John Yoo has been appointed Attorney General.

John Cassel: If the President deems that he’s got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person’s child, there is no law that can stop him?

Yoo: No treaty.

Cassel: Also no law by Congress. That is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo.

Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.

... and most sentient people now feel that way, including Congress, which has apologised for the internment.

As for spying on the "enemy", that's precisely what FISA allows.

Someone here probably ain't old enough to remember CONTELPRO and the Church Commission.....

Cheers,

That was a beautiful read. I still see the winter courtroom scene. Snow melting on the windows... etc., The book captivated me. Oh, huh...You married? Smack! apologies

I don’t think Supreme Court precedent is unchanging –- and I obviously disagree that the FISA should be read to enfringe on the wartime powers of the Commander-in-Chief –- so, I guess you think the ROBERTS Court is going side with you on that one?! LOL

The 4th Amendment reads “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against UNREASONABLE searches and seizures, shall not be violated . . .” (emphasis added).

If Korematsu was “reasonable” please explain how simply listening to the enemy (yes, even if they are U.S. Citizens as Mr. Korematsu was), but NOT shipping them to internment camps, would be unreasonable. Assuming you could even get that kind of ruling, first, I’d like to see the Supreme Court enforce it; second, I would advocate what is COMPLETELY LEGAL then – the President signs another Executive Order to round up every Arab-American and put them in camps with no communication whatsoever – then we won’t have to wire-tap them anymore. So much for trying to compromise with you Democrats. You people have no idea how to defend a nation.

He is a traitor.

Isn't enough enough? This ain't any fun any more. What kind of a human being is an apologist for this kind of continual corruption, this degradation of the best in our country, and glorification of the worst?

When will the moderates rise up against these folks? Exclude them from polite conversation? Identify them as what they are? Identify this conversation as beyond the pale?

Justifying this administration is justifying the evisceration of our bill of rights. It's justifying torture of even the innocent. Of the murder of on the order of a million Iraqis. Of wholesale destruction of the environment. Of industrial suicide. It's justifying the flushing the future of our children down a toilet.

I have no more patience for their madness. Their narcissistic dreams of power and myths of godhood. Their childish self-centeredness which lacks even a modicum of redeeming morality.

What else are they but traitors? Not just to our nation, but to the future of our species? For what? Ten shekels?

So, you actually think it was “illegal” for every wartime President to spy on the enemy within our own borders, huh?

Only if they didn't comply with FISA or whatever law was in place prior to FISA. Otherwise, it was legal. Obviously.

I'm curious: how do you feel about private wiretapping? Do you care if your ISP logs all your data and sells it to anyone who has the money? There is a lot of personal information that can be gotten legally (or at least, can be gotten without much threat of enforcement.) For instance, credit cards are under no obligation not to sell your transaction data, and cell phone records can easily be gotten for less than $100. Do you feel as comfortable with that fact as you do with the government watching you?

After all, if you're not doing anything wrong...

How about when FDR shipped off all those Japanese-Americans to internment camps?

Even if that were technically legal by a bad ruling, it was an immoral and un-American act. I could scarcely have more contempt for those think otherwise.

Brain ... "Jake007" ... sense.

"One of thes things is not like the others; one of these things just doesn't belong...."

We're talking major hallucinogens here, folks ... or rampant senility already in someone that wasn't around in 1978.

Cheers,

You married? Smack! apologies

-- bebop-o

Flattered that you enjoy my commentary, Bebop-o. But I should inform you that I'm Kitt as in Kit Carson rather than, say, Anne Frank's made up freind, Kitty, that she addresses in her diary. In other words...I'm a guy.

Still, though, no apologies necessary.

So glad you are as deeply moved by Snow Falling on Cedars as I am.

Read the Fourth Amendment again. You left out the phrase “no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.”

The rest of your post is based on a false premise. Korematsu was not reasonable. Read the dissenting opinions to learn why.

I thought you were ignoring me? So, I'm not quite sure how to respond to your "points".

No, it's not senility. It's an intentional campaign to spread absurd ideas throughout the culture in order to justify the most atrocious attacks on the best in this country. Jake, ain't senile - he reads the talking points and repeats them.

They don't have to make any sense. As long as they're endlessly repeated, they will become part of the common wisdom. Fools who catch a few scraps will hear them over and over again, and believe them. And repeat them to other fools. They put the edge of acceptable conversation at such an extreme, that the middle of the conversation itself takes on a proto-fascist quality.

Remember, the Nazis never gained a majority in Germany. But they did shift the conversation so that the center-right became supporters of the Enabling Act in 33.

I don't see any value in treating these "people" as reasonable conversational partners. They are propagandists, and by treating them as anything else, their speech is legitimized.

I don't think warrants should issue except on probable cause as well. The Commander-in-Chief doesn't need warrants to spy on the enemy during wartime though. See the distinction? These Venn diagrams wouldn't touch at all. Oh, yeah, since someone brought up an analogy to the Saturday Night Massacre all over again with a simple hospital visit, keep in mind that Comey was not a Special Prosecutor, there were no resignations or firings, no “Robert Bork” to authorize the program anyways, and the President went ahead and allowed DoJ to change what they needed to. Good luck with that canard though: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/watergate/articles/102173-2.htm