Human Torture SHOULD Be Allowed

Ten years ago on September 11, terrorists successfully executed a plan to kill thousands of innocent American citizens. That day, millions of Americans saw them with fear. Why does this happen in the country of the United States? In order to retaliate soon, President George W. Bush strongly declared against terrorism against those responsible for massacreting his people 's al Qaeda. On the head of this organization, the architect "9-11" is a man named Osama bin Laden.

Many people believe that torture should not be allowed under any circumstances. The rights of all people are protected by human rights treaties, and torture is one of them. Therefore, torture should not be allowed under any circumstances. Today's fundamental human rights abuses can lead to more human rights violations in the future. We are equal before the law, no matter what he / she represents, no matter who has the right to deal with other people, whom he / she is. According to those who oppose torture, this should not be used as a reason for torture under any circumstances, regardless of whether a person is responsible for the accused. He / she is sent to the court and should be judged according to international law

Torture to the human body is legal under all circumstances when agreeing that the human rights agreement logic should not impose torture on the human body under any circumstances. There is no exception. I hope to pass hard and fast black and white your mind and die. This is the promise we promised to the world, and there will be no torture of future generations. Our promises never sympathize with the dignity of human life like the Nazis. This is the focal point of the agreement. No exaggeration

Due to war and emergency situations, each country can "depreciate" or temporarily put aside some of their human rights pledges. However, do not put aside specific human rights such as rights to life, liberation from torture, inhuman rights, and the right to hurt the quality. Since they are considered to be very important and basic, even when national security is at risk, they should abide. The European Human Rights Court's decision in 2011 (Al-Skeini et al., V. UK) said Britain violated Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and when it conducted security activities in Basra, Iraq, I concluded that I disagreed. For the first time in treatment, the case revealed that the "European Convention" applies to war zones, foreign territories and all regions under the effective control of the "treaty" signatories.