Eddie Beaver

John Yoo, perhaps a tad angry with the hefty historical down payment legal scholars and many of his own contemporaries in the Bush Administration have placed on his exceptionally poor legal scholarship, or maybe even a bit nervous that he may be the fall guy for torture prosecutions, returns to launch a typically shoddy blast against President Obama and the military for reversing Bush's interrogation policies. Yoo presents an either/or fallacy argument in the argument that American must torture or expect terrorism. Rather than consider the matter with an open mind and make an honest argument about its potential efficacy as responsible adults such as Robert Kaplan,  Dan Abbott (who also helpfully pointed out the problem of the scattered definitions of torture and even provided an arguably excellent definition himself*) and numerous others have done, he asserts with no corresponding evidence that it works and is essentially the only method that does. He glosses over (as his legal memos tended to) pesky precedents that might impede his argument, such as the multiple productive interrogations of terrorists by FBI agents that were interrupted by the CIA's lack of patience (and possible need to beat Donald Rumsfeld to the punch in impressing the President and Vice President on detainee intelligence revelations). Not surprisingly, Yoo degenerates the exceptional service of military interrogators (and FBI white teams) who have used inventive, adapative techniques (along with classic ones that have worked well for decades) to glean useful intelligence from terrorists and insurgents. Yoo seemingly can't comprehend or can't believe that their methods work. Few are under the illusion that a lot of this has been caused by a failure of responsibility and oversight in all three government branches. The extraordinary rendition program accelerated in the Clinton administration and left CIA agents out to dry on exactly what the rules were for their operational behavior and decision-making. Speaker Pelosi and other prominent Democrats screaming about torture were perfectly willing to approve its use or ignore its occurrence when it was convenient for them to do so. The courts have generally avoided this like the plague, save for the military tribunals at Gitmo which have evaluated the outcomes of interrogations with torture and found them illegal under their operating guidelines, partially because some of the methods involved violated federal law. Neither should people be impressed that the Army Field Manual on Interrogation is now the gold standard of interrogation. Techniques devised and studied that are found to be effective should be considered for adaption, dependent upon the situation. A more reasonable world would allow for the common-sense suggestion from Phillip Bobbitt that intelligence agents and interrogators convinced they must torture a suspect to stop an act of terror or save lives be prosecuted and have their actions weighed by a jury of their peers (fellow professionals) to see if they truly were required. In the end, Yoo simply can't admit there could be a better way. He is wedded to his legacy of poor legal scholarship and lawbreaking. Were someone to take the pro-Cheney (potentially pro-Yoo) case and ask for an independent commission to assess (not indict) the claims of Cheney, Yoo and others, perhaps the evidence Yoo and others fail to mention in support of their seemingly baseless claims will come to light. In the absence of such evidence and patent lies told on a regular basis by this bunch, skepticism is certainly warranted. *His offered definition:  "might be that is painful, harmful, and without interrogative value. "

Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND),  recent recipient of a sweetheart mortgage deal from sub-prime superstar Countrywide, is a staunch champion of "Buying American", particularly in the Congressional stimulus package. As a protectionist measure that could impose substantial costs on free/fair trade progression around the world, this is a terrible idea. That Dorgan is unlikely to be punished for his corruption is disappointing but not surprising. That "buying American" is likely to be implemented as national economic policy is perhaps even less surprising but extremely disheartening for brighter hopes for the nation's economic future.

This former college dropout is about finished with his Associates (a pesky Stats course left) and ready to jump to UNC-Greensboro this summer after being accepted in spite of my previous egregious failure. I am majoring in Geography (likely along the GIS track) and seeking a second major. Right now, Anthropology is at the top of the list, with a Public Health minor as well. Ideas and suggestions are always welcome. I sincerely thank those who have helped me throughout my time in school already with excellent guidance.

I have written before about the need for America to move beyond the Cold War and be pragmatic in its dealings with Cuba. (Che was a tyrannical bastard but he had one great idea.... H/T Dr. Bulldog & Ronin) Dave Schuler talks about China's plan to provide an estimated $123 billion universal health care system for its citizens. Ezra Klein discusses how Chinese leaders see the plan as a way to induce consumption and economic dynamism. Chris Albon offers a link to an article about Cuba's education of thousands of foreign students in the medical fields and its expeditionary medical efforts. If you can ignore the the socialist drivel that appears throughout, the author offers some keen insights into a new project Cuba has conceived with its Venezuelan allies to train medical students in the latter country.

Each of the these new university programs dispenses with the traditional university campus and creates a “medical university without walls.” In the new system, there is regular classroom instruction at community polyclinics and diagnostic clinics, and this is supplemented by a great deal of participation and observation with family medicine specialists as they attend to patients in nearby Barrio Adentro offices. ...... Cubans, with the help of Venezuela, are currently educating more doctors, about 70,000 in all, than all the medical schools in the United States, which typically have somewhere between 64,000 to 68,000 students enrolled in their programs.

A good argument could be made that this is the first area America and Cuba can work together in, sharing resources in an effort to train medical personnel from participating nations and then reaping the benefits years later with more dedicated staff in "Seam" and "Gap" states alike.  Cuba already does an admirable job training future medical professionals, including a few Americans. A wise use of dwindling foreign aid funds would be a public/private sector effort to dramatically expand this effort. No shortage exists of qualified instructors in Cuba, let alone America. Doctors, nurses, dentists and other qualified medical personnel could be trained, developing indigenous skill sets in parts of the world sorely lacking them. Conditions would apply, with at least a binding contract to render health services in their home country or another non-Core nation for at least 8 years. China was mentioned earlier because while they have the fiscal capacity to create such a program, it is perhaps iffy whether they have the professional capacity. A Cuba-US program of this sort could work with the Chinese (and the Indians, amongst others) to provide this expansive medical diplomacy. *In my time in Miami, I heard many bitter complaints and attacks on Cuban society from exiles. Alone among most present subjects, the quality of the Cuban medical schools were praised. They were well-regarded, unlike most professionals and institutions in Cuba.

