser]

Pragmatically, much better to settle now than run up further expense or risk exposing sensitive sources of information. Also, if we are going to continue to pretend we don't condone torture, we need to pay for our complicity.

 

[DeletedUser]

[clt]ok, a few points for you to consider..

In this time of redundancy and cutbacks, shouldn't the government have done more, after all, millions in compensation given to a torture victim of 2 years, compared with a soldier who has to spend the rest of his life without legs and is given £50 a week. Who decides what is fair for the trauma they have indured? Think of what that money could do... repair our schools? Pay for medication that could save lives.. save thousands of jobs..

What if some of these 16 were actually terrorists and will now use these millions for terror against us?

How abt the way in which the free nations wud now be perceived as a soft touch? What if many other 'torture victims' come out to claim their millions?

Finally, what if one peice of information obtained from torture saved hundreds of lives? Thousands? Hundreds of thousands? When does it become morally alright? What if your loved one were in a bomb explosion that could have been prevented by water-boarding techniques? Would it be ok then?

Just some food for thought[/clt]

 

[DeletedUser]

Where do i sign up for this?

 

[DeletedUser]

[clt]In this time of redundancy and cutbacks, shouldn't the government have done more, after all, millions in compensation given to a torture victim of 2 years, compared with a soldier who has to spend the rest of his life without legs and is given £50 a week. Who decides what is fair for the trauma they have indured? Think of what that money could do... repair our schools? Pay for medication that could save lives.. save thousands of jobs..

What if some of these 16 were actually terrorists and will now use these millions for terror against us?

How abt the way in which the free nations wud now be perceived as a soft touch? What if many other 'torture victims' come out to claim their millions?

Finally, what if one peice of information obtained from torture saved hundreds of lives? Thousands? Hundreds of thousands? When does it become morally alright? What if your loved one were in a bomb explosion that could have been prevented by water-boarding techniques? Would it be ok then?

Just some food for thought[/clt]

Yes, all valid points. But what do you do? Say to hell with the rule of law and just ignore your own judges? Or fight the case at a far greater cost? No, you pay the £40m and move on. It's not fair, but it's sensible.

 

[DeletedUser]

Did these people actually get charged in a proper court of law? It seems to me that these people are just suspected of terrorist activities not actually linked to them with concrete evidence. The United Kingdom also follows a thing called human rights, just cause their enemies uses torture does not mean that the UK should stoop to such low levels.

I think it's sick that the United States has allowed to run such a horrible facility that has tortured, sexually abused and done every crap thing you could do to a human being to people that from what I know have never faced a fair trial. In my view the people running the camp should be charged with crimes against humanity and the US should be forced to pay the compensation.

 

[DeletedUser]

[clt]ok, a few points for you to consider..

In this time of redundancy and cutbacks, shouldn't the government have done more, after all, millions in compensation given to a torture victim of 2 years, compared with a soldier who has to spend the rest of his life without legs and is given £50 a week. Who decides what is fair for the trauma they have indured? Think of what that money could do... repair our schools? Pay for medication that could save lives.. save thousands of jobs..

What if some of these 16 were actually terrorists and will now use these millions for terror against us?

How abt the way in which the free nations wud now be perceived as a soft touch? What if many other 'torture victims' come out to claim their millions?

Finally, what if one peice of information obtained from torture saved hundreds of lives? Thousands? Hundreds of thousands? When does it become morally alright? What if your loved one were in a bomb explosion that could have been prevented by water-boarding techniques? Would it be ok then?

Just some food for thought[/clt]

First with the bolded.
And where does this sense of morals fit in with innocent people being tortured for information that they do not have ? Like almost all the people actually tortured in such facilities.

People who advocate torture only talk about how torturing one person can save thousands of lives if the correct info is extracted and never about the fact that thousands of people are tortured in reality in search of information which they do not have.


And this I believe in with absolute conviction,
If the British government essentially kidnapped a civilian from another country, detained him without trial, tortured him for information, permanently physically and mentally traumatized him, crippled him for life, they definitely owe him millions more than they owe a British soldier who voluntarily signed up for service and got injured or crippled in a unnecessary war the British government only committed to to appease their American policy setters.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes, all valid points. But what do you do? Say to hell with the rule of law and just ignore your own judges? Or fight the case at a far greater cost? No, you pay the £40m and move on. It's not fair, but it's sensible.

[clt]I don't think the government did everything in their power, 'this is a problem we inherited' is a phrase too easily banded around at the moment and they seem to be taking full advantage of it as a get-out-of-jail free card.[/clt]

First with the bolded.
And where does this sense of morals fit in with innocent people being tortured for information that they do not have ? Like almost all the people actually tortured in such facilities.

