is hanging out. In an article entitled, Backsliding on Ford’s ban on assassination in the Christian Science Monitor, the Ancient Mariner Schorr discusses how Ford signed an executive order banning “political assassinations.” According to Schorr:
Since then, an executive order signed by Ford has banned US government employees from engaging in, or conspiring to engage in, political assassination. But after 9/11, President Bush issued a “finding” which makes exceptions from the murder ban for known terrorist leaders if capture is impractical.
That makes Ford’s executive order 11905, the ban on political assassinations, which was updated by subsequent presidents, not very operative any more.
You know what’s not very operative anymore, Mr. Schorr? Your dendrites. We are at war. Known terrorist leaders who cannot be captured are not, for the most part, agents of recognized governments. It certainly stretches the definition of assassination beyond all recognition to claim that the killing of enemy combatants is equivalent. Are you suggesting that we kill the foot soldiers and spare the higher-ups?
Admiral Yamamoto was shot down during WWII, and killed. Was that a political assassination? Are you the same guy who makes a point of stating, whenever he can, that we still haven’t gotten bin Laden?
You are such a decerebrate fuckhead that it’s impossible even to put into words how deeply I scorn this piece of crap agitprop cross-dressed as political-historical analysis. You suck, old man.
Sorry, lost my cool.
Daniel Schorr is senile news analyst at National Public Radio
Interesting. I saw that and did not have the same reaction. Except for the “quotes” “around” the word “finding”, I thought it was factual.
Although, I hate him on NPR.
Anyway, my thoughts were moving more in the direction of how so many people and nations and institutions are still using the Geneva Convention as the means to evaluate and respond to enemies and threats. Wasn’t Ford into making sure the US was fully compliant with all things Geneva? I could be wrong but that’s in my brain for some reason.
Useful in its time, but how about some updates and rewrites? Did I miss that? Is that on the UN agenda?
Or as NPR would write, responding to “enemies” and “threats.”
lunarpuff, that’s nowhere near the UN agenda, revising the Conventions. It’s a damned good idea, though.
Reading or listening to Schorr, I’m just surprised he hasn’t accused the US of having ordered the assassination of Gemayel to give cover to the Zionist invasion of Lebanon. He is a complete hack.
Which reminds me- why are the taxpayers expected to contribute $400,000,000 to fund the likes of Schorr?
Has Air America applied for a grant yet?
It seems to me that for Schorr to say that President Bush’ finding makes President Ford’s executive order “not very operative any more,” then he, Schorr, would have to believe that any political opposition to Bush, be it Nancy Pelosi or Jacques Chirac, is considered by Bush to be by definition terrorist in nature. Or Schorr does.
Well put, Scott.
Leaving aside the sheer idiocy of his position, contractors technically aren’t US government employees. According to IRS rules, anyway.
Blackwater, anyone?
WWII took place before Ford’s ban and Yamamoto was a soldier.
I see. So, after Ford’s ban, it became illegal to kill extra-state actors perpetrating or plotting to perpetrate terrorist acts?
Your powers of observation are quite stunning. Now explain why that would matter.
I don’t know why I even read Schorr—I guess it’s the same compulsion that makes one gawk at the aftermath of a gory car wreck. He engenders the same feeling of fascinated revulsion.
What world are people like him living in? Are we supposed to continue committing civilizational suicide just so that he and his ilk can feel morally superior?
Completely unrelated, Daniel Schorr still sounds as if he’s reading his written copy, word for word, comma for comma, through a mouthful of turkey, dressing, mashed potatoes and gravy and cranberry relish.
You just can’t get the fresh talent to do that.
It’s that bogus patina of exclusively wise credibility the Left faithfully laps up, glistening drop by glistening drop, the little music bites adding their insider-only mood shifts as needed. Voodoo as news.
What a script. NPR has become a parody of itself.
Oh, and pie. Pumpkin pie, with lots of whipped cream.
Mmmmmmm….pie.
Slartibartfast beat me to the punch – I find Schorr painful to listen to, for reasons in addition to his pomposity, bias, & lunacy.
