The Memo is online. Post your favorite parts here.

[Evil_Captor]

You see the term “fascist” bandied about a lot on Internet message boards. But this memo is EXACTLY how fascists operate in a bureaucracy. To the extent that this kind of thinking is part of the Bush administration, the Bush administration can logically and reasonably be described as fascist.

[jjimm]

@Evil Captor

But this memo is EXACTLY how fascists operate in a bureaucracy.

Hear hear. This is indeed the proof of that which I had hitherto suspected.

[ElvisL1ves]

@elucidator

There must be a word for it, a descriptive noun for the sense of absurd horror when you witness perfectly ordinary people discuss how to commit a moral outrage as though it were the county municipal tax plan.

“The banality of evil.” -Hannah Arendt

[manwithaplan]

@Spavined Gelding

This nation must stand for something. We say it stands for (under God, for Christ’s sake) liberty and justice for all. We now stand just as exposed to the judgment of the world as did all those good Germans who bosted of Germany as a bastion of culture in the years leading up to WWII. There is a special corner of Hell for people who would betray the nation’s principles, integrity and pledged word for expedience.

I wish to say, as a foreigner, that this is as perfect a statement of american patriotism as I have ever heard. The Bush administration is as unamerican an edifice as has ever been constructed and no amount of wrapping themselves in the flag can change that.

[Sevastopol]

The silence from some quarters is eloquent.

Within the party over which Bush presides, there are decent people who recognise the absolute nature of this memo.

No-one with respectable ambitions of leadership can side with this. Fissures and splitting before your very eyes.

[NurseCarmen]

Hey, you cherry pick from the Bible long enough, and eventually you can transfer that talent to pert near every document.

[World_Eater]

@manwithaplan

I wish to say, as a foreigner, that this is as perfect a statement of american patriotism as I have ever heard.

I wholeheartedly agree.

[hapaXL]

@elucidator

There must be a word for it, a descriptive noun for the sense of absurd horror when you witness perfectly ordinary people discuss how to commit a moral outrage as though it were the county municipal tax plan. The prose is utterly calm and civil, the intent is wholly savage.

From Indian genocide to slavery to colonialism to modern international finance, it has always served as a fundamental part of Western Civilization. The greatest devil is usually dressed in a suit and he speaks in a language meant to confuse. Intelligence and education are no great indicator of morality.

[iampunha]

There’s a right choice bit on the top of page 5 (I am very very bored and so am typing up the whole of the thing. If anyone comes across a copy of the thing typed out, lemme know and I’ll stop:)):

“A good faith belief need not be a reasonable one.”

I’ll leave it to someone else to explore the possibilities behind that one.

[chula]

@Diogenes the Cynic

If you read them both I think you’ll see that the JD memo is much more overtly evil.

FYI, Justice Department = Department of Justice = DOJ. DOJ is a very well known and recognizable acronym in the legal world.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@chula

FYI, Justice Department = Department of Justice = DOJ. DOJ is a very well known and recognizable acronym in the legal world.

I know. I don’t care.

[chula]

I don’t think the explanation of specific intent was a good example of what’s wrong with this memo. “Specific intent” has a legal meaning understandable to lawyers. The explanation of the meaning is actually pretty thorough and clear to me. Unfortunately, I couldn’t explain it any better. It’s sort of like the difference between 1st degree murder and involuntary manslaughter.

[PatriotX]

I’ve heard that Jefferson said that there maybe instances where the president could be morally compelled to break the law. It wasn’t a break the law with impunity or break the law and and try to hide it sort of thing, though. Jefferson’s take was different in that he advocated the PotUSA subsequently throwing himkself upon the mercy of the country, admitting and confessing his crimes and accepting their judgement.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

I understand the language just fine. There is no esoteric distinction which is being missed by us simple laypeople. The memo trys to argue in weasespeak that if a criminal act is committed with a different specific intent than merely the result of the act, then the crime is somehow mitigated, even if the result of the act is fully known beforehand.

It’s a bullshit distinction and it wouldn’t fucking fly in a courtroom. If this were a valid distinction it could be argued for virtually any crime.

“I knew that if I shot her I would kill her, but my intent was to kill the fly on her forehead.”

It’s not like the difference betweem Murder one and involuntary manslaughter, because the act is still deliberate and the result of the act is still known before the act is committed. At best, it’s like the difference between first degree murder and felony murder and even that’s a stretch.

[Larry_Mudd]

@chula

FYI, Justice Department = Department of Justice = DOJ. DOJ is a very well known and recognizable acronym in the legal world.

It’s an acronym?

That makes sense, if it’s pronounced the way I assume it is. Can we then talk about DOJ-y reasoning?

[Apos]

@Cervaise

Oh, hey, wasn’t Saddam a head of state? Can’t he authorize torture and other Geneva Conventions “violations” if the integrity of his nation was at stake? Wouldn’t any and all extreme interrogation measures be entirely justifiable if they were carried out with his authorization?

Sure, the Kurds were rebelling. Iranian agents had infiltrated them and there was no way to sort them out. Sure, chemical weapons aren’t great, but nobody major strongly objected to its use, and it got the job done in quelling the rebellion and saving the national security of Iraq. sometimes the President has to break the rules, and some heads, in order to save the country.

Now, in light of that memo, what response could there be?

[Apos]

And, I’m not saying there can’t be any response to it. But doesn’t it ring a little falser in light of that memo?

[kaylasdad99]

@NurseCarmen

Hey, you cherry pick from the Bible long enough, and eventually you can transfer that talent to pert near every document.

That WHOOOOSHING sound you’re hearing is the above post going right over my head. Could I trouble you for a clarification, Nurse Carmen?

[rjung]

So, am I the only doper who’s flabbergasted by the amount of front-page barn-burnin’ news coverage this memo is getting?

[tagos]

This Won’t Hurt Much: - a succinct summary of the memo, by Terry Jones of Python fame

For some time now, I’ve been trying to find out where my son goes after choir practice. He simply refuses to tell me. He says it’s no business of mine where he goes after choir practice and it’s a free country.

To begin with I simply put a bag over his head and chained him to a radiator. But did that persuade him?

I hesitated to gravitate to harsher interrogation methods because, after all, he is my son. Then Donald Rumsfeld came to my rescue.

The March 6 memo, prepared for Mr Rumsfeld explained that what may look like torture is not really torture at all. It states that: if someone “knows that severe pain will result from his actions, if causing such harm is not his objective, he lacks the requisite specific intent even though the defendant did not act in good faith”.

So I’m going to round up all the children in the neighbourhood, chain them and set dogs on them. I might accidentally kill one or two - but I won’t have intended to - and perhaps I’ll take some photos of my wife standing on the dead bodies, and then I’ll show the photos to the other kids, and finally, perhaps, I might get to find out where my son goes after choir practice. After all, I’ll only be doing what the US administration has been condoning since 9/11.

I so love this guy’s humour.