I don’t understand - why would they be waterboarded?
Do you mean the CIA spies here? And if I understand you right, only guilty people are tortured, because torturing innocents would be a waste of time. You must be the God Almighty, all-knowing, to know which ones are innocent before starting the interrogation (torture)… But it does makes things a lot easier: only guilty people are tortured, so everybody who’s tortured is therefore guilty.
Over here, that kind of logic was thrown out when we finally got rid of the inquisition. Maybe your country will also learn about that fallacy one day?
So the Sheik Can’tRememberHisName (because I never remember names) who was 2nd in command of Al Quaida (allegedly- the CIA/ military said so), who was waterboarded (the CIA/ military openly admitted that) and signed a confession during torture, and was tried in that special military court without rules for Al Quaid people and sentenced based on his confession, earlier this year - that didn’t happen? And that most Americans on the street (I don’t have Gallup numbers) found that quite right and hunky-dory and fair makes it obviously right? It’s not as if any real court stepped in to declare this wrong, last I heard.
We aren’t the ones using them, your country is. But then, the special way the US police has of gathering evidence, and then conducting a trial, and calling it still a country with justice for all, is … difficult to comprehend over here. (Not that we don’t have individual policemen who overstep bounds, or judges who are out of line, either. But the public and justice comes down hard on those cases, because we think those cases aren’t right, instead of being normal.)
Like the defence lawyer being asleep during trial is not reason for a new trial? New evidence overturning verdicts because of the shoddy way the original trial was done or evidence ignored on purpose by police and prosecution wanting to get a sentence? How easy and common it is to pressure a suspect to accept a deal for a lesser offense by threatening to stick him with a murder charge or similar heavy offense, knowing how easy these things stick?
Obviously, you don’t know objective information about torture. Torture only gets one thing: what the torturer wants to hear. It doesn’t get information. Side effects include trying to break the spirit of the victim if dealing with rebels/ guerillas / opposition figures, so they will stop protesting/ rebellion. (Which is why the CIA trained South American police from dicatorships in the use of torture in the 60s, 70s, 80s.)
I also said that confessions could be gotten with torture - because that’s acceptable in the US right now. The confessions are then used to make the conviction. There’s one step in between.