Shame on Yoo
The New York Times reports today that soon after 9/11, “President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying.â€
Who provided the legal justification to spy (perhaps illegally) on Americans without judicial oversight? None other than former Justice Department official John Yoo. It’s not the first time Yoo has advised the administration to push moral, legal and ethical boundaries:
Yoo Argued Interrogation Wasn’t Torture Unless It Resulted In Organ Failure or Death: Yoo also wrote an infamous torture memo which argued that interrogation techniques only constitute torture if they are “equivalent in intensity to…organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death.” The Bush administration was forced to repudiate that memo once it became public. Yoo continues to defend it, saying the new torture definition “makes it harder to figure out how the torture statute applies to specific interrogation methods.â€
Yoo Argued President Bush Didn’t Need To Ask Congress Before Invading Iraq: Yoo has also argued that “President Bush didn’t need to ask Congress for permission to invade Iraq.” The 1973 War Powers Resolution, according to Yoo, is “irrelevant.†Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice echoed the argument when she told a congressional committee that “the president has the right to attack Syria, without congressional approval, if he deems that a necessary move in the war on terror.”
Yoo Argued Geneva Conventions Do Not Apply to Detainees: Thanks to Yoo’s legal work, the Bush administration justified the creation of a new category of detainees: “illegal enemy combatants.†“Yoo and other Administration lawyers began advising President Bush (after 9/11) that he did not have to comply with the Geneva Conventions in handling detainees in the war on terror,†the New Yorker reported earlier this year.
Although Yoo is now a law professor, his views remain influential in the Bush administration. Maybe it’s time to stop taking his advice.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Come to my blog and read my thoughts on this issue:
http://www.guntotingliberal.blogspot.com
December 16th, 2005 at 11:40 amYoo scumbag!
December 16th, 2005 at 11:40 amSeriously, these people (and I use the term loosely) need to be subjected to their own insane theories and fascist regulations…
December 16th, 2005 at 11:45 amWho the F@#$ is this guy? and where the hell did he come from. I got an idea. Lets take him to an undisclosed location and interrogate him to find out. We will see how he likes his own methods.
December 16th, 2005 at 11:46 am
December 16th, 2005 at 11:46 amscrew yoo…and the bush he’s hiding behind too…
December 16th, 2005 at 11:47 amMaybe it itme for disbarring this guy from practicing law, let alone teach it.
Nothing that he has advised on is legal, it is time remove him from practice. Maybe he will write books on how to destroy America by using the law as cover.
December 16th, 2005 at 11:48 amcan we clone Patrick Fitzgerald?
Yoo also teaches at that bastion of progressivism, Berkeley Law.
You can mail him here: yoo@law.berkeley.edu
Happy Holidays!
December 16th, 2005 at 11:50 amThere is no longer a constitutional republic, so the President can do any dern fool thing he wants. He does.
His decision to go to war wasn’t a good one. He is responsible for the mess in Iraq. Who else can be blamed?
December 16th, 2005 at 11:52 amCRIMINAL PROSECUTION SHOULD INCLUDE NY TIMES.
At the Nuremberg Hearing, the tribunal includes propagandists who supported the Nazi regime.
When we finally get control of our government again, we need to include the owners and editors of the NY Times (which also now owns the Boston Globe as well as many other media outlets).
———
On the second page of a report which reveals the White House engaged in warantless domestic spying, the New York Times reveals that it held the story for a full year at the request of the Bush Administration, RAW STORY can reveal.
The Times also reveals that senior members of Congress from both parties knew about Bush’s decision to spy on Americans who were making international calls or emails, without warrants.
Further, the Times notes that they have omitted information in the article they did write, agreeing with the Bush Administration that the information could be useful for terrorists. Excerpts from the Times’ article follow.
http://rawstory.com/ news/ 2005/ New_York_Times_admits_it_held_1215.html
Let’s get work quickly before they manage to control the internet also.
December 16th, 2005 at 11:53 amCome to my blog and read my thoughts on this issue:
http://www.guntotingliberal.blogspot.com
Comment by gun toting liberal
Can I bring my bat?
December 16th, 2005 at 12:03 pmThis guy sounds like he could find legal justification to detain all anti-war protestors. I’m sure that is in the not too distant future……
December 16th, 2005 at 12:07 pmT2005–you’re not far off. check out the MSNBC story from a few days ago. DoD has increased its domestic intelligence gathering capabilities and has been investigating peaceful anti-war protestors on the grounds that they constitute a “threat” to the military.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10454316/
December 16th, 2005 at 12:25 pmAnd i,ll Wager that YOO IS ALSO A Treasonist and BETRAYER OF his OWN RACE!
December 16th, 2005 at 12:25 pmLook, I can guess what most here think of conservative Blogs in general … but in case any care … here’s an excerpt from one
“So I guess the headline is not that President Bush took extraordinary measures to protect Americans in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, but that the Times chose to disclose classified information.”
“The Times attempts to create a national uproar over something called a “special collection program” launched by the National Security Agency sometime after the Sept. 11 attacks. The opening paragraphs give the alarming impression that the agency is spying broadly on “Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying.”
“Those who actually read the piece will note that the paper must grudgingly acknowledge that it is talking about the NSA’s monitoring of international communications (e-mails, cellphone calls, etc.) only … the agency still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.”
“Not until the 16th paragraph, some 1,110 words into the massive piece, does the paper tell you the important context in which the program was created and used …”
What the agency calls a “special collection program” began soon after the Sept. 11 attacks, as it looked for new tools to attack terrorism. The program accelerated in early 2002 after the Central Intelligence Agency started capturing top Qaeda operatives overseas, including Abu Zubaydah, who was arrested in Pakistan in March 2002. The C.I.A. seized the terrorists’ computers, cellphones and personal phone directories, said the officials familiar with the program. The N.S.A. surveillance was intended to exploit those numbers and addresses as quickly as possible, the officials said.
In addition to eavesdropping on those numbers and reading e-mail messages to and from the Qaeda figures, the N.S.A. began monitoring others linked to them, creating an expanding chain. While most of the numbers and addresses were overseas, hundreds were in the United States, the officials said.
“As a result of the NSA program (buried down in the 11th paragraph) we learn that the terrorist plot involving convicted al Qaeda operative Iyman Faris was uncovered … possibly saving untold lives.”
“Here is some info about Faris’s activities not included in the Times’ piece, via the Justice Department’s October 2003 press release upon Faris’ sentencing to 20 years in prison for providing material support to terrorists …”
Faris has admitted traveling to a training camp in Afghanistan in late 2000, where he was introduced to Usama bin Laden. Faris admitted that during a meeting in late 2000, one of bin Laden’s men asked him about “ultralight†airplanes, and said al Qaeda was looking to procure an “escape airplane.†Faris admitted that about two months later, he performed an Internet search at a café in Karachi, Pakistan and obtained information about ultralights, which he turned over to a friend for use by al Qaeda.
