Dershowitz: Torture could be justified (2003)

[think]

Dershowitz: Torture could be justified

~Snip~

BLITZER: Alan Dershowitz, a lot of our viewers will be surprised to hear that you think there are right times for torture. Is this one of those moments?

DERSHOWITZ: I don't think so. This is not the ticking-bomb terrorist case, at least so far as we know. Of course, the difficult question is the chicken-egg question: We won't know if he is a ticking-bomb terrorist unless he provides us information, and he's not likely to provide information unless we use certain extreme measures.

My basic point, though, is we should never under any circumstances allow low-level people to administer torture. If torture is going to be administered as a last resort in the ticking-bomb case, to save enormous numbers of lives, it ought to be done openly, with accountability, with approval by the president of the United States or by a Supreme Court justice. I don't think we're in that situation in this case.

~Snip~

BLITZER: All right. Ken, under those kinds of rare, extreme circumstances, does Professor Dershowitz make a good point?

ROTH: He doesn't. The prohibition on torture is one of the basic, absolute prohibitions that exists in international law. It exists in time of peace as well as in time of war. It exists regardless of the severity of a security threat. And the only other comparable prohibition that I can think of is the prohibition on attacking innocent civilians in time of war or through terrorism. If you're going to have a torture warrant, why not create a terrorism warrant? Why not go in and allow terrorists to come forward and make their case for why terrorism should be allowed....


Read more:
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/03/cnna.Dershowitz/

Not a big fan of those who support violating international law and advocating torture....

[OKNancy]

1. I remember the big fuss about this and what he said. However....

I think I recall him saying something like... If a person had information about a nuclear explosion that would kill millions, then torture of a person is justified. I see no problem with this hypothetical.

---
Reminds me of an embarrassing moment in Shakespeare class. We we asked if we would submit to sex ( rape) if it meant saving our brother's life. In class a lot of the young women hesitated. The professor really jumped on us. " You mean your virtue is worth more than the life of your own brother?" Made me think.

Dershowitz makes you think.

[think]

2. He justified torture during the time when the Bush Administration was actively pursuing it

This helped justify the Bush Administration use of torture. Bush's Intel received from torture was bogus and actually helped lead us into the Iraq War


http://m.democracynow.org/stories/14881


It is against the Geneva Convention to use torture under any circumstances.

International humanitarian law. The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 contain a number of provisions that absolutely prohibit torture and other cruel or inhuman treatment and outrages upon individual dignity.Jun 24, 2011

https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/faq/torture-law-2011-06-24.htm

President Obama was adamant that Americans do not torture.

http://www.azquotes.com/quote/1095781

[edhopper]

3. It's bunk

the ticking bomb thing is bullshit. Any terrorist would just lie and hold out until the bomb went off.
That is the last scenario where torture might work.
He justified an abdominal practice.

He is now siding with Trump over Obama on Israel. And let's not forget, he helped get OJ off.

He is a dick.

[RandiFan1290]

5. How deplorable. nt

[Solly Mack]

4. I remember that.