History shows that torture has frequently failed to force those who “would rather die than submit” or “would rather die than feel more pain” to reveal evidence or significant information about the subject they were accused of suppressing.
(Photo: A leaked image suggesting torture methods at Guantanamo Bay)
In the middle ages, torture forced many to confess to the accusations thrown by churches or the government. How many innocent members of the public were tortured into acknowledging that they were witches or werewolves?
According to studies over the past decade: a person who has a hot iron forced onto their chest is actually likely to say anything — factual or not – to end the pain.
In 1988, a CIA official testified before a Senate intelligence committee claiming "Physical abuse or other degrading treatment was rejected, not only because it is wrong, but because it has historically proven to be ineffective"
There have been many so-called “non-lethal” methods of torture in the past with religious torture involving forcing faith-filled persons to listen to “dark music” that often features Satanic lyrics or meanings such as songs by Slayer and Cradle of Filth.
So in a world that tries to abide by “innocent until proven guilty” and “rights for all humans – whether criminal, concealing information or not”; Is torture an effective way to protect others?