I don't need to prove anything. The only person they would need to convince is the President, who has access to threat information that the public does not.
And yes, as I said, the investigators would have to be sure that the information they got would save lives, because they would have to convince the President to pardon them. If anything, the investigators would have to be willing to sacrifice their own freedom to the principle of the rule of law if their actions were not deemed worthy of a pardon. Of course, this is all academic for the people that were already subjected to this treatment. The White House gave the go-ahead in advance for the interrogations to take place and for waterboarding to be used in cases like KSM. On Jan 1, 2008 8:25 AM, Larry wrote: > >It comes down to the ticking time-bomb scenario. The information > extracted > >from Khaleid Sheik Muhammed saved thousands of lives, maybe more. > > Can you prove that? From what I remember reading, the information he > provided was so flawed as to be useless. That's the problem with torture, > there's no way to discriminate between real information and stuff made up > just to get the torturers to stop. > > Its also a false dichotomy - save lives vs principles. First you have to > be assured that the information will save lives. By setting up the scenario > of an immanent threat, you're setting up a strawman argument. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;160198600;22374440;w Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:249391 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
