"Jonathan Ganz" wrote,
Vito wrote:
I don't think we ever handed anyone over for the *purpose* of having them
tortured.

Unfortunately, we did. We've been doing this for years, and prior to
Bushco. We'd send them to Egypt for example, knowing full well that
they used "more aggressive" techniques to get information. Sad really.

Sending somebody somewhere knowing they will be tortured is quite different
than sending them there to be tortured.

What policy? The worst I've heard is that Rummy said "I stand at my desk
12-16 hours/day. It is not torture to have a prisoner do likewise." I
tend
to agree. To me "torture" inflicts real pain but remember I think setting
one's ass on fire is a great joke.

It's a bit worse than that. They will force someone to neither stand
nor sit for hours at a time... somewhere in between. This can be
extremely painful.

Cite?

I'm not sure it is any worse or simple better reported. If anything, I
suspect that true torture - inflicting pain - is less common in intel
circles because it seldom yields truth. Police are a different story.
They
want confessions not truth. OTOH I agree on the causes you cite.

It generally gives you nothing useful, as the prisoner will say
anything to stop the pain. The point is that people are fallible and
they resort to things that don't really work to satisfy those higher
in rank or authority.

Sure, but again suppose I beat on a guy until he tells me where his buddies
are hideing. I eagerly tell my boss and a patrol is sent to catch them too.
But the patrol gets ambushed and shot up because that info was wrong. I'd
prolly get fragged.