Faris also admitted that during a visit to Karachi in early 2002, he was introduced to a senior operational leader in al Qaeda. A few weeks later, the operational leader asked what he could do for al Qaeda. Faris said he discussed his work as a truck driver in the United States, his trucking routes and deliveries for airport cargo planes, in which the al Qaeda leader said he was interested because cargo planes would hold “more weight and more fuel.â€
According to Faris’ admission, the operational leader then told Faris that al Qaeda was planning two simultaneous attacks in New York City and Washington, D.C. The al Qaeda leader spoke with Faris about destroying a bridge in New York City by severing its suspension cables, and tasked Faris with obtaining the equipment needed for that operation. The leader also explained that al Qaeda was planning to derail trains, and asked Faris to procure the tools for that plot as well.
Faris admitted that upon returning to the United States from Pakistan in April 2002, he researched “gas cutters†- the equipment for severing bridge suspension cables - and the New York City bridge on the Internet. Between April 2002 and March 2003, he sent several coded messages through another individual to his longtime friend in Pakistan, indicating he had been unsuccessful in his attempts to obtain the necessary equipment. Faris admitted to traveling to New York City in late 2002 to examine the bridge, and said he concluded that the plot to destroy the bridge by severing cables was unlikely to succeed because of the bridge’s security and structure. In early 2003, he sent a message that “the weather is too hot†- a coded message indicating that the bridge plot was unlikely to succeed.
“The Bush administration argues that the NSA program that helped uncover the Faris plot was necessary because officials needed to act quickly on large caches of information, such as the data found after the Zubaydah capture in March 2002. Normally, the government obtains court orders to monitor such information from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. But the window of opportunity to exploit the names, numbers, and addresses of those associated with the top terrorist leaders was obviously small.”
“Contrary to the impression the piece and headline leave of an administration acting in complete secrecy and with total impunity and disregard for civil liberties, the reporters reveal that Vice President Dick Cheney, then-NSA director Gen. Michael V. Hayden of the Air Force, and then-CIA director George Tenet called a meeting with Congressional leaders from both parties to brief them on the program.”
“The administration trusted that the briefing would remain confidential for the sake of national security. Obviously, they trusted too much …”
December 16th, 2005 at 12:26 pmDoD has increased its domestic intelligence gathering capabilities and has been investigating peaceful anti-war protestors on the grounds that they constitute a “threat†to the military
Maybe so … but that’s not what this NSA program was about … it was international communications only.
December 16th, 2005 at 12:28 pmYOO IS CHINESE!
What is He doing in America?
December 16th, 2005 at 12:28 pm#17 The better question is what are you doing here?
December 16th, 2005 at 12:31 pmYOO IS ALSO A Treasonist and BETRAYER OF his OWN COUNTRY ???CHINA?
December 16th, 2005 at 12:31 pmI’m surprized this ass wasn’t tapped for a supreme court nomination. I agree with #7. If he gave counsil that was illegal, perhaps he should be investigated for disbarrment. Is there some bar association we could partition?
December 16th, 2005 at 12:32 pmhttp://www.law.berkeley.edu/faculty/yooj/#Professional
December 16th, 2005 at 12:36 pmGroomed by the Right: John Yoo is the creature of a powerful and wealthy right-wing legal organization, the Federalist Society. Founded in the early 1980s, the Federalist Society is now the ticket to fame, fortune and political influence for right-wing lawyers.
December 16th, 2005 at 12:40 pmhttp://zfacts.com/
December 16th, 2005 at 12:41 pmI have been warning about this guy for months ,how off the wall and dangerous he is . I am not surprised that Bush espoused those EVIL views , what i am surprised is that he teaches at Berkeley. Shame on Yoo ! Shame on Berkeley !
December 16th, 2005 at 12:45 pmTeaching false premises of constitutional law should be sufficient cause for dismissal
Teaching false premises of constitutional law should be sufficient cause for dismissal
On what basis can you state this? Your understanding of Constitutional Law? Opinion? I have no problem with you disagreeing with him, but to call for his dismissal for what amounts to “I think he’s wrong” is ridiculous.
To review … here’s Woo’s qualifications
Education
Yale Law School, J.D. 1992
Harvard College, A.B. 1989, summa cum laude, American History
Current Position
Professor of Law, 1999-present
Acting Professor of Law, 1993-99
Director, Advanced Law Program (LL.M and J.S.D. degree programs), 2004-present.
Experience
Visiting Scholar, American Enterprise Institute, 2003-present
Visiting Professor, University of Chicago Law School, 2003
Office of Legal Counsel, United States Department of Justice, 2001-03
Judiciary Committee, United States Senate
General Counsel, 1995-96
Justice Clarence Thomas, United States Supreme Court
Law clerk, 1994-95
Judge Laurence Silberman, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit
Law clerk, 1992-93
I’d say it’s safe to assume that, while you may disagree with him, he certainly has the education and experience to substantiate his interpretation of constitution law … what substantiates your interpretation …. ?
December 16th, 2005 at 12:53 pmThe office that should be heading the investigation against the NSA should be the Department of Justice, headed by the Attorney General, but, in all likelihood, Alberto Gonzales is in the hip pocket of the Bush Administration, making it highly unlikely that Gonzales will move against them.
December 16th, 2005 at 12:55 pm#25 - Then Yoo should know better.
December 16th, 2005 at 12:57 pmWho is John Yoo?
Groomed by the Right: John Yoo is the creature of a powerful and wealthy right-wing legal organization, the Federalist Society. Founded in the early 1980s, the Federalist Society is now the ticket to fame, fortune and political influence for right-wing lawyers.
Yoo’s career shows its enormous influence. According to the Wall Street Journal (9/12/2005), Yoo joined in 1989 while in law school. “With help from Federalists, he snared prestigious clerkships: first with Judge Laurence Silberman, an appellate jurist in Washington much admired on the right, and then with Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. A good word from the justice, Mr. Yoo says, helped him obtain a top staff job with Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, then chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. While on Sen. Hatch’s staff, Mr. Yoo clashed with Democrats over Clinton judicial nominees. In 2000, he aided the Republican legal contingent that helped win the decisive electoral brawl in Florida.”
“Original Intent” and the Law: Like Scalia and Thomas, Yoo belongs to the “original intent” school of constitutional interpretation. They believe not only that the Constitution should be interpreted according to the intentions of its authors but that they can divine what those intentions were. As noted by the Wall Street Journal (9/12/2005), “even by the standards of elite Washington legal circles, Mr. Yoo earned a reputation for what Justice Thomas calls ‘a very high level of confidence in conclusions he might reach’… Mr. Yoo had an unusual degree of certainty that he knew the ‘original intent’ of the Constitution’s authors, Justice Thomas says. ‘We’d kid him sometimes that he was right there at the founding.’”
