Historians sponsor petition to protest John Yoo's legal opinions on torture

[sabra]

Source: HNN

A number of members of SHAFR (Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations) are circulating the following petition expressing opposition to John Yoo's legal opinions on torture and executive power. The petition is prompted by SHAFR's invitation to John Yoo to serve as a plenary speaker at the upcoming SHAFR conference in Columbus, Ohio.

To: U.S. Congress, the Bush Administration, John Yoo & concerned citizens

We, the undersigned, members of the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR) and/or participants at the 2008 annual meeting of SHAFR, believe that the legal opinions of John Yoo on the legality of torture are morally abhorrent and constitute the untenable advocacy of war crimes by or on behalf of the United States. The opinions are in contravention of both the criminal laws and the treaty obligations of the United States. We believe that Yoo's legal opinions on the unfettered exercise of executive power are legally unsound and pose a grave threat to the separation-of-powers feature of the Constitution.

In an August 2002 memorandum that he co-authored and in a recently released March 2003 memorandum that he authored, Yoo stated that federal statutes against torture, assault, maiming, and interstate stalking cannot restrict the President in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief. He licensed the use of atrocious and clearly illegal practices such as "waterboarding" by narrowing the legal standards for "torture," defining it as a practice requiring the victim to experience intense pain or suffering equivalent to pain associated with death, organ failure or permanent damage resulting in loss of significant bodily functions. Yoo's arguments have provided the legal foundation and justification for the commission of war crimes, including torture and cruel and inhumane treatment of prisoners, as one component of a constitutionally indefensible expansion of executive power. Yoo's arguments contravene the letter and spirit of the U. N. Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, both of which were ratified by the U.S. Senate, and are the "law of the land" under Article VI of the Constitution. Yoo furthermore stated in his memoranda that arguments for self-defense or necessity could be used in defense of torture, despite the Convention's unequivocal statement that "o exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war" may be invoked as a justification of torture."

We, the undersigned, strongly affirm the need for U.S. policy to respect human rights both internationally and within the United States. We call upon the executive and legislative branches to forbid torture and cruel and inhumane treatment of detainees under all circumstances, wherever they are held and whatever their nationality.


Read more: http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/50403.html

[alllyingwhores]

1. The documented acts of Woo himself as a co-conspirator

How about the idea that his opinions are not only invalid but are nothing more than the documented acts of Woo himself as a co-conspirator in the commission of illegal, unconstitutional and morally abhorrent war crimes.

The idea that any asshole can make the most preposterous and blatantly obvious political opinion that has absolutely no basis in any possibly rational, logical or imaginable connection to the US Constitution or criminal law--and that is allowed to stand as an opinion that somehow gives the rest of the cabal free reign to simply ignore established law and commit any and all atrocities is beyond incredulous.

The only more incredulous idea is that they continue to get away with it--with absolutely no accountability and no justice.

[sakabatou]

2. I wonder what would happen if we tortured Yoo

What would he say after that?

[FREEWILL56]

3. A little to the right and harder?

[sakabatou]

12. ...

:spray:

[grahamhgreen]

4. the torturer movie

[bonito]

5. Making illegal laws to commit illegal acts, the US hijackers.

Throw the bums out.

[rpannier]

6. He was probably disappointed to find out that Saw and Hostel were not documentaries nt

[democrank]

7. John Woo is part of one of the darkest chapters in U.S. history.

May he get what he deserves.

[eShirl]

8. "were ratified by the U.S. Senate, and are the "law of the land" under Article VI of the Constituti"

damn straight

[The Wizard]

9. What law school

gave this second hand excuse for an attorney a law degree? It should have its accreditation revoked.

[fasttense]

10. We no longer have legal arguments

we simply have spin. America has gone from the rule of law to the rule of whim.

If someone in power wants to break the law, they simply get a black robed justice or professor at some overpriced college to spin the law. The Dancing Supremes did it in order to selected their friend and buddy bush as our president. Yoo did it to save his friends from prison, and Scalia does it every time he opens his mouth. There is no law simply the whims and desires of tyrants supported by a black robed junta.

[ToughLuck]

11. The bastard Yoo, does not have immunity for his contributions to war crimes outside the US

He needs to be tried, it may take many years, but he is young. The article called "The Green Light", at VanityFair website last month speaks about just this problem for Bush,even his fucking lawyers too.

[Supersedeas]

13. but Berkley law and their self-righteous Dean can be so proud of Yoo