So it's ok for Bush to torture, maim, and murder American citizens

I'm a bit confused here.

As noted below, Bush's lawyers say that the president could order torture, Abu Ghraib style and worse, of anyone he wants, whenever he wants, and it's not a violation of the Geneva Conventions or any other international treaties or laws, US law or anything else, since nothing can restrict the power of the president to conduct military operations. Which poses a few conclusions and questions:

1. That means that any action the president orders, if it is to further an interrogation of any suspect, so long as the interrogation is intended to benefit the war on terror, is per se legal under US and international law and something the president has full authority to do. That would include, therefore, any kind of torture, physical or mental, including chopping off appendages, electrocution, castration, rape, and even murder (including beheading).

2. Then why are we punishing the smiling Abu Ghraib soldiers for doing things that would have been perfectly legal had the president ordered them? What exact crime did they commit?

3. And finally, that memo seems to say that the president can order US citizens arrested, tortured, disfigured, and killed so long as he does this in his role as commander in chief in order to further an interrogation in the war on terror. Think about that little analysis.

This is chilling stuff, folks. And don't think the Bushies haven't thought about what kind of power that memo gives them.

(Atrios just posted the link to the torture memo, a portion of it at least - you can get it here, via IsThatLegal.org)