I still don't get it.

[Duer 157099]

I'm really trying to carefully read and understand these torture memos.

On the one hand, they categorically state that the Geneva Conventions just simply do not apply to the detainees in question. Period. PERIOD. This is an unconventional war, these are not traditional prisoners of war, they are TERRORISTS, so Geneva, uh uh, forget it, doesn't matter - we could pull their toenails out one by one, and still they are not covered.

So, why isn't that the end of the discussion? Why do they then go on to say "...and even if they did, well it still doesn't qualify as torture, because it doesn't 'shock the conscience.' And even if it did shock the conscience, well, it doesn't matter because we're doing it to prevent imminent terrorist attacks."

It's the worst tortured logic I've ever seen.