What is "torture lite" the term, coined by the popular media, refers to sophisticated interrogation techniques that do not cause any clearly
visible physical harms, as do more traditional forms of torture. Example of torture lite include sleep deprivation ,isolation, standing in stress
position, noise bombardment ,humiliation, mock executions ,and subjecting the prisoner to heat and cold.

Another notorious method is called water boarding: the suspect head is dunked into water or his head is wrapped in a wet towel to include the sensation of drowning. In contrast to traditional forms of torture in which pain is directly inflicted upon the victim by the interrogator techniques do not require contact between the interrogator and the victim at all.

Advances interrogation techniques are employed by a number of democratic government, including the United States, as well as France a
d the United kingdom. These methods are mainly used for the purpose of intelligence gathering. Democratic government do not permit the more classic form of torture because the Geneva convention forbids them.

Torture lite, as some argue, is this the only legal resort and is sometimes necessary to prevent even greater harm. One important reason for
employing lite techniques, for instance, has been to prevent future terrorist attacks. Since 9/11, the use of these techniques has become
more common. Torture lite has particular gained notoriety because of its employment at Guantanamo bay and Abu Ghraib.

The primary defense for using these techniques is utilitarian in nature.

It's supporter argue that by subjecting prisoners to these techniques we can gain important information that can prevent great harm to society.

Thus, the pain and suffering of one individual (or a few) is pinned against the potential suffering of the many. This justification is often called the "ticking bomb scenario": imagine that there is a ticking bomb hidden somewhere that threatens to kill millions of people, and the only way to find the bomb and prevent these death is to apply torture lite to the individual who knows where the bomb is hidden. Wouldn't you be willing to torture the individual in such a situation.?

In reply to this scenario, Georgetown law professor David Laban has over some interesting challenges. According to Luban, this scenario makes some assumption that are seldom-if ever-met in reality . In the scenario for instance it is assumed that we know for sure that the suspect has all of the information we need but when is that ever actually the case?

If we really don't know what the suspects might be able to reveal, could we still be justified in torturing that individual as long as the odds
of getting that needed information high enough? How high should those odds be? Is 50/50 sufficient? Could torturing someone when there is just a 20% chance of success still be justified if enough is at stake? Should the question of torture be a game of odds in the first place?

Also, how many individuals could we justifiably subject to torture lite because even the later can cause permanent psychological and physical harm.

Standing in stress positions, for instance, can cause swollen ankles,blistering on the feet, and an increased heart rate. Carried far enough, it's kind of eventually lead to kidney failure and heart attack.

Sleep deprivation, meanwhile, can produce delusions, and in some cases, these delusions May remain heaven after deprivation has ceased.

Torture lite can also cause post-traumatic stress disorder to such severity that the victim may never be able to function as a normal member of society.

PLEASE CREATE A 8-10 POWER POINT SLIDES ON THE TOPIC TORTURE LITE, IN YOUR RESEARCH AND POWER POINT PLEASE MAKE A REFERENCE TO THE ABOVE CASE STUDY.