We have it for many drug crimes, why not for white-collar crimes?

My maternal grandfather was an Ohio native & WW2 vet who married a Florida nurse towards the end of the war. They lived for many years before their divorce in Crestview, Florida. In the '50s, he ran a general store and angered locals by refusing to segregate his business (whites and blacks stood in line together had the same shopping hours, etc) and daring to employ a black female cashier. He could give a damn about race, only wanting to make a profit to provide for his growing family of six daughters and one son. After months of threats and warnings, someone vandalized his store and stole most of his merchandise. No one was ever arrested and he ended up being unable to recoup his losses. Living in Panama now, to this day, he professes indignation at what happened. He always said to the family during the '50s and '60s that character and skill is what matters. Today, a President was elected based on a majority of the American people judging his character and skill up to the task. It won't bring him back his store, but it has to bring a smile to my grandfather's face to see his beliefs validated so dramatically.

Chirol @ Coming Anarchy proposes a very different future for Mexico than the one commonly held. He imagines a "Republic of Mexico City" due to the fact that: "Over time, the central government’s control does not extend much further than the area surrounding Mexico City." Chirol's post sparks the imagination. To expand upon this prospect, what will the fate of countries in the "Gap" be in the next 2-4 years of global financial troubles? How will countries which have had to resort to bribery of the poor (as in Brazil, where Lula's government provides money to 11 million poor families) to keep them out of starvation and utter destitution find the funding to continue to do so? Will we see considerably more violence against minorities and foreigners (as we've seen in South Africa, the Philippines), which further drives away business and investment? How will cities adapt as they are flooded with more refugees from the increasingly lawless and/or hopeless hinterlands? What sort of mixed-authoritarian/populist administrations could arise to the challenge? How far can feral cities devolve?

Dick Cheney with the Weekly Standard: "And I think on the left wing of the Democratic Party, there are some people who believe that we really tortured." Cheney from the same interview: "He denied that prisoners were tortured." Rather than get flustered with the continued lies of Dick Cheney, I find humor in his defiance.  He is so out of touch with reality that he seems to ignore the condemnation his actions have produced from such visionary liberals as John McCain, George Will, Jack Goldsmith, military prosecutors at Gitmo and now, the convening authority of the military commissions, Susan J. Crawford. Cheney  violated our own laws, subverted our system of law from the Justice Department to the military, and did so with reckless abandon, not just with the top echelons of Al-Qaeda (who it is at least arguable in good conscience MAY have necessitated torture), but with lackeys and underlings, usually on flimsy evidence and often with lethal effect. Most of all, he stands proud of what he did, like the drunken fool who crashes his car into a telephone pole, survives and crawls out, smiling and proud of his daring and luck. I am reminded of the reaction in 2005 of a towering liberal (who slyly titles his blog, "Right Wing Nut House"), Rick Moran*, who without the additional detail uncovered since then in countless books and reports with plenty of government officials and military officers on the record to corroborate the guilt of Cheney, had this to say: "It’s one thing to be hard in war. It’s one thing to be pitiless in the prosecution of it. But its quite another thing to violate all tenets of civilized behavior in acheiving your objectives. Even in war, the ends cannot justify the means. If you believe that it does, then ask yourself what kind of country you will have at the end of it? Will it be the kind of country you can live in with pride? Or will history itself remember us with scorn and derision for abandoning the very principals we were fighting to protect." Given the severity of the various crises engulfing America at this time, we will likely never have any sort of justice for the crimes Cheney, Rumsfeld, Yoo and others committed. In the end, I believe a pardon should be in the works for Cheney and the rest. A pardon for all the crimes we won't have time to investigate to the extent of indicting and convicting them, but more so, a pardon to ensure rear-guard efforts to salvage their reputations or twist the facts of their crimes fail. * No disrespect meant to Rick Moran, who is the best conservative blogger I read every morning, as well as one of the most intelluctually honest and reflective writers, given to outright hilarious bouts of stupidity skewering.

I attended a funeral last Friday for the mother of a high school friend. She had  been a Vietnamese refugee and immigrated to America after the war ended. Her fate (as the bearer of an Amerasian child) would have been stark if not for the political courage shown by President Gerald Ford, who fought like hell over the objections of alleged liberal human rights champions  like Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, Robert Byrd and George McGovern to save the lives of hundreds of thousands (and over time, change the lives for the better of millions) of Vietnamese. Left behind for good, they would have faced the wrath of the Hanoi regime. Ford was determined to not stand idly by. He said later: "To do less would have added moral shame to humiliation." His efforts, along with the goodwill and generosity of many Americans, helped to give the Vietnamese refugees a decent shot at success.  Ford could earnestly say afterwards: "The refugees have proven themselves to be hard-working and industrious people with a thirst for education and a deep-seated desire to improve themselves." My friend Amy and her five siblings (two nurses, a lawyer, a plant manager and two college students) are a testament to Ford's belief in what they could achieve.

Edward Luttwak wrote ten years ago: "Hopes of military success must fade for accommodation to become more attractive than further combat." What are the chances the African Union and/or the United Nations will support the ceasefire request of Joseph Kony's Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda? The very concept of mediators in dealings with a terror organization such as the LRA is laughable. Even Hamas at least governs because of a relatively democratic vote and offers social services to its citizens. The LRA, like a parasite, merely lives off the misery of the local population its terrorizing and moves on. The US should be pouring money into Uganda and her allies in the effort to weaken the LRA as much as possible, not supporting or even accepting efforts to spare the LRA at its most vulnerable.