Bush claims right to torture

This video is called Bush: Torture is Good for USA.

By Joe Kay:

2003 Justice Department memo justifies torture, presidential dictatorship

4 April 2008

On Tuesday, the Defense Department released a 2003 memo asserting the right of the US president to order the military to torture prisoners.

The memo is signed by then-Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo and is dated March 14, 2003, one week before the launch of the Iraq war. It is the latest memo to be released that argues for virtually unrestrained executive powers as part of the president’s “Commander-in-Chief” authority.

The memo should serve as a sharp warning about the type of barbaric methods the US government is employing and will continue to employ to suppress all international and domestic opposition.

The timing of the memo indicates that it was intended at least in part to provide a justification for the future torture of prisoners captured during the Iraq war.

Enhanced by Zemanta

2 thoughts on “Bush claims right to torture

  1. The conservative movement: From failure to threat

    Paul Craig Roberts • published May 25, 2008 12:15 am

    University of California-Berkeley tenured law professor John Yoo epitomizes the failure of the conservative movement in America. Known as “the torture professor,” Yoo penned the Department of Justice (sic) memos that gave a blank check to sadistic Americans to torture detainees at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. The human rights violations that John Yoo sanctioned destroyed America’s reputation and exposed the Bush regime as more inhumane than the Muslim terrorists. The acts that Yoo justified are felonies under U.S. law and war crimes under the Nuremberg standard.

    Yoo’s torture memos are so devoid of legal basis that his close friend and fellow conservative member of the Federalist Society Jack Goldsmith rescinded the memos when he was appointed head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.

    Yoo’s extremely shoddy legal work and the fervor with which he served the evil intentions of the Bush regime have led to calls from distinguished legal scholars for Yoo’s dismissal from Berkeley’s Boalt Hall Law School.

    I sympathize with the calls for Yoo’s dismissal. In the new edition of “The Tyranny of Good Intentions,” my coauthor and I write, “Liberty has no future in America if law schools provide legitimacy to those who would subvert the U.S. Constitution.”

    However, Yoo is but the tip of the iceberg. Scapegoating Yoo diverts attention from a neoconservative movement that has become the greatest enemy of the U.S. Constitution.

    In theory, conservatives adore the Constitution and seek to protect it with appeals to “original intent.” In practice, conservatives hate the Constitution as the protector of homosexuals and abortionists. Conservatives regard civil liberties as coddling devices for criminals and terrorists. They see the First Amendment as a foolish protection for sedition. The neoconservative magazine Commentary has called for The New York Times to be prosecuted for informing Americans that President Bush was illegally spying on them without warrants.

    The conservative assault on the U.S. Constitution is deeply entrenched. The Federalist Society, an organization of Republican attorneys from which the Republican Party chooses its Justice Department appointees and nominees to the federal bench, was organized as an assault on the checks and balances in the Constitution.

    The battle cry of the Federalist Society is “energy in the executive.” The society has its origin in Republican frustrations from the days when Republicans had a “lock on the presidency,” but had their agenda blocked by a Democratic Congress. The Federalist Society set about producing rationales for elevating the powers of the executive in order to evade the checks and balances the Founding Fathers wrote into the political system.

    With the Bush regime, we have seen President Nixon’s claim that “it’s not illegal if the president does it” carried to new heights. With the complicity of Democrats, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have appointed attorneys general who have elevated the presidency above the law.

    Just as liberals used judicial activism in the federal courts to achieve their agenda, the conservatives are using the Department of Justice to concentrate power in the executive branch in order to achieve their agenda. In America, the Constitution has no friends. It is always in the way of one agenda or the other and, thus, always under threat.

    For now, however, the threat is from the right. Conservatives have confused loyalty to country, which is loyalty to the Constitution, with loyalty to the Bush regime. It is purely a partisan loyalty based in emotion — “you are with us or against us.”

    When I was a young man, conservatives were frustrated that facts, reason and analysis could not penetrate liberal emotion. Today, facts, reason and analysis cannot penetrate conservative emotions. When I write a factual column describing how we have been deceived into wars that are clearly not in our interest, self-described conservatives indignantly write to me, “If you hate America so much, why don’t you move to Cuba!” Conservatives have become so intellectually pathetic that they regard my defense of civil liberties as an anti-American act.

    Today’s conservatives are so poorly informed that they cannot understand that to lose the Constitution is to lose the country.

    John Yoo was a willing accomplice of inhumane and illegal acts. But his greatest crime is that he was a willing participant in the Bush regime’s assault on the Constitution, which protects us all. If Yoo is to be held accountable, what about Bush, Cheney and his aides; Attorneys General Alberto Gonzales and Michael Mukasey; Yoo’s Justice Department boss, now federal judge, Jay Bybee; Donald Rumsfeld; Condoleezza Rice; Steve Hadley; and the legion of neocon Brownshirts that comprise the regime’s subcabinet? Is Yoo any more culpable than anyone else who served the corrupt, evil and anti-American Bush regime?

    The ease with which the Bush regime has run roughshod over the law and Constitution indicates that the Brownshirt mentality to which many Americans have succumbed has sufficient attractive power to cause a professor from one of the country’s great liberal institutions to serve the cause of tyranny. The conservative movement has produced a cadre of Brownshirts that might yet succeed in destroying the American Constitution.



  2. Pingback: US musician Laurie Anderson and the Iraq war | Dear Kitty. Some blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.