Today's Article
The Justice
Department's Office of
Legal Counsel has
forgotten that free
people don't have
commanders.
Department's Office of
Legal Counsel has
forgotten that free
people don't have
commanders.
The American Spark
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Torture Memo Reveals Danger Of Undue Secrecy
By Cliff Montgomery - Apr. 13th, 2008
A 2003 Justice Department memo from its Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), which apparently authorized the
torture of presumed 'unlawful combatants' held beyond American borders, was recently declassified. It
single-handedly reveals the inherent danger of allowing an unchecked secrecy to thrive within a democratic
government.
Among other things, the memo breathlessly claims that criminal statutes which outlaw torture "do not apply to
properly-authorized interrogations of enemy combatants"--in short, insisting that Bush's authority as
commander-in chief of U.S. armed forces somehow gives him the sole ability to determine, at whim, which laws
His Majesty shall follow...and which laws he shall not.
Any other policy, the OLC memo asserts, "would conflict with the [U.S.] Constitution's grant of the
commander-in-chief power solely to the president."
But the president's power as commander-in-chief, like all his other constitutionally-granted duties, merely are
separate powers--not absolute ones. The American people at no time cease to be the real rulers of this
democratic nation; at no time does either Congress or the Judiciary cease to possess its inherent,
constitutionally-granted oversight power as a check on the Executive Branch.
A commander-in-chief is indeed the high commander of American forces; but he is never the commander of
the American people, or of the American state. The notorious writer of this "legal opinion", John Yoo, forgot
that free people don't have commanders--especially during wartime, when the Natural Right of the people to
hold their representatives accountable for dubious actions matters most.
All the same, Mr. Yoo essentially asserted that a president is a rightful tyrant during wartime. Such wild-eyed
opinions clearly never were entertained by our constitutional framers; they spring solely from the Jovian brains
of Yoo and other neo-conservatives.
That Yoo's ramblings were ever seriously thought by any White House to constitute a valid legal opinion proves
the inherent danger of an unchecked classification power.
This bizarre memo was classified as "Secret", even though there's not a single statement in the document
which may conceivably 'threaten national security'. The entire thrust of the paper is that of a legal opinion, not
of an operational plan against the enemy.
Nor may it be argued--however weakly--that the very existence of torture must be treated as some secret; it's
hardly a secret that this White House tortures others. And as history makes clear, the people whose relatives
and friends are the victims of such brutality are always aware of these deeds.
It's therefore brutally clear that this "legal memo" was not classified to protect Americans, but solely to keep us
in the dark as to the true activities of our glorious "commander".
There are in place some basic oversight mechanisms for congresspeople and judges to act as checks on
White House secrecy abuses. But since the 9/11 attacks, many in those positions have simply rubber-stamped
whatever whim our Duce has at this or that moment.
If it were not for a legal challenge brought by the ACLU--often Public Enemy Number 1 for those who clearly
think that America has or needs a king--this little embarrassment still would be kept from the eyes of the public.
True secrecy oversight needs to be vigorously maintained in fact, not just on paper. The recently-released
"torture memo" makes that simple truth stunningly clear.
Like what you're reading so far? Then why not order a full year (52 issues) of the The American Spark
e-newsletter for only $15? A major article covering an story not being told in the Corporate Press will be
delivered to your email every Monday morning for a full year, for less than 30 cents an issue. Order Now!
By Cliff Montgomery - Apr. 13th, 2008
A 2003 Justice Department memo from its Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), which apparently authorized the
torture of presumed 'unlawful combatants' held beyond American borders, was recently declassified. It
single-handedly reveals the inherent danger of allowing an unchecked secrecy to thrive within a democratic
government.
Among other things, the memo breathlessly claims that criminal statutes which outlaw torture "do not apply to
properly-authorized interrogations of enemy combatants"--in short, insisting that Bush's authority as
commander-in chief of U.S. armed forces somehow gives him the sole ability to determine, at whim, which laws
His Majesty shall follow...and which laws he shall not.
Any other policy, the OLC memo asserts, "would conflict with the [U.S.] Constitution's grant of the
commander-in-chief power solely to the president."
But the president's power as commander-in-chief, like all his other constitutionally-granted duties, merely are
separate powers--not absolute ones. The American people at no time cease to be the real rulers of this
democratic nation; at no time does either Congress or the Judiciary cease to possess its inherent,
constitutionally-granted oversight power as a check on the Executive Branch.
A commander-in-chief is indeed the high commander of American forces; but he is never the commander of
the American people, or of the American state. The notorious writer of this "legal opinion", John Yoo, forgot
that free people don't have commanders--especially during wartime, when the Natural Right of the people to
hold their representatives accountable for dubious actions matters most.
All the same, Mr. Yoo essentially asserted that a president is a rightful tyrant during wartime. Such wild-eyed
opinions clearly never were entertained by our constitutional framers; they spring solely from the Jovian brains
of Yoo and other neo-conservatives.
That Yoo's ramblings were ever seriously thought by any White House to constitute a valid legal opinion proves
the inherent danger of an unchecked classification power.
This bizarre memo was classified as "Secret", even though there's not a single statement in the document
which may conceivably 'threaten national security'. The entire thrust of the paper is that of a legal opinion, not
of an operational plan against the enemy.
Nor may it be argued--however weakly--that the very existence of torture must be treated as some secret; it's
hardly a secret that this White House tortures others. And as history makes clear, the people whose relatives
and friends are the victims of such brutality are always aware of these deeds.
It's therefore brutally clear that this "legal memo" was not classified to protect Americans, but solely to keep us
in the dark as to the true activities of our glorious "commander".
There are in place some basic oversight mechanisms for congresspeople and judges to act as checks on
White House secrecy abuses. But since the 9/11 attacks, many in those positions have simply rubber-stamped
whatever whim our Duce has at this or that moment.
If it were not for a legal challenge brought by the ACLU--often Public Enemy Number 1 for those who clearly
think that America has or needs a king--this little embarrassment still would be kept from the eyes of the public.
True secrecy oversight needs to be vigorously maintained in fact, not just on paper. The recently-released
"torture memo" makes that simple truth stunningly clear.
Like what you're reading so far? Then why not order a full year (52 issues) of the The American Spark
e-newsletter for only $15? A major article covering an story not being told in the Corporate Press will be
delivered to your email every Monday morning for a full year, for less than 30 cents an issue. Order Now!