“Original Intent” and the Yoo Doctrine: Yoo uses the original intent doctrine to argue that the Consitution’s founding fathers intended the President to have vast, inherent powers as commander-in-chief, justifying the Bush Administration’s handling of prisoners at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib and use of torture and assassination as weapons in the war against terrorism.
Bio:Professor of Law, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California at Berkeley, 1993-present
December 16th, 2005 at 12:59 pmVisiting Scholar, American Enterprise Institute, 2003-present
Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, Department of Justice (under John Ashcroft, 2001-2003
General Counsel, Senate Judiciary Committee (under Orrin Hatch, 1995-1996
Law Clerk, Supreme Court (under Clarence Thomas), 1994-1995
Law Clerk, U.S. Court of Appeals, Washington, DC (under Laurence Silberman, controversial right-wing judge, veteran of Nixon and Reagan administrations), 1992-1993
J.D., Yale Law School, 1992
A.B., Harvard College, summa cum laude, American History, 1989
Yes, Gonzales is definitely in Bush’s back pocket.
December 16th, 2005 at 12:59 pmFederalist Society
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, most frequently called simply the Federalist Society, began at Harvard Law School, University of Chicago Law School and Yale Law School in 1982 as a student organization that challenged what it saw as the orthodox liberal ideology found in most law schools. In its Statement of Principles, the Society states that it is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of powers is central to the United States’ constitutional form of government, and that the role of the judicial branch is to say what the law is, not what the law should be.
The Society currently has chapters at 145 United States law schools, including all of those ranked in the top 20 [1]. The Federalist Society also serves as a parent organization for conservatives and libertarians who are interested in the current state of the legal order, though there is no ideological “litmus test” for membership [2].
December 16th, 2005 at 12:59 pmzFact: In November 2001, the President’s Council of Economic Advisors 140.9 million jobs for July 2005. How many million jobs short are we? Hint: they thought the tax cuts would make jobs and outsourcing would not matter much.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:01 pm[…] Read more Shame […]
December 16th, 2005 at 1:01 pmI consider hearing Rita Cosby’s voice torture, but it doesn’t cause organ failure or death — except, of course, if you listen to her entire show.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:01 pmzFact: Gross Nation Debt passes $8 Trillion!! $8,141,865,684,408
zFact: In 1981 the gross national debt was only 32.5% of the country’s annual output, GDP. Who mistook this 50-year low, for an all-time high and warned “We can leave our children with an unrepayable massive debt …”?
Answers
In what year does the White House predict President Bush will push the gross national debt to a 47-year high? Free debt clock
December 16th, 2005 at 1:01 pmHere’s what I wrote Yoo:
Dr. Yoo,
I would like to beat my wife. Could you please craft a brief which justifies my actions (she does nag alot). I could use it in court in case I am caught and arrested.
Thank you,
December 16th, 2005 at 1:02 pmzFact: We make 9 million tons of hydrogen a year from fossil fuel, but the “hydrogen economy” idea was invented in about 1970 to use excess nuclear power to make hydrogen. How many nukes would we need to make this practical?
December 16th, 2005 at 1:03 pm#25, I believe that the following is a very strong indication and support to your answer.
Yoo also wrote an infamous torture memo which argued that interrogation techniques only constitute torture if they are “equivalent in intensity to…organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death.â€
December 16th, 2005 at 1:03 pmThanks TrueBlue. here is a pice of it. !!!!WARNING!!!!!!READ AT YOUR OWN RISK!
December 16th, 2005 at 1:05 pmYoo Argued President Bush Didn’t Need To Ask Congress Before Invading Iraq: Yoo has also argued that “President Bush didn’t need to ask Congress for permission to invade Iraq.†The 1973 War Powers Resolution, according to Yoo, is “irrelevant.†Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice echoed the argument when she told a congressional committee that “the president has the right to attack Syria, without congressional approval, if he deems that a necessary move in the war on terror.â€
The Federalist Society states that it is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of powers is central to the United States’ constitutional form of government, and that the role of the judicial branch is to say what the law is, not what the law should be.
I don’t think there are too many that would find fault with the above … are there?
December 16th, 2005 at 1:05 pmDecember 16th, 2005 at 1:08 pm
Yoo must have been compensated.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:09 pmWhat was it, where is it?
Nail his ass.
In other words Giacomo, One Branch is NOT Allowed to have More Power than the Other Branch!
December 16th, 2005 at 1:10 pmTitle 18 of the United States Code, section 2340, forbids torture, provides a 20-year jail sentence for those who commit torture, and permits the death penalty for the person who commits torture resulting in the death of the victim.
Torture is illegal, period. Anyone in this administration that condoned and perpetrated or defended using torture needs to be procecuted and the president impeached. Some clearly need to be escorted to the nearest electric chair, because people have died from torture while in US custody.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:10 pmMaybe we can get Yoo to be Karl Rove’s attourney when he gets indicted.
That would guarantee some nice “downtime” for Karl. Uh, Karl, they don’t offer single residency cell’s in this hotel and be very careful with the soap in the shower.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:15 pmAs I’ve already said … I don’t condone torture of any type (other than having Al Qaeda watch Rita Crosby, as someone earlier mentioned).
My posts merely reflect my distaste for those that attempt to over simplify any issue … calling Woo a scumbag or moron clearly misses the mark as he is well thought and articulate. All are free to disagree with him of course, but to flatly call for his disbarment or termination is not only ill-founded, it’s ignorant.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:17 pmGiacomo–Please read more carefully. I was responding to someone else’s statement about whether the Administration would start going after lawful anti-war protestors.
And with respect to the quote you cite from the Federalist Society: if the state exists to preserve freedom, then why is this Administration undermining the freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution? More specifically, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was written to prevent precisely the kind of unchecked and warrantless domestic spying that is the subject of today’s NYT story. And it doesn’t matter that the govt was intercepting international calls of US persons in the US. US persons residing in the US have a reasonable expectation of privacy in calls they make from the US to someone within or outside of the US.
With regard to the statement about the separation of powers being central to our form of govt, that is precisely right. That is why the President is not above the law and cannot circumvent US law with secret executive orders that authorize activity in violation of the law.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:17 pmGiacomo= Propaganda and Tyranny.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:19 pm“That would guarantee some nice “downtime†for Karl. Uh, Karl, they don’t offer single residency cell’s in this hotel and be very careful with the soap in the shower.”
Comment by kindness
I am afraid Karl would not think this is punishment, unfortunately.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:20 pm“Can I bring my bat?
