Like anyone that has ever tripped over their own ever so sophisticated rationale for engaging in immoral acts Glenn Reynolds keeps digging his own metaphorical grave just a tad deeper with every new word he writes on selective murder, More of Glenn Reynolds’ Wisdom on Political Assassination. Having heard so many thugs come up with every lame excuse in the book for their behavior I have to give the thugs higher marks for imagination if nothing else. They’re generally not law professors, you know people that should certainly know better. Reynolds writes,
Other law professors have, of course, made similar arguments, at far greater length than my blog post. Campos, himself a law professor, could have learned these things through a simple Google search, but apparently did not.
Reynolds seems to be the one that doesn’t know how to use Google or perhaps he just uses some kind of wing-nut filter that only shows him the results that are in sync with his unhinged world view. It’s not just that his opinion is wrong, he uses bent facts to justify his opinion.
“Self-defense” is understood to refer to an “actual or imminent armed attack”:
Under Article 51, the triggering condition for the exercise of self-defense is the occurrence of an armed attack (“if an armed attack occurs”). Notwithstanding the literal meaning of that language, some, though not all, authorities interpret Article 51 to permit anticipatory self-defense in response to an imminent attack. A generally recognized guide to the conditions for anticipatory self-defense is Daniel Webster’s statement regarding the Caroline affair of 1837: Self-defense is justified only when the necessity for action is “instant, overwhelming, and leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation.” (Letter from Daniel Webster, Secretary of State, to Lord Ashburton, August 6, 1842, reprinted in 2 John Bassett Moore, A Digest of International Law 409, 412 (1906)).
Reynolds who the great state of Tennessee has to put up with feels that he is under imminent and urgent threat from Iran in much the same way that George Bush thought he was defending Texas from the Vietcong when he ducked the draft to join the TANG. That said, yes there are people such as Osama Bin Laden who have proven themselves a threat beyond any reasonable doubt, but to suggest that all Iranian officials and clerics are fair game just doesn’t qualify in the same way that OBL does – A difference that is very obvious to us non-kool-aid drinkers ( Iranian official offers glimpse from within: A desire for U.S. ally). Mark Kleiman ( bless him for his patience in debating these nationalistic rubs) writes Eugene Volokh on assassination and academic freedom
1. First and foremost, the assassination debate is a remarkably stupid discussion to be having right now. There is every reason to think that the current Iranian regime is unpopular, and that the Guardian Council is getting nervous about Ahmadinejad. The relevant supplement to diplomacy right now is not violence, but subversion: not the financing of MeK or the various silly exile groups, but moving the Iranian political process, which is after all semi-republican, in the right direction.
The current cabal of rulers in Iran are not the most lovable folks in the world. They are clever and manipulative. The Right goes wrong as usual by thinking that the best, first and only response in dealing with them is assassinations and tactical nukes. They’re like some drivers I know that only know two speeds, parked and eighty miles per hour. Do we really need to say that nukes have a way of punishing the innocent along with the presumed guilty.
5. Two of the proposed targets are “radical mullahs” and “atomic scientists.” Eugene seems to think that the “scientists” are more plausibly legitimate targets than the mullahs, on the grounds that building nuclear weapons is more obviously wicked than preaching. That makes a certain amount of sense, though perhaps one ought to distinguish between members of the Guardian Council and those who don’t wield political power.
To imagine a small band of plain clothed American assassins wandering around Tehran reminds me of one of those absurd David Zucker movies. The the Iranians respond by having some assassins stalking around America and suddenly we have two nations in one international game of paint ball with real bullets. This is why its difficult to take the Right seriously as a a movement of ideas, I can get ideas like those of Reynolds and Volokh from any seven year old with a vivid imagination.
( Just a note on the Reynolds should be fired meme. Much better to hold him up the ridicule that he so richly deserves)
Seriously is Dick Cheney having some kind of medical problem that is effecting his mental stabilityEXCLUSIVE: Cheney Says Pelosi Strategy Would Validate Al Qaeda
Karl: So, Mr. Vice President, Tony Blair is announcing that the British are beginning their withdrawal from Iraq. Are you concerned about that?
Cheney: No, they’ve indicated for some time now that they were going to make adjustments based on conditions on the ground. I think they believe that in southern Iraq, that Basra region where they’ve been most active, we have made significant progress. And I think that’s one of the reasons they feel that they can draw down their forces there.
A rudimentary comprehension of Cheny’s remarks tells us that things in Iraq have improved so dramatically that hey its as cool as James Dean’s Levis that the British are packing up and heading back home for some god awful warm beer. But no wait we must have misunderstood,
I think, in fact, if we were to do what Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Murtha are suggesting, all we’ll do is validate the al Qaeda strategy. The al Qaeda strategy is to break the will of the American people. In fact, knowing they can’t win in a stand-up fight, try to persuade us to throw in the towel and come home, and then they win because we quit.
Things are going great in Iraq, the British are leaving which is just dandy, yet Murtha and Pelosi are on al-Queda’s side because they are against sending in more troops , troops that don’t even have enough rifles or mortars – National Guard May Undertake Iraq Duty Early
The accelerated timetable illustrates the cascading effect that the White House plan to increase the number of troops in Iraq by more than 21,000 is putting on the entire Army and in particular on Reserve forces, which officers predicted would face severe challenges in recruiting, training and equipping their forces.
“We’re behind the power curve, and we can’t piddle around,” Maj. Gen. Harry M. Wyatt III, commander of the Oklahoma National Guard, said in an interview. He added that one-third of his soldiers lacked the M-4 rifles preferred by active-duty soldiers and that there were also shortfalls in night vision goggles and other equipment. If his unit is going to be sent to Iraq next year, he said, “We expect the Army to resource the Guard at the same level as active-duty units.”
Considering Cheney and by proxy Bush’s continuing mental breakdowns Speaker Pelosi was very understated in saying, Statement on Cheney Iraq Comments
Vice President Cheney continues to question the patriotism of those of us in Congress who challenge the Bush Administration’s misguided policies in Iraq, but his latest attack is beneath the office of the Vice President, especially at a time of war.
Mischaracterizations by the Vice President will not dissuade Congress from developing, on a bipartisan basis, a responsible new direction for U.S. policy in Iraq that brings our troops home safely and soon. I hope the President will repudiate and distance himself from the Vice President’s remarks.
Squeezing in one last thing for the day, Conservative judicial activism – Shielding the Powerful
The Supreme Court’s decision yesterday overturning a nearly $80 million punitive damage award against Philip Morris is a win for corporate wrongdoers. It stretches the Constitution’s guarantee of due process in a way that will make it easier for companies that act reprehensibly to sidestep serious punishments.
It also provides unsettling new evidence that the court is more concerned about — and more willing to protect — the powerful than the powerless.
“Republican comes in the dictionary just after reptile and just above repugnant.” – J. Roberts