Who cares if we torture enemy combatants?

"But in the end, if we're torturing enemy combatants.....and that's a big if.....who cares? We can do whatever we want to them, because we're allowed." - Neil Boortz

Um, the President of the United States cares (or at least he recognizes that torture is something the United States is supposed to be opposed to.)

"Torture anywhere is an affront to human dignity everywhere. We are committed to building a world where human rights are respected and protected by the rule of law…The United States is committed to the worldwide elimination of torture and we are leading this fight by example." - George W. Bush, June 26, 2003

"The non-negotiable demands of human dignity must be protected without reference to race, gender, creed, or nationality. Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right, and we are committed to building a world where human rights are respected and protected by the rule of law… America stands against and will not tolerate torture. We will investigate and prosecute all acts of torture and undertake to prevent other cruel and unusual punishment in all territory under our jurisdiction." - George W Bush, June 26, 2004

I wonder if that makes the President a "bedwetter" who doesn't believe in the War on Terror and who doesn't "see Islamic terrorists as a threat."

Nevermind the evidence that the US has been less than careful in exactly who ends up getting detained as an enemy combatant

Also nevermind Boortz's idiotic assertion that Amnesty International does not probe North Korean and Cuban human rights violations (google it or visit Amnesty's sight to see otherwise, while also considering the difficulty in probing N. Korea and Cuba in light of the fact that they rank last and second to last in the world in freedom of the press.)

Notice that Boortz immediately sets up his dismissal of the Amnesty International report on the grounds of motive - this is the logical error known as the genetic fallacy- by opening with calling Amnesty International an "anti-American, leftist organization." Then, the only substantial response he has to the extensive report released by Amnesty International which concludes that torture within the US system of "war on terror" prisons is widespread is to claim that the report isn't valid because Amnesty International has "stated in the past that the act of force-feeding someone who is trying to kill themselves through a hunger strike is 'torture.'" Boortz consider that this is "'nuff said" to dismiss the report, despite it containing far more serious allegations of abuse, including the 34 confirmed instance of detainee deaths having been ruled homicides.

As to the issue of whether or not the US should torture enemy combatants because it can, I defer to Greg Djerejian.