huffington post
Recently, the Senate has released private information regarding the CIA's post 9/11 interrogation detention program and their methods on "torture," an international crime. Although the people detained were only suspected of having affiliations with the events that took place on 9/11, all of them were tortured in inhumane ways that were not only physically disturbing, but psychologically, as well. Of the 119 known detainees, it has been confirmed that at least 26 of the 119 were innocent. In the fight for slavery, Nat Turner fought for the freedom of the black slaves; however, in the process, he killed many white people even if they did not do harm to the slaves. Although some whites did not directly harm black slaves, they suffered for the mere reason of being white. Just because someone may be suspected of being involved in the events which have harmed another, is it right to immediately take action? Nat Turner and the CIA's post 9/11 detention program both were not 100% sure that the people they tortured were guilty, yet they took initiative into torturing and even killing the opposing side. Is that justified? Should the 9/11 detention program have confirmed whether the person was guilty before taking course of action?
No comments:
Post a Comment