![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Why is this not bigger news?
From the briefing transcript:
Q: Mr. President, I wanted to return to the question of torture. What we've learned from these memos this week is that the Department of Justice lawyers and the Pentagon lawyers have essentially worked out a way that U.S. officials can torture detainees without running afoul of the law. So when you say that you want the U.S. to adhere to international and U.S. laws, that's not very comforting. This is a moral question: Is torture ever justified?
THE PRESIDENT: Look, I'm going to say it one more time. If I -- maybe -- maybe I can be more clear. The instructions went out to our people to adhere to law. That ought to comfort you. We're a nation of law. We adhere to laws. We have laws on the books. You might look at those laws, and that might provide comfort for you. And those were the instructions out of -- from me to the government.
Is it just me, or would any reasonable person - any person with nothing to hide - simply say "No, torture is not justified, and I did not authorize it"?
I'm trying to find a link for the original story, which basically says that the Bush administration went through some remarkable linguistic and legal contortions to make acts that would have been considered torture legal now. It's proving harder than it should be to find a link that doesn't require registration.
Aha. Found it.
This Washington Post editorial requires registration, but it's well worth reading if you happen to be registered.
From the briefing transcript:
Q: Mr. President, I wanted to return to the question of torture. What we've learned from these memos this week is that the Department of Justice lawyers and the Pentagon lawyers have essentially worked out a way that U.S. officials can torture detainees without running afoul of the law. So when you say that you want the U.S. to adhere to international and U.S. laws, that's not very comforting. This is a moral question: Is torture ever justified?
THE PRESIDENT: Look, I'm going to say it one more time. If I -- maybe -- maybe I can be more clear. The instructions went out to our people to adhere to law. That ought to comfort you. We're a nation of law. We adhere to laws. We have laws on the books. You might look at those laws, and that might provide comfort for you. And those were the instructions out of -- from me to the government.
Is it just me, or would any reasonable person - any person with nothing to hide - simply say "No, torture is not justified, and I did not authorize it"?
I'm trying to find a link for the original story, which basically says that the Bush administration went through some remarkable linguistic and legal contortions to make acts that would have been considered torture legal now. It's proving harder than it should be to find a link that doesn't require registration.
Aha. Found it.
This Washington Post editorial requires registration, but it's well worth reading if you happen to be registered.