Comment by Bat Wielding Moonbat”
Bats can find their way in the dark, republicans can’t find their way no matter how much light is shined on their activities :()
December 16th, 2005 at 1:20 pmYoo’s secret police knows who is guilty and who is not. So stop worrying.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:21 pm“My posts merely reflect my distaste for those that attempt to over simplify any issue … “GeoMetro
And yet ironically you do this daily with your own posts…
The problem with republicans is you let your ’simple preconceptions’ dictate everything, and you’re too lazy, stupid and inept to do your homework.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:21 pmGiacomo= Propaganda and Tyranny.
C’mon propoganda … I just disagree on some issues … chill out.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:22 pmRight Now, The Judicial Branch Makes and Abuses its Powers by Creating laws the Harm Others. Reread #39
December 16th, 2005 at 1:22 pmI think we need to see what kind of info we can get out of Yoo before his organs fail.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:22 pmSorry
December 16th, 2005 at 1:24 pmGiacomo, Just didnt want to see you falling for the Rights Agenda.
Wouldnt want you to fall over the cliff with them. wink wink.
Yoo, like so many others including mighty aphrodite, suffers from Stockholm Syndrome.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:25 pmNLCD
OK … My comments weren’t directed at you specifically … I just knew that if I didn’t clarify someone would I assume that I support torture and the like. I support Woo (in the sense that I think he’s well educated and, from what I read thus far, well thought) even though I don’t 100% agree with his conclusions.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:25 pmMagnitude 3.4 - SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA, CALIFORNIA
December 16th, 2005 at 1:25 pm2005 December 16 18:21:33 UTC
oops.# 58. thats not propaganda
December 16th, 2005 at 1:27 pmwell Yoo, then you won’t mind if the gov. SPYS on you? I hope you don’t have any playboy mags….
December 16th, 2005 at 1:28 pmUncle Yoo knows what’s best for us.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:30 pmhttp://zfacts.com/p/99.html
December 16th, 2005 at 1:30 pm“I support Woo (in the sense that I think he’s well educated and, from what I read thus far, well thought) even though I don’t 100% agree with his conclusions.
Comment by Giacomo ”
You claim to be well educated in economics, and I’ve consistently shown everyone what an idiot and a moron you are. An education is a set of learning processes, it doesn’t mean the person on the other end is truly suited or competent to continue the learning required to actually be good at their job. Clearly Yoo is just another inept whacko with an over inflated ego - no wonder you relate to him.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:30 pmThe problem with republicans is you let your ’simple preconceptions’ dictate everything, and you’re too lazy, stupid and inept to do your homework.
For future note for all readers of any blogs … anytime ANYONE starts a statement with “the problem with (a certain group of people)” immediately assume the person is a hack and only responds to self-aggrandize … attemtping to encapsulate an individual by attacking the larger group in general (and somewhat meandering) ways is ignorant and in poor form.
A new type of “ism” needs to be invented for you, Ryan … one that describes your prejudice based upon political idealogy and thought … perhaps politism.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:31 pmSEE ALSO:
December 16th, 2005 at 1:32 pmWhere the data comes from
National Debt Graph
Presidents & National Debt
Main national debt page.
Keywords: National Debt, Public Debt, General Fund
I will work harder!
Bush is always right!
-Yoo
December 16th, 2005 at 1:33 pm#57, Whos NLCD?
December 16th, 2005 at 1:34 pmYoo Douche!
-GSD
December 16th, 2005 at 1:35 pm“A new type of “ism†needs to be invented for you, Ryan … one that describes your prejudice based upon political idealogy and thought … perhaps politism.
Comment by Giacomo”
This word already exists, and you express it daily. It’s called a TROLL you dope.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:35 pmnever mind.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:35 pmYou claim to be well educated in economics, and I’ve consistently shown everyone what an idiot and a moron you are.
Yeah … you’ve shown all right. I invite others to look at previous threads about economics … Ryan certainly responds multiple times … that is until I finally make a comment that he either a) doesn’t understand or b) doesn’t have an answer for … then he mysteriously withdraws …
An education is a set of learning processes, it doesn’t mean the person on the other end is truly suited or competent to continue the learning required to actually be good at their job.
Please note that I said “I think he’s well educated (ehich he is) AND, from what I read thus far, well thought (which is my opinion). At no time did I say that education is the only component to competence (if I thought this, I’d be repeating it incessantly to you) or qualifier for future learning … that said, Harvard and Yale happen to be quality places of education and usually contain some of our nations “brightest” (except for most politician’s children).
Clearly Yoo is just another inept whacko with an over inflated ego - no wonder you relate to him.
Takes one to know one I guess (for both of us) …
December 16th, 2005 at 1:39 pm“Ryan certainly responds multiple times … that is until I finally make a comment that he either a) doesn’t understand or b) doesn’t have an answer for … then he mysteriously withdraws …”GeoMetro
I prove you wrong, and depart. That would require you be smart enough to resolve this event - you aren’t.
TROLL - end of story.
“Takes one to know one I guess (for both of us) …”
No just you. That’s the problem trolls and conservatives alike. You always project your own failures on others. It’s why you get Brown and Bush blaming everyone for their failures. It’s part of your sad and distorted pathology. See unlike you have the capacity to judge each person and each event differently. You are a different troll, with a slightly different pathology than saw a wwallace, but you are definitely a moron conservative despite the differences.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:42 pmGiacomo, here is a TIP For you. ITS NOT ABOUT ECONOMICS, ITS ABOUT HUMANITY.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:43 pmWITHOUT HUMANS THERE IS NO NEED FOR ECONOMY.
now do you get it?
Results are the only true measure of competence, not degrees. Degrees and credential at times improve the ability of the person to actually deliver that competence, (at leas that’s the goal), but Yoo has shown he has neither the competence to deliver good law or good citizenship.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:44 pmHot Tip,
GeoMetro is what my friends in the south call ‘an educated fool’… Not enough common sense to blow out a candle.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:45 pmAnd it is NOT About how smart you are. Just Wisdom.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:45 pmThis word already exists, and you express it daily. It’s called a TROLL you dope.
Again … instead of admitting that you tend to act like a rabid attack dog (a sentiment echoed by some of your compatriots who, while agreeing with your opinion, detest your manners) … you accuse me of the same. Classic projection.
Then again, I have to admit that even you have “educated” me, at times, on some concepts … these are the times that you respond in a fair and even manner (unfortunately in the area of 10% of your total posts) … I won’t hesitate to admit this because, unlike you, I’m aware of my limitations on some issues. Would that you have the same epiphany …
December 16th, 2005 at 1:46 pmMore like”Dont stand behind the horse, you,re liable to get kick?lol.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:46 pmor, dont touch the fire, you might get burned?
