Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

John Yoo is an accessory to war crimes

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:03 AM
Original message
John Yoo is an accessory to war crimes
Edited on Wed Mar-04-09 10:21 AM by Solly Mack
John Yoo attempts to frame his involvement in the Bush administration's war crimes as nothing more than a lawyer serving his client.

"These memos I wrote were not for public consumption. They lack a certain polish, I think would have been better to explain government policy rather than try to give unvarnished, straight-talk legal advice. I certainly would have done that differently, but I don't think I would have made the basic decisions differently.


I think the job of a lawyer is to give a straight answer to a client"



A Timeline

US invaded Afghanistan on October 7, 2001


November 13, 2001 - President Bush authorizes trials by military commission.

(e) To protect the United States and its citizens, and for the effective conduct of military operations and prevention of terrorist attacks, it is necessary for individuals subject to this order pursuant to section 2 hereof to be detained, and, when tried, to be tried for violations of the laws of war and other applicable laws by military tribunals.

From this we know people are/will being/be detained.

"(f) Given the danger to the safety of the United States and the nature of international terrorism, and to the extent provided by and under this order, I find consistent with section 836 of title 10, United States Code, that it is not practicable to apply in military commissions under this order the principles of law and the rules of evidence generally recognized in the trial of criminal cases in the United States district courts."

From this we know there will be a new thinking applied to the detainees. That it's just not "practicable" to grant the same rights usually found in military tribunals/commissions




December 27, 2001 - Defense Secretary Rumsfeld announces plan to send prisoners to GTMO.

We've now been in Afghanistan since October - over 2 months. Where are the detainees at this point?


Let's look at a timeline of David Hicks

9 December 2001:

An unnamed Australian twenty-six year old Caucasian male (later known to be David Hicks) is reported to have been captured by the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan.

14 December 2001:

David Hicks is to be transferred to US custody. The Australian Government intends to do whatever is necessary to bring him to justice if Mr Hicks has committed a crime against Australian law.

17 December 2001:

The Northern Alliance transfers David Hicks to US forces.

David Hicks withdraws claims

"As part of the plea bargain, Hicks also withdrew claims he had been beaten by US forces after his capture in Afghanistan (in 2001) and that he had been sedated before learning of the charges against him."

David Hicks claims abuse by US military

24 December 2001:

A joint team of AFP and ASIO officers begins interviewing David Hicks aboard a US naval ship.

2 January 2002:

Australian officials complete their week-long interrogation of David Hicks on board the USS Peleliu in the Indian Ocean.


3 January 2002:

David Hicks is transferred from the USS Peleliu to the USS Bataan, an amphibious naval assault ship

Prison ships, torture claims, and missing detainees

"The US has admitted that the Bataan and Peleliu were used as prison ships between December 2001 and January 2002"

13 January 2002:

Mr Hicks is confirmed as having landed yesterday at Camp X-Ray, Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.


17 January 2002:

The Australian Government confirms that David Hicks is being held in US military custody and accepts that this is appropriate. Access to Mr Hicks is assured and advice is given that he is held in humane conditions.


US faces prison ship allegations

US accused of holding terror suspects on prison ships

"Ships that are understood to have held prisoners include the USS Bataan and USS Peleliu. A further 15 ships are suspected of having operated around the British territory of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, which has been used as a military base by the UK and the Americans

According to research carried out by Reprieve, the US may have used as many as 17 ships as "floating prisons" since 2001. Detainees are interrogated aboard the vessels and then rendered to other, often undisclosed, locations, it is claimed"

"Even on the (usually-dubious) assumption that these secret detainees may be held as prisoners of war, Article 22 of the Third Geneva Convention states that "Prisoners of war may be interned only in premises located on land." These provisions were included in the 1949 Conventions in response to the appalling mistreatment of American prisoners of war by the Japanese, who shipped thousands of American prisoners to labour camps in the Philippines, Thailand, Korea and elsewhere under decks in vermin-infested ships. (Indeed, many of these prisoners were killed when allied armed forces torpedoed the unmarked prison ships where they were held.)"

Extraordinary Rendition:

"According to the flight plans, the first 23 prisoners to arrive at Guantanamo including another British citizen, Feroz Abbasi, then 21, and an Australian, David Hicks had arrived at the American naval base in Cuba after flying from the Moron airbase in Spain." (January 11,2002)

So from December 9, 2001 until January 11, 2002, Hicks goes from Afghanistan to 2 different US naval ships to Spain and then on to GTMO. One month - which included multiple interrogations


Spain 'authorised' CIA rendition flights

" Spain has previously denied all knowledge of "secret stopover" flights by CIA planes transporting terror suspects to the US military base in Guantnamo Bay, Cuba.

