I'm still confused about the connection back to Google in China, if that's implied here. I absolutely agree that the US government's behavior regarding detenti

I'm still confused about the connection back to Google in China, if that's implied here. I absolutely agree that the US government's behavior regarding detention, torture, rendition, and so on was horrifying and immoral, and it betrays an utter lack of conscience in most everyone involved. And, I agree that the acts remain dubiously legal at best. For American-administered treatment, the determination of combatant status was almost certainly done improperly to the Geneva standard. For foreign administration, the practice of extraordinary rendition itself was unambiguously illegal, and if "here, violate the Constitution for us" wasn't actually illegal, it was obviously counter to intent. The thing I still can't reconcile is how Google's action undirected by the USG is comparable to torture/rendition/etc done directly under government instruction. The Bill of Rights doesn't even bind non-government actors domestically, so I'm struggling to understand the appeals in this thread to 'enforce' it regarding Google in China.