Torture and Public Policy to the Central Intelligence Agency

The dilemma involved with torture is best represented though the hypothetical ticking bomb scenario. The circumstance involves law enforcement apprehending a terrorist, for deducing that they have intersected a bomb nearing ignition (Henschke, A., p. 478, 2014). To continue with the incarceration, police believe that torture is the optimal and only way to stimulate the detainee to disclose information needed to thwart injury and prevent death.

Through critiquing detainment and interrogation propositions succeeding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States accompanied by the conduct of torture through the ticking bomb scenario subsequently, regarding evidence has been publicly revealed opening up a mutiny under international and United States law (Garrison, A. H., p. 3, 2012). Thus, an adequate foundation for which to build a connection from torture and public policy to the Central Intelligence Agency acts suitable to recommend the United States government to warrant a criminal investigation (Roberts, L. K., 2003). Such a proviso would concentrate on the nefarious performance of four predominant executives: President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and CIA Director George Tenet. The negligence of proper investigation of torture of any kind conducted on United States territory infringes the United States’ duty to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Human Rights Watch, No More Excuses: A Roadmap to Justice for CIA Torture, 2017, April 14) and (Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 2017).

Devoid of accountability for heinous behavior, offenders are left to ricochet their own criminal bearing to that of the maltreatment of United States internees. A capable and instrumental government like that of the United States holds the influence of its people. Favorable credibility has such been damaged by the actions of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the September 11, 2001 attacks, but like the verse of Proverbs 27:17 states, “As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another,” the United States can become a paragon to invite its people to do the same once responsibility and change is made (Stillman, R. J., p. 454-464, 2010).

It is recommended that, in harmony with the president’s consent, the attorney general ought to conduct an in-depth criminal investigation from a prosecutor regarding the C.I.A. torture that will inspect all data so that these minute details not be repeated again. Investigations thus far have been limited or remain incomplete (Human Rights Watch, 2017, April 14). The second recommendation is that the president take responsibility for their actions and apologize to the hurting and the broken. It is crucial that victims and stakeholders are given a proper apology, compensation, damages, or rehabilitation amenities. Lastly, it is recommended that the president at the time redact edited rules in regards to the special cases provided special treatment. The towering notes of secrecy of the government grew, specifically in the rule making operation and thus the heavy reliance on voluntary engagement of the White House grew. Removing this newly created information ensures an accurate and original account of the government alteration and wrong doing.