In 2002 President Bush said the Guantánamo detainees would be treated "humanely and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, consistent with the principles" of the Geneva convention.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1237175,00.html

Yet it appears Mr Bush's words may contain a more sinister meaning. A series of leaked memos from within the administration contain legal opinions that - to put it bluntly - justify torture. According to the memos from lawyers at the departments of justice and defence, the president is able to order the torture of prisoners, and that anyone carrying out the president's orders is immune from prosecution. They define torture as "equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death"

The administration says the memos were merely legal opinions drawn up for consultation. It denies any link between the conclusions of the memos and the evidence of abuse amounting to torture from former inmates at Guantánamo and elsewhere. But it refuses to publish its legal opinions and internal memos, a decision which can only fuel suspicion. The administration defends itself by repeating its "humane" treatment of prisoners - but when the definition of "humane" is stretched to mean anything up to death, rape or disfigurement, that defence carries no weight whatsoever.

The US has long since ceded the moral high ground in its "war on terror", after the exposure of its Abu Ghraib abuses. These latest revelations threaten to expel it from the foothills..