An assistant professor of the US military academy at West Point has argued that legal scholars critical of the war on terror represent a “treasonous” fifth column that should be attacked as enemy combatants.
In an academic paper William Bradford wrote that he wants them, their home offices, law schools where they teach and media outlets interviewing them targeted like radical Islamists, “even if it means great destruction, innumerable enemy casualties, and civilian collateral damage,” he wrote
“Shocking and extreme as this option might seem, (dissenting) scholars, and the law schools that employ them, are – at least in theory – targetable so long as attacks are proportional, distinguish non-combatants from combatants, employ nonprohibited weapons, and contribute to the defeat of Islamism,” he also claimed.
The Guardian reports: West Point is the revered undergraduate institution north of New York City where the US army educates its future officer corps. It prides itself on the rigor of its curriculum. Representatives from the school said Bradford had only begun his employment there on 1 August.
Bradford’s article, Trahison des Professeurs: The Critical Law of Armed Conflict Academy as an Islamist Fifth Column, appeared in the most recent issue of the National Security Law Journal, a student-run publication at the George Mason School of Law. Bradford clarifies that the term means “treason of the professors”, itself an allusion to a famous attack on French intellectuals from the 1920s.
In the paper, Bradford identifies himself as an “associate professor of law, national security and strategy, National Defense University”, seemingly his previous job before West Point. But a representative of the National Defense University said Bradford was a contractor at the prestigious Defense Department-run institution, “never an NDU employee nor an NDU professor”.
It appears not to be the first time Bradford misrepresented his credentials. He resigned from Indiana University’s law school in 2005 after his military record showed he had exaggerated his service. (Among his paper’s criticisms of supposedly treasonous lawyers is “intellectual dishonesty”.)
The National Security Law Journal’s editor-in-chief has called the article’s publication a “mistake” and an “egregious breach of professional decorum”.
“We cannot ‘unpublish’ it, of course, but we can and do acknowledge that the article was not presentable for publication when we published it, and that we therefore repudiate it with sincere apologies to our readers,” the editor-in-chief, Rick Myers, wrote on the journal’s website.