The recent US Senate Intelligence Committee report condemned the United States' use of "enhanced interrogation" – a euphemism for torture. One technique, waterboarding, simulated drowning. Waterboarding had only one purpose – to terrorise the subject.
Intelligence obtained by such methods is unreliable. The torturers knew this, so why did they persist? Vindictiveness? Revenge?
The 9/11 attacks terrorised the Free World. "Lone Wolf" attacks like the assault on the Canadian Parliament and on the Sydney coffee bar are intended to unnerve.
Regardless of such episodes, if we resort to torture we are handing victory to deviant organisations like Al-Qaeda, ISIS and the Taliban. By resorting to torture we cede the moral high ground to the aggressor. He presents himself as the victim. We present ourselves as morally bankrupt.
Sometimes everything seems hopeless, until someone comes along who reminds us of humankind's potential for goodness. One such person is 17-year-old Nobel Peace Prize winner Malala Yousafzai. Shot by the Taliban because she argued for universal education, Malala's story is inspirational.
According to the Taliban's wrong-headed reading of Islam, girls are socially unequal to boys. Being inferior, they do not require education. Their only purpose is to serve the needs of men.
Because she challenged this sexist, if not misogynistic credo, Malala was shot in the head. She survived to be heard by the world.
If you have not read her acceptance speech, you should. It is inspirational. She said that when the Taliban infiltrated her neighbourhood "I had two options: one was to remain silent and wait to be killed; the second was to speak up and then be killed. I chose the second one; I decided to speak up".
The price she paid was a bullet to the head from a coward.
By eliminating their critics, fundamentalist movements – the Taliban, Al-Qaeda and ISIS – confirm their sociopathic tendencies... and weakness.
The UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the closest thing we have to a rule book of civilised behaviour.
Too many religions persecute those who don't "fit" with their model of the ideal citizen. Look at how many of the so-called "great religions of the world" persecute adulterers, single mothers and homosexuals. Why do we allow them to do this?
In a crisis, why do reporters ask Church leaders to comment? Clergy are self-appointed spokespeople. They have no democratic legitimacy.
The sooner we consign religion to the dustbin of history, the better.
Dr Simon Bennett is the director of the Civil Safety and Security Unit, at the University of Leicester.
