Tournament: Shirley | Round: 3 | Opponent:  | Judge:
A2 Framework?

1. We Meet- Resolution dictases that we restrain the president IN some way and then lists areas. Torture is an intergral part of indefinite detention.
   2. The decision to torture indefinitely detained is a war power authority of the president.
   Alexander, 2012 (Janet Cooper, Frederick I. Richman Professor of Law, Stanford Law Review, “John Yoo’s War Powers: The Law Review and the World,” California Law Review Vol 100, No. 2, 356-358)

War Powers is seriously flawed as a piece AND  or immunized by executive power.

3.  In means to indicate is included or a part of something
Merriam Webster No date ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/in)
in preposition \?in, ?n, ?n\
—used to indicate location or position within something

to the inside of (a room, container, etc.)
—used to indicate that someone or something belongs to or is included as part of something

AT: Anthropocentrism
2. Perm solves -- Phenomenology is a well suited way of thinking about cross-species interaction
Bussolini 2000 (Jeffrey Bussolini Associate Professor Sociology, Anthropology and Social Work TOWARD A CAT PHENOMENOLOGY a Search for Animal Being by Jeff Bussolini http://web.gc.cuny.edu/csctw/found_object/text/cat.htm NVM)

This paper takes up the issue of animal AND  types of cross-species interactions.
3. The alt doesn’t solve the aff. We need to make sense of the way that communities are formed through language. We need the plan as a vehicle to understand both the nature of suffering and how suffering happens.
Crossley, 1993 (Nick, Department of Sociological Studies, University of Sheffield, “The politics of the gaze: Between Foucault and Merleau-Ponty,” Human Studies 16, 1993, 412-413)

The existence of language, as a public institution, is crucial AND participants can become wholly absorbed in this process.
4. Phenomenology allows us to break from the Cartsian anthropocentric god and ending the language and human consciousness based approach to the world
Bussolini 2000 (Jeffrey Bussolini Associate Professor Sociology, Anthropology and Social Work TOWARD A CAT PHENOMENOLOGY a Search for Animal Being by Jeff Bussolini http://web.gc.cuny.edu/csctw/found_object/text/cat.htm NVM)

Throughout our considerations AND one among an infinity of other types of thought in substance.

5. We solve the alternative. The logic they critique assume the liberal, atomistic conception of the human. We say this interpretation is the same flawed one that lets Section 2340 exist. The definitional rupture of the aff plan clears space for a different way to think about ontology. That’s Vicaro. When we think about how people are embodied in the world, this shows that we’re just a part of the environment. That’s the Grey evidence we’re about to read.

6. Total rejection of anthropocentrism fails—understanding humans as part of the environment allows environmental protection.
Grey, 1993 (William Reader in Philosophy at the University of Queensland. “Anthropocentrism and Deep Ecology,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 71.4, pages 463-475, http://www.uq.edu.au/~pdwgrey/pubs/anthropocentrism.html)
There is an obvious tension which arises AND  And a genuinely non-anthropocentric view delivers only confusion.

1. 
   Perm:  Do the plan and break down the relationship between bios and zoe.  Sovereignty must be used strategically – critique can be simultaneous
   Lombardi 96 Mark Owen, Associate Political Science Prof @ Tampa, Perspectives on Third-World Sovereignty, p 161
   Sovereignty is in our collective mindsAND  the welfare and quality of life for the human race.

Zero solvency for the alternative- their talk of freedom and rethinking of the political are rhetorical flourishes that lack the substance necessary to found a new politics
Parry ‘05, visiting professor Lewis and Clark Law School,
(John T. “PAPER SYMPOSIUM: FEDERALISM AFTER GONZALES V. RAICH: SYMPOSIUM ARTICLE "SOCIETY MUST BE REGULATED": BIOPOLITICS AND THE COMMERCE CLAUSE IN GONZALES V. RAICH” Lewis and Clark Law Review Winter 9 Lewis and Clark L. Rev. 853)
My goal so far has not been  AND  one has any practical idea how to make it happen. 95

Alt Fails - Agamben offers no realistic alternative that has the potential to be successful against the sovereign
Babias 7 Marius: Director of the Neuer Berliner Kunstverein “Zones of Indiferrence,” Eurozine, http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2007-11-15-babias-en.html
What are the consequences now of the “state of exception” having become a
AND
to recognise this difference is synonymous with a battle against injustice and oppression.

