{"id":3357,"date":"2009-07-21T00:30:28","date_gmt":"2009-07-21T04:30:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/?p=3357"},"modified":"2009-07-21T00:44:01","modified_gmt":"2009-07-21T04:44:01","slug":"the-mother-of-causes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/2009\/07\/21\/the-mother-of-causes\/","title":{"rendered":"the MOTHER of reasons&#8230;"},"content":{"rendered":"<br \/>\n<blockquote>\n<p align=\"center\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/shrinkrap13.blogspot.com\/2009\/07\/common-cause-lists-these-as-issues-that.html\"><font color=\"#a00000\"><strong>ShrinkRap<\/strong><\/font><\/a><br \/>            07\/16\/2009<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">Common Cause lists these as issues that need to be investigated and calls for a special prosecutor to be appointed:<\/div>\n<ul>\n<li>Warrantless spying on Americans.<\/li>\n<li>Misuse of the state secrets doctrine.<\/li>\n<li>Preventive detention and secret prisons.<\/li>\n<li>Use of torture and other interrogation abuses.<\/li>\n<li>Deliberate flaunting of Congress&#8217; oversight role.<\/li>\n<li>Politicization of the Justice Department.<\/li>\n<li>Abuse of executive privilege.<\/li>\n<li>Misuse of signing statements to override laws duly passed by Congress.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<div align=\"justify\">That seems to me more than sufficient to mandate an investigation.  But I would add one glaring omission:<\/div>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong><font color=\"#300030\">Presenting false evidence and lying to Congress and to the American people, as well as the United Nations, as justification for invading Iraq, a sovereign nation which was no imminent threat to the United States.<\/font><\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/blockquote>\n<div>After I read this, I got to wondering why we don&#8217;t immediately go to the Invasion of Iraq as the most egregious of the Bush Administration&#8217;s abuses of power [and other things]. The Campaign against Iraq began in September 2002 with a media blitz, headlining the Vice President, among others:<\/div>\n<p>                 <\/p>\n<table cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"5\" border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"92%\">\n<tr>\n<td>\n<div align=\"center\">September 8, 2002 <strong><a href=\"http:\/\/www.mtholyoke.edu\/acad\/intrel\/bush\/meet.htm\" target=\"_blank\">MEET THE PRESS<\/a><\/strong><\/div>\n<hr width=\"75%\" size=\"1\" \/>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>TIM RUSSERT: One year ago when you were on MEET THE PRESS just five days after    September 11, I asked you a specific question about Iraq and Saddam Hussein&#8230; Has anything changed, in your mind?<\/sup><\/div>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, I want to be very careful about how I say this. I&rsquo;m    not here today to make a specific allegation that Iraq was somehow responsible    for 9\/11. I can&rsquo;t say that. On the other hand, since we did that interview,    new information has come to light. And we spent time looking at that relationship    between Iraq, on the one hand, and the al-Qaeda organization on the other. And    there has been reporting that suggests that there have been a number of contacts    over the years. We&rsquo;ve seen in connection with the hijackers, of course,    Mohamed Atta, who was the lead hijacker, did apparently travel to Prague on    a number of occasions. And on at least one occasion, we have reporting that    places him in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official a few months    before the attack on the World Trade Center. The debates about, you know, was    he there or wasn&rsquo;t he there, again, it&rsquo;s the intelligence business.<\/sup><\/div>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>TIM RUSSERT: What does the CIA say about that and the president?<\/sup><\/div>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>VICE PRES. CHENEY: It&rsquo;s credible. But, you know, I think a way to put    it would be it&rsquo;s unconfirmed at this point. We&rsquo;ve got&#8230;<\/sup><\/div>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>TIM RUSSERT: Anything else?<\/sup><\/div>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>VICE PRES. CHENEY: There is &#8211; again, I want to separate out 9\/11, from the other    relationships between Iraq and the al-Qaeda organization. But there is a pattern    of relationships going back many years. And in terms of exchanges and in terms    of people, we&rsquo;ve had recently since the operations in Afghanistan &#8211; we&rsquo;ve    seen al-Qaeda members operating physically in Iraq and off the territory of    Iraq. We know that Saddam Hussein has, over the years, been one of the top state    sponsors of terrorism for nearly 20 years. We&rsquo;ve had this recent weird    incident where the head of the Abu Nidal organization, one of the world&rsquo;s    most noted terrorists, was killed in Baghdad. The announcement was made by the    head of Iraqi intelligence. The initial announcement said he&rsquo;d shot himself.    When they dug into that, though, he&rsquo;d shot himself four times in the head.    And speculation has been, that, in fact, somehow, the Iraqi government or Saddam    Hussein had him eliminated to avoid potential embarrassment by virtue of the    fact that he was in Baghdad and operated in Baghdad. So it&rsquo;s a very complex    picture to try to sort out. <br \/>                                                <\/sup><\/div>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>TIM RUSSERT: But no direct link?<\/sup><\/div>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>VICE PRES. CHENEY: I can&rsquo;t &#8211; I&rsquo;ll leave it right where it&rsquo;s at.    I don&rsquo;t want to go beyond that. I&rsquo;ve tried to be cautious and restrained    in my comments, and I hope that everybody will recognize that. <\/sup><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<p align=\"justify\">Bush went to the U.N. a few days later [September 12th]. Meanwhile the Department of Justice got in the act:<\/p>\n<table cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"5\" border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"92%\">\n<tr>\n<td>\n<div align=\"center\">October 23, 2002 <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.usdoj.gov\/olc\/2002\/iraq-opinion-final.pdf\"><strong>OLC Memo by John Yoo<\/strong><\/a><\/div>\n<hr width=\"75%\" size=\"1\" \/>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>You have asked our Office whether the President has the authority, under both domestic and international law, to use military force against Iraq. This memorandum confirms our prior advice to you regarding the scope of the President&rsquo;s authority.1 We conclude that the President possesses constitutional authority for ordering the use of force against Iraq to protect our national interests. This independent authority is supplemented by congressional authorization in the form of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution, Pub. L. No. 102-1, 105 Stat. 3 (1991), which supports the use of force to secure Iraq&rsquo;s compliance with its international obligations following the liberation of Kuwait, and the Authorization for Use of Military Force, Pub. L. No. 107-40, 115 Stat. 224 (2001), which supports military action against Iraq if the President determines Iraq provided assistance to the perpetrators of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. In addition, using force against Iraq would be consistent with international law, because it would be authorized by the United Nations (&ldquo;U.N.