[clt]How do you know they don't have that information unless you attempt to extract it from them?[/clt]

People who advocate torture only talk about how torturing one person can save thousands of lives if the correct info is extracted and never about the fact that thousands of people are tortured in reality in search of information which they do not have.

[clt]There are 16 individuals involved in this process, not thousands. Again you sound determined that they do not have this information.. terror plots have been foiled on many occasions indicating that this information is out there and in the minds of people who have the intention of killing many innocent people.[/clt]

And this I believe in with absolute conviction,
If the British government essentially kidnapped a civilian from another country, detained him without trial, tortured him for information, permanently physically and mentally traumatized him, crippled him for life, they definitely owe him millions more than they owe a British soldier who voluntarily signed up for service and got injured or crippled in a unnecessary war the British government only committed to to appease their American policy setters.

[clt]I have seen no evidence to suggest that any of the above was carried out on these detainees. Water-boarding methods were admitted which is extremely distressing for the victim. But would this cause the victim millions in damages? Definitely not, how can that amount be justified?
Your last comment regarding the reason for the war on terror in the middle east is a separate subject.[/clt]

 

[DeletedUser]

[clt]

[clt]How do you know they don't have that information unless you attempt to extract it from them?[/clt]

How do would I know you don't have information on terror threats unless I torture you ?
Its cyclical, you can't torture innocent people on the suspicion that they may have information useful to you.

[clt]There are 16 individuals involved in this process, not thousands. Again you sound determined that they do not have this information.. terror plots have been foiled on many occasions indicating that this information is out there and in the minds of people who have the intention of killing many innocent people.[/clt]

If you had read my post :

People who advocate torture only talk about how torturing one person can save thousands of lives if the correct info is extracted and never about the fact that thousands of people are tortured in reality in search of information which they do not have.

I was not referring to the reparation incident but rather the advocacy of torture in general.
Now do the people tortured in Gitmo and and other black camps used to interrogate randomly snatched suspects number in the thousands ? heh, I was probably being very conservative, it probably numbers in tens of thousands.

Now again you ask how I can be sure they don't have the info ? Quite simple, the vast majority of people tortured as terror suspects are innocent, its basically like saying you know there are certain people willing to murder or rape in a populaton, therefore you should detain everyone to prevent such.

Have terror plots been foiled due to interrogation ? how many ? which ones ?
Have "hundreds of thousands" (in your words) ever been threatened in a terror plot much less saved ?

9/11 had a death threat of like 3K ish and that was as big as terror plots get.

[clt]I have seen no evidence to suggest that any of the above was carried out on these detainees. Water-boarding methods were admitted which is extremely distressing for the victim. But would this cause the victim millions in damages? Definitely not, how can that amount be justified?
Your last comment regarding the reason for the war on terror in the middle east is a separate subject.[/clt]

Lets assume they stopped at water boarding, which I frankly think is bs because if the British government admits to water boarding, there is no doubt in my mind that they've actually perpetrated a lot worse. Governments always try and downplay their misdeeds and the British one have quite a history of lying to the people (Tony Blair era, justifications for Iraq, etc, etc).

Now even if it was "just" water boarding ? Is it worth millions of dollars in reparation ?
Of course it is.

If a British citizen - lets say a white Christian one, because face it such things matter in a court - got picked up by a government agency and waterboarded (torture victim of two years no less), and was innocent, would he sue the government for millions of pounds ? Yes he would ?
Would he win ? If he could prove his case, he would. In this case, the govt admitted it.
Would there be public outrage that demands millions of dollars of compensation ?
Massively.

If this happened in US with their suing culture, the figure sued for would be a lot higher than a few million dollars.

So yes, if the British Govt has admitted to waterboarding these 16 people, then most certainly the least theyre owed is a few million.

 

[DeletedUser]

How do would I know you don't have information on terror threats unless I torture you ?
Its cyclical, you can't torture innocent people on the suspicion that they may have information useful to you.

[clt]So instead.. we should just assume that everyone is innocent? I'd love to live in that world, i really would, but we don't. If terrorists knew what a soft touch we would become, they would flock here.[/clt]

If you had read my post :

I was not referring to the reparation incident but rather the advocacy of torture in general.

[clt]At what point did i advocate the use of torture? The point i brought forward was, should these detainees be compensated for the torture they may have received[/clt]

Now do the people tortured in Gitmo and and other black camps used to interrogate randomly snatched suspects number in the thousands ? heh, I was probably being very conservative, it probably numbers in tens of thousands.

