The Justice Department recently outlined a legal defense for the interrogation methods that have been deemed "torture" by several respectable dictionaries. The Justice Department argues that the executive order last summer telling the CIA not to do illegal things never mentions exactly what illegal things the CIA shouldn't do. As a form of compromise, the DOJ has prohibited interrogation that includes forcing individuals to perform sexual acts, significantly decreasing Dick Cheney's ability to get laid.

The thrust of the argument is that, unlike any previous interrogation system in the history of mankind, harsh interrogations have the prospect of thwarting enemy actions by leading to a suspect to divulge sensitive information. The Geneva Convention specifies that treatment of prisoners cannot include "outrages on personal dignity." As deputy assistant attorney general Brian Benczkowski put it, "The fact that an act is undertaken to prevent a threatened terrorist attack, rather than for the purpose of humiliation or abuse, would be relevant to a reasonable observer in measuring the outrageousness of the act." Instead of an abstract entity like the Geneva Convention, America should adopt a solid metric like the "reasonable observer." Benczkowski argues that the conduct "must be so deplorable that the reasonable observer would recognize it as something that should be universally condemned." It is a relief to know that CIA interrogators will finally be under the close supervision of a reasonable observer.

But why is gaining useful information relevant to justifying torture? Brian is, of course, comparing modern interrogations with interrogations from previous international conflicts which were, in general, for shits 'n giggles. In fact, the Geneva Convention was written specifically to stop soldiers from interrogating suspects for the heck of it. You think Abu Ghraib was bad? Nazis used to force British POWs to moon passing Austrians. The Vietcong are infamous for torturing Americans for sheer sexual excitement.

However, in the past few decades, torture has been strictly for work purposes only. Long gone is the French pastime of spending sunny Algerian afternoons hanging FLN terrorists from metal bars in lieu of finding a good café. Forever lost is signatory Columbian "Piñata/Sandinista Switch" which was always good for a laugh.

This explains why Bush vetoed a bill which would make the CIA follow the Army rulebook on interrogations. The Army, unlike the CIA, does not interrogate suspects in order to thwart terrorist attacks. They just like writing handbooks.