on june 26, 2008, before the house judiciary committee chairman john conyers (i.e., while under oath), john yoo — the chief architect of the hopelessly-flawed purported “legal analysis” condoning cheney and bush’s policies of torture from at least early 2002 through late-2006 — admitted that he believes the question of whether the executive branch — the president or vice president — have the lawful authority to torture someone’s child in front of him “depends on why the president or vice president “feels” he needs to do that. . .”
this suggestion, by john yoo, marks a fundamental departure from our chosen form of government — we are a nation ruled by laws — not men.
to suggest that either of these men might have the lawful right to torture a child, is to admit that one views our government as no more than an old-world monarchy — one where the crown’s word is the only law — and is therefore “beyond contestation“.
this friday, we will celebrate our independence from that view, mr. yoo — we won that independence at the price of much spilled blood — we have, for 220 years, disavowed, often forcefully, that notion of government.
ironic — john yoo would return us to a system of “lex-regis” — or literally “the king’s law“.
do watch — it is only 37 seconds long!