But a "top secret" document leaked to Spanish daily newspaper El Pais shows that permission was sought by the US from Spain's Foreign Ministry in early 2002.

The request was communicated to Josep Pique, then foreign minister, hours before a CIA flight landed at Moron airbase in southwest Spain, the newspaper claimed."

David Hicks arrives in GTMO on a flight from Moron airbase in Spain in early 2002.


December 28, 2001 - Legal advisors inform President Bush GTMO is probably beyond reach of federal courts.

"One Justice Department memo, written for the CIA late in the fall of 2001, put an extremely narrow interpretation on the international anti-torture convention, allowing the agency to use a whole range of techniquesincluding sleep deprivation, the use of phobias and the deployment of "stress factors"in interrogating Qaeda suspects. The only clear prohibition was "causing severe physical or mental pain"a subjective judgment that allowed for "a whole range of things in between," said one former administration official familiar with the opinion. On Dec. 28, 2001, the Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel weighed in with another opinion, arguing that U.S. courts had no jurisdiction to review the treatment of foreign prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. The appeal of Gitmo from the start was that, in the view of administration lawyers, the base existed in a legal twilight zoneor "the legal equivalent of outer space," as one former administration lawyer described it. And on Jan. 9, 2002, John Yoo of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel coauthored a sweeping 42-page memo concluding that neither the Geneva Conventions nor any of the laws of war applied to the conflict in Afghanistan."

So in the fall of 2001, they were already allowing the CIA to torture people...I mean, use "enhanced interrogation" on people...

And ALL of this long before the infamous Yoo memo of March 2003....and well before the Bybee "torture memo" of August 2002.


And just one more person - among many - tortured BEFORE Yoo's March 2003 memo was written

Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded by the CIA in March 2002 - a full year before the Yoo memo was issued, and 5 months before the Bybee "torture memo" was issued.


John Yoo was attempting to provide legal cover for crimes already committed














December 28, 2001 - Legal advisors inform President Bush GTMO is probably beyond reach of federal courts.

"One Justice Department memo, written for the CIA late in the fall of 2001, put an extremely narrow interpretation on the international anti-torture convention, allowing the agency to use a whole range of techniquesincluding sleep deprivation, the use of phobias and the deployment of "stress factors"in interrogating Qaeda suspects. The only clear prohibition was "causing severe physical or mental pain"a subjective judgment that allowed for "a whole range of things in between," said one former administration official familiar with the opinion. On Dec. 28, 2001, the Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel weighed in with another opinion, arguing that U.S. courts had no jurisdiction to review the treatment of foreign prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. The appeal of Gitmo from the start was that, in the view of administration lawyers, the base existed in a legal twilight zoneor "the legal equivalent of outer space," as one former administration lawyer described it. And on Jan. 9, 2002, John Yoo of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel coauthored a sweeping 42-page memo concluding that neither the Geneva Conventions nor any of the laws of war applied to the conflict in Afghanistan."





January 9, 2002 - Legal advisors (Yoo) inform William Haynes, Defense Department General Counsel, laws of war do not restrain President Bush, and Geneva Conventions do not protect prisoners seized during war on terror.


January 11, 2002 - First detainees arrive at GTMO. David Hicks is among the group.

January 18, 2002 - President Bush decides detainees' standing as terrorists disqualifies them from prisoner-of-war protection under the Geneva conventions

January 25, 2002 Memo from Alberto Gonzlaes reaffirms the thinking that the GC doesn't apply.]

March 14, 2003 - Infamous Yoo Memo
Part 2 of memo


Definition of Accessory: Aiding or contributing in a secondary way or assisting in or contributing to as a subordinate.

In Criminal Law, contributing to or aiding in the commission of a crime. One who, without being present at the commission of an offense, becomes guilty of such offense, not as a chief actor, but as a participant, as by command, advice, instigation, or concealment; either before or after the fact or commission.

One who aids, abets, commands, or counsels another in the commission of a crime.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
1. yes he is
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. I agree!
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baju Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #1
82. Agree
I am not from USA, but I agree too

baju
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
2. Kick and recommend
:applause:

Masterful post, solly!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. Thank you, BurtWorm
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
3. In the end it is just a legal opinion
If we move into the area of arresting lawyers for their legal opinions, it is a slippery slope.

It would be interesting to analyze it for malpractice, though. A lawyer giving wrong legal advice. The damages would be to Bushco, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Then the US owes some German lawyers an apology and more
Edited on Wed Mar-04-09 10:16 AM by Solly Mack
At the end of World War II, the U.S. took a different view in one narrow area. When the legal advice had to do with the treatment of detainees in wartime, the U.S. argued, lawyers had to adhere closely to the law or face prosecution. In one case, two German Justice Ministry lawyers were charged and sentenced to 10 years in prison for giving advice that allowed the creation of a special internment system for suspected insurgents.

