Debating Torture

This from Andrew Sullivan today:

". . .we do know from Gonzales' documents released yesterday that the Bush administration wants to reserve the right to torture detainees for the CIA. Rice has also confirmed this. They refuse to specify what "coercive interrogation techniques" they are sanctioning for security reasons. They say they don't want to tip off al Qaeda. So we don't have a right to know if the government is practising torture as policy? I guess not. We have now crossed a line where the CIA can torture anyone they deem to be an enemy combatant, with no one outside the inner circle knowing, in places no one knows about. Isn't that worth debating?"

No, it's not worth debating Andrew. Some things are just wrong, period-- end of discussion. Rape, genocide, torture-- how do you defend these things intellectually? Take this administration to task, no questions asked. They need their feet held to the fire, and I do mean that metaphorically.

Okay, I'm not usually one to steam-roll discussion like that. But we all have our buttons, and torture really pushes mine, so to speak.

Here-- in my as yet most extreme act of intellectual openness, I present to you:

"In Defense of Terrorism," by Henry Mark Holzer.

Errr. . . enjoy.