Check out: 'You Say Torture, I Say Coercive Interrogation' on Slate

I thought you might find this Slate article interesting:

You Say Torture, I Say Coercive Interrogation
By Dahlia Lithwick
http://www.slate.com/id/2300550?wpisrc=sl_ipad

"The rule of law is actually much more resilient than many cynics thought and many people would have predicted on 9/11. ... On 9/11, had you said to somebody that the United States is not going to get away with doing whatever it wants to respond to this attack, you would have been laughed at. Who was going to stop us? ... I think that is actually the mindset that unfortunately operated. I don't see much of a box that John Yoo or Alberto Gonzales created for the president, unless the box has infinite lines. Alberto Gonzales said the Geneva Conventions are quaint, obsolete, irrelevant, and don't apply. John Yoo said that law doesn't apply when the president is acting as commander in chief. As commander in chief he can ignore the fact that Congress has made it a crime to commit torture. He can ignore the fact that Congress has made it a crime to wiretap people without judicial approval. ... Where is the box? If international law doesn't bind, if constitutional law doesn't bind, if the president is able to do whatever he wants?
---Sent from Steve's iPad...