´╗┐John Yoo: Law professor, former official in the United States Department of Justice.

Details: He was a law professor at the state of California, Berkley School of Law. He wrote a book on the Presidential Powers and the war on terror as well as numerous amounts of newspaper articles and journals. He was also part of the Pennsylvania Bar, was also part of the Bush Administration, in legal justification. He stated that "the Geneva Convention was not applied to 'enemy combatants' and they can use other 'interrogation techniques''. John Yoo

This ties into the Constitution because this is against the 8th amendment, cruel and unusual punishment. The Bush administration's logic is that this isn't cruel and unusual punishment, it is 'enhanced interrogation techniques." As mentioned before, these laws don't apply to people not in war; even though that this is "legally right", to many, this is morally wrong, and because they aren't the ones who are torturing them, John Yoo is basically justifying how this is legal, and he himself does not need to torture them. The men of the nation, who most proudly serve, do not join to torture detainees and watch them suffer, but they are here to serve in the nation's interest.

This picture ties into this project because, as said in this caption, John Yoo is justifying how torture is legal in the nation, and how it isn't wrong. An example is Guantanamo Bay, located in Cuba, allowed torture to detainees. When the case Hamdan vs. Rumfeld took place, this questioned the power of Guantanamo Bay, and under the rulings of the Supreme Court, duh duh, duh duh duh duh, future prisoners were under the protection of Article 3.

images.jpg
Without Displaying Torture, this picture perfectly suits John Yoo
Quote from the Constitution-"In order to form a more perfect union"----- Framers of the Constitution.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.phawker.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/john_yoo_torture.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.phawker.com/2009/05/11/heckuva-a-job-why-is-this-man-bloviating-about-supreme-court-replacements-in-the-inquirer/&usg=__DZi0eMy2pOtGtailV9gXK95eUPQ=&h=299&w=500&sz=115&hl=en&start=0&sig2=2in3-4Te45vXjvJ0uMzBhA&zoom=1&tbnid=PE4HVYmmXVfu6M:&tbnh=99&tbnw=166&ei=wp-7TM_xLYWynAfQj7nMDQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3DJohn%2BYoo%2Bactions%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1C1GPCK_enUS387US365%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D699%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=957&vpy=91&dur=439&hovh=119&hovw=200&tx=151&ty=64&oei=wp-7TM_xLYWynAfQj7nMDQ&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=28&ved=1t:429,r:6,s:0