"Harsh Interrogation" should not have secrecy protections

Foreign Terrorists: But domestic terrorists like McVeigh deserve a justice system? So no one outside the U.S. has any rights nor value to you? They're just things to go torture as we please? Don't you think that creates an ill will back toward us that leads others to commit terrorism against us? Gitmo, etc.: These are all "detention centers." There are no trials, no lawyers. One of our "informants" points at someone they don't like, we grab them and hold them indefinitely with no trial, not even a military tribunal. That's what "detention centers are." See also: Japanese-American Internment Camps, circa WW2. World Peace: Then why do you advocate exterminating people who haven't themselves committed terrorism but they look like the people who did? Terrorists attack: And when we go and bomb them in their countries, and take out oppressive governments which leads to anarchy and civil war and we are then responsible for a million deaths, do we sign our own death warrants to the terrorists who will strike back at us? al-Qaeda: bin Laden was on our payroll during the 1980s. We gave fighter jets to Iran in the 1970s. We've been giving guns and bombs and arms, even biological and chemical WMDs, to manipulate or overthrow Middle Eastern regimes for decades. It wasn't until we started doing this that we became a target. al-Qaeda imminent bomb: You missed the point. Its not that someone wants to lie, if they don't know and truly have no involvement but you keep torturing them and don't stop, they will tell you what you want to hear. You are blind to the consequences of torture and bullying ... even if torture were justifiable, its useless to get reliable information because when you "break" them, they will tell you what you /want to hear/ instead of the truth. The notion of Hussein having links to al-Qaeda and possessing nukes both came out of torture, and both were proven wrong. Bush's minions wanted excuses to wage war against Iraq, so that's what the prisoners we tortured told us. Terrorist's fault: Its different how, again? The terrorists who struck on 9-11 either died in the attacks or the failed one is in prison. The people we pick up did not try to kill us, and many of them aren't even involved with al-Qaeda. We're bullying them out of blind revenge. Proof: I cannot prove a negative. Show a single case where any of them had a trial and was convicted prior to being tortured. Iraqi death: The vast majority are dead as a result of the civil war we are responsible for. We took out Saddam, we are responsible for the consequences including the chaos and anarchy that ensued. We are responsible for the civil war and al-Qaeda being able to have a presence in Iraq, because we took out the regime that kept al-Qaeda out and the factions in line, even if it was brutal. That's a lot of deaths we are responsible for. Wrongdoing: So torture is okay if we do it, just not if someone else does. Sorry, hypocricy fails. Torture is wrong or it isn't. It always is to me, its a cruel vendetta, even worse when its blind against innocent targets. Middle East & U.S.: Already covered above. US and China: The consequences of our committing torture are very much relevant to the discussion. You can't expect China to take us seriously if we complain about their use of torture when we torture as well. Terrorism: Simple philosophy for eternal bloodshed. We kill them, they kill us, we kill them, they kill us. Find an exit to that infinite loop in "they don't attack us, we don't attack them" philosophy of yours. Terrorism: "Shock and awe" is the very definition of terrorism. Push a button, launch a cruise missile or drop a bomb, kill a few people and terrorize a lot more. If a terrorist blows up a building here, the survivors who saw it are terrorized. The same thing happens there -- if we blow up a building there, those who witnessed are then terrorized. It even become blatant when we boast it as "shock and awe" ... beyond the immediate deaths, we want to instill terror in everyone living there! Striking back: I thought you said it was an intelligence tool, not revenge. You're inconsistent. So revenge is an okay excuse to commit torture as well? Why not allow it against domestic felons as well, then? National Threat: Committing torture is a national threat, its earned us more enemies. Even Senator McCain acknowledged that the insurgency and al-Qaeda in Iraq erupted because al-Qaeda recruiters went around with photos of what we did at Abu Ghraib. Every time we commit torture, we're giving more recruits to al-Qaeda and dwindling our support from friends and allies. Guilty: Known terrorists are dead. No one we tortured was a known terrorist. Many were merely fingered by someone else and that's it. Hey, you, I don't like you, you're a terrorist! Enjoy the torture! Its the same witchhunts we went through for communists under McCarthy and, well, witches in Salem. No evidence, no justice, no truth, it just feels good to tear down people and torture them because you don't like them, even if the people themselves have done nothing. Not every Muslim or Arab is a terrorist. Human rights: By your definition, those who torture are terrorists. They actually did abuse a human's right to life. The poor struggling people we pick up off the street and accuse of terrorism, there's not a shred of evidence on a single one of them that they committed terrorism. In fact, if they had using al-Qaeda's suicide bomb techniques, it'd be rather obvious -- they'd be blown up along with their targets. That we commit human rights abuses is reason enough to preclude any secrecy protections. These are criminal actions, and to cover them up under secrecy protections is the most grotesque abuse of power, and if it continues unchecked, the U.S. government deserves to be violently overthrown from within or without. Torture can be any combination of physical or emotional duress. It does not matter if blood is drawn or not. A prisoner is a prisoner, and once someone is disarmed and in our custody, they must be given the same rights as any other POW and treated the way we would like our soldiers to be treated when they get captured by an enemy. Whether or not the enemy acts with honor, we cannot fight evil by resorting to evil means, and you cannot get much more evil than torture. Is eye for an eye justified? Should we have resorted to genocide to fight Hitler's genocide? Should we bomb Arab civilians because Arab terrorists bomb our civilians? Torture is the same. Eye for an eye vengeance only leads to an infinite loop of revenge for revenge for revenge for revenge. If we are the better nation and the better people, we must act and behave better and not stoop to the level of terrorism and torture. The only way such a fight will ever end is when everyone is dead. There is dishonor and disgrace in our actions, and those who committed dishonor and disgrace must not be protected and shielded from answering for that with national secrecy. We are a nation supposedly of a balance of power, liberty and justice for all, if we abandon or infringe any of these principles, then our nation stands for nothing. No one else has the might to act, we as a nation must be the ones to act to remove the taints of dishonor and disgrace from our own ranks, cast out those who commit torture and make them answer for the crime. Only in doing this will we be better than and above the terrorists.