Appearing on Meet the Press, the general made a compelling case against torturing terrorist detainees, saying he found it far more pragmatic and beneficial to stick to methods authorized by the army field manual.
"I have always been on the record, in fact, since 2003, with the concept of living our values. And I think that whenever we've perhaps taken expedient measures, they've turned around and bitten us in the backside. We decided early on, in the 101st airborne division, we just said, we decided to obey the Geneva Conventions...
"In the cases where that is not true [where torture takes place or international human rights groups aren't granted access to detention sites] we end up paying a price for it, ultimately," he added. "Abu Ghraib and other situations like that are non biodegradable. They don't go away. The enemy continues to beat you with them like a stick.... Beyond that, frankly, we have found that the use of interrogation methods in the army field manual that was given the force of law by Congress, that that works."
Today Scott Horton writes about the Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision in the Maher Arar case. He sadly recalls those golden days of yesteryear when the very same court in Filartiga vs Pena-Irala “completely rejected its earlier narrow interpretation of international law and opened the door of the federal courts to civil actions by aliens and citizens alike for damages for human rights violations.” (http://www.ccrjustice.org/ourcases/past-cases/fil%C3%A1rtiga-v.-pe%C3%B1-irala )
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Decided June 30, 1980.
. Indeed, for purposes of civil liability, the torturer has become like the pirate and slave trader before him hostis humani generis, an enemy of all mankind.
Here is the last paragraph of that decision in full
Articles 
Fascinating
