WASHINGTON, DC -- A secret legal opinion by the Justice Department that
reportedly justifies torture should be repudiated by the U.S. government
before it backfires on U.S. troops or civilians overseas, Libertarians
say.

“Iraqis can torture Americans just as easily as Americans can torture
Iraqis,” said Joseph Seehusen, Libertarian Party executive director.
“Not only is the U.S. government’s rationale for torturing prisoners
uncivilized and un-American, it could have a dangerous boomerang effect
on the very people President Bush claims he’s trying to protect.”

In an appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday,
Attorney General John Ashcroft refused to release 2002 Justice
Department memos on interrogation techniques being used at U.S. prisons
in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. But according to documents that
have been leaked to the press, the department’s lawyers say that a
wartime president is not bound by anti-torture laws or treaties, and
that inflicting physical and psychological pain might be justified
during enemy interrogations.

Of course there’s no legal or moral justification for torture,
Libertarians say, which is why the U.S. government should repudiate the
Justice Department’s legal opinion.

But Bush and Ashcroft seem to have overlooked a dangerous and immediate
consequence of “reinterpreting” anti-torture statutes: The same
rationale could be used by foreign governments against U.S. military
personnel, as well as American civilians traveling and working overseas.

“The U.S. government has signed international treaties banning torture
not just to protect foreign troops, but also to protect American troops
when they’re captured,” Seehusen said. “It’s in America’s self-interest
to abide by these laws. Flouting these standards gives tyrants and
dictators around the world the green light to do the same.”

Unfortunately, U.S. troops have already been captured in Iraq, and may
be captured again, Seehusen observed.

“Imagine opening your morning newspaper and seeing a photo of a captured
U.S. soldier wearing a black hood while being forced to stand on a box
with electrodes attached to his body,” Seehusen said. “Or imagine photos
of naked American men and women being piled on top of each other for the
amusement of prison guards, or lying naked on the floor wearing only a
dog leash held by a smiling Iraqi soldier.

“The American public would be justifiably outraged, and would demand
that the enemy troops be brought before a war crimes tribunal.”

Yet under the Bush administration’s “reinterpretation” of anti-torture
laws, such a prosecution might be impossible, he noted.

“No civilized person wants to see such brutal, thuggish behavior go
unpunished,” Seehusen said. “Yet that’s exactly what could happen if
George Bush insists that wartime presidents have the power to exempt
themselves from anti-torture laws.”