Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D.

The editorial board of the New York Times has had an epiphany: namely, that there is something suspect about the ends justifying the means. Not always, of course. Most of the time, the board believes that the end justifies the means. But not here; not in the case of torture. Here, the end does not justify the means. Certain means, such as torture, are impermissible, no matter how good the end. Do you suppose the board members would oppose torture if their lives depended on it?