I have read the law including the parts you didn't mention. The parts about conspiracy to commit torture, complicity in attempts to commit torture inside or outside the US.
"Section 2340A provides that "[w]hoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life."
Under your interpretation just about every administration and congress since the beginning of the USA should be criminalized and if living, imprisoned for life or executed. I think it is safe to assume that is not the common sense interpretation of circumstance this law was designed to cover.
Congress enacted sections 2340-2340A to carry out the United States' obligations under the CAT. See H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 103-482, at 229 (1994). The CAT, among other things, obligates state parties to take effective measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under their jurisdiction, and requires the United States, as a state party, to ensure that acts of torture, along with attempts and complicity to commit such acts, are crimes under U.S. law.
Certainly the acts committed under Extraordinary Rendition were more severe than the waterboarding interrogations of the Bush Admin. As you know but insist upon ignoring, The Clinton Administration designed and orchestrated Extraordinary Rendition, that is direct and undeniable complicity.
There is no doubt that the DOJ and Congress had sanctioned the use of waterboarding under the specific conditions used in interrogation.
There are several pages of definition but here is some more of what you left out.
Section 2340(1) defines "torture" as "an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control."
II(1) The meaning of "severe."
Because the statute does not define "severe," "we construe [the] term in accordance with its ordinary or natural meaning." FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 476 (1994). The common understanding of the term "torture" and the context in which the statute was enacted also inform our analysis.
Dictionaries define "severe" (often conjoined with "pain") to mean "extremely violent or intense: severe pain." American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 1653 (3d ed. 1992); see also XV Oxford English Dictionary 101 (2d ed. 1989) ("Of pain, suffering, loss, or the like: Grievous, extreme" and "Of circumstances . . . : Hard to sustain or endure"). |
