Senator Lindsey Graham parses the use of torture and the opinions that led to the acceptance of torture as proper methods to use in a spurious manner. First, to answer Senator Graham, the effectiveness of torture does not increase its morality one jot or tittle; second, torture's effectiveness does not make it legal or constitutional. The question of whether the writers of the opinions justifying torture gave unethical or immoral advisories is not fraught with ambiguity. The answer is Yes. They gave the wrong advice; they gave unethical advice; they gave illegal advice; they gave unconstitutional advice: it was immoral advice. Senator Graham says that they were good men who sought to protect us from harm, and their zeal over stepped. No, they were bad. It was not yours truly offering an opinion as a citizen. These were government officials whose opinions were translated into acts by other government agents; these opinions were accepted as 'law.' If these acts had not been committed and condoned, even encouraged, then the opinions might not require scrutiny by the Department of Justice. These opinions became policy: immoral and unconstitutional policy.