This is not to condone torture, which is still prohibited by the Torture Convention and federal criminal law.
This is not to condone torture, which is still prohibited by the Torture Convention and federal criminal law.
Once the attacks occur, as we learned on Sept. 11, it is too late. It makes little sense to deprive ourselves of an important, and legal, means to detect and prevent terrorist attacks while we are still in the middle of a fight to the death with al Qaeda.
Human-rights advocates, for example, claim that the mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners is of a piece with President Bush's 2002 decision to deny al Qaeda and Taliban fighters the legal status of prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions.
In light of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, critics are arguing that abuses of Iraqi prisoners are being produced by a climate of disregard for the laws of war.
If you believe those rules have been changed by the state Supreme Court in this instance, you have the legal right and indeed the constitutional duty at that point to intervene,
The Bush administration policy is against torture of any kind it's prohibited by federal criminal law. The debate is whether you can use interrogation methods that are short of torture. Some who have been critical of the Bush administration have confused torture with cruel, inhumane treatment.
While Taliban fighters had an initial claim to protection under the conventions, they lost POW status by failing to obey the standards of conduct for legal combatants: wearing uniforms, a responsible command structure, and obeying the laws of war.
I'm not talking policy. I'm just talking about the law.
© 2020 Inspirational Stories
© 2020 Inspirational Stories