Tournament: Wayne | Round: 2 | Opponent: UNI SS | Judge: Hennigan
Observation One – The Meaning of Torture

US code defines the torture as actions which intend to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering
Section 2340 13(18 U.S.C. § 2340, last updated 1/3/2013 (Title 18 – Crimes and Criminal Procedure, Chapter 113C – Torture, accessible at http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C113C.txt)
As used in this chapter—
(1) “torture” means an act committed by a person acting under
AND
, and the commonwealths, territories, and possessions of the United States.

However, declassified documents show that enhanced interrogation techniques are permitted because of the lack in judicial guidance on the meaning of section 2340. The Department of Justice decided that all of the techniques used by the CIA did not violate existing statutory language.
Bradbury, 2005 (Steven G., Principle Deputy Assistant Attorney General, “Memorandum for John A. Rizzo, Senior Deputy General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency,” U.S. Department of Justice, May 10, 2005, pg. 4-5 http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/olc/techniques.pdf)
The task of interpreting and applying sections 2340-2340A is complicated by the lack
AND
arguments based on possible defenses of "necessity” or self-defense.

Section 2340 is written to criminalize the liberal fantasy of torture while strategically permitting those forms of torture liberal democracies want to use. The current statutory definition impedes our ability to defend against contemporary state violence.
Vicaro, 2011 (Michael P., Ph.D University of Pittsburgh, “A Liberal Use of ‘Torture’: Pain, Personhood, and Precedent in the U.S. Federal Definition of Torture,” Rhetoric and Public Affairs, Vol. 14, No. 3, pg. 407-408)

The above section explored two key precedents for the current U.S. definition
AND
the extent to which it remains an inadequate defense against contemporary state violence.
?
Plan: The United States federal government should increase its statutory restrictions on the President to authorize any interrogation technique which cause pain, humiliation, and/or harm personhood against those who are indefinitely detained.

?
Observation Two: The Problem of Liberalism

Public outcry against CIA enhanced interrogation techniques focused on waterboarding those indefinitely detained. Ignored were those other eleven techniques the Department of Justice said were not at all problematic. The goal of these techniques is not to cause long term physical harm, but to humiliate or instill fear into the detainee. The only concern the DOJ has with CIA techniques is a technique does not cause long term harm to the body.
Bradbury, 2005 (Steven G., Principle Deputy Assistant Attorney General, “Memorandum for John A. Rizzo, Senior Deputy General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency,” U.S. Department of Justice, May 10, 2005, pg. 8-11 http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/olc/techniques.pdf)
You have described the specific techniques at issue as follows: 1. Dietary manipulation
AND
avoid the inhalation or ingestion of water by the detainee, see id.

The problem of liberalism is tied to its epistemological and ontological division between the mind and the body. This division evokes a particularly ‘clean’ version of liberal torture which trusts torture is legitimate if it does not cause act upon the body in substantial ways.
Vicaro, 2011 (Michael P., Ph.D University of Pittsburgh, “A Liberal Use of ‘Torture’: Pain, Personhood, and Precedent in the U.S. Federal Definition of Torture,” Rhetoric and Public Affairs, Vol. 14, No. 3, pg. 408-410)

The liberal-modernist subject is organized by a philosophical anthropology that presumes two separate
AND
culture and community, emotion, and intersubjective recognition are secondary and inessential.

The goal of liberal torture, breaking down the identificatory commitments of those indefinitely detained, is paradigmatic of how liberalism negotiates all types of subject formation. Liberalism works by subsuming the particular to the universal. This uneasy relationship clears space for the rise of both particularized neoliberal economic attachments alongside of disciplinary constitution of subject positions.
Brown, 1996 (Wendy, Professor of Political Science at UC-Berkeley, States of Injury, pg. 56-59)

The tension between particularistic "I's" and a universal "we" in liberalism
AND
read as a history of variations on and vacillations between these two strategies.
The abstract character of liberal political membership and the ideologically naturalized character of liberal individualism
AND
universal does not have any necessary body, any necessary content. "7
While this détente between universal and particular within liberalism is riddled with volatile conceits,
AND
potentially produces political identity through these categories, produces identities as these categories.
In this story, the always imminent but increasingly politically manifest failure of liberal universalism
AND
liberal individuation, while liberalism politically neutralizes rights claims generated by disciplinary identities. 