December 16th, 2005 at 1:47 pmAnd GeoMetro, I ‘disappear’ at times because I have a very rich and rewarding life that I continue to attend to. I would ‘imagine’ that ‘could’ be the case for you, and why you occassionally disappear in response to something as well. But I could be wrong, you might be a ‘coward’, which is what you implied about me. Since republicans tend to project their personal failures, it’s easy to speculate on this one…
December 16th, 2005 at 1:47 pmGiacomo, Ryan Neat
Yoo doesn’t merit this intellectual banter. I’ve heard Yoo talk in great detail about his philosophy on enemy combatants. Every argument he makes is based on the president’s definition of an enemy combatant. The long and short of everything Yoo argues is that he knows who is guilty and who is worthy of torture.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:47 pmBy Golly Ryan, I do Believe GIACOMO might be coming around, What do you think?
December 16th, 2005 at 1:49 pmHow far around the circle is Giacomo willing to come?
Carl,
Yoo is just another whacko fascist, end of story.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:49 pmITS NOT ABOUT ECONOMICS, ITS ABOUT HUMANITY.
I understand your point … our discussions have centered on economic issues like taxes, corporations, etc. We then debated the economic truths that effect humanity in one way or another.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:50 pmResults are the only true measure of competence
Spoken like a true capitalist … the oil companies must be banging down your door.
I guess the democratic party might wish to disagree with you given the overall results of the congressional, senatorial, and presidential elections in the last 8 years.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:53 pmGeoMetro,
The only complaints about me I see are from other trolls. I get lots of pats on the back though, how about you?
FYI rabid implies irrational, I’ve posted orders of magnitudes of more facts, studies and resources to back up my ‘opinion’ than you have. Only a ‘rabid partisan’ would respond in your fashion in light of my responses.
See unlike you, I don’t try to post as an ‘authority’ or ‘argumentatively’ about things I don’t know about. And this is EXACTLY why you and other republicans are LAZY. You’re highly opinionated on virtually every topic, and you don’t know jack!
You’re just a fool.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:53 pmTo get more understanding of Life, One must”Of Course, Stay on the Straight and Narrow Road, But, The Straight and Narrow Road has to be Bent into a Circle to Help those why fell off the Straight and Narrow Road.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:55 pmDo NOT Let your stepping stones cause the weak to stumble.
now imagine yourself on that straight and narrow road as it curves and winds its way up the mountain. there are others behind you. you are doing fine, BUT, how will you help those behind you.? you sometimes have to circle back to pick them up.
“‘Results are the only true measure of competence’
Spoken like a true capitalist … the oil companies must be banging down your door. “GeoMetro
Ironic, I said ‘results’, not ‘monetary success’. Most oil companies are horrible with their practices, and those are just as equally considered ‘results’. How ironic you would attempt to say my response was ‘raw capitalism’, and yet your interpretation of what I said was one that was clearly the offending response.
Once again, can everyone see? This is EXACTLY the sort of projection and idiocy I was referring to.
You’re a moron.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:56 pmyou sometimes have to circle back to pick them up.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:58 pmAND, If you Dont? Your Economy Collapses .
I have degrees - three of them - and in difficult subjects (engineering and architecture), yet the best education I believe exists is experience.
The neocons have little experience. They’re too afraid to leave their own livingrooms to get any.
December 16th, 2005 at 1:59 pmI vote for Ryan
December 16th, 2005 at 2:01 pmI don’t try to post as an ‘authority’ or ‘argumentatively’ about things I don’t know about. And this is EXACTLY why you and other republicans are LAZY.
The only time I claimed authority status was when we discuss economic issues and finance … and you know why. Considering that you’re argumentative on almost every thread, I find it hard to believe that your breadth of knowledge includes ALL items under discussion.
When I don’t know about a subject, I ask (as you may recall, after admitting ignorance, I asked YOU about Kyoto … you responded in a typical nasty fashion). If I have insight or a “devils advocate” position, I may mention it … why is it hard to understand that my challenges and subsequent retort only make your positions stronger (if they’re accurate and true) for having to defend them intelligently to someone else of similar (note I didn’t say exceeding) intelligence.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:03 pm[…] […]
December 16th, 2005 at 2:03 pmGiacomo, Marx, Lenin and Mao were also well educated does that mean we should agree with their conclusions as well? In post #45 you defend Yoo, at least not to have him disbared. I’m not a lawyer, but I thought that lawyers are sworn to uphold and defend the law. So, if Mr. Yoo has provided counsil that was clearly illegal, ie. NSA could wire tap without judical clearance, shouldn’t he be disbared for suggesting illegal activity in face of the law? At a minimum, I don’t think he should be educating a new crop of lawyers in a well know law school with his twisted view of the law. How could Berkley defend his hiring? On the basis of a good education when he advocates braeking the law?
December 16th, 2005 at 2:06 pmBack on thread - I certainly hope an evil intentioned “enemy combatant” never gets ahold of any of the regrssives who live at this, and other “liberal” blogs. The enemies you so vociferociously defend would love nothing more than to see the weak-willed and spineless die first - the respect you hope to gain from them is nil. A note to all “useful idiots” out there (even the guilt ridden “old $$$” types) AlZarqawi and AlZawahiri send their THANKS!!
Payson appears to intentionally skip over the international aspect of the monitored phone calls (perhaps hoping that lazy progs won’t visit the link). Instead, paranoid progs worry they may fall into the definition of “domestic enemies”. Maybe they’ll start to rely on courier pigeons.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:07 pmThe only complaints about me I see are from other trolls. I get lots of pats on the back though, how about you?
Maybe so … I do think you’re in the lead for the most “deleted by admin” moments though.
have degrees - three of them - and in difficult subjects (engineering and architecture), yet the best education I believe exists is experience.
I can’t say I disagree with this … given that education though, you are more articulate and learned in your field of study than those who are not similarly educated … I made the same argument in defense of Woo’s statements on constitutional law (and also said that I didn’t particularly agree with all his conclusions).
Ironic, I said ‘results’, not ‘monetary success’. Most oil companies are horrible with their practices, and those are just as equally considered ‘results’. How ironic you would attempt to say my response was ‘raw capitalism’
Fair enough … my response clearly indicates my bias that results = winning, out playing, out earning, etc. That said and as you state, results can also (and should also) be measured sociologically (when applicable).
December 16th, 2005 at 2:09 pmMightyTranny,
You’ve been clocked as both a man, and not a lawyer. Get out of here you lying troll nerd.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:09 pm#91 - “I vote for Ryan”
December 16th, 2005 at 2:11 pmComment by unbelievable — December 16, 2005 @ 2:01 pm
**** NO KIDDING!!!! I’M SHOCKED - Two people who think they are morally superior and believe in nothing larger than themselves - who knew???!!!
