John Yoo Argues In Favor of Crushing Testicles
This shows how radical and sadistic the Bush administration is on torture. John Yoo wrote memos that took serious leaps in arguing what the president's executive powers were in regard to waging war and torture. His legal reasoning would be laughed out of most law schools "Some commentators have read the constitutional text differently. They argue that the vesting of the power to declare war gives Congress the sole authority to decide whether to make war." The Constitution clearly states that only Congress can "declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water."
Yoo's interview with human rights scholar Doug Cassel is a horrifying moment of candor. This is why Republicans don't say what they really think.
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.
Hat tip to the Heretik.
2 Comments:
I posted a link to that story back in January, but didn't have the mp3 sound bite.
There was widespread disbelief that a noted legal scholor could have actually taken this position. Law professor Michael Froomkin, (of discourse.net), was persuaded to believe that this conversation couldn't actually have taken place.
Unfortunately, it did.
Yoo's legal interpretation shaped the Bush administration's effort to remove all moral constraint against adding torture to America's arsenal.
Even the young children of our enemies may be tortured, if it should serve the president's purposes.
Is there no shame?
It's a very real statement.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home