Neoliberalism renders the periphery discardable, makes destruction inevitable.
Santos, 2003, (Boaventura de Sousa, “Collective Suicide,” Bad Subjects, April 2003, http://bad.eserver.org/issues/2003/63/santos.html)
According to Franz Hinkelammert, the West has repeatedly been under the illusion that it
AND
deaths, as a result of war, of thousands of innocent civilians. 

The biopoliticalization of life makes war and violence inevitable, culminating in extinction.
Foucault 78 (Michel, Professor of Philosophy at the College de France, The History Of Sexuality: An Introduction, Volume 1, 136-137)
Since the classical age the West has undergone a very profound transformation of these mechanisms
AND
species, the race, and the large-scale phenomena of population.

Observation Three: Pain and Personhood

The rhetoric of section 2340 criminalizes the use of severe forms of torture. In the eyes of the DOJ, examples of such forms of torture are those found in the historical record of devices that crush or maim.
Bradbury, 2005(Steven G., Principle Deputy Assistant Attorney General, “Memorandum for John A. Rizzo, Senior Deputy General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency,” U.S. Department of Justice, May 10, 2005, pg. 20- http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/olc/techniques.pdf)

Under the language adopted by Congress in sections 2340-2340A, to constitute “torture,” conduct must be “specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering.” In the discussion that follows, we will separately consider each of the principle components of this key phrase: (1) the meaning of “severe”; (2) the meaning of “severe physical pain or suffering”; (3) the meaning of “severe mental pain or suffering”; and (4) the meaning of “specifically intended”.
(1) The meaning of “severe”
Because the statute does not define "severe," "we construe the
AND
a sensation or condition that is extreme in intensity and difficult to endure.
This interpretation is also consistent with the historical understanding of torture, which has generally
AND
cited supra p, 2, make this clear. As Professor Langbeinsummarized:
The commonest torture devices – strappado, rack, thumbscrews, legscrews—worked upon the extremities of the body, either by distending or compressing them. We may suppose that these models of torture were preferred because they were somewhat less likely to maim or kill than coercion directed to the trunk of the body, and because they would be quickly adjusted to take account of the victim's responses during the examination.
Torture and the Law of Proof at 15 (footnote omitted).

The decision to condone pain insofar as it does not cross into the domain of ‘severe pain’ that is specifically intended shields all forms of liberal torture from prosecution.
Vicaro, 2011 (Michael P., Ph.d University of Pittsburgh, “A Liberal Use of ‘Torture’: Pain, Personhood, and Precedent in the U.S. Federal Definition of Torture,” Rhetoric and Public Affairs, Vol. 14, No. 3, pg. 410-412)

In 18 U.S.C. § 2340, torture is defined most
AND
it difficult to verify and quantify. Elaine Scarry states the problem eloquently:
 For the person in pain, so incontestably and unnegotiably present
AND
once that which cannot be denied and that which cannot be confirmed.40
However, as Schrag has persuasively demonstrated, what Scarry theorizes as essential to the
AND
having a funny sort of particular before the eye of the mind.”42
Critics of dualistic theories of experience, such as Schrag and Rorty, have revealed
AND
conjured in judgments about whose world-annihilating suffering should be considered torturous.
The problem with pain in 18 U.S.C. § 2340 goes
AND
a crime for which it is difficult to prosecute physically remote authorizing officials.
This focus on the severity of pain, when coupled with the “specific intent
AND
permissible providing that they are not motivated by an emotional state of cruelty.
Lastly, requiring that an individual specifically intend to inflict severe pain makes aberrant interpersonal
AND
-usual” abuse rather than the aberrant behavior of “bad apples.”

