So Jayb, we are only going to confine ourselves to India?
Even they don't make their condemned stand dig their own grave and in pig guts.
It appears you have a low opinion on Indians if you believe that this method of execution is commiserant with their culture.

The 'red herring' you labelled is in fact not. Who is more likely to have information on future attacks, a terrorist who hasn't carried out one yet, or a 21yr old that just got captured during a suicde mission.
I'm sure many authorities would want to interrogate people before the attack. And we aren't just talking about this singular individual, we are talking about the policy of dealing with terrorists generally, using him as an example.

And America IS a signatory to the convention, as are many 3rd world countries. They just work on the definition of torture.
The signatories and the USA's understandings and definitions are here:
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/ratification/9.htm

From the UN page:
(1) (a) That with reference to article 1, the United States understands that, in order to constitute torture, an act must be specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering and that mental pain or suffering refers to prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from (1) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering; (2) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality; (3) the threat of imminent death; or (4) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality.

So in fact, most techniques that you would think of as torture are in fact, torture.
the word torture appears in the thread title and in the question, 'persuasion methods' is a far broader term that doesn't necessarily involve torture. America agrees.

Why not simply put everyone into prison now and only release them when they can prove they've done nothing wrong. (Torture permitted).

It's the only way to be sure.

Even they don't make their condemned stand dig their own grave and in pig guts.

This was meant to be an example of a "persuasive Method." Given that Muslims abhore pigs. But then you knew that & put a different slant on it.

It appears you have a low opinion on Indians.

Yes & no. I have a number of indian friends of all casts. They're glad they live in Australia & agree that India, as a Nation, lives in the Dark Ages. Their thoughts, not mine.

The 'red herring' you labelled is in fact not. Who is more likely to have information on future attacks, a terrorist who hasn't carried out one yet, or a 21yr old that just got captured during a suicide mission?

The original question doesn't mention "potential attackers"

"Would it surprise anyone if the Indian government applied 'persuasion' of an extreme nature to this individual to ferret out every bit of information "he" can supply?"

"Given that the attack was of such a horrific then surely it would be understandable if the Indian authorities used every means at their disposal to force "this" person to tell all."

I'm sure many authorities would want to interrogate people before the attack. And we aren't just talking about this singular individual, we are talking about the policy of dealing with terrorists generally, using him as an example.

And America IS a signatory to the convention, as are many 3rd world countries. They just work on the definition of torture.

And America IS a signatory to the convention,

Oh yes, but they ARE immune from prosecution.


'persuasion methods' is a far broader term that doesn't necessarily involve torture."

Good. Now, as I have been asking, Please forward to the discussion some of the soft "Persuasive Methods" that you think could be used. As opposed to hard "Torture Methods." Is that so hard? or are you just ignoring the Question because you don't have a clue. You see, all mouth when it comes to being critical but no help when it comes to presenting a solution. Typical Sweetie PC.

A major component of the use of torture is the effect, immediate and ongoing, that it has on the participants - the people ordered or encouraged to torture other people. And not in life or death ticking bomb scenarios either.

Think on the following:

"Abuse and torture of prisoners was much more widely spread than just Abu Ghraib. The guilt and shame of soldiers who took part continues to haunt Americans. "The one who scars another's soul, can come away wounded as well." American RadioWorks investigates."

And listen to the audio: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2008/2435398.htm

Torture injures far more than the unfortunate prisoner (who may may not be guilty) it exacts a toll that ripples out into all our communities.

"A major component of the use of torture is the effect, immediate and ongoing, that it has on the participants."

I disagree. Nice Westernised senterments but. These are 3rd world countries. Torture is a way of life for them. It's normal, for them so it doesn't have any effect on the perpetrator at all.

"The guilt and shame of soldiers who took part continues to haunt Americans."

I doubt whether the participants have any regrets other than they got caught. A lot of Americans laughed at the photos & most of those that didn't feigned indignation because tha's the PC thing to do. Only A few would have been genuine in their disgusted.

Fractelle can YOU give us a solution to how to extract information, in a nice friendly way, from the captured terrorist attacker? Any thoughts on the proceedure will do.