“‘The only complaints about me I see are from other trolls. I get lots of pats on the back though, how about you?’
Maybe so … I do think you’re in the lead for the most “deleted by admin†moments though.” GeoMetro
So you admit you lied? Good. That’s a good start, but I’m sure it won’t hold.
As for the delete, I hadn’t noticed any of my posts, other than the occassional where I forgot to cite reference materials ever being deleted. They have a ‘fair use’ copyright approach, and that’s the most common reason posts are deleted. Since I post a LOT of links and reference, sometimes they remove those because too much copyrighted materials are included.
I don’t take it personally, because I understand the ‘legal’ ramifications. Clearly you don’t, and have fabricated yet another fantasy around what’s happening in the world - fully ungrounded in reality…
December 16th, 2005 at 2:12 pmYoo Argued Interrogation Wasn’t Torture Unless It Resulted In Organ Failure or Death.
Leaving aside all the legal mumbo jumbo, taking a stance where Torture is ok as long as it doesn’t result in Organ Failure or Death is morally repugnant. To argue otherwise completely misses the point.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:12 pmYOU, the Bush Administration, are unAmerican - John Locke would spank you, JJ Rousseau would wash your mouth out with soap, and our founding framers wouldn’t invite you to a Constitutional signing party. And as for YOO, YOO is a fascist! -Kevo
December 16th, 2005 at 2:12 pm“**** NO KIDDING!!!! I’M SHOCKED - Two people who think they are morally superior and believe in nothing larger than themselves - who knew???!!!
Comment by mighty aphrodite ”
This is the most amusing part. Every day this MAN comes here and tries to pretend he’s morally superior, and yet he projects that on others. And when he’s CAUGHT as not being a woman OR a lawyer, he makes silly ranting posts.
You’re such a sad and pathetic little boy, I hope you grow out of this phase once you’re out of junior high.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:14 pm#98
I believe that your mouth is larger than me…
December 16th, 2005 at 2:14 pmMarx, Lenin and Mao were also well educated does that mean we should agree with their conclusions as well? In post #45 you defend Yoo, at least not to have him disbared. I’m not a lawyer, but I thought that lawyers are sworn to uphold and defend the law.
1) Education does not mean morally relevant or otherwise correct. It does give insight and relevance when one is discussing within the arena they are educated in … that’s all I’m saying.
2) Woo’s legal arguments are not intellectually light-weight or lazy … follow the link in post #21 … he’s extremely articulate and he defends his arguments logically, persuasively, and, most importantly, constitutionally. Like I said, I may disagree with some of his conclusions but to say they’re “illegal” when the basis of much of our “legality” in the US derives from the Constitution (in addition to torts, common law, assumed law, etc.) that he is citing, is odd.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:14 pmMightyHermaphrodite,
How do you feel that your family ‘cut and run’ during WWII and left others to die?
And as for domestic terrorism, how do you feel about the fact that none of the domestic terrorist groups that bombed abortion clinics, gay bars, black churches and synagogues are on the watch list - but the pascifist quakers are?
December 16th, 2005 at 2:15 pm“It does give insight and relevance when one is discussing within the arena they are educated in … that’s all I’m saying.” GeoMetro
Not necessarily. That depends on how well the student learns. Trickle Down Economists are examples of ‘educated’ people, who not only don’t understand their own arena, but in fact understand it LESS than those who are uneducated.
Hence the term ‘uneducated fool’.
You’ve made a ’supposition’ and ‘anecdotal’ response based on your prejudice. Many people who live in the real world disagree.
I work with lawyers all of the time, and I find most of them are woefully ignorant of law, as are the judges that often judge cases…
December 16th, 2005 at 2:18 pmSo you admit you lied?
No … I merely agreed that conservatives tend to like you less than liberals. If you were honest, you’d admit that other progressives have made comments like, “Ryan’s passion gets the best of him” or “uh oh, Ryan’s on the rampage” or “Ryan, calm down”.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:19 pm#107
In defense of Ryan, I’d personally rather see someone passionate about the issues in here than out on the battle field.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:21 pm“Woo’s legal arguments are not intellectually light-weight or lazy … follow the link in post #21 … he’s extremely articulate and he defends his arguments logically, persuasively, and, most importantly, constitutionally.” GeoMetro
And yet educated lawyers disagree with you profusely. Perhaps it is just that you wanted to believe him, or you’re just ignorant and easily fooled.
“Several legal academics, including Cass Sunstein and myself, are quoted in this New York Times article by Adam Liptak on the OLC and Defense Department torture memos. Cass, by nature a gentle soul, does not mince words here: “It’s egregiously bad. It’s very low level, it’s very weak, embarrassingly weak, just short of reckless.” John Yoo, who worked at the OLC when the memos were written, dismisses the criticisms, saying they were mostly “political rather than legal.”"
http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/ 2004/ 06/ 25/ politics/ 25LEGA.html&OP=4627eb65Q2FJsXPJQ2BQ5DU-uQ5DQ5DFgJgmmQ20JmnJgQ25JRQ5DQ3EQ60FQ60U-JgQ25tSQ7BQ2FxQ5EFAQ3E
December 16th, 2005 at 2:22 pm#25 Giacomo - I didn’t get any further along, but must post: CREDENTIALS, DEGREES, OR JOBS HELD (etc.) DO NOT, REPEAT NOT NOT NOT EQUATE TO INTELLIGENCE. There. Breathe. Brilliant people throughout history have esposed and vehemently defended ill informed, confused, and flat out wrong ideas. And in Yoo’ case, is it WILLFUL? An intelligent man would do better at misrepresenting the facts that a dumb man. Just because he has credentials does not make him smart, and just because he is smart it does not make him moral or just.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:23 pmWhat all this education served him for . His polical ambitions and emotional make up , his psycholicical profile are what counts here . Slavery , exploitation , torture have been well served by so call educated individuals . China is not a respecter of human rights . Individuals have no place in Tien ma square . I do not think we would have found Yoo there .
December 16th, 2005 at 2:24 pm“If you were honest, you’d admit that other progressives have made comments like, “Ryan’s passion gets the best of him†or “uh oh, Ryan’s on the rampage†or “Ryan, calm downâ€.” GeoMetro
You consider those ‘complaints’? Most of the time they’re intentionally encouraging. The ‘calm down’ quote is the only one that is remotely negative, and that’s hardly a ‘complaint’, it’s a request.
Man you are one lying retarded propagandist moron!
December 16th, 2005 at 2:24 pmYou’ve made a ’supposition’ and ‘anecdotal’ response based on your prejudice. Many people who live in the real world disagree.
