Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Dr. Strangelove has nothing on West Point law professor William Bradford. Unlike Stanley Kubrick's crazed doctor, or even the unhinged General Buck Turgidson, Prof. Bradford doesn't want to just kill America's supposed enemies abroad, he wants to take out the traitors here at home as well. That means killing pretty much everyone who dares question the war on terror.
Don't worry though, it's all legal! At least that's the argument he made in his absolutely nutballs 180-page manifesto which an even nuttier editorial board at George Mason's National Security Law Journal decided to publish in full. According to Bradford's piece, lawful military targets in the war on terror include religious sites, civilians, "law school facilities, scholars' home offices and media outlets where they give interviews."
Bradford's Not Getting Along With His Colleagues
Bradford's thesis is pretty simple: anyone who questions the war on terror is an enemy combatant, who the U.S. military should be free to target. In "Trahison des Professeurs: The Critical Law of Armed Conflict Academy as an Islamist Fifth Column," Bradford proposes having the army attack Islamic holy sites, which he believes will somehow stem Islamic extremism and anti-American sentiment. Of course it would. Those attacks should be taken out "even if it means great destruction, innumerable enemy casualties, and civilian collateral damage," by jingo!
Pilgrims to Mecca aren't the main target of Bradford's scorn, however. That's reserved for his fellow law professors. Bradford describes professors who question the war on terror as affiliated through some sort of "Critical Law of Armed Conflict Academy," or CLOACA. According to Bradford, "CLOACA scholarship and advocacy that attenuates U.S. arms and undermines American will are PSYOPs," or psychological warfare. "CLOACA members are thus combatants who, like all other combatants, can be targeted at any time and place."
Turns out John Yoo's Torture Memos weren't the most outrageous things to come out of legal academia after all.
More Shocking Than Bradford's Writing
The only thing more troubling than Bradford's twisted legal logic is the fact that the law department at West Point, America's most respected military academy, thought he was worthy of employment. It's not like West Point couldn't have done some background research either. As Above the Law pointed out, Bradford made headlines ten years ago when he claimed he was denied tenure at Indiana University because he was too patriotic. When people questioned his claims back then, they quickly found out that much of Bradford's resume had been falsified.
Then there's George Mason, where the law school's national security journal decided that Bradford's ideas were worth disseminating. Perhaps they just assumed that no one bothered reading law journals (almost true!) or that 180 pages of crazy was a good way to fill up their summer issue. Whatever their logic, they've since repented, repudiating the piece.
Bradford resigned from West Point on Monday. Free from academic work, he can now devote himself fully to protecting our precious bodily fluids.