CSIS will ignore credible information about, say, a gas attack on the Montreal subway because there is a chance the information came about from torture?
What happened is that a witness told an inconvenient truth:
CSIS head says official misspoke on torture
— The head of Canada's spy agency says CSIS does not rely on information extracted through torture. Jim Judd, director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, has told a Commons committee that a CSIS official misspoke on the subject earlier this week.
CSIS lawyer Geoffrey O'Brian said Tuesday that the agency will use statements collected through force when lives are at stake.
James Morton
3 comments:
In other words, we will take information from torture, we just will not admit it...
Creeps - all of them.
The difference should be that no evidence from torture will be used against any individual for two reasons - it is unreliable and it is obtained unethically (to put it mildly).
On the other hand taking precautions to save lives based on a tip passed on (that originally came from torture unrelated to any Canadian investigation) might be a prudent thing to do, as long as doing so in no way encourages the future use of torture.
If the information came from torture, it is not credible.
Sneaking the contrary into a trick question does not change that fact.
Post a Comment