Before we get digressed down a relatively meaningless tangent about whether torture works or not...
This news is a couple of days old and probably warrants its own thread, but I'll drop it in here anyway:
Quote:An FBI document suggests the president authorized inhumane interrogation methods against Iraqi detainees, the American Civil Liberties Union said Monday.
The document is among those obtained from the government by the ACLU in a Freedom of Information Act suit in New York.
A two-page FBI e-mail refers to "a presidential executive order," and contends President Bush directly authorized interrogation techniques that included sleep deprivation, stress positions, the use of military dogs and "sensory deprivation through the use of hoods, etc.," The ACLU said.
The FBI e-mail was sent in May 2004 from "On Scene Commander -- Baghdad" to senior FBI officials.
The techniques are "beyond the bounds of FBI practice but within the parameters of the executive order ..." The e-mail said some FBI personnel witnessed the use of the techniques, but did not participate.
That damned liberal media
The full batch of documents is
here.
So....
....some FBI guys know that Bush himself personally issued an Executive Order authorizing torture. They ought to go public. They should have gone public months ago.
Now we get to sit back and enjoy watching Bush's people deny everything again.... and see if a copy of any such Executive Order suddenly turns up.
The way the Red Staters rolled over for the "few bad apples" story about Abu Ghraib was one thing. But would America really stand for knowing Bush personally authorized torture?
The fact that I don't know the answer is depressing really, since, you know, torture ought not to be a brainer. But so should going to war based on a mountain of fabricated and faulty intelligence, billions of dollars for no-bid contracts but not enough money for up-armored Humvees, blahblahblah....