Do you have proof that there are NO AlQaeda or battlefield combatants affected by this ruling as Yoo indicates? If not, then your statement here is false and his is true. I would think it more likely that both of you are partially correct.

Actually it is you in his WSJ op-ed piece who writes as though every prisoner at Gitmo is an A-Qaida terrorist; GG was rebutting that demostrably false assertion, not claiming no one at Gitmo has Al-Qaida links.

--

As bad as torture and mistreatment of detainees is, especially on those who are totally innocent, what is even worse is the total disregard by Yoo and so many Busheviks about the vital importance of transparency and seeking the truth. When government leaders forget they are servants to the people and see their role as masters, who only care about grabbing and increasing their power, abuse becomes rampant and pervasive.

When government officials believe that they know better than the people and respond with “So what?” they have dishonored their office and service to our nation. I sense that the overwhelming legacy of the Busheviks will be a service to our nation because the citizenry is finally waking up to how much power has been lost and wants to regain it.

The exposure and prosecution of these abuses, can serve as a Truth Commission for our nation. The power of the Internet has provided the means for a major revolution of the people. The Busheviks’ foundation is crumbling one brick at a time because true leaders like Glenn are emerging and using the truth and transparency as their weapons. In the end, lying, deceit and propaganda can’t prevail if the people believe in fairness and the rule of law as a just means of seeking the truth.

Great article, Glenn. What's the likelihood that any of these points will make it onto the evening news, though - or even into the broadsheets?

It's pretty amazing that Yoo has the chutzpah to defend this situation. What's equally amazing to me is that so few Americans seem to have noticed that we've had our procedural due process rights taken away by executive fiat.

Let's review. Under the Bush doctrine (or should it be the Yoo doctrine or the Gonzalez doctrine?), the executive is capable of secretly and summarily determining that an American citizen is an enemy combatant (based, presumably, on the authority of anyone sufficiently close to the inner circle to pull the strings), secretly detain and expatriate that person (via "extraordinary rendition" and a secret CIA charter aircraft) on that basis, secretly and summarily "try" them (through a secret administrative process that doesn't even have the procedural protections of an "administrative" decision in the common law understanding of that term, and probably involves nothing more than a blanket decision applied informally to a category of detainees). They can be subject to cruel and unusual punishment (including torture, beatings, or even summary execution via the above methods) and indefinite imprisonment in a secret facility (the administration has admitted they hold prisoners at undisclosed locations and at known, but not officially recognized locations, e.g. Diego Garcia, prison ships). At no point from investigation to execution does the administration concede they are obligated to reveal anything about this process.

According to Yoo, who obviously hasn't gotten as far in the "Idiot's Guide to Constitutional Law" as _Marbury_ (or even whatever Blackstone's Commentaries had to say about the Habeas writ), the executive branch can do this if it wants to, and doesn't have to account to the judiciary, or respect Constitutional limitations.

All of which begs the question: if you don't have to know jack s- to get Yoo's job, where do the rest of us sign up for our fat Berkeley law professor salary?

We shouldn't be surprised that Yoo's thesis is transparently false and incoherent. Despite his academic credentials he's just a sleazy co-conspirator shamelessly trying to defend the indefensible.

Holy smokes! George F. Will, today's Washington Post:

Did McCain's extravagant condemnation of the court's habeas ruling result from his reading the 126 pages of opinions and dissents? More likely, some clever ignoramus convinced him that this decision could make the Supreme Court -- meaning, which candidate would select the best judicial nominees -- a campaign issue...

...The purpose of a writ of habeas corpus is to cause a government to release a prisoner or show through due process why the prisoner should be held. Of Guantanamo's approximately 270 detainees, many certainly are dangerous "enemy combatants." Some probably are not. None will be released by the court's decision, which does not even guarantee a right to a hearing. Rather, it guarantees only a right to request a hearing. Courts retain considerable discretion regarding such requests...

...He [McCain] who wants to reassure constitutionalist conservatives that he understands the importance of limited government should be reminded why the habeas right has long been known as "the great writ of liberty."

No state power is more fearsome than the power to imprison. Hence the habeas right has been at the heart of the centuries-long struggle to constrain governments, a struggle in which the greatest event was the writing of America's Constitution, which limits Congress's power to revoke habeas corpus to periods of rebellion or invasion...

http://tinyurl.com/5twvay

I think it would be very illuminating to sample the opinions of Yoo's students to see what they think of his teachings. As we know, college student bodies tend to me overwhelmingly liberal leaning. Given their "pre-Yoo" teachings about civics, the Constitution, and the rule-of-law, it would make for a great post or radio/podcast interview to hear what some of them think.

I strongly suspect that non-embedded, independent journalists were targeted for destruction/removal at the beginning of the war. al-Haj being just one case. The benefit of this to the US would become obvious--with a dazed and frightened media, the choreographed PR campaigns and attendent propaganda that followed. Viewed in this context, al-Haj's being "captured fighting the US" suggests the bankrupt falsehood of Yoo, and those higher up who own him and his work. He was no more fighting the US than those al Jazeera reporters who were targeted in Bagdhad in the opening days of the war.

DOHA Qatar — An Al-Jazeera journalist who previously worked for Fox News Channel was killed Tuesday in Baghdad, the Arabic-language channel reported.

The network claimed Tareq Ayoub was fatally wounded when U.S. bombers targeted and struck Al-Jazeera's Baghdad office Tuesday morning.

Ayoub, 35, was a Jordanian national. He was survived by his wife and 1-year-old daughter.

...

The Abu Dhabi TV office in Baghdad also was targeted by U.S. bombing, the station reported. Officials at Abu Dhabi TV were not available for comment.

...

Some Al-Jazeera employees felt the bombing might have been deliberate, for the station has been reporting extensively on the plight of Iraqi civilians and the number of casualties from U.S. bomb attacks.

Al-Jazeera correspondent Majed Abdul-Hadi said "astonishment, concern and fear" were gripping journalists after Al-Jazeera and Abu Dhabi offices were targeted.

"We are witnesses to what is happening. We are not a party," Abdul-Hadi said, speaking in the Iraqi capital. "The killing of colleague Tareq Ayoub and the bombardment of the Al-Jazeera office is to cover up the great crime which the Iraqi people are subjected to at the hands of the United States."

Chief editor Ibrahim Hilal, speaking from the station's headquarters in Doha, Qatar, said witnesses "saw the plane fly over twice before dropping the bombs. Our office is in a residential area and even the Pentagon knows its location."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,83499,00.html

****

11 Journalists Die in 21 Days of War

By TIMOTHY L. O'BRIEN

During the 43 days that comprised the Persian Gulf war in 1991, no journalists lost their lives in the conflict. In the current war in Iraq, now just 21 days old, 11 journalists have died, including three who were killed today in United States military strikes in Baghdad.

more

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/08/international/worldspecial/08CND-JOUR.html?ex=1213848000&en=933761e276a907a2&ei=5070

The highly suspicious behavior of the US in 2003 has been "hiding in plain sight" for years now, and I've never seen much in the way of investigation. Congress should look into the Pentagon's role in all this.