Sometimes the truth must be known concerning justice in military matters concerning war crimes and people will not speak it because they are protecting someone. Even a righteous man can not be sure when to speak and to whom, and be deceived into thinking he must protect his country's reputation, or someone he thinks does not deserve to be punished. He thinks he is smarter than his questioners, works out whom he thinks is in the wrong and tells lies to effect the judgement that he thinks is God's will. But those who know that they represent true justice and mercy, being appointed for this role, must have all the information upon which to base their decisions. Justice is those decisions based upon the evidence.
To make a person realise that they must let the judge decide, corporal punishment can make a man realise that he is proud to make decisions himself, and that the justice department is superior in making decisions. It is wrong to use electrical torture, and it is wrong to use pain to make a man keep talking. But he must be strongly taught that it is wrong to tell lies.
For a man, if the woman who interrogates him uses kindness and truth as well as cruelty, the man if he is righteous, should come to trust her. That is, that she and the people she tells, are better able to use the facts that he knows, to bring about justice, mercy and truth in the earth than he is by himself or with his confederates. I believe that correctional pain with instruction, can teach a man this lesson, thereby reducing the pain necessary in traditional interrogation.
For example Muslims should be told the words of Benezir Bhutto, true Muslims would not kill a woman. Could you be misguided. Isn't God able to help Muslims in some other way that does not cause such reproach upon them. What if God has only revealed half the truth to you and the other half to Christians, and wants us to work constructively together by talking. And are not some of your doings against Mohommad. This may work on Muslims, because however bad their actions, their motive is religious delusion, which is perhaps forgivable, unlike the IRA. Never the less, however forgivable the motives, all terrorists should be put to death.
Originally I thought that pain could only be used in interrogation if the man has committed a crime worthy of punishment. But the bible teaches that the righteous must suffer to reign in heaven. Those who take the easy way miss out on reward. It is the easy way to be unwilling to prove the veracity of your evidence, by corporal punishment.
Whilst a Singapore cane is to severe and it is wrong to use so much pain, some sort of whip might be just right. The man should be afraid of the woman and respect her, rather than being afraid of some huge pain. For this reason the woman should thoroughly familiarise with what to expect, in a gentle way, because if the man is righteous, and even if he has made mistakes, she is his friend, to stop him making further mistakes. It is good to establish trust rather than to be continually deceived. That is why she is his friend. Cain said, Am I my brother's keeper. The Muslim's think that they please God by making everyone obedient, but they should rather say, I must make sure that my brother does not do wrong, and get into trouble with God. The bible teaches that God chastens those whom he loves.
But the man should be able to trust his interrogator to be fair and wise, and will not divulge information to his enemies, or this will not only make it harder for him to talk, but pride in the interrogators may cause information to be divulged to the enemy. This is why people must have a chance to say, I wish to speak to someone high up, or I wish to speak to the British, or to the Americans, and must know whom they are talking to. The pride of low level interrogatory scum, is to hypnotise people, before they have a chance to say they need assurances before speaking. These scum then holiday perhaps in Cuba, where the Russians can find out military secrets from them by hypnosis.
He must also receive protection from his enemies who may not like his testimony. They should also have the power to show mercy, and not return him to a place of danger, and perhaps take him to a farm in Spain, where he will be safe. If his life has been difficult before interrogation because of the military, he should have hope of peace afterward according to his righteousness., irrespective of whether the trouble is the fault of his testimony. Before interrogation the man must receive much assurance that the truth will further the cause of justice and mercy throughout the earth, and even if his own country has done wrong it is better to cleanse his country. One thing that will hinder truth is legality, that every crime must be punished. Leaders of countries have many decisions to make, and it is unfair to blame them for every mistake. Some decisions are technically against the law, but the leaders of the country think that they must do somethin, whether rightly or wrongly.
When rightly, this does not necessarily mean no punishment, because if the law could be broken lightly, there would be disorder. So a merciful punnishment, perhaps of flogging followed by kindness and mercy should give sufficient respect for the law. If there is punishment for deeds done in righteosness, only the noble and brave would do these. The man must also know that the punishment will be fair and not excessive. Excessive punishment is a just cause to withhold information to protect yourself or others.
The mind is holy, and not to be affected by hypnosis which is evil. Only God and Satan sway the mind. Man does not have sufficient wisdom to tamper. People can give incomplete answers or make mistakes and not remember to correct them. The hypnotist also has tremendous power over the subject and can use this power to deceive. One deception is to reduce the qualification of answers with words such as perhaps, or with excuses for faults. Anyone who uses hypnosis to interrogate a righteous man should be flogged to death.
There are moral reasons for just interrogation of Arabs. There are even more powerful reasons for just interrogation of our own, and this is that it is unlikely that interrogators want to deceive their own about an Arab, but politicians who do not like dissent could capture those with alternative ideas, and spread confusion, perhaps sometimes even to escape justice themselves, or to stay in power.
Women should gather evidence and interrogate, and give this evidence to a man who decides the judgement, whether flogging or fine or house arrest or prison or death. If the punishment is flogging, a woman should decide the number of lashes and administer them. It would be good if the woman administering the lashes had some say in the number of lashes so that the man comes to fear the woman rather than the lash. It is not good to tell the man he will receive a huge number of lashes and then administer only a few becuse as much truth as possible should be used, so that the man trusts the woman. But some uncertainty causes the man to fear the woman rather than the pain. This should direct his steps after he is released he should remember her as his shepherd , not his enemy.
Although there should be no sexual gratification within interrogation or punishment, as this will cause lack of respect for the law, the sexuality of a woman may help overpower a man with less pain. Glamour is not good, but a sober, forty year old, strong and gentle looking Spanish woman, with a good husband might give the man something to turn to for mercy. If the man is very frightened, the woman could place his hand on her bottom and tell the man she is not his enemy, but it is necessary to find out the truth. She should comfort him with words after interrogation and punishment, so that he learns a lesson rather than rebels against it.
I think that Spanish women, with advice from Spanish men, are best equipped for this role of international justice, because they are respected and strong. Black American women might too easily cave in to the wishes of the government, and their husbands could be a corrupting influence upon their integrity. Spain also is a good country to take a person to after interrogation or punishment, because the men there can protect him from further suffereing.
Righteous men that have committed military crimes, should be flogged for punishment, exiled, and work on economic projects, making money for their own country's military contribution to world peace, with similar wages and condition's to their own country's military. They should be marry and make a fresh start.
Spanish women should do the evidence collection then interrogation, then give the evidence to a Spanish man to make the decision on type of punishment. Then if death, by a man, or if lashes, by a woman, according to a woman's determination. Within the confines of the processes of law, the death should not be humiliating, because however much some people may deserve this, mistakes can be made in determining who deserves such a fate. Only angels with 100% certainty can go beyond, although in the case of those who seek to overthrow the presumption of innocence by using hypnosis I have been strong, yet the woman who flogs a man to death must look pure.