>>On September 22, 2003, an agent of Iran's Intelligence Ministry was charged with the murder of Canadian photojournalist Zahra Kazemi. Commenting on the arrest, a spokesman from the prosecutor's office said "The crime is attributed to one of the [Intelligence Ministry] interrogators," and added that no government body was involved.
>>
>>She was tortured and killed, and it was entirely the fault of some interrogator? Certainly not Iranian policy. I suppose you buy this? I have a feeling you don't.
>>
>>Why is it the buck always stops at the top everywhere else, but always at the bottom in the U.S.?
>
>Comparing us to the Iranians is hardly fair, don't you think?

Can't think why. If the guys at the top in the U.S. don't know what's going on down the line, and the fault is with the underlings, then why can't the same be true of the Iranians? If the guys at the top of the Iranian ladder do know what's going on and are lying, why can't that be true of the U.S.? As far as I can figure it out from your posts here, you take Bush and his cronies at their word simply because you want to, and disbelieve other nations for exactly the same reason.

For me, that defies logic. You may actually be right (I doubt it, but who knows), but there should be a better reason for those beliefs than simply the fact that it's the way you want it to be.

The fact that Chaney and crew are trying very hard to exempt the CIA from the torture ban seems to me to be a good start in applying logic to the situation and concluding that the administration really is aware that it goes on and condones it at least tacitly, if not by edict.

Similarly, why would the U.S. send prisoners to Syria where everybody knows torture is rampant instead of interrogating them at home?