Proposition:
Torture is a legitimate and moral act in some situations.
First, the legalities:
When the terrorist is held by US law enforcement agencies, obviously it is not legitimate due to certain parts of the Constitution.
However, when the terrorist is held by certain other government organizations, there are no laws governing the treatment of the terrorist.
In the case of some portions of the DOD, there are no rules governing the treatment of the terrorist.
In the case of the military, the terrorist was not taken in a declared war while wearing a uniform, and is not subject to the various conventions offering protection to combatants. To The Neutral Observer's knowledge, there have been no binding court decisions on the treatment of these "enemy combatants" as of yet, therefore, the law is at worst undefined. When the law in the US is undefined, it is generally interpreted based on morality by a judge.
This brings up the morality of torture:
In every case in which a terrorist has been captured, there has been evidence that would convict the terrorist in any court of law in the world. Either this evidence has been developed through intelligence (which is how the terrorist was captured in the first place) or the terrorist has been captured while engaging in hostile activities.
Terrorists commit murder, if not directly then by assisting those who do. Nevertheless, terrorist groups do commit murder, and since that is their publically avowed goal, anyone who knowingly join a group intends to commit murder.
Terrorists generally intend and plan to commit murder at some point in the future, and possess information about plans to commit murder.
In most US states, law allows for the provision for citizens to commit justifiable homicide to save the life of a third party. Not many people here would argue with putting a Hellfire up some terrorist's ass in light of the above.
In general, it is accepted that the worst thing one can do to someone is to kill them (Yes, The Neutral Observer knows you could argue this, but in general...). If killing a terrorist is legal and moral in light of the above, why is torture (a lesser thing) not legal and moral if done by an agency that is not restrained by law, since the information that results will save lives of third parties?
Discuss.