South Bend is heating up over the controversy surrounding Obama and the local bishop...Read the post

2009 College Grads: We're the Lucky Ones

Why there is hope for the graduating Class of 2009, and how they can find work in a recession...Read the post

Beer in Vending Machines -- What Drinking Age?

U.S. policies on drinking age seem restrictive when examining the rest of the world...Read the post

How The Press Can Remain Relevant

Is it any surprise that Obama has employed a strategy to cordon journalists that is similar to previous administrations?...Read the post

Be Afraid, Cheney Warns. Be Very Afraid.

Just when you thought the Bush-era warnings of Armageddon around the corner were over, Cheney strikes again...Read the post

Obama: You Wouldn't Like Me When I'm Angry...

Obama threw down his stick, spat on the floor and growled in the face of cameras -- metaphorically... Read the post

Obama to GOP: 'I Won, I'm The President'

"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," Obama told GOP leaders...Read the post

Palin Seeks $11M Book Deal, but Can She Read?

One can only imagine what Republican rising star Sarah Palin could possibly write about in her memoirs...Read the post

usc

politics

'Waterboarding Memo' Author Speaks to College Republicans

Joshua Sharp

Posted: Apr 26th 2009 12:36AM

Filed under: Politics, Small Campus, Big Story, USC

Joshua Sharp is now a contributor for The Cram, a student news arm of the newly launched PoliticsDaily.com. To follow his future work, click here.

Former Bush Administration official John Yoo, author of several Justice Department memos determining waterboarding and other "enhanced interrogation techniques" to be legal, addressed the California College Republicans as the keynote speaker at their statewide convention in San Francisco this weekend.

Author's note: In addition to political commentary, I'm a member of the USC College Republicans. Views posted here are my own.

Two dozen protesters gathered outside the Hyatt Fisherman's Wharf hotel where the convention was being held, holding signs calling Yoo a war criminal as they chanted, "Jail John Yoo!"

Yoo was actually remarkably soft-spoken compared to the protesters outside. He described his background and his support of key Bush Administration policies, saying, "Sometimes in war, you have to take pre-emptive action to stop someone from trying to harm our country." He pointed out that al-Qaeda had deliberately targeted civilians on Sept. 11, not combatants or military troops.

Putting perspective on enhanced interrogation techniques, Yoo said the United States interrogates detainees "not because we're trying to get a confession [for use in the courts], we're trying to get information to prevent the next attack."

Yoo closed with a question: "Were those policies successful?" It's been almost eight years since 9/11, he said, and our nation has not seen another domestic terrorist attack "because of the Bush Administration's counterterrorism policies."

Yoo also encouraged young conservatives to "have the courage of your convictions" and engage in free speech and open debate with "the people who would shout you down."

Earlier in the day, hundreds of College Republicans took to the streets of San Francisco for an anti-bailout "Tea Party" protest, holding signs with slogans like, "You keep your Hope, I'll keep my Change."

Recent Comments »
Page 2/3
Post Your Comments Below

Previous 20 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | Most Recent | Next 20 Comments

FireEagle

11:07PM 11:07PM Apr 26th 2009

James,
I appreciate your service to the United States. You are a hero. There is no doubt that if was not for the military we would have thousands of 9/11. Our wars in Afgan and Iraq have help prevent another 9/11. The problem is sometimes the best defense is preventing an attack. No one died in these torture sessions, Chuck. There were doctors there to make sure the health of the person was ok. Unlike the beheadings that Iraq's were they killed journalist and civilian and soldiers.

Let me put it another way.
You are sitting in the park you and your wife with the kids. You hear some screaming and you realize that 2 guys have grab your kid and are dragging him to a van. You run after them tackle one guy but the other guy gets away in the van with your kid. You call the police but the clock is ticking. You do not know why or what he is going to do to your kid, but you suspect that he will killed.
I do not know too many parents that would not do anything the can to extract information from the second guy to get him to talk so that you can find out where your son or daughter is. Once the police get there their hands are tied, the most they can do is very very seriously ask the suspect where the child was taken,, pretty please. The suspect has rights via the constitution, but these people that were tortured were enemy combatants, with no protections by our constitution nor should they be. War is hell and should be avoided but if you are attacked you must be able to defend yourself or start bending over for the dictator when he takes over.

