I've got to both agree and disagree with this point.
On the one hand I'd agree with you on the point of speaking out against torture from a moral perspective (further, from a utilitarion perspective as well because it doesn't work[0]).
On the other hand, I think the point is more emphatic because even on utilitarian grounds, this policy doesn't make any sense, so the only logical argument is malevolence. I'd say this is a more chilling proposition, especially when stated by someone who has the views he admitted to having.
On the one hand I'd agree with you on the point of speaking out against torture from a moral perspective (further, from a utilitarion perspective as well because it doesn't work[0]).
On the other hand, I think the point is more emphatic because even on utilitarian grounds, this policy doesn't make any sense, so the only logical argument is malevolence. I'd say this is a more chilling proposition, especially when stated by someone who has the views he admitted to having.
[0] http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674743908