That's not the point, though
Torture by U.S. Personnel Illegal, Gonzales Tells Senate
By Dan Eggen and Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, January 19, 2005; Page A04Attorney general nominee Alberto R. Gonzales, responding to questions about his role in setting controversial detention policies, told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that any form of torture by U.S. personnel is illegal, according to new documents released yesterday.
But Gonzales, the White House counsel who is expected to be confirmed by the Senate in coming weeks, declined to identify the techniques allowed under U.S. interrogation policies, citing restrictions on classified information. He also reiterated his view that a president could theoretically decide that a U.S. law -- such as the prohibition against torture -- is unconstitutional, though he dismissed the question as irrelevant under President Bush.
Of course torture is illegal.
The question, though, is exactly what is or isn't torture as defined by US Law. We move things in and out of legal categories at the drop of a hat...there are rules on how it is done. So, for instance, when a market we declare open (like, say, catfish) begins to tilt too strongly toward a nation we've seduced into that market (like, say, Vietnam) we redefine their product so now it's no longer called what it was (like, say, Vietnamese catfish can only be sold as "basa")...and no longer is part of that "open" market.
And there's the UglyRipe controversy.
Now torture ain't tomatoes, but the same techniques are at play.
Just so you know.