[clt]These numbers are elevated in parts of the world where torture is more common, in the UK and US, torture is used as a last resort. M15 have a long history of not using torture methods.[/clt]

Have terror plots been foiled due to interrogation ? how many ? which ones ?

[clt]Terror attacks on Canary Wharf, Heathrow Airport and many others in the UK have been prevented by obtaining information from the US through water-boarding techniques. I'm not saying i agree with it, nonetheless... if one of my family members were in Canary Wharf and died as a result... and i was given the chance to turn back time and advocate torture in order to prevent it and save their life... i would find it extremely difficult to say no to that, how about you?[/clt]

Have "hundreds of thousands" (in your words) ever been threatened in a terror plot much less saved ?

[clt]I have no evidence of these plots, however, its not to say it isnt impossible with the right maniac given the right tools..[/clt]

Lets assume they stopped at water boarding, which I frankly think is bs because if the British government admits to water boarding, there is no doubt in my mind that they've actually perpetrated a lot worse. Governments always try and downplay their misdeeds and the British one have quite a history of lying to the people (Tony Blair era, justifications for Iraq, etc, etc).

[clt]Agreed, however, M15 have an astonishing record for preventing terror plots, but even they have been forced to turn to the use of information provided to them by governments employing torture tactics.[/clt]

Now even if it was "just" water boarding ? Is it worth millions of dollars in reparation ?
Of course it is.

[clt]Ridiculous, would that individual have generated that sum of money had he not been subjected to the torture? That is what compensation is right?[/clt]

If a British citizen - lets say a white Christian one, because face it such things matter in a court - got picked up by a government agency and waterboarded (torture victim of two years no less), and was innocent, would he sue the government for millions of pounds ? Yes he would ?
Would he win ? If he could prove his case, he would. In this case, the govt admitted it.
Would there be public outrage that demands millions of dollars of compensation ?
Massively.

If this happened in US with their suing culture, the figure sued for would be a lot higher than a few million dollars.

So yes, if the British Govt has admitted to waterboarding these 16 people, then most certainly the least theyre owed is a few million.

[clt]His race has nothing to do with it. It is still a ridiculous sum of money.[/clt]

 

[DeletedUser]

Honestly guys, torture is needed. It is rarely long lasting damage when done under controlled conditions and usually only affects mental stability.

These 16 guys are nothing special really, people get tortured around the world all the time... are you going to give them £40m for the trouble too?

Many people believe Torture is extremely bad and all that, but those people need to grow some balls and realise torture is part of the system protecting the country. It has been for many years and will continue to be, people throw away their human rights when they do wrong.

 

[DeletedUser]

Honestly guys, torture is needed. It is rarely long lasting damage when done under controlled conditions and usually only affects mental stability.

These 16 guys are nothing special really, people get tortured around the world all the time... are you going to give them £40m for the trouble too?

Many people believe Torture is extremely bad and all that, but those people need to grow some balls and realise torture is part of the system protecting the country. It has been for many years and will continue to be, people throw away their human rights when they do wrong.

Lets say a terrorist was captured that was believed to have planted a bomb that could kill a large amount of people. How far would you go to get the information? Say if pain was having no effect would you torture his wife who knows nothing of his actions? Or his young son? Would you allow those innocents to be harmed in order to possibley save a larger number of people?

 

[DeletedUser]

Lets say a terrorist was captured that was believed to have planted a bomb that could kill a large amount of people. How far would you go to get the information? Say if pain was having no effect would you torture his wife who knows nothing of his actions? Or his young son? Would you allow those innocents to be harmed in order to possibley save a larger number of people?

Well actually physical torture is incredibly ineffective! Physcological torture is the most effective method of extracting information. Threatening of this action should be enough in itself, if it isn't then I suppose it comes down to the amount of damage caused.

Basically physical torture when done correctly should be enough for everyone apart from 1 in a million. If you happen to get that 1 in a million, start physcological torture. If THAT fails, then give up all hope because threatening his family won't work either.

 

[DeletedUser]

But what says that you're going to get the right answer from torture, you may just end up with the answer you want to hear.

And psychological torture can be just as damaging as physical to a person. If you were to choose the wrong person to torture its a horrific thing to inflict upon someone that can last with them throughout their entire lives.

 

[DeletedUser]

But what says that you're going to get the right answer from torture, you may just end up with the answer you want to hear.

And psychological torture can be just as damaging as physical to a person. If you were to choose the wrong person to torture its a horrific thing to inflict upon someone that can last with them throughout their entire lives.