We either hold to our ideals, our laws and our treaties - or we don't.

Yoo, and the rest, weren't just lawyers - they were DOJ/government lawyers - tasked with upholding the Constitution. They are not supposed to be about figuring out ways to break the law and violate the Constitution...regardless of what some President thinks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. They seemed to be looking for a way around the Constitution
Or to squeeze the words until they allowed for unlimited detention, etc.

Which is ridiculous to the point where even the * Administration did not carry it out.

The First Amendment is clear, and there is just no way around it.

Scalia should be considered similarly. His dissents were full of "but it's the war on terror!" arguments that have no legal validity. The Constitution simply does not provide for any suspension of its provisions, regardless of what we may be afraid of.

The closest they can come is habeas corpus that can be suspended in wartime. The SCOTUS found that even during the Civil War, it could not be suspended. They made some attempt to argue the battlefield for the War on Terra included the entire planet as their justification for detaining Padilla. But that one did not fly with anybody, except maybe Scalia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vattel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #14
69. Scalia's dissents were not
full of "but it's the war on terror!" arguments. You're confusing him with the cartoon. In Hamdi v Rumsfeld, his dissent (he was joined by Stevens) was on the far left in terms of trying to protect civil liberties against abuses of executive power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newtothegame Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #3
18. See I kinda agree...
there was a post on this yesterday. I don't understand how you can be arrested for a memo giving an opinion; I could write a memo and people wouldn't give two shits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #3
19. No. It's complicity.
Big difference from best advice which is what he should have been giving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #19
28. True. One need not be a lawyer even to know the Constitution
just does not allow these things. Yoo was trying to cobble together a rationale for them from words that clearly did not allow for it.

They knew the US could not torture. So they tried to define waterboarding as "not torture." Typical repuke legalistic, technical thinking, untempered by any concepts of justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newtothegame Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #28
44. I just finished up "1984." These memos are total thoughtcrime. Executions anyone? n/t
Edited on Wed Mar-04-09 04:17 PM by newtothegame
ed for sp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #44
45. And this is why I remain pro-death penalty.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billybob537 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
4. "They lack a certain polish"
Yeah yeah "tell it to the WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. I wish!
"tell it to the WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
47. where is the ABA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MiniMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
5. Yoo Who?
:hi: :hide:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. You, dahlink! I see you there!!
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:18 AM
Response to Original message
9. knr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. TY, spanone
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
13. Great post
K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Thank you, malaise
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lsewpershad Donating Member (964 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
16. Darn right
he is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. You can say that again!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
20. I prefer the term 'enabler.'
It was his 'legal' opinions that enabled Bush Gang to use them as a fig leaf for their illegal policies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. That works for me too
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. The term accessory is valid too
Edited on Wed Mar-04-09 11:16 AM by formercia
since he is more than likely a co-conspirator in their treason. Branding him as an enabler is easy to prove, since the connection is more obvious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
specimenfred1984 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 11:15 AM
Response to Original message
23. K&R, so is everyone who tries to cover his crimes up or ignore them
along with the rest of the war criminals: Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Powell, Gonzales, Libby.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. No arguments from me on that
At all

You can't just wash your hands of war crimes then pretend your hands are clean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
25. Yoo Betcha!
Not the only one, in fact, I think there should be conspiracy charges as well. If only we could get a grand jury convened to examine this.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. I agree - conspiracy charges all around!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
27. John Yoo needs to be in prison for a long, long time. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. I think so. Him and many others
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
30. He and the crime family he belongs to, a.k.a.
Republicans!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. Good number of enablers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
31. Yoo provided legal cover for a crime that was already committed.
Accessory after the fact.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. Yep
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
34. Sure he is
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. I dunno. That sounds kinda ambiguous, madokie.
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Soylent Brice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
36. BIG K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Thank you, Soylent Brice
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orwellian_Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
38. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. Thank you, OG
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
40. K&R
Thanks for this timeline, and the links

:thumbsup:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. You're welcome, leftstreet
and Thank you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pleah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
41. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. Thank you, pleah
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tblue37 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #43
46. k&r
I like the post--and I am still grateful that you gave me my first heart when I had none!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 04:18 AM
Response to Reply #46
53. Hey tblue37
Thank you!

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tblue37 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 07:39 AM
Response to Reply #53
63. I never forget my friends! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
48. I believe those who have taken one of his classes
Edited on Wed Mar-04-09 10:25 PM by proud patriot
should have their credits revoked or granted a free
class on Constitutional Law to pass .

