« The Rule Of Law | Main | Bush To Senate, UN, World: Screw You »

July 31, 2005


No, not surprising. I hope Newsweek plans to publish the full memo. I'd like to know which Pentagon officials. Rendition started as a CIA program, though this is not the first hint that it's not only the CIA anymore.

It's the specific intent requirement again, that allows them to weasel around this advice. "In as much as the intent" is to torture them, sure it would be illegal, but we only know that it is overwhelmingly likely that they will be tortured; we don't actually INTEND for them to do it. Perish the thought. That's the theory, and it's actually less implausible than the argument that Egypt's and Uzbekistan's assurances are reliable--it is possible that we only want these people disposed of in as convenient a manner as possible, that we only want the credible threat of torture in an Egyptian prison to use against a really important prisoner, so if Egypt doesn't happen to torture this one guy it's no big loss.

It's not a really convincing argument, but they've made much worse ones with a straight face.

We ought to revise the statute to require a mens rea comparable to that for murder under the model penal code:
a) intent, b) knowledge, or c) very severe recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to human life.

Did this one Sunday afternoon.

Bush voters: Objectively Pro-Torture, since 2000.

Bush ethical theory.

If you can lie about it and conceal it, then you can say you are against it and it never happened.

Translation -- the Bush torture policy. We do it, lie about it, say we are against it and say it never happens (except for those few bad apples).

There is another suspect making allegations about a rendition. To Morocco, in this case.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad