Apparently the fears are: 1) prosecution for actions they took in secret prisons. 2) what might come out if 100-or-so detainees get a trial in regular courts (where the methods of interrogation might be questioned thoroughly). 3) a huge pendulum shift in this country away from support for the less obviously legal aspects of our anti-terrorism efforts 4) a lack of will or ability on the part of Justice Dept. to defend them as individuals if they get sued.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
This reminds me of a story I heard one afternoon on NPR a few months or so ago, about some high-level firefighters purchasing private insurance against prosecution for flawed procedures because they didn't trust the government to stand by them.
Posted by Eduardo St. Elmo (Member # 9566) on :
But what happens when a firefighter in the heat of the moment (excuse the pun) has to improvise, disregarding the procedures in favour of instinct? Would he or she then be in danger of getting sued just because the rules weren't followed? There has to be a certain amount of slack, IMO. "Soldiers on the battlefield cannot always follow commands." (source of the quote evades my memory at this time)
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I don't want to derail this thread, so I'll answer quickly: this story was concerning the head-honcho firefighters, the ones who administrate entire efforts against large-scale fires, who might later be sued for negligence or incompetence or something.