The use of liberal torture in the War on Terror marks the personalization of warfighting. The goal is not to eliminate an enemy but destroy those bonds which hold communities together. Despite sitting outside of the legal definition of torture, these techniques literally undo the self and destroy the person being interrogated.
Vicaro, 2011 (Michael P., Ph.d University of Pittsburgh, “A Liberal Use of ‘Torture’: Pain, Personhood, and Precedent in the U.S. Federal Definition of Torture,” Rhetoric and Public Affairs, Vol. 14, No. 3, pg. 416-417)

Unlike modernist “Great State” war, victory in post-modern counterinsurgency¶
AND
within which older¶ models of citizenly subjectivity are revealing their inadequacy.59
Preventative detention and “no-touch” torture have thus emerged as¶ tactical
AND
the disciplinary and confessional rituals of pre-modern¶ religious conversion.61
For these reasons, the “personality” clause in 18 U.S.C. § 2340 is most¶ significant and most in need of critique and revision. “Disruption of¶ personality” is and likely will remain a preferred tool for executors of¶ counterinsurgency warfare. In the now infamous KUBARK interrogation¶ manual, the goal was explicit:
There is an interval—which may be extremely brief—of suspended animation,¶ a kind of psychological shock or paralysis. It is caused by a traumatic¶ or sub-traumatic experience which explodes, as it were, the world that is¶ familiar to the subject as well as his image of himself within that world. . . .¶ The more well-adjusted . . . the subject is, the more he is affected.62
As McCoy has shown, an unbroken chain connects this Cold War–era document,¶ through the techniques described in Ireland v. United Kingdom, to the¶ “enhanced interrogation techniques” used in the current conflict. That these¶ techniques do not conclusively meet the legal definition of tortureindicates¶ profound problems with the implied conception of “personality” therein.
The addition of culturally specific torture is the primary innovation¶ developed by interrogators in
AND
in the intrasubjective space that many¶ religious traditions call the soul.”64

The loss of being obliterates value to life and is worse than nuclear war.
Zimmerman 1997 (Michael – Professor of Biology at CU Boulder “Contesting Earth's Future: Radical Ecology and Postmodernity” Berkeley, Calif. University of California Press, 1997. pg. 119-120)

Heidegger asserted that human self-assertion, combined with the eclipse of being,
AND
species are somehow lessened because they were never "disclosed" by humanity.
?
?
Observation Four: Solvency
We must reclaim the definition as a site of political contestation. Our plan brings the legal liberal definition of torture into harmony with the phenomenological techniques employed by those executing torture techniques.
Vicaro, 2011 (Michael P., Ph.D University of Pittsburgh, “A Liberal Use of ‘Torture’: Pain, Personhood, and Precedent in the U.S. Federal Definition of Torture,” Rhetoric and Public Affairs, Vol. 14, No. 3, pg. 403-404)
The central argument of the essay builds on and contributes to the ongoing reclamation by
AND
an alternative that is potentially more useful, more beautiful, more just.
Contemporary debates about whether “no-touch” techniques should legally constitute torture suggest
AND
lacuna between these distinct theories of subjectivity, great violence is taking place.

Our act of redefining torture clears space to reflect how individuals exist in the world and how acts of torture destroy the meaning of the self…
Vicaro, 2011 (Michael P., Ph.D University of Pittsburgh, “A Liberal Use of ‘Torture’: Pain, Personhood, and Precedent in the U.S. Federal Definition of Torture,” Rhetoric and Public Affairs, Vol. 14, No. 3, pg. 418-420)
?
This essay has sought to advance the claim that the theory of subjectivity¶ unique
AND
offer three interrelated appeals for including rhetorical considerations¶ in such a project.
First, rhetoric is relevant to questions about torture insofar as the¶rhetorical tradition
AND
definitions and amplifies¶ language as a site of political and experiential contestation.
Second, rhetoric is relevant to questions about torture insofar as the¶ rhetorical tradition
AND
be protected in any ethically sound defense of¶ the individual against torture.
Third, rhetoric is relevant to questions about torture insofar as the¶ rhetorical tradition
AND
denotative accuracy, but by the quality of the worlds it makes possible.¶
The world of 18 U.S.C. § 2340 remains one in which liberal democracies¶ can torture systematically and with impunity so long as their methods do not¶ offend popular sensibilities. A revised definition that draws from a rhetorically¶ informed conception of being and experience is, however, possible. With it¶ might come new protections for both the word and the flesh—for fragile¶ selfhood and for the forms of life from which it unfolds.