Even shorter Rivkin/Casey: Our money! Our precious money!

What’s the legal reason for taking an Ethiopian and transferring him into Pakistani custody? What charges?

Oh, wait, no charges? And then international law gets violated?

Those two fuckers need to be extraordinarily rendered into a Turkish prison for some reason.

The Shorter is funny and all, but everyone should read the original article

It is truly vile – a John Yoo style masterpiece of mis-statement and mis-direction , where at the end of the story the “good” guys are held blameless for aiding and abetting torture and murder because they dotted their I’s and crossed their T’s.

Please take a moment to read this screed against humanity and decency then email the authors:

lcasey@bakerlaw.com
drivkin@bakerlaw.com

I love legal anlysis from people who haven’t read the decisions they’re citing.

Shorter Riven/Casey: Color us jealous that FDR was able to send an entire race to concentration camps while we can’t even abduct foreigners without the courts getting involved.

Sweet baby Jesus in heaven – has WSJ/OJ ever published an Op/Ed that wasn’t a reactionary screed?

It’s a rhetorical question…

http://www.nmatv.com/view_video.php?viewkey=7f89ddbebc2ac9128303&page=1&viewtype=&category=m

OMG that video is AWESOME, Marie. Thanks for the laughs.

[…] for sending us this video, Marie. It’s a non-stop laugh-a-second cornucopia of […]

I’m actually ok with letting wingnuts decide what is and isn’t torture, provided they meet me halfway and base all their judgments on personal experience.
First, we determine what is unquestionably torture, and they go through that.
Then, after some time for healing and counseling, they get subjected to the ‘debatable’ practices.
Afterwards, they all get together for pie, punch, and group weeping, and decide what’s what.
Hell, I’d even support a bill making the Wingnut Torture Taste-test Committee the legally binding authority on what is n isn’t torture. Provided we filter out the sado-masochists first. Which might thin the eligible numbers of wingnuts out a bit, admittedly.

This particular lawsuit might be a stretch, but Rivkin and Casey’s analysis here is total horseshit:

These are real advantages from an antiwar activist’s perspective, since the result is likely to be a marked aversion by the citizenry in general, and government contractors in particular, to engage in conduct, however lawful, supporting the war. This alteration in the corporate mind set, such that risk-averse companies, no matter how patriotic their management, would find it safer to say no to any war-related requests from the federal government is very likely the goal of at least some activists.

I know it’s too much to ask the Wall mother fucking Street Journal to provide any evidence that corporations are shying away from lucrative military contracts, but I guess the paper’s opinion is that we should grant them total legal immunity so that they never have to worry their pretty little heads about it. They are just doing it because they love America, right?

And yet, a poor 73-year-old black woman sues to get wages for the overtime she worked and the US Supreme court “on Monday in a 9-0 decision ruled that federal minimum wage and overtime laws do not apply to home care workers.”

http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=45523

America levels the playing field for the lowest paid workers…now everyone in home care can earn third world guest worker wages.

[…] give a shit if the Wall Street Journal runs countless op-eds supporting torture (though actually, they already do that): they have the right to say that shit. And similarly, I have the right to trash and make fun of […]