This is not anecdotal … are you saying that if I read a lot about engineering and architecture I’d know more than “unbelievable”. How about with medecine. Woo has degrees from Harvard and Yale … we can safely say that his educational credentials are sound (before you say it, I’ve already said the same cannot be said for legacy students … if Woo is of this type, all bets are off). If you wish to get all hypothetical about the quality of the student or the educator then I guess I can see your point … just not with Woo.
Also, please note that I attribute “relevance” and “insight” to education but not necessarily “correctness” … there’s a difference. You have an economics degree … because of that, I assume you understand the basic terms of economics better than someone who doesn’t share your background. I don’t transfer your lack of ignorance about the concepts to mean that you are then automatically correct in your observations any more than you do so for me.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:26 pm#113
There are people without degrees in engineering and architecture who know more than me on those subjects. Several states, including California, allow people to become registered in architecture and engineering without degrees.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:30 pmMysticagent
As you continue to read you’ll learn … you’re preaching to the choir … I agree with you.
And yet educated lawyers disagree with you profusely. Perhaps it is just that you wanted to believe him, or you’re just ignorant and easily fooled.
Exactly my point … education doesn’t necessarily mean agreement or “correctness”. As I’ve said already, you and I are educated (somewhat similarly) … how often do we agree, even in the arena where we share formal education. That by no means cheapens either argument though … we both can be intelligent and educated AND arrive to differing conclusions.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:30 pm#49 - Bat wielding Moonbat want’s to bring a bat to visit Gun Toting Liberal. Hmmm….. Brining a bat to a gunfight…. I know where my money is….
December 16th, 2005 at 2:31 pm“Ryan STFU” (Always comes from the Right), does not equal a complaint. That is somebody trying to stop somebody’s freedom of speech.
“Ryan calm down,” “Ryan’s on a rampage” and “Ryan’s passion gets the best of him” are all from people that aren’t regular posters here and don’t know Ryan.
Ryan, like myself is sick and tired of trolls coming to this site and spewing lies, hate and deceit.
It is one thing if a conservative wants to come and debate topics here. That is welcomed. It is another thing all together if a troll starts by attacking people.
“We’re mad as hell and we’re not goin to take it anymore.”
December 16th, 2005 at 2:31 pm“because of that, I assume you understand the basic terms of economics better than someone who doesn’t share your background. ” GeoMetro
And this is the point. Understanding the ‘term’ does not give one insight into the meaning. I’ve known entrepreneurs personally with little to no formal education that understood basic principles of economics that CEOs of major companies with Harvard MBAs.
To understand the ‘vocabulary’ of a topic does not give one the insight or degree of ‘integrated thinking’ needed to be an expert in that area.
“I don’t transfer your lack of ignorance about the concepts to mean that you are then automatically correct in your observations any more than you do so for me.”
I constantly post reference material that debunks your ignorance - stop projecting your continuing failures on me - it’s undignified you loser!
December 16th, 2005 at 2:31 pmAnd…. so, Mr. Yoo (and the Administration, and all who support his definition) does not believe that there is such a thing a psychological torture. Nor does he apparently believe that permanent psycological damage is a real thing. Well, Mr. Yoo, and all of his disciples in thought: get to be early on Christmas eve, because Santa won’t come until you’re really asleep. And the Easter Bunny is painting eggs right now for you. And mommy will lock the closet door so the ookey monster that hides in there won’t get you.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:35 pmThere are people without degrees in engineering and architecture who know more than me on those subjects.
I’m sure there are … that in no way changes YOUR ability to speak relevantly and insightfully in your field … this isn’t really a far out concept folks.
And, given that I already agreed that experience is usually the best teacher, the example that I used was if Me, Myself, I read a lot of books on your subjects … could I then somehow know more (or be as relevant) than/as you in said subjects. Certainly not, or perhaps, likely not.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:35 pm#120
According to the state of California you could be.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:37 pm#120
I suggest we use experience to find out. Go read some books on architecture and then let’s see… I’m game (and I won’t call you names :)
December 16th, 2005 at 2:39 pmGeoMetro,
Then you’re reading the wrong books, because you are consistently and woefully ignorant on virtually every topic you post.
I notice you didn’t respond to how the ‘legal scholars’ say that Yoo’s writing was idiotic trash? Of course not..
December 16th, 2005 at 2:40 pmThe writers of the constitution were influence not only by Greek , French and English philosiphers but also by Native Americans . Yoo it seems to me is influence by Chinese authocraticies and in my views he advised Bush on the basis of his emotional make up rather his educational background . It is my empirical observation that in America , our diversity greatly reflects our views and we see this on this post and on our politics .
December 16th, 2005 at 2:41 pmAnd this is the point. Understanding the ‘term’ does not give one insight into the meaning. I’ve known entrepreneurs personally with little to no formal education that understood basic principles of economics that CEOs of major companies with Harvard MBAs.
To understand the ‘vocabulary’ of a topic does not give one the insight or degree of ‘integrated thinking’ needed to be an expert in that area.
You keep changing the argument … please stick to what I’m saying …
1) I used the word “terms” in a macrofocused sense to symbolize a modicum of understanding of a concept … not in a manner that symbolizes understanding of a definition.
2) The existance of undeducated and successful individuals in all arenas is not up for debate … we all can agree on this.
3) I am merely drawing a line between education and relevance to and insight in the given subject. This isn’t really something to debate … is it?
I constantly post reference material that debunks your ignorance - stop projecting your continuing failures on me - it’s undignified you loser!
I’m not sure why you chose to respond in this manner … did you understand that all I was saying is that our respective educations don’t make either of us any more “right” … there’s no need to be defensive, nor do you require validation for your intellectual muster (based upon my previous comment, at least).
December 16th, 2005 at 2:44 pmI notice you didn’t respond to how the ‘legal scholars’ say that Yoo’s writing was idiotic trash? Of course not..
Dear Ryan,
Please refer to post 117
“Love”, Giacomo
December 16th, 2005 at 2:45 pmSome of the most incompetent people I’ve ever had to deal with were from ‘big names’ like Harvard, Yale, Stanford. They tend to be incredibly arrogant because of their degrees, and it lulls them into a ‘laziness’ that shuts down their learning. It’s way too common unfortunately, and Yoo seems to suffer from this very problematic behavior.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:45 pmDang Hardass, Sounds like a Ginuwine pholosifer. har har.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:46 pmthat was hard to digest. but i got the point.
anyways, just wanted to pass tidbit news to all,
Magnitude 5.9 - NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN
2005 December 16 18:32:17 UTC
GeoMetro,
117 has nothing to do with the posting. Is that just more incompetence, idiocy or just plain stupidity on your part?
December 16th, 2005 at 2:46 pmGeoMetro,
See #109
Yoo is a HACK!
