Skip to main content

Posted on behalf of David Swanson at, who is busy working to stop the War Supplemental Appropriations bill (more here.)

New York Times:

   A federal judge has ruled that John Yoo, a former Bush administration lawyer who wrote crucial memorandums justifying harsh interrogation techniques, will have to answer in court to accusations that his work led to a prisoner’s being tortured and deprived of his constitutional rights. The government had asked Judge Jeffrey S. White of Federal District Court in San Francisco to dismiss the case filed by Jose Padilla, an American citizen who spent more than three years in a military brig as an enemy combatant. Judge White denied most elements of Mr. Yoo’s motion and quoted a passage from the Federalist Papers that in times of war, nations, to be more safe, "at length become willing to run the risk of being less free."

John Yoo: Professor of Law at Boalt Hall School of Law in Berkeley, California, with house at 1241 Grizzly Peak, Berkeley, (UPDATE: Chased out of Berkeley and now at Chapman), (but a lawyer with the Pennsylvania bar from which he should be debarred and would be if enough people demanded it) counseled the White House on how to get away with war crimes, wrote this memo promoting presidential power to launch aggressive war, and claimed the power to decree that the federal statutes against torture, assault, maiming, and stalking do not apply to the military in the conduct of the war, and to announce a new definition of torture limiting it to acts causing intense pain or suffering equivalent to pain associated with serious physical injury so severe that death, organ failure or permanent damage resulting in loss of significant body functions will likely result. Yoo claimed in 2005 that a president has the right to enhance an interrogation by crushing the testicles of someone's child.

Judge's comment on Rove's citizen arrest in Iowa: "It's about time."


Where does your congressman's money come from?  Take a peek here!

Testicle-Crusher Yoo:

Originally posted to Ralph Lopez on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 11:32 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  That nasty, slithery, whispery noise you hear (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    followyourbliss, JL

    is the noose tightening around Yoo.

    Will he point at others and say "They really deserve it?" Stay tuned.

    Searching for intelligent life on the Internet. Please post a URL.

    by blue aardvark on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 11:36:03 AM PDT

  •  Not "debarred," "disbarred." nt (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Investigation! Indictment! Incarceration!

    by followyourbliss on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 11:39:06 AM PDT

  •  legally torture children (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dancewater, followyourbliss

    In a democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don't have to waste time voting.

    by allenjo on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 11:45:27 AM PDT

  •  John Yoo, War Criminal (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    As Jane Mayer reported two years ago in The New Yorker -- in which she quoted former Navy General Counsel Alberto Mora as saying that "the memo espoused an extreme and virtually unlimited theory of the extent of the President's Commander-in-Chief authority" -- it was precisely Yoo's torture-justifying theories, ultimately endorsed by Donald Rumsfeld, that were communicated to Gen. Geoffrey Miller, the commander of both Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib at the time of the most severe detainee abuses (the ones that are known).

    It is not, of course, news that the Bush administration adopted (and still embraces) legal theories which vest the President with literally unlimited power, including the power to break our laws. There are, though, several points worth noting as a result of the disclosure of this Memorandum:
    Justices Thomas and Scalia both sided with the administration and Thomas wrote (emphasis added):

    "[T]he experience of our wars," Winthrop 839, is rife with evidence that establishes beyond any doubt that conspiracy to violate the laws of war is itself an offense cognizable before a law-of-war military commission. . . . . In [World War II], the orders establishing the jurisdiction of military commissions in various theaters of operation provided that conspiracy to violate the laws of war was a cognizable offense. See Letter, General Headquarters, United States Army Forces, Pacific (Sept. 24, 1945), Record in Yamashita v. Styer, O. T. 1945, No. 672, pp. 14, 16 (Exh. F) (Order respecting the "Regulations Governing the Trial of War Criminals" provided that "participation in a common plan or conspiracy to accomplish" various offenses against the law of war was cognizable before military commissions).

    In a democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don't have to waste time voting.

    by allenjo on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 11:51:48 AM PDT

  •  Tipped, recc'd, bookmarked for future use. (0+ / 0-)

    Thanks for the videos.

  •  Your Article Has Been Added (0+ / 0-)

    Your article has been added to Framed: Prosecuting Officials for Crimes in Dkosopedia.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site