That said, and notwithstanding its other flaws & biases, NPR is still excellently produced & quite listenable. That, plus listening to it hones my bullshit filter.
Hear hear, Patton.
I used to enjoy Schorr for the sheer weight of his pronouncements. Not what he was saying, just the way he said it. Then I started listening to what he was saying.
Sigh. I don’t like to speak ill of the elderly. But I’m sure that he was just as foolish, and possibly as arrogant, when he was young.
Ya’ know I think that is one of the reasons why I also hold back some of my comments.
He’s not the most evil or annoying of the NPR commenters by far (IMO) and he’s also 90!!
I don’t care for his views but I can only hope I’m that active when I’m his age.
Daniel Schorr still sounds as if he’s reading his written copy, word for word, comma for comma, through a mouthful of turkey, dressing, mashed potatoes and gravy and cranberry relish.
Perfect. I loath everyone at NPR who is involved with the “news” operation. All of their yak-masters ooze such a narcotic soaked ill-liberalism that it truly is one of the biggest wastes of taxpayer money this side of the Yang-Tze.
Solution: all that tax money goes to the first university that can produce a daily news show cemented in balanced, fact-based reporting. No ignoring news that favors either side of the debate, no pejoratives in one direction, no weak quote/strong quote, no tying disparate items together. None of the slanted, biased, advocacy crap that passes as journalism.
I love the music, though. They are six months ahead of commercial stations.
WWII took place before Ford’s ban and Yamamoto was a soldier.
Well, in point of fact Yamommoto Isoruku was a Fleet Admiral and Commander-in-Chief of the Dai-Nippon Teikoku Kaigun – a post that had political as well as military resonance in the ruling structure of Japan at that time. Lawnguylander might find it interesting to inquire into the background to the decision to bring down Yamamoto’s aircraft in 1943.
Well. There’s still ‘Click and Clack the Tappet Brothers” and the guy that does sound effects on Prarie Home Companion. It has that going for it.
Yeah, he’s good, Rusty. And Shamrock and Thistle.
Why is C*SPAN not a presence in radio? The same pot of money that NPR leaches to pursue its agenda could be used to build that out. I think it’s pretty clear that one of the reasons NPR survives in spite of its insipid dreck is that it really has no competition. Their audience has not even kept up with population growth over the last decade … the market is saying something here…
Correct me if I’m wrong, but can’t a President supercede a previous Exec. Order with his own Exec. Order? Are they written in stone, or something even harder?
Or, can’t executive authority refuse to enforce a previous “finding” and Order?
This would cast Schorr as just barking at the moon.
Harry – you’re right – Presidents can supercede prior executive orders. Note that Schorr vaguely concedes that Ford’ order was “updated by subsequent presidents.” Here’s an article that gives an overview of how 11902 has been amended over time. I think you’ll find the article surprising. I did anyway. I imagine Schorr would as well.
Fun facts I found in an old Washington Times article (1999-08-23):
* The process of issuing executive orders is spelled out by executive order.
* Only twice in history have federal courts directly overturned one. (They included Mr. Clinton’s 1995 directive barring federal contractors from hiring striker replacements, which conflicted with existing law, and President Truman’s 1952 order seizing steel mills in order to avoid a nationwide strike. The Supreme Court nullified the latter because the president acted during the Korean conflict under “emergency” war powers even though no war was declared.)
* Current numbering, now at 13132, began on Oct 20 1862, when Abraham Lincoln signed No. 1, establishing a “provisional court” for Louisiana.
* Every executive order must cite an authorizing statute and theoretically be aimed at government agencies under the president’s purview.
* Despite uncontradicted statements attributed to Rush Limbaugh that Mr. Clinton issued more executive orders than any prior president, his numbers are at the low end for recent presidents, despite questions about content. Mr. Clinton has averaged 45.8 executive orders a year, the least among the last eight presidents except for Mr. Bush, who averaged 42 per year.
Mr. Carter leads the pack with 80 per year, followed by Mr. Kennedy (76), and Gerald Ford (70). All, however, fell behind a pace that averaged 96 orders per year since 1862.