Eagleionline Partners
Westlaw-Trademark3training.gif
Campus Calendar
Carpool Map

View Larger Map

To add your car e-mail editor Kaiko.Shimura(at)gmail(dot)com.
Search

Recent Comments
Class of 2011 - Special Feature!
facebook.jpg
Admitted students may now register with Eagleionline using their BC.EDU email addresses. To register, click here. Registration gets you hundreds of course outlines, course evaluations and more.
 
If you have not yet joined the Boston College Law School Class of 2011 Facebook page, click the Facebook link above.
 
Check out our “Where Should a BC Law Student Live” post (and summer shuttle bus link).
 
Don’t forget BCLS’s official admitted Student page (and the offical live chat transcript).
 
Finally, take a look at what students are saying about the law school in a feature Eagleionline calls WHY BC?
Login
« Commencement Survey Results | Main | REMINDER TODAY!!: "Privacy in Cyberspace" (Free Lunch too!!) »
Wednesday
02Apr

Shall we.....Torture?

AbuGhraibAbuse-standing-on-box.jpgFollowing the healthy discussion BCLS has had regarding the fact that Attorney General Mukasey’s is slated to be our commencement speaker, I find it timely to note that the so-called 2003 “torture memo”—granting the executive branch and Pentagon broad leeway in its interrogation methods of terror suspects—was declassified and released to the public yesterday. The document, available here and here and here and here (four separate parts), according to the Guardian, “outlines legal justification for military interrogators to use harsh tactics against al-Qaida and Taliban detainees overseas so long as they did not specifically intend to torture their captives. It argues that poking, slapping or shoving would not give rise to criminal liability, and also appears to defend the use of mind-altering drugs that do not produce “an extreme effect”.” [1] Part of memo even explicitly states, ““Even if an interrogation method arguably were to violate a criminal statute, the Justice Department could not bring a prosecution because the statute would be unconstitutional as applied in this context.” Yale Law School professor Eugene R. Fidell told the New York Times ““This is a monument to executive supremacy and the imperial presidency. It’s also a road map for the Pentagon for fending off any prosecutions.” [2]

In additional news, FOX News—yes, you read correctly, FOX—blogger Father Jonathan wrote a piece a few weeks ago noting Bush’s veto of a bill that would’ve banned waterboarding and other techniques, stating that, “We should never trust anyone’s judgment that evil can sometimes be good. Torture, like rape and other intrinsic evils, is always wrong. The international community, following a long tradition of ethical reasoning, and having witnessed the tragic consequences of Machiavellian alternatives, has defined torture and condemned it universally.” Father Jonathan also describes waterboarding and other such enhanced interrogation techniques as “un-American” and “unethical.” [3]

For additional law review articles on waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques please click the following links:

Torture, Violence, and the Global War on Terror

Playing by Our Own Rules

A World Without Torture



[1] Guardian, 2 April 2008, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/02/usa1

[2] Mazzetti, Mark. 2 April 2008, “’03 US Memo Approved Harsh Interrogations,” New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/02/washington/02terror.html?em&ex=1207281600&en=45e1d63b7e0901b9&ei=5087%0A

[3] Father Drinian, “Why President Bush Should Have Vetoed Waterboarding,” 10 March 2008, FOX, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,336589,00.html


Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>