Yes but unfortunately that kind of thing happens, you will always pick the wrong person whether torturing, murder or capital punishment. It just means that the operatives in charge need to be more thorough.

As to the right answer comment, you are correct. That does happen, although I did read an article about a new technique that is designed for quick pain both physcological and physical that should get the correct answer relatively quickly.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes but unfortunately that kind of thing happens, you will always pick the wrong person whether torturing, murder or capital punishment. It just means that the operatives in charge need to be more thorough.

As to the right answer comment, you are correct. That does happen, although I did read an article about a new technique that is designed for quick pain both physcological and physical that should get the correct answer relatively quickly.

What answer? This centre is currently a recruitment goldmine for various anti-american terrorist organizations across the world. All they have to do is state the facts of the various people tortured in the centre without charge and they can gain a lot of support in the extreme areas.

You pick the wrong person and you take an innocent civilian through un-needed pain and mental horror, you take the right person and it could take days to crack him seeing as the hardline terrorists have sworn and oath and are extremely religious.

 

[DeletedUser]

Honestly guys, torture is needed. It is rarely long lasting damage when done under controlled conditions and usually only affects mental stability.

These 16 guys are nothing special really, people get tortured around the world all the time... are you going to give them £40m for the trouble too?

Many people believe Torture is extremely bad and all that, but those people need to grow some balls and realise torture is part of the system protecting the country. It has been for many years and will continue to be, people throw away their human rights when they do wrong.

As Dick Cheny said in one of his many speeches. It's 'enhanced interrogation' :icon_wink: The United Kingdom and others don't torture their terror suspects, using torture is just an excuse for a poor intelligence network.

 

[DeletedUser]

As Dick Cheny said in one of his many speeches. It's 'enhanced interrogation' :icon_wink: The United Kingdom and others don't torture their terror suspects, using torture is just an excuse for a poor intelligence network.

Well, if UK likes to give away money then tell them to send some my way. I would happily receive them.

 

[DeletedUser]

[clt]So instead.. we should just assume that everyone is innocent? I'd love to live in that world, i really would, but we don't. If terrorists knew what a soft touch we would become, they would flock here.[/clt]

Do you know a single legal code that assumes guilt until proven innocent ?
Nope, they all work on the assumption of innocence. Does that mean the law considers everyone to be innocent ? Of course not, however when the law punishes an innocent, does that person get compensated after being proven to be right ?
In US and UK certainly.


Terrorists have their reasons and causes which are not related to the hardline image of the country they target but rather the actions the country takes in provoking such attacks. If Britain is involved in wars in the middle east that they have no direct stake in just to be America's international colonial lapdog, then it opens itself up to terror attacks. Never saying these terror attacks are justified, but thats the reasoning they use. How soft a touch the nation becomes, has nothing at all to do with it. The more hardline you get, the more fuel you give the terrorists to bring new members to their ranks.

[clt]At what point did i advocate the use of torture? The point i brought forward was, should these detainees be compensated for the torture they may have received[/clt]


And surprisingly you yet again do not read my message before responding to it.

Read again. And this time, try to read:

People who advocate torture only talk about how torturing one person can save thousands of lives if the correct info is extracted and never about the fact that thousands of people are tortured in reality in search of information which they do not have.

Do you see me stating that "you" advocate torture ? What part of "advocacy of torture in general" is so hard to understand ?

I was not referring to the reparation incident but rather the advocacy of torture in general.

[clt]These numbers are elevated in parts of the world where torture is more common, in the UK and US, torture is used as a last resort. M15 have a long history of not using torture methods.[/clt]

No its not used as a last resort in US especially in jails run by the US millitary in Afghanistan and Iraq, and I'm very sceptical of this claim that M15 have a long history of not using torture methods. According to whom ? I'm pretty sure they don't publicize the torture they commit, doesn't mean they don't commit them.

[clt]Terror attacks on Canary Wharf, Heathrow Airport and many others in the UK have been prevented by obtaining information from the US through water-boarding techniques. I'm not saying i agree with it, nonetheless... if one of my family members were in Canary Wharf and died as a result... and i was given the chance to turn back time and advocate torture in order to prevent it and save their life... i would find it extremely difficult to say no to that, how about you?[/clt]

Yep, I'd say no every time, if what it meant was that a lot of innocent people get tortured in the hope that one of them has the necessary information. They attain such info through blanket torture methods.

[clt]I have no evidence of these plots, however, its not to say it isnt impossible with the right maniac given the right tools..[/clt]

When we move to the realm of theoretical possibility, it loses its relevance to the discussion. I'd like to keep this grounded in reality.

