5/26    - UN Convention Against Torture and implications, Cliffs Notes -
        Definition of torture:
          "severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental"
        What this means:
          Everything up to this is fine for those without protection of the
          Geneva Conventions.
        Bush's case:
          GC protects Iraq, but it's okay in Guantanamo Bay and Afghanistan.
          \_ This is disputed. To put it mildly.
             \_ Undersecretary Cambone and Taguba both agree that GC protects
                Iraq, but not Gitmo.
                \_ And almost everyone else in the world disagrees with
                   them. Including the US Supreme Court, I will hazard to
                   guess, as soon as they start ruling on this.
                   \_ You include the SC but then say it's well maybe your
                      guess you think they might sorta maybe agree with you.
        Implication:
          Dogs are fine, simulated drowning, sexual humiliation, forced
          positions, days-long sleep deprivation with no clothes and with no
          light, blows while hooded -- Moderate pain and suffering.
        Obvious big problem:
          Non-GC treatment in Iraq.
        Big problem:
          If you are incarcerated in Gitmo or Afghanistan and you turn out to
          be innocent.
        Another big problem:
          Public relations ("They aren't convered by GC!  It isn't 'torture'!
          Everyone in there is an enemy of freedom!").