Yeah, the reasoning behind the memo that...<br><br> "even if criminal prohibitions applied and an interrogation method might violate those prohibitions necessity or self-defense could provide justifications for any criminal liability" <br><br>was wrong so it's just as well it's been withdrawn. First of all the very fact that necessity and self-defence are defences to an indictment implies a criminal process and secondly there is no basis in judicial precedent for assuming that either defence would be successful.<br><br>Necessity only applies as a defence in favour of a person whose life is in immediate danger. Self defence allows only reasonable force by a person who is himself under threat - torturers are not under threat from prisoners and torture is not reasonable force. <br><br>It was a nice try by Yoo to get people off a torture rap in advance but it doesn't work because like every other nation the US is bound by its treaty obligations. The US Constitution has got nothing to do with it because violations are sanctionable at the World Court.<br><br>km
This was a case of Humpty Dumpty. Perhaps you'll recall in Alice in Wonderland (or was it Through the Looking Glass?) that Alice happens upon a good-ol' Egg sitting on a wall. Humpty Dumpty was so smart that he could make words mean anything he wanted them to mean. Alice was none-too-impressed with anything but Humpty's arrogance and conceit. Yoo was trying to be Bush's Humpty Dumpty by proxy. Of course, the real HD was W. They left the laws intact: torture would still be illegal, and the USA would NEVER torture anyone. They just made "torture" mean something else. As in:<br><br>TOR-TURE [tôr-cher] Verb trans: to cause someone's internal organs to rupture beyond repair, resulting in death, through deliberate, intentional harm expressly purposed for that particular outcome. Synonym: to kill (especially with the intent of making it hurt before death occurs)<br><br>Thus, death caused through interrogation is not torture, since the interrogator obviously does not INTEND for his victim to die. After all, a dead prisoner is useless. You can't get secrets from a dead prisoner. And if the interrogator did not intend to kill his victim, then it cannot be called torture, for Humpty Dumpty said torture must involve the intent to kill by rupturing internal organs. If the prisoner is still alive, then obviously he wasn't tortured! If he'd been tortured, he wouldn't be alive! <br><br>See? It's just a matter of language. Humpty Dumpty knew that. Alice knew that. The Red Queen Dubya knows that. <br><br>Another definition of torture: to give prisoner amenities like running water, a holy book, shade from sun. We'd NEVER Torture a prisoner.<br><br><br>Shooshie<br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:green]Pictures and things</font color=green>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.