One reason given not to 'dig up the past' is that we have put torture behind us.
Have we?
It's a provocative and forward-looking question, one that can help shape the debate.
- -Did Bush's signing statement(s) assert an Article 2 right to torture? If so, the question is ... open, in a sense.
- -We stopped using the waterboard, but that was because the CIA dropped the "request" to do so.
- -A list of approved techniques is probably how we structure CIA activities.
Under this Regulate und Legalize (RULE) set-up, the President can change the list fiat (he's the "Unitary Executive", under some radical legal theories). There is no need to build a proper necessity defense, is there?
Also, it's hard to know whether keeping various "bits", like video tapes, is still at the discretion of the CIA. - -Obama's CIA director has stopped the _practice_ of outsourcing interrogation for profit. Practices, however, can be reversed by an incoming Republican Administration.
It's clear that the Obama Administration doesn't want this on their plate right now, but it's not going away, either, if the above is an accurate description of the current state of the law.
