KOW SOURCES: REPORT TO DETAIL ALLEGED ABUSE INSIDE CIA SECRET PRISONS

SOURCES: REPORT TO DETAIL ALLEGED ABUSE INSIDE CIA SECRET PRISONS
The article comments about the unethical interrogation techniques of the CIA officials with respect to Al Qaeda prisoners. After the September 11 attacks, the treatment meted out to terrorist suspects has been made drastically stringent and in some cases inhuman. While there is no mention of the unethical nature of illegal interrogation techniques, a knower can perceive from the tone of the article that the author is reprimanding the CIA for using such severe methods to extract the truth from terrorist suspects. The neutral tone is compromised to convey the content of the article.
The author of the article cites an unnamed source that has access to a classified report of the probe on CIA interrogations. The author seems to share his source’s perception that the CIA officers are indeed guilty of using illegal interrogation techniques on terrorist suspects in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. That is the primary knowledge issue of the article. The knower (reader) can perceive that emotions are running high in the mindset of the author as he sympathizes with the prisoners. The article isn’t completely objective or neutral enough to help the reader to come to a knowledgeable and logical conclusion. For instance there is no concrete perspective in the article of the CIA officials with only a inconclusive remark by a spokesperson finding its way in the article. Without the CIA point of view about the interrogations, we cannot comment upon the ethical nature of such events. While the article primarily deals with the report about prosecuting CIA officials guilty of using such illegal interrogation techniques, we must concentrate on the macrocosmic issue of justifying the ethical nature of these interrogation practices. Though the article does not clearly mention the ethics issue, it is very clearly prevalent in the argument due to the language used. Can we really reason out using inhuman means to extract the truth from terrorist suspects? This could after all help in saving thousands of innocent lives by preventing such future incidents. But is inhuman treatment of terrorists the real answer. There are two points to reason before coming to a logical conclusion. Firstly, we must not forget that these prisoners are “suspected terrorists” and are not yet convicted of their crimes. One does not need to go back to far in history to validate the above statement. Mohammad Hafeez, the Indian doctor too was suspected of being a terrorist for a period of 4 months by the entire planet, only to be late proved innocent. They may just be ordinary innocent people. One can just imagine the state of one individual who may be a victim of circumstances and still be forced to undergo such severe interrogation practices. Secondly, even if these prisoners are confirmed terrorists, their jobs are most likely already done and we know enough about the Al Qaeda modus operandi to say that it is highly unlikely that they would play a major part in any future terrorist attacks. So what use would it be to hand out such treatment to them when we know that there is not much to gain?
If the knowledge claim of the article is indeed true, I think it is deeply regrettable that officials would stoop to such lows to interrogate prisoners. One must not forget and neglect the scientific advancements like the nuero polygraphic test among others, which could provide legal and ethical alternatives to using a gun and drill against helpless prisoners. I agree to the counter argument stressing on the importance of the information such prisoners potentially hold, but the officials and the government as such need to form legislations to prevent such future incidents. Officials to must know where to draw the line while interrogating such prisoners.