&rdquo;) Security Council, or would be justified as anticipatory self-defense.  <\/sup><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<p align=\"justify\">The U.N. acted, and passed <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1441\"><strong>UNSCR 1441<\/strong><\/a>, which laid out stiff requirements for resumption of inspections in Iraq and Hussein agreed. The U.N. Resolution was passed on November 8th, 2002. But Yoo was ready. This OLC Memo was released <u><strong>on the same day<\/strong><\/u>, just to cover the fact that the UN resolution didn&#8217;t bind the President or affect his ability to make war on Iraq, no matter how things came out:<\/p>\n<table cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"5\" border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"92%\">\n<tr>\n<td>\n<div align=\"center\">November 8, 2002 <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.usdoj.gov\/olc\/2002\/iraq-unscr-final.pdf\"><strong>OLC Memo by John Yoo<\/strong><\/a><\/div>\n<hr width=\"75%\" size=\"1\" \/>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>You have asked our Office to analyze the effect of United Nations (&ldquo;U.N.&rdquo;) Security Council Resolution 1441, adopted on November 8, 2002, on the President&rsquo;s authority under international law to use military force against Iraq. We recently advised you that the use of military force against Iraq would be consistent with international law under existing U.N. Security Council resolutions (&ldquo;UNSCRs&rdquo;), or as an exercise of anticipatory self-defense. See Memorandum for Alberto R. Gonzales, Counsel to the President, from Jay S. Bybee, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, Re: Authority of the President Under Domestic and International Law to Use Military Force Against Iraq (Oct. 23, 2002) (&ldquo;Iraq Opinion&rdquo;). The terms of UNSCR 1441 do not alter our earlier conclusion: the United States continues to have the authority, under international law, to use force against Iraq.<\/sup><\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\"><sup>We emphasize at the outset that U.N. Security Council authorization is not a necessary precondition under international law for the use of force. On numerous occasions, states have, consistent with international law, used force without prior authorization from the Security Council. Such uses of force have been based on the inherent right to national self-defense recognized and affirmed in article 51 of the U.N. Charter. See generally Iraq Opinion at 30, 35-42. Under the doctrine of anticipatory self-defense, the United States may use force against Iraq if the President determines the use of force would be necessary due to an imminent threat, and a proportional response to that threat. See generally id. at 30-46.<\/sup><\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>We also emphasize that the question of legality of the use of force against Iraq under international law has no bearing on the President&rsquo;s authority under domestic law. As we have advised you previously, the President has full constitutional authority as Chief Executive and Commander in Chief to use force against Iraq. Id. at 6-8. Congress most recently supported the President&rsquo;s authority in this context by passing H.J. Res. 114, Pub. L. No. 107-243, 116 Stat. 1498 (2002).  <\/sup><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<p>But we now know that this UN business was all for show. The outcome was already assured. Note the date <font color=\"#300030\"><strong>JULY 23rd<\/strong><\/font>.    <\/p>\n<table cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"5\" border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"92%\">\n<tr>\n<td>\n<div align=\"center\">July 23, 2002 <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/downingstreetmemo.com\/memos.html\"><strong>The Downing Street Memo<\/strong><\/a><\/div>\n<hr width=\"75%\" size=\"1\" \/>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime&#8217;s record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action. <\/sup><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<p align=\"justify\">The inspectors didn&#8217;t find anything in Iraq, but there was inadequate documentation. The UN was continuing to pressure Iraq. But when it became obvious that the Security Council wasn&#8217;t yet ready to declare war, we acted unilaterally.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">It&#8217;s abundantly clear that the plan top invade Iraq was already a <em>fait accompli<\/em> before the media campaign, or Bush&#8217;s U.N. speech, or the inspections. As the Downing Street Memo says, &quot;no patience with the UN route.&quot; If you read over Yoo&#8217;s Memos, there&#8217;s no real Cassus Belli [cause for war] that was close to true, even by Yoo&#8217;s standards:<\/div>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong>No immediate threat<\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong>No WMDs<\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong>No harboring of Terrorists<\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong>No involvement in 9\/11<\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<div align=\"justify\">I don&#8217;t know why we aren&#8217;t still beyond outraged, and Common Cause didn&#8217;t even list it in its reasons for a Special Prosecutor. To paraphrase Hussein from long ago, it&#8217;s the MOTHER of all reasons. Are we too embarassed to even turn over that rock?&#8230;<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>ShrinkRap 07\/16\/2009 Common Cause lists these as issues that need to be investigated and calls for a special prosecutor to be appointed: Warrantless spying on Americans. Misuse of the state secrets doctrine. Preventive detention and secret prisons. Use of torture and other interrogation abuses. Deliberate flaunting of Congress&#8217; oversight role. Politicization of the Justice Department. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3357","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3357","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3357"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3357\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3357"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3357"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3357"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}