>The last sentence is the most important part, but the whole thing is relevant. Torture implies: - That a public official is consenting to the infliction o

>The last sentence is the most important part, but the whole thing is relevant. Torture implies: - That a public official is consenting to the infliction of pain and suffering - The act is done to obtain information or a confession - The act is done outside of lawful sanction The US code you quote doesn't support your 2nd bullet. Obtaining information or a confession is only one of several reasons listed where the infliction of severe pain or suffering would be torture under US code. Excessive force during the flights is performed by persons acting in an official capacity, excessive force is not inherent or incidental to lawful sanctions, is very likely based upon discrimination and intended to be punishment by the person inflicting the excessive force. This all makes it to be likely classifiable as torture under US code. The biggest problem I have with your comment is the believe that the only acceptable definition of words seems to be the US legal code. Let's see how the Cambridge Dictionary defines torture: "the act of causing great physical or mental pain in order to persuade someone to do something or to give information, or to be cruel to a person or animal". Hmmm, that doesn't exactly match your 3 bullet points either and certainly seems to likely apply to the actions as documented in the report.