Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Thursday, April 05, 2007

President Illegally Asserting He Has No Time To Consult Congress on Iran

NATO Intelligence Gathering Against Iran

Ref contrary to claims by Israel and the GOP, the US and British have no information on illegal Iranian activity. If there was any information, the US and UK would not be asking for assistance.

The President has time to gather intelligence, and openly admit he doesn't know things. The situation with Iran is not urgent, nor is there an imminent threat.

The President has time to consult with Congress. A decision by this President to ignore COngression, launch combat operations against Iran, would satisfy the standard for a war crime.

Congress has direct evidence this President will use propaganda, misleading statements, and false evidence to wage illegal warfare. Congress would be reckless if it requires a second line of evidence in re Iran before taking lawful action to hold this President to account for war crimes.

* * *

The available information indicates the US and UK are fumbling in the dark, unable to get definitive SIGINT of any illegal Iranian action, yet making accusations.

Intelligence gathering when lawfully done is permitted.

But when there is ongoing intelligence gathering, and clear evidence that the US and UK do not know something, there is no basis to believe any assertions the US or UK have about Iran.

DoJ, DoD, and White House counsel know these statements are misleading, with the intent to deceive Congress, and that the illegal assertions related to planned war crimes against Iran.

* * *

Repurposing the UN Mandate

Here is another example the US and UK are twisting the UN into covering for illegal warfare. Notice the way the language is framed: Would clearly . . .exact same way White House and DOJ Counsel asserted things, as did Addington, on dubious legal issues.
He added: "The UN mandate would clearly empower the military taskforce to gather information about the environment in which they were working."Ref
Sounds like the US legal community working for the US President has issued talking points for NATO to parrot. As we've seen with the US Attorney firing e-mails, language using "empower" and "clearly" is most likely well coordinated within the White House legal, political, and public affairs office; then routed through DoD PA and Centc0m, then into NATO and Iraq.

Note the similar invocation of the UN as discussed in this analysis, apparently stretching the UN language into something that was not intended: Expanding illegal warfare based on accusation, not evidence.

The US and UK intelligence gathering, combined with their open admissions that they are not sure about things, means the US and UK are not facing any imminent threat.

As with Iraq, the US and UK are facing uncertainty. That is no legal justification for the President to launch combat operations against Iran.

* * *

The problem for the US President is his assertion that the Iranians are doing something illegal; and this President's plan to direct US combat forces to attack Iran.

One does not gather intelligence when there is certainty; the intelligence gathering occurs because there is lack of precisions, doubt. That does not satisfy the imminence requirement.

The fact the US and UK are gathering intelligence, have no information, means that the doctrine of immediacy does not apply. For there to be a immediate problem not permitting any didscsison with Congress, the intelligence gathering would have to be confused, not plodding into the netherworld of nothing as is the case here.

There is time to discuss scraps of information. The US and UK cannot argue there is no time to discuss the issues with Congress. Sadly, this Congress despite this President's refusal to meet with Congress, will not meet this President head on.