Rating : 2 stars Report!

greatgoog3

1:37PM 1:37PM Apr 28th 2009

Here's the problem, FireEagle: The majority of detainees at Guantanamo have been proven to have been falsely accused. The U.S. said "Hey, we'll pay anyone for giving us terrorists, no questions asked" and the poverty-stricken Afghanis thought for a moment, picked someone who they had been feuding with or whose absence would benefit them and said "Here you go." Although I don't care if these torture methods worked or not, I'll address a point that you surely can't argue with - The people we call "enemy combatants," in at least two-thirds of cases, were not combatants and most of the remaining third were know-nothing grunts. It's like torturing a rookie U.S. soldier to get info about U.S. Intelligence Ops.

Rating : 2 stars Report!

Bruce

2:44PM 2:44PM Apr 28th 2009

You are correct, gretagoog3, most of the detainees are not enemy combatants. The original poster, James, is not correct when he says "FBI and CIA experts agree that advanced interogation techniques (torture) don't work." - George Tenet (Director if the CIA)said ""I know that this program has saved lives. I know we've disrupted plots." This is not torture in the sense of the Inquistion, where false confessions were extracted at any cost to justify false charges brought against innocent people. This is a supervised program to gain information that would be otherwise un-obtainable from the people who were involved it the planning of attacks against Americans. If you think it's so bad, try going to Afghanistan and reasoning with the Taliban. They'll make a video out of your execution by beheading and broadcast it to the world. Do you really think water on the face is the same thing? Thak God we still have some people in this country that would do whatever it takes to protect the rest of us, just like our founding fathers did when they broke the British rules of war and won the revolution with their guerilla tactics.

Rating : 2 stars Report!

12:47AM 12:47AM Apr 27th 2009

My wish for all of you Americans who condone this and believe that "the ends justify the means" is that you be taken away in the night with no representation, no contact with anyone, to be tortured over and over and over again, then years from now when it's decided you really don't know anything and you are let go, come back and tell me that yes, it was all worth it, because it kept America safe--and btw you didn't die (you just wished you would). As for the war in Iraq, I was under the impression (falsely, it now appears) that we went there to defend ourselves from a country that supposedly had WMDs. We didn't find any--so why are we still there? And just exactly what are we trying to "win"? A medal for being egotistical enough to decide we'll destroy a country trying to force our beliefs on them?

Rating : 3 stars Reply to this commentReport!

Shannon

8:06AM 8:06AM Apr 28th 2009

No, we did not go into another country to try to "force our beliefs on them, we went to another country to try and eliminate the threats to America. We are not killing everyone in the country that does not believe the way that we do. We are eliminating TERRORISTS. People that have been proven to kill innocent people over and over again. They don't mind strapping a bomb to thier son to kill 60 innocent people that do not believe the way THEY do. Don't confuse us with them.And as for what we are trying to "win"? It's our freedom to walk around our towns everyday and not have to worry if a plane is going to crash into one of our buildings, or if someone is going to walk in with a bomb and kill everyone. If you want to be scared everyday you walk outside your house, move over there. But as for me, I like being able to take a walk and know that I am safe.

Rating : 2 stars Report!

jparchery02

3:22PM 3:22PM Apr 29th 2009

my wish for all you Americans who think we were just doing this for shits and giggles is to have someone in your family or even your whole family killed by these muslim terrorists because we only asked them for their name rank a sn...then you idiots would be all over the govt for not protecting you and your loved ones if the terrorists promised to only kill liberal idiots then and only then would I say, fvck it no need to water board any more terrorists, but as long as it might save someone in my family I don't give a rats ass if they pull their fingers off one by one till they sing like a canary,If this was a war between two countries things like water boarding would not happen but we are at war with muslim terrorists who fight without rules and their only objective is to kill as many Americans as they can civilian or other wise, I have three family members and 5 friends currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan and if water boarding a few scum muslim terrorists keeps each and every one of these people alive then im all for it and as far as im concerned water boarding IS NOT TORTURE.....no one died from it no one got any little bruises or broken bones or any mental trauma no lasting effects no nightmares or anything but still the yuppie liberal idiots cry torture ....till one of their own gets killed.... then it will be OK

Rating : 2 stars Report!

James W. England

5:58AM 5:58AM Apr 27th 2009

FireEagle;

The use of situational ethics doesn't change the truth. Yes, war is hell, been there done that, and ignoring or twisting the laws of land warfare to suit your own purposes doesn't make it better, only worse.

