John Yoo Says President Bush Can Legally Torture Children

Cassel: If the president deems that he's got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person's child, there is no law that can stop him?

Yoo: No treaty

Cassel: Also no law by Congress -- that is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo...

Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• John
• Yoo
• torture
• children
• Bush

[shoeboxtube]

Um... talk about misleading headline. Yoo doesn't say the president can do that carte blanche. It depends on whether he has appropriate justification as commander in chief... which would depend on the situation (in war... necessary.... etc.). And given we only have a snippet, I don't know if he elaborates on the context. Can you guys not read or understand English?

[robrobbins]

@shoeboxtube Mein Englisch ist nicht so gut.

[kennywn]

Anyone involved in the torture of children...well that just makes me sick to my stomach and outraged. These sickos deserve nothing short of the death penalty for committing treason.

[stperkin]

What this adviser to this Bush administration is saying is; "Yeah, it depends on what the President wants. In some situations it might be okay to "crush a child's testicles". Is it not obvious this is (was) a criminal administration?!

[TOMHYLE88]

@shoeboxtube there is no context that makes torturing children OK 

[ken1334]

SO where do I sign up to crush childrens testicles again? Wait, are you saying I was mislead? Appears so...

[1976donzi]

Fuck Johnny boy Yoo, waterboard him and get him to STFU

[ihsxps]

@Mirani2 That is what is so galling about Mr. Yoo's answer. As much as it sickens me that the power of the government to torture is now an open question in America, this was not even a question about torture. He was asked if the President has the power to order a brutal assault on a child hostage in order to obtain information from a third party. In Mr. Woo's legal opinion, Congress is powerless to protect an innocent child from sexual mutilation by the Commander in Chief in time of war.

[Mirani2]

@ihsxps I cannot stand the idea that an innocent child- who will spend the rest of his days in shame and terror, wondering what he ever did wrong- would be treated in this way.

[Mirani2]

What could a CHILD have possibly done to warrant this? What about if the child is innocent.

John Yoo doesn't feel that child's pain because he HAS no balls!

[johnroshan]

@shoeboxtube I grant you that this was in fact a loaded question.  However, the answer given by Yoo was absolutely horrendous! Under no circumstance is torture of a human being allowed, much less a child. "UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES" must have been the answer.

[chuckupd]

This is the voice of PURE evil.