Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz has famously pondered publicly whether torture should be legally regularized with a process similar to judicial search warrants, to be used only in "special cases."
It's amazing that a dimwit and third-rate intellect like Dershowitz has been able to bamboozle people from his lofty perch at Harvard U. Law School.
Dershowitz trots out the tired old "ticking time bomb scenario" to explain why legalizing torture might be desirable. Does Dershowitz consider for even a moment the actual probability of such a scenario?
Has anyone ever actually documented even a single instance of such a scenario in real life, where someone could locate a ticking bomb, and had to be forcibly compelled to surrender information that could stop it?
Let us suppose for a moment that such a scenario were in fact to arise. What then?
In that case, the best way to insure that torture could only be used in such rare and extreme scenarios is very simple: make it totally illegal, with a guarantee that anyone caught committing it will be indicted and tried for the crime before a jury of their peers. In the event that the fact of the torture is not in dispute, then the burden will then rest on the DEFENDANT to prove to their peers that they acted under the pressure of survival necessity, to save innocent lives from immediate peril.
Dershowitz's proposal to regularize torture as a legal practice is the best way to insure that the use of it expands indefinitely to become a routine practice, and that its practicioners can rest with confidence in their impunity.
Dershowitz is either very evil, or an idiot. But a very dangerous idiot, because some people will put stock in his dangerous absurdities without using their own brains to think them through, relying simply on the merit of his lofty title.