The Bush administration came up with new terms like enemy combatant, in a clear effort to get around compliance with standards of prisoner treatment we helped to develop.

Do you think the doctor is present everytime? Do you think the doctor is there in behalf of the victim? The word naive would apply if you believe either of those. The doctor is there to insure the prisoner survives for the next segment of torture.

If you want to include the U. S. Constitution in the discussion, it only gets worse. The Bush administration labeled some American citizens as enemy combatants and then denied them their constitutional rights. Maybe a rereading of the Constitution, and the events surrounding its writing and adoption should be revisted. The rights enumerated and protected by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are considered "God given rights," and apply to all people, not just Americans.

The real test of a democracy governed by the rule of law and accepted standards of moral conduct is whether we can up hold and protect thoses laws and standards of conduct even when it hurts to do so. A soldier takes and oath to protect and defend the Constitution, not situational ethics adopted by a particular president or administration.

Rating : 3 stars Reply to this commentReport!

Robb

10:28AM 10:28AM Apr 27th 2009

If the Bush adminstration thuoght that torture will keep Americans safe forever and ever then they should have introduced an amendment to the constitution so that terrorists or would-be terrorists can be tortured anywhere, anytime. As long as the American Consitution says is wrong then its wrong and (until then) NO amount of ends will justify the means!

Rating : 3 stars Reply to this commentReport!

Robb

10:33AM 10:33AM Apr 27th 2009

If the Bush adminstration thuoght that torture will keep Americans
safe forever and ever then they should have introduced an amendment
to the constitution so that terrorists or would-be terrorists can be
tortured anywhere, anytime. As long as the American Consitution says
is wrong then its wrong and (until then) NO amount of ends will
justify the means!

Rating : 2 stars Reply to this commentReport!

TRogers

12:17PM 12:17PM Apr 27th 2009

This man is a traitor to America, as are all who believe in this nonsense.

- In 1942 when we had U-boats prowling American seaports and California expected a Japanese invasion, We didn't torture.

-In 1962, When 22,000 Soviet Nuclear bombs were aimed at America, to go off at a moments notice, we didn't torture.

- in 1862- When America ripped itself in half and people murdered each other by the thousands in our own backyards and corn fields, We did not torture.

- George Washington and Dwight Eisenhower ordered us to never torture! Thats the facts, Keep your stupid Jack Bauer movie script scenarios to yourself!

Rating : 3 stars Reply to this commentReport!

ABh1171

1:35PM 1:35PM Apr 27th 2009

PIG !!!!!!!!! HOPE EACH COMES DOWN WITH THE "SWINE FLU".

Rating : 1 star Reply to this commentReport!

Sharon

3:04PM 3:04PM Apr 27th 2009

What I find strange is America tried the Japanese as war criminals after the World Wars for waterboarding. So when did it become legal for the US to now use those same tactics they put the Japanese on trial for as war criminals?

Rating : 3 stars Reply to this commentReport!

Bruce

12:14PM 12:14PM Apr 28th 2009

Read your history rather than spouting stupidity. The Japanese waterboarding was nothing like what we did. The Japanese experiments were designed to kill and maim, not to extract information. They would pump the stomach full of water and then jump on the prisoner to force the stomach to rupture. We dripped water on people who had already killed Americans.

Rating : 2 stars Report!

TEXAN

3:30PM 3:30PM Apr 27th 2009

NO terrorist that was waterboarded by the US ever died.
No terrorist that was waterboarded was physically harmed.

3000 innocent civilians were burned and crushed to death by terrorists hijacking American airplanes filled with innocent civilian passengers, who crashed those planes into twin towers and the pentagon.

I wonder if those poor innocent civilians that I saw jump out of the twin towers to their death, rather than be burned alive in the buildings...would RATHER have been WATERBOARDED by the terrorists.

You people are just stupid. You do not deserve to be kept safe by our brave military and the serious minded adult Americans.

Rating : Half a star Reply to this commentReport!

Ron

4:11PM 4:11PM Apr 27th 2009

As a lawyer he should have given a legal opinion. It seems that he gave a political opinion instead. I bet the Japanese we tried after WWII for waterboarding wish he had been their legal expert. During the confirmation hearing for the Attorney General Holder mentioned that we court-martialed American soldiers in Vietnam for waterboaring VC prisoners. I guess it is a war crime unless in involves the Bush Administration.

