Letters to the Editor
-
Yoo and the Bigger Fish
I don't disagree with your analysis, Glenn, at all. But one thing about John Yoo is that he is teaching Constitutional Law at Berkeley. I've generally been an absolute supporter of academic freedom, and I'm not calling for his firing here.
But, is it impolitic to call for relieving him of the privilege of teaching first-year students Constitutional Law at a major public University (in MY state)?
And I would support actions to revoke his license to practice law in my state. To practice law in California
RULE X Moral Character
Section 1. Good Moral Character. Every applicant shall be of good moral character.
The term "good moral character" includes qualities of honesty, fairness, candor, trustworthiness, observance of fiduciary responsibility, respect for and obedience to the laws of the state and the nation and respect for the rights of others and for the judicial process. The applicant has the burden of establishing that he or she is of good moral character.
Sure, go for the bigger fish. But my fear is that all of them, every last one, is going to walk away and enjoy a life on the speaker circuit, with cushy jobs in the print and broadcast media, sitting on numerous boards and honored fellows at various think tanks, the whole nine yards of Life After Wholesale Crime for Republicans. It's been done before -- ref the criminals from the Nixon Administration and the felons from Iran Contra, Scooter Libby.
Will any of them, at any time, EVER pay a price for the crimes they have committed? I fear not.
-
Pardons for all
Yes on his way out the door Bush will issue blanket pardons for everyone in his administration. But who will pardon Bush? I guess he won't have to worry about anyone testifying against him in exchange for a lesser sentence. If everyone's been pardoned, there is no threat of jail time so that possibility is removed. So Bush is going to skate and we the taxpayers will pay for his pension, healthcare, and security til the day he dies. Isn't that great?
As for Yoo, it's disgusting that Berkeley is saying they won't fire him. I would think having a war criminal teach at your school, wouldn't be something you'd want. But since America has descended into the sewer, I guess it doens't matter anymore. Hell it's probably a draw to get conservative students to attend the school. Learn from the man who legalized torture. Republican scum will jump at the chance. It's also a handy defense against perceptions of liberal bias at Berkeley. We ain't liberal, we have war criminals on our staff. You can't get anymore anti-liberal then that.
-
"Yes on his way out the door Bush will issue blanket pardons for everyone in his administration. But who will pardon Bush?"
McCain would.
-
Good Post
GG: "But discussion of things like the 'Yoo Memos' has started to have the effect of obscuring the fact that those were really 'Bush Memos' and, ultimately 'American Memos'."
--This is one of the most poignant lines, and points, I've ever read on this post. Good writing, comrade!
-
They wouldn't of been covered
When I heard sound clips in the news earlier this week of people in SF protesting human rights abuses in China, I felt disgust that the protesters weren't also screaming about the abuses committed by their own government. Such moral blindness, ignorance, and hypocrisy. We've become a nation of Good Germans turning a blind eye to the administration's Little Eichmanns.-- lichen
I agree with your sentiment but would like to point something out. If those same protesters had signs protesting America's torture of detainees, the media wouldn't cover it. It's funny how the media can cover protests against the Olympic torch, but when hundreds of thousands march against the war no coverage. Or if it is covered at all, it's treated like a big joke. On the 5th annniversary of the Iraq war, CNN's only coverage was provided by Jeanne Moos. She's the reporter that does the tongue-in-cheek ain't that funny reports. Check out her report by clicking on my signature.
-
Right...
Glenn Greenwald's caution here is entirely in keeping with my understanding of the general campaign; it is not to punish John Yoo (as if that were ever going to happen), nor is it to initiate "war crimes" trials against more senior Bush Administration officials or an impeachment trial of the President or Vice President. (Ha ha!)
The real campaign has nothing to do with John Yoo. Nor does it have anything to do with serious national security policy.
It is all about the 2008 general election.
-
Low Hanging Fruit
Yoo is tempting because he is small and exposed enough that he is perhaps vulnerable (someone used the weak pack animal metaphor upthread). While I wholeheartedly agree that Yoo should not be the scapegoat that allows the rest of the criminals to go free, as happened at Abu Graib, nevertheless he could be the first juicy appetizer that stimulates the system to go after the entree. Have I mixed enough metaphors here?
What I'm trying to say, badly, is that enough anger and information could be generated while going after Yoo, that it becomes easier, both logistically and politically, to go after the real spearheads.
-
We must start somewhere to make these people accountable but we must not stop with Yoo.
We simply cannot allow these "unintentional" torture monsters to hold positions of influence whether as government officials or educators. Yoo may not have enough influence to protect himself from accountability as Cheney or Bush might have and therefore may be easier to make accountable but we must continue to make them all accountable. I do not see Yoo as becoming a scapegoat but more likely an example of what our society is willing to no longer tolerate. He must be used to show the DoJ that they are not untouchable when they use their positions to endorse criminal actions especially actions as vile as torturing another human being. I would hope his students would show complete and total "disrespect" to Yoo treating him as someone who should be on trial for war crimes as his "memos" resulted in the commission of war crimes.
-
@Silash "After all, we can trace TSP and its ilk back to things like Carnivore/TIA."
"After all, we can trace TSP and its ilk back to things like Carnivore/TIA."
For your edification (and others) *g*, you may want to revise your opinion by reading James Bambford's "The Puzzle Palace - Inside the National Security Agency" written in 1983.
TSP-like domestic surveillance without warrants by agencies within the Federal Government have been going on for over 60-70 years.
Read James Bambford's section on the "Huston Report" from July, 1970 where President Nixon signed off and approved the following:
"1. Interpretive Restraint on Communications Intelligence, National Security Council Intelligence Directive Number 6 (NSCID No. 6) is to be interpreted to permit NSA to program for the coverage of U.S. citizens using international facilities.
2. Electronic Surveillances and Penetrations. The intelligence community is directed to intensify coverage of individuals and groups in the United States who pose a major threat to the internal security...
You might also check this link (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0518-07.htm) out on the immediate predecessors of the TSP in the 1990s which include "ThinThread" and its follow-on successor, "Trailblazer".
And Trailblazer begat the TSP et al. Note that the TSP is but one component of this Administration's overall destruction of our 4th Amendment.