December 16th, 2005 at 2:47 pmGiacomo,
December 16th, 2005 at 2:47 pmThank you for the thoughtful debate of my previous issues. One last point on which I think we can agree. George W. Bush also has degrees fron Yale and Harvard, and he’s one of the most ignorant people I ever heard, certainly the least brightest individual to hold the presidential office. So when its all said and done, its WHO not WHAT you know that matters.
“I’m not sure why you chose to respond in this manner … did you understand that all I was saying is that our respective educations don’t make either of us any more “right†…” GeoMetro
And yet my citing of evidence, facts and studies do show I’m write. That’s the difference between you and me, and YOO and me, for that matter. I know how to use my education, the two of you don’t.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:48 pm#15 Giacomo, Please in the future could you just go ahead and attach the link for the articles you cut& paste? Also I forgot what you said about Mr. Yoo? You seem to be purveying more Blog advise than consistant tangent ideas related to the posting. Thanks.
December 16th, 2005 at 2:59 pmGiacomo -
“1) Education does not mean morally relevant or otherwise correct. It does give insight and relevance when one is discussing within the arena they are educated in”
This is not an absolute truth. If the “educated person” wishes to intentionally misrepresent facts, then that person’s education has no relevance, and the issues may not be “insigtful”. You are not going to be a successful criminal if you can’t dance around the law.
“2)…. but to say they’re “illegal†when the basis of much of our “legality†in the US derives from the Constitution (in addition to torts, common law, assumed law, etc.) that he is citing, is odd. ”
I present a couple of relevant sections from, as Bush put it, that “G&^d^&%&d piece of paper.”:
“Section 2. The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;–to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;–to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;–to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;–to controversies between two or more states;–between a state and citizens of another state;– between citizens of different states;–between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.
In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.
Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason,…
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”
December 16th, 2005 at 3:04 pmI will assume intelligence on the part of readers to see how the Yoo document (I can’t link you to it, but I have read the entire thing) is in direct conflict with basic Constitutional principles.
David … you said, George W. Bush also has degrees fron Yale and Harvard, and he’s one of the most ignorant people I ever heard, certainly the least brightest individual to hold the presidential office. So when its all said and done, its WHO not WHAT you know that matters.
I will refer you to my post #155 where I say, before you say it, I’ve already said the same cannot be said for legacy students … if Woo is of this type, all bets are off
I agree with you …
Ryan
First you said, 117 has nothing to do with the posting. Is that just more incompetence, idiocy or just plain stupidity on your part?
Since, appearantly, my position didn’t speak for itself clearly enough in 117 … my take on your link is that the presence of disagreement, especially amongst experts in a field, shouldn’t diminish eithers opinion or relevance. Two doctors disagree all the time about treatment and diagnoses … it’s reasonable to assume that constitutional “scholars” will as well. To say otherwise is peculiar, to say the least.
Then you said, Some of the most incompetent people I’ve ever had to deal with were from ‘big names’ like Harvard, Yale, Stanford. They tend to be incredibly arrogant because of their degrees, and it lulls them into a ‘laziness’ that shuts down their learning.
While I too have met arrogant “Ivies”, I’ve found much of this arrogance attributable to their lives of lavish comfort and coddling … those that went to Harvard and Stanford from more meager beginings, in my experience, haven’t suffered from this issue. My point is, your observation isn’t only about their education. Again, the presence of “morons” with Ivy league degrees shouldn’t diminish the whole in general … It may be my fault we’re speaking in “hypotheticals” about education … but my only point was to reference one of many aspects of Woos “credentials”.
Lastly you say, And yet my citing of evidence, facts and studies do show I’m write (sic). That’s the difference between you and me, and YOO and me, for that matter. I know how to use my education, the two of you don’t.
To make this statement after accusing others (in your previous aforementioned post) as being arrogant is absolutely hysterical. “Hey Kettle”, says Ryan the Pot, “you’re black”.
December 16th, 2005 at 3:06 pm#15 Giacomo, Please in the future could you just go ahead and attach the link for the articles you cut& paste?
Roger, wilco.
December 16th, 2005 at 3:07 pmMan I can’t catch up here. Giacomo - 115. There does ssem to be some agreement, but the quote you responded to there was not mine.
December 16th, 2005 at 3:08 pmLet’s frame this up a little differently: the White House supported torture (at the least “torture lite”, as it was refered to - THAT much none can deny: but by definition, we are still talking torture (and certainly by practice - there is NO “torture lite”)). The WH justified this torture (which is against US law, as well as against treaties which the US has signed) with a legal ramble penned by Mr. Yoo. The entire point of this document was to justify the US using torture. A man of law, who is, by report (or by Giacomo) supposed to be an educated and intelligent man with sterling credentials, wrote a legal document arguing that the US need not honor its treaties, and that the US need not be bound by the law laid down in the Constitution. That is problematic. Such a person should not be allowed to practice or teach law. He made effort to (and did) subvert the morality of the country by legal parsing until he rendered the Constitution quaint.
December 16th, 2005 at 3:21 pmOh, and for some reason, I keep typing Woo when I mean Yoo … my apologies.
December 16th, 2005 at 3:23 pmThat is problematic. Such a person should not be allowed to practice or teach law. He made effort to (and did) subvert the morality of the country by legal parsing until he rendered the Constitution quaint.
While I see your point, it is entirely predicated upon a) your personal moral judgment (and your interpretation of the “framers” intent) and b) the projection of that judgment as absolute. I cannot disagree with the basic moral tennent of your statement, but I would ask you to possiblly consider that Yoo may have considered the moral quandry and found another moral path that he believes serves the greater good.
Perhaps, and I’m playing devils advocate, Yoo believes that the constitution’s mandate against torture doesn’t consider the possibility of a threat so grave to merit such actions. In that sense, the constitution itself is impeding its own protection … for what good is a constitution to a country if that country’s been decimated by a certain threat. So in trampling the letter of the constitution … the “torturers” uphold the spirit/fabric of it. Admittedly, this is deeply theoretical … but if you can follow the logic, you may be able to see how those that advocate torture (I don’t) can believe it to be the “moral” decision.
This is hard to define without looking like I’m espousing moral relativism (which I detest).
December 16th, 2005 at 3:36 pmFor Crying out loud, The Man is Chinese Who Hates Comunist China.
December 16th, 2005 at 4:02 pmJust like an american who hates free america.
it just a bunch of non fullfilling words.
Good heavens Giacomo - here’s a hint, any time you say “for the greater good” you’re espousing moral relativism.
December 16th, 2005 at 4:04 pmOkay, how about if we do this: Let’s detain John Yoo on, well whatever we feel like it, and then use interrogation methods that do not result in organ failure, but stop just short of it. Let’s start with bamboo under the nails, etc.
After we are finished, we can ask Mr. Woo if he would like to reevaluate his opinion of what constitutes torture.
December 16th, 2005 at 4:05 pmI Wonder if he was tor