enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
But not "contractors"
by ljrmiller
+1 Reply
The new executive order may apply to the CIA and other governmental agencies, and the U.S. military, Abu Ghraib notwithstanding, has always had restrictions on what can be done during an interrogation, BUT what about "contractors". My guess is that prisoners will somehow end up in the hands of those private-sector workers and that the Bush administration will again be able to avoid responsibility for torture and extraordinary rendition.
Re: But not "contractors"
by trapdoor
Legally, contractors working for a government entity are acting as agents of the government, and would be bound by the executive order.
Re: But not "contractors"
by Eigenvector
I don't see how. Government contractors are often held to much more stringent restrictions than the government itself is. I speak from years of experience working on government contracts. That said, it's an interesting angle.
What's your take on Sy Hersch's reporting
by Isonomist
that the interrogation contractors don't have to follow US military law? They are only liable to civilian law in the country where they work, and of course, by the time the law might catch up with them, they're long gone.
Re: What's your take on Sy Hersch's reporting
by Eigenvector

Well hmmm. That's my take, hmmmm. Unfortunately I think it will play out that way. That doesn't mean it will automatically happen. There is a difference between politics and legality. Legally the Bush administration or any subsequent presidency may use that as justification for its actions, however when it comes to that point politically that will leave such an ugly stain in our minds that its unlikely anyone would deal with them again.

We focus on Bush and Cheney as the harbingers of evil in this country, but they are not even remotely the only people who have committed deeds like this - this is not a Republican issue only.

View as RSS news feed in XML