Johnnie Cochrane???
Why does the Dersh support torture?
That's simple. Job security. More torture subjects=more clients.
If torture is not legalized, it will take place in dangerous back alleys. It should be safe, legal, and rare.
Dershowitz is probably correct on this one. There's an old and largely forgotten principle in Anglo-American law that says that the safety of the community is the greatest good and that there may be times that the executive branch HAS to act outside of the law to protect the people. There are long periods of time when the legislature isn't even in session, much less able to act quickly in an emergency. The rule was that the executive should go ahead and do what was necessary even if it meant breaking the law, but THEN, afterwards and at the first opportunity, the executive has an obligation to lay an account of its conduct and the circumstances before the legislative authority. The legislature would then either pass a resolution retroactively justfying the executive's illegal action (if they agreed it was justified) OR would proceed to impeach the executive for violating the law.
This happened in 1779 (I think) when Thomas Jefferson was governor of Virginia. There was (or may have been) a plot by Loyalists to seize and destroy the lead mines in SE Virginia on which Washington's army depended. The county militia officers, mainly Colonel Crockett (not the Alamo guy) and Colonel Lynch (yes, that one), acted swiftly to arrest suspected loyalist conspirators, many of whom were whipped etc., although no one was hanged. AFTER the conspiracy was crushed -- if there was a conspiracy -- they wrote Governor Jefferson an official report describing everything they had done. Jefferson laid it before the legislature, which passed a law indemnifying the militia officers and their men. What the law said was that if anyone brought criminal or civil action against Crockett or Lynch or their men, they could plead the act of indemnification and the judge was to consider the case against them null and void.
Doesn't he come from a Stalinist family political heritage? The Constituition forbids cruel and unusual punsihment but nobody seems to take it seriously any more. Yeah just excise it from the Constituition and allow the Government to treat all its "subjects" as they like.
Alan Dershowitz brings no credit to himself or the legal profession. He is a joke without the laughs.
I saw him the other night on Fox. He actually made a lot of sense.
I'm not into the torture thing, but he talked a lot about how people were too involved in protecting the civil rights of those that would kill us. For a change, I actually listened to him.
When Hillary and her gang (which includes, ta-da,... Dershowitz!) take power, they'll need torture as another means to control the general American "terrorist" unrest and revolt they likely will face.
Until then, they think it is OK to start polishing up such techniques and getting legal acceptance against terrorists in general by using it now on Muslim terrorists, while they slide their own noses under the edge of that tent in anticipation of future events.
I agree with Dershowitz. Sometimes torture is necessary to save lives. Why should our soldiers have to decide whether to put their own careers on the line in order to do it. Set up a process.
The Italians did it. Let's legalize it ourselves.
We won't ride PC to victory over terrorists. Pay them in their own currency.