[clt]Agreed, however, M15 have an astonishing record for preventing terror plots, but even they have been forced to turn to the use of information provided to them by governments employing torture tactics.[/clt]


So do we agree that that the British govt often lies about this sort of thing and probably took it worse than waterboarding ?

[clt]Ridiculous, would that individual have generated that sum of money had he not been subjected to the torture? That is what compensation is right?[/clt]

[clt]His race has nothing to do with it. It is still a ridiculous sum of money.[/clt]

See here again you haven't responded to my core argument and attempted to deviate to the issue of his race and religion, read this time :

If a British citizen - lets say a white Christian one, because face it such things matter in a court - got picked up by a government agency and waterboarded (torture victim of two years no less), and was innocent, would he sue the government for millions of pounds ? Yes he would ?
Would he win ? If he could prove his case, he would. In this case, the govt admitted it.
Would there be public outrage that demands millions of dollars of compensation ?
Massively.

If this happened in US with their suing culture, the figure sued for would be a lot higher than a few million dollars.

So yes, if the British Govt has admitted to waterboarding these 16 people, then most certainly the least theyre owed is a few million.

Do you or do you not admit, that if a British civilian, was wrongly subjected to this, he would sue the government for millions of pounds and if he won, he'd get it and the public would consider it just ? I don't care what you feel he should get, I'm asking about what he would get.
If so, then the innocent suspects should probably get even more because Britain is now guilty of kidnapping him from his homeland.

 

[DeletedUser]

Do you know a single legal code that assumes guilt until proven innocent ?
Nope, they all work on the assumption of innocence. Does that mean the law considers everyone to be innocent ? Of course not, however when the law punishes an innocent, does that person get compensated after being proven to be right ?
In US and UK certainly.

[clt]'Innocent until proven guilty' are just words, we all know that isn't how it works, but anyway, compensation i agree with... as long as it is fair to the circumstances.[/clt]

Terrorists have their reasons and causes which are not related to the hardline image of the country they target but rather the actions the country takes in provoking such attacks. If Britain is involved in wars in the middle east that they have no direct stake in just to be America's international colonial lapdog, then it opens itself up to terror attacks. Never saying these terror attacks are justified, but thats the reasoning they use. How soft a touch the nation becomes, has nothing at all to do with it. The more hardline you get, the more fuel you give the terrorists to bring new members to their ranks.

[clt]And the attacks in Spain? Italy? Many other countries that aren't 'lapdogs' to the US?[/clt]

And surprisingly you yet again do not read my message before responding to it.
Read again. And this time, try to read:
Do you see me stating that "you" advocate torture ? What part of "advocacy of torture in general" is so hard to understand ?

[clt]Its a very clever tactic to imply something without actually making the accusation. I just want to make it clear where i stand.[/clt]

No its not used as a last resort in US especially in jails run by the US millitary in Afghanistan and Iraq, and I'm very sceptical of this claim that M15 have a long history of not using torture methods. According to whom ? I'm pretty sure they don't publicize the torture they commit, doesn't mean they don't commit them.

[clt]According to the Director General, i can find you a quote if you like? I'm not stupid though, i know there are things going on that i will never know about and i dont blindy follow my government's word without question.. but as you yourself said earlier, innocent until proven guilty.. i have no evidence that M15 has used torture tactics on detainees.[/clt]

Yep, I'd say no every time, if what it meant was that a lot of innocent people get tortured in the hope that one of them has the necessary information. They attain such info through blanket torture methods.

[clt]Then you are obviously a different person to me, given this choice in that scenario, i would put a man through torture, so that my family could live. I think its always difficult to know how you would feel until you are personally confronted by that situation.[/clt]

So do we agree that that the British govt often lies about this sort of thing and probably took it worse than waterboarding ?

[clt]I couldnt possibly know for certain, all i have are theoretical possibilities. There is a fine line between probable and possible, and without any insider knowledge or facts. I can only speculate.[/clt]

See here again you haven't responded to my core argument and attempted to deviate to the issue of his race and religion, read this time :

because face it such things matter in a court

[clt]Your words buddy, not mine.[/clt]

Do you or do you not admit, that if a British civilian, was wrongly subjected to this, he would sue the government for millions of pounds and if he won, he'd get it and the public would consider it just ? I don't care what you feel he should get, I'm asking about what he would get.

[clt]He/She/They may well get compensated to this degree, and even though you arent asking, i'll tell you anyway that i would not agree with it. I would be just as outraged if these detainees were British.[/clt]