Rating : 3 stars Reply to this commentReport!

Ed W.

4:25PM 4:25PM Apr 27th 2009

If using torture is acceptable as long as there's a possibilty that it could save lives on the torturers' side then it's almost always acceptable. Maybe if the Japanese had tortured every single prisoner in their possesion, they could have done more to save Japanese civilians in Tokyo, Hiroshoma and Nagasiki. Perhaps if the Germans had tortured more prsoners they could have done a better job protecting German civilians from alled assault or saved more of their soldiers' lives by learning that the Normandy invasion wasn't a feint afyer all. The ends don't justify the means when it comes to torture, the bad guys employ it, the good guys don't. That's one of the key differences between the good guys and the bad guys.

Rating : 2.5 stars Reply to this commentReport!

mahalapril

4:28PM 4:28PM Apr 27th 2009

If we want our US troops not to torture, Is there somebody here brave enough to go to Al-Qaeda and the Talibans in Pakistan that since the US WILL NOT TORTURE EVEN BARBARIC ISLAMIC FANATICS THAT THEY ALSO WON'T TORTURE AMERICAN TROOPS OR CIVILIANS AND GIVE US A WRITTEN GUARANTEE? I NEED BRAVE VOLUNTEERS RIGHT NOW AND IF ANYBODY IS WILLING TO GO JUST PRAY THAT YOUR HEAD WILL STILL BE CONNECTED TO YOUR NECK WHEN YOU COME BACK TO THE US.

Rating : 2 stars Reply to this commentReport!

mahalapril

5:02PM 5:02PM Apr 27th 2009

James,James-It was Bill Clinton's failure to do his job as PRESIDENT that resulted in 9/11.The 1993 WTC bombing was not investigated by Clinton as a war on terror. He didn't put safeguards and waterboarding. Bill Clinton had plenty of opportunities of taking out Bin Ladin including Sudan's offer of giving up Bin Ladin 3 times and Clinton refused. There were many warning signs,signals and attacks on the US that Clinton missed because of his military weakness and womanizing. The other warning signals were the USS Cole bombing in Yemen by Al-Qaeda where 17 American sailors died. Then there was the Khobar Tower Military housing complex bombing in Saudi Arabia by Al-Qaeda. The unforgivable mistake was in 1998 when Al-Qaeda bombed 2 US embassies in Africa killing hundreds which should have triggered already the invasion of Afghanistan to take out Bin Ladin and Al-Qaeda. Instead Clinton just launched symbolic missile strikes on a building owned by Bin Ladin in Sudan and the training grounds of Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. Bill Clinton was responsible for the massacre of 3,000 innocent American civilians on 9/11.Bush protected us since 9/11 by placing safeguards which Obama is slowly dismantling. The Iraq war was not about whether there were or no WMDS in Iraq. We knew Saddam used it against his own Kurds people and on Iran. The Iraq war started when Saddam refused the search of the WMDs and the UN,EU ,US and the democrats supported the war. The thousands of deaths in Iraq were Saddam's goons,Saddam's brutal army and mostly thousands of multinational islamic fanatics who went to Iraq and distracted from Afghanistan who were wiped out by the US troops in Iraq because of the easier Iraqi terrain. That is why we are still in Afghanistan and the RUSSIANS LOST AND LEFT AFGHANISTAN.

Rating : 2 stars Reply to this commentReport!

joseph.malta

8:15PM 8:15PM Apr 27th 2009

Mr. Yoo, you deserve our respect. I look at the comments from your detractors and it is disheartening. I never see the same complaionts when US citizens are treated with uncomparable consequences...death. Can only tell me theyt are either not completely informed or biased in their opinions. Either way the fact remains,attacks by Al Queda occurred prior to 9/11....we did not respond....they attacked civillians with a blatant planned attack, not "accidental deaths".

With tha said, those who want to " prosecute" those who helped protect us..why? Do you really think history would be different if we "turned the other cheek"? President Clinton did and what was the result?

Rating : 1 star Reply to this commentReport!

mike

8:52PM 8:52PM Apr 27th 2009

Think of it this way , the lifes saved over the last 8 years may have been your's or one of your love one's. As the soul purpose of these people is to kill as many Americans or anyone else within their reach that doesn't agree with their believe's , I can live with it .

Rating : 2 stars Reply to this commentReport!

Previous 20 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | Most Recent | Next 20 Comments