Reply #9: There is already a law on the books to deal with the

[Spike from MN]

situation you mentioned. In a nutshell, the law states that in the event of a dire emergency, imminemt attack, etc., torture can be used as a means to extract information that can be used to save lives. I wasn't aware of this law either until I heard KO mention it on his show last week.

Of course, that still doesn't address the issue that information gained through torture is notoriously unreliable. Victims will say absolutely anything to get the pain to stop so it's rather difficult to assume that information gathered under the "emergency" clause would be any different. However, the law is there nonetheless, most likely because in a dire emergency where lives are at stake and time is of the essence, it wouldn't be realistic to wait for a court ruling on the issue before proceeding with "aggressive interrogation." Also, since we have the "emergency" clause already on the books, they can't claim they don't have the tools they need to defend us and that's probably another reason the law was put into place.

I'm against any and all forms of torture and, though I see what you're saying aikoaiko, I don't think torture doled out even under an "emergency" situation would actually help save lives because, as stated above, information gathered through torture is notoriously unreliable. KO has been covering this a lot lately so if you want some more info, you might want to check out the transcripts of his show for the last week or so on the MSNBC website. The interview with the ex-CIA agent on Wednesday was particularly good. Here's a link to the transcripts page. (Scroll down to the Keith Olbermann section and click away. I believe the "emergency" clause was discussed on Friday's show but the transcript for that one isn't up yet.)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3719710/