Yoo is a worthless PITA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 04:26 AM
Response to Reply #48
58. He is that
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
49. K & R n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 04:23 AM
Response to Reply #49
57. Thank you, c_w!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
50. Indeed, my friend.
NT!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 04:23 AM
Response to Reply #50
56. Thanks, Zhade
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 01:45 AM
Response to Original message
51. i.e "a tool"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 04:22 AM
Response to Reply #51
55. a very handy one ...and oh, so willing and eager
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #55
78. and slimy. I don't invest in hating any of these monsters but Yoo is a slimeball of the nth degree
Unbelievable how someone that smart could be that stupid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ddeclue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 01:49 AM
Response to Original message
52. I thought he was consiglieri to the war ciminals...
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 04:21 AM
Response to Reply #52
54. That's a good word for it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 04:40 AM
Response to Original message
59. you rock!
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 05:11 AM
Response to Reply #59
61. Thank you, G_j!
I think :yourock: too
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 04:45 AM
Response to Original message
60. Great OP !!!
If I could nominate this 100 times, I would.

Thank you for posting this. It is really appreciated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 05:13 AM
Response to Reply #60
62. Hey H2O Man
Thank you

:)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 07:43 AM
Response to Original message
64. what a filthy man.
Edited on Thu Mar-05-09 07:44 AM by bdamomma
"These memos I wrote were not for public consumption. They lack a certain polish, I think would have been better to explain government policy rather than try to give unvarnished, straight-talk legal advice. I certainly would have done that differently, but I don't think I would have made the basic decisions differently.



He wouldn't have made the basic decisions differently? he is an accomplice to the bush crimes.

very good Solly!! :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #64
65. Thanks, bdamomma
It says a lot about his mentality that he can be so detached from his words..and the crimes those words gave cover to
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
66. K
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nichomachus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
67. The problem I see in all this
is that you can't convict someone of an accessory to a crime until you're first convicted someone of the crime. You can't be an accessory to something that doesn't exist.

So, to talk about Yoo as an accessory, you would first need to convict the war criminal. Until that happens, this is all just talk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #67
68. None of that changes his role or how I can talk about him or his role.
He aided and abetted the Bush administration - even without a conviction - that doesn't change what his actions amount to. No, it's not a legal pronouncement - but then I can't just single-handily make those. But I'm all for prosecutions and a trial that can. Still, nothing prevents me from calling Yoo an accessory or the Bush administration war criminals. Everything written about the Bush administration's crimes have been "just all talk" (by your standard) - and I'm happy to be in the company of those people doing the "talking".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nichomachus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #68
71. See -- I refer to him differently
I think he is a war criminal -- not just an accessory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #71
73. I'd agree actually
I find him to be just as guilty

and maybe finding him just as guilty begins by showing how he aided and abetted in war crimes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Senator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #67
70. Not a problem at all
Accessories plead guilty and become witnesses. That's how it works.

It's not "just talk" when you're talking jail time -- or extradition to The Hague. Even something as simple as disbarrment can often cause crooks to "see the wisdom" of coming clean.

--

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 09:39 AM
Response to Original message
72. Why is this guy even teaching his foul interpretation of law
at Berkeley. Too bad we couldn't get him fired.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #72
74. That galls me too
Look how many of them still wear the cloak of respectability. America - where war criminals can teach your kids! Tomorrow's leaders learning from today's war criminals.

And it doesn't seem to bother a great many. :(

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #74
75. doesn't that school have a code of ethics?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #72
79. He's their only specialist in Slimeball Studies
:thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pmorlan1 Donating Member (763 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
76. Great Post
Thanks for your post. Until I read your post I wasn't aware that the USS Bataan was used as a prison ship. I was so outraged by this that I wrote a diary about it at Oxdown Gazette and Daily Kos.


http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/4019

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/3/5/9415/68182/881/7...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #76
77. The first I learned of it I was just amazed
Edited on Thu Mar-05-09 11:39 AM by Solly Mack
Something named Bataan...a prison ship

The irony...

Checking out your links - Thanks for posting them!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pmorlan1 Donating Member (763 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #77
80. Thanks Again
Hey - my thanks to you for letting me and others know about this. I don't know how I missed hearing about this when it first came out because I've followed the torture of prisoners pretty closely. By the way in my original diary I referenced your post and provided a link to your piece but I failed to identify you by name. I have corrected that now. Sorry about that. I don't write very many diaries so it was an unintentional mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aldo Donating Member (297 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
81. Disbar him and lift the credentials of any law school that employs him
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
83. Ya think?
:freak: :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #83
84. I try to avoid it actually
:P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Aug 29th 2014, 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC