You are hereCongress
Here in rural Virginia, we switch between Democrats and Republicans, but they all vote for war ... until now. Our recently unseated Congress member, Tom Periello, is rallying humanitarian warriors to bomb nations because we care. His replacement, Robert Hurt, met with a group of constituents on Thursday and indicated that he had "grave, grave concerns" about voting for any attack on Syria.
Hurt said he was inclined to believe that Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack on the 21st and that it was indeed "horrific." "That being said, I have grave concerns about going into Syria," Hurt said at the meeting in his Charlottesville, Va., office, which was attended by constituents from across the political spectrum, many of whom had held a forum the night before (video). Also attending Thursday's meeting were camera crews from NBC Channel 29 and Newsplex Channel 19/16/27.
Hurt said it was "the responsibility of the President and proponents of a war to make a clear and compelling case that it would be in the national security interest of the United States. And I have not seen that."
"We've learned what it means to be in a protracted struggle in the Middle East," he said. He said he had not seen, and would need to see, a clear objective, a way to achieve it, and a plan for getting out again.
Hurt said that during the past two weeks he had heard from many constituents, and that they were "absolutely overwhelmingly" against an attack on Syria.
"How does our going in do anything other than make it worse?" he asked. He also said that he was against half-measures that aren't all-in.
Hurt said that he would have to answer to his constituents and members of the military, and military family members, and be able to look them in the eye and say that the loss of their loved one was "worth it."
Asked if he would move to raise taxes to pay for this war and other recent wars if he voted for this one, Hurt said, "That's an excellent point," and suggested that the greatest threat to national security may be the national debt."
Hurt did not commit to voting No, but rather said he would go to Washington, look at the classified materials, and hear out the war proponents.
But, of course, he is not going to hear that Syria is a threat to the United States or that there is an exit plan or that the war will cost no money.
The Congressman also said that the Constitution required that the House vote on any war. It is to be hoped that if that vote is denied, a majority of members including Hurt will force a vote over the preference of the Speaker and the Democratic Leader.
Cross-Posted from DeSmogBlog
With the school year starting for many this week, it's another year of academia for professors across the United States - and another year of "frackademia" for an increasingly large swath of "frackademics" under federal law.
"Frackademia" is best defined as flawed but seemingly legitimate science and economic studies on the controversial oil and gas horizontal drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing ("fracking"), but done with industry funding and/or industry-tied academics ("frackademics").
Need to Amend Text of Syria Resolution
From: The Honorable Brad Sherman
As you know, the President has delayed military action against Syria to allow for Congress to consider a resolution approving the use of force. The President has released the proposed text of such a resolution.
Whether you support the President’s call for limited use of force in Syria, or are opposed to any military force, we should not simply consider and vote on the text submitted by the President. While the action the President has proposed is only in the air for a short duration, the text he has proposed is unlimited. In fact, it would authorize boots-on-the-ground for an undetermined duration. Accordingly, we should consider amendments, including those that limit the scope and duration of the authorization.
While I support granting authority for the President to do what he has proposed, namely conduct limited operations designed to punish and deter the use of chemical weapons, his proposed resolution allows him to use whatever force he deems necessary, for as long as he deems necessary, so long as there is some connection to weapons of mass destruction.
I trust the President when he says that he plans a very limited military action. Congress should give him the authority to carry out that limited plan. We do not need to give the President a blank check just to show our respect for him. We can authorize limited action now, and consider additional authorization on an expedited basis in the weeks to come.
I am proposing two amendments to the President’s resolution (see below). First, the authorization should be for no more than 60 days. Any further use of force beyond the 60 days should require an additional resolution, one that can be considered pursuant to the expedited procedures provided for in the War Powers Resolution.
Second, the President has made clear he does not want to introduce ground forces to Syria. Any resolution we pass should explicitly state that it does not authorize ground action, except limited action to rescue American personnel.
I urge you to support a process in which these amendments, and those proposed by others, can be debated and voted on. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss these issues with you. I will be in my office Tuesday. My cell phone number is available from Siamak Kordestani, who can be reached at and Mr. Kordestani is available during the weekend to discuss these issues with your staff.
Sincerely, BRAD SHERMAN Sherman Amendments to Syria Resolution Amendment I Nothing in this resolution authorizes any military action undertaken more than sixty days after enactment. Congress shall consider a resolution to authorize the use of force, beyond that authorized by this Resolution, pursuant to the procedures described in Section 6 of the War Powers Resolution of 1973. Amendment II Nothing in this resolution authorizes the deployment of ground forces in Syria, except for limited efforts to rescue American personnel.
Sherman Amendments to Syria Resolution
Nothing in this resolution authorizes any military action undertaken more than sixty days after enactment. Congress shall consider a resolution to authorize the use of force, beyond that authorized by this Resolution, pursuant to the procedures described in Section 6 of the War Powers Resolution of 1973.
Nothing in this resolution authorizes the deployment of ground forces in Syria, except for limited efforts to rescue American personnel.
Back in 2007, the Congressional Progressive Caucus helped organize 90 Congress members to commit to voting against war funding. Most of them turned around and voted for war funding. That was a high point for the CPC. Since then, its commitments -- such as to vote against corporate healthcare -- have hardly been taken seriously, and so it's hardly been news when most members have gone back on their commitments.
The CPC has shifted in recent years away from pretending to take a stand on things, and instead toward issuing statements full of non-committal rhetoric. That, too, is now a stage in the devolution of the CPC to which we can look back with nostalgia.
The CPC, on the question of a new war on Syria, is choosing to do nothing at all. In fact, one of its two co-chairs is actively promoting war. Compare this whip list with this list of CPC members. You'll notice that virtually no members of the House of Representatives have taken any position on whether or not to attack Syria. That includes most of those who claimed they wanted the president to allow a vote, as the Constitution requires. The same is true for the CPC: virtually nobody has a position.
Those firmly committed to attacking Syria, in the House, include four Republicans, five non-CPC Democrats, and CPC Co-Chair Keith Ellison. Those firmly committed against this madness include 10 Republicans, three non-CPC Democrats, and four CPC Democrats.
Ellison was first elected as an opponent of war and an advocate for impeaching George W. Bush for the crime of war, but reversed his positions immediately upon election. He just recently responded to pressure from Veterans For Peace in Minnesota and introduced into the Congressional Record acknowledgment that the Kellogg-Briand Pact bans all war. He then turned around and threw his support in behind the next war.
The other co-chair of the CPC, Raul Grijalva, is listed as "leaning nay," along with nine other Democrats (two of them in the CPC) and 15 Republicans. We've learned, however, what solid commitment means to these weasels, so you can imagine what "leaning" signifies.
The CPC has no requirements for membership. A member need not hold any progressive positions. There are no required actions. A member need not oppose even the worst atrocities our government inflicts on us or the world. The CPC doesn't fund its members' elections in this corrupt buyer-takes-all system. A CPC member is exactly as dependent as any other Congress member on the bosses of a party, for funding, for committee positions, and for pork in a district. The CPC offers no serious megaphone for progressive views, leaving members as susceptible to the manufactured militarism of the corporate media as anyone else.
Perhaps, at long last, it's time for Congress members Grayson, Nolan, McDermott, and Rangel to establish a Congressional Peace Caucus, which would differ from the Congressional Progressive/Pentagon Caucus. Congressman Grayson has pointed out that the Chemical Weapons Convention requires criminal prosecution for its violation -- not the bombing of a country, which is itself, of course, a crime. That ought to be a simple enough position for any elected official in favor of the rule of law to grasp. If drones get to have their own caucus, why doesn't the rule of law get one? This is, after all, the legislative branch of government.
Nearly a century ago, if a woman wanted to join the Women's Peace Union, she had to sign a pledge, including this:
"We affirm it is our intention never to aid in or sanction war, offensive or defensive, international or civil, in any way, whether by making or handling munitions, subscribing to war loans, using our labor for the purpose of setting others free for war service, helping by money or work any organization which supports or condones war."
A Congressional Peace Caucus, were there such a thing, might use a pledge like this:
"We affirm it is our intention never to aid in or sanction war, offensive or defensive, international or civil, in any way, but to actively oppose all war, and to seek to deny all funding for war or war preparations, and to treat the waging of war in violation of treaties to which the United States is party as an impeachable offense."
If someone joined that caucus, even if it were just one person, I would begin to see the value in elections and caucuses that others manage to discern through the mists of pretense and sycophancy that currently enshroud Capitol Hill.
UPDATE: Now let's stop "lethal aid" to Syria.
Obama Will Launch a Huge Propaganda Blitz -- and May Attack Syria Even If He Loses the Vote in Congress
By Norman Solomon
Grassroots pressure has forced President Obama to seek approval from Congress for an attack on Syria. But Obama is hell-bent on ordering a missile assault on that country, and he has two very important aces in the hole.
The administration is about to launch a ferocious propaganda blitz that will engulf a wide range of U.S. media. And as a fallback, the president is reserving the option of attacking Syria no matter what Congress does.
News from the Office of
Minnesota’s Eighth District Congressman Rick Nolan
Bipartisan call to President Obama and House Leadership
By Dave Lindorff
The forces arrayed in Washington propelling the nation into a war against Syria, including the Pro-Israel lobby AIPAC, the cabal of neo-conservative pundits and “think” tanks, whose ranks include President Obama’s National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice, the arms industry, the oil industry and other groups, are very powerful, and it may well be that eventually sheer momentum will lead to a US bombing attack on Syria. But for the moment, a grass-roots anti-war campaign has triumphed.
In a fairly remarkable defeat to the UK Conservative Party's Prime Minister David Cameron, the British Parliament voted against intervention in Syria in a preliminary vote today. That could change in a subsequent vote, but, hey, at least they met, debated and voted! And that was after Cameron's government actually, publicly offered their legal basis for such intervention and an intelligence assessment [PDF] they claim supports it.
Meanwhile, back in these United States, John Nichols details the several bi-partisan --- and surprisingly robust --- Congressional letters calling on President Obama to seek Congressional approval before taking military action against Syria. So far, over 150 members of Congress have signed on to those efforts.
In all, the New York Times concluded this morning (even before the vote in Parliament): "momentum for Western military strikes against Syria appeared to slow."
While a healthy portion of the U.S. Congress members speaking up are progressive Democrats, interestingly (though, perhaps, not surprisingly?), there are far more Republicans, this time around, joining the effort to call on the President to wait for an Article 1, Section 8 declaration of war from Congress --- or, at least, some form of authorization from the Legislative branch --- as clearly envisioned (an actual conservative would say "required") by the U.S. Constitution.
It's nice to see Congress, this time around --- at least more than 150 of its members --- calling on the President to do the right thing. On the other hand, Congress has its own responsibility here...
They are currently not in session. And while one of the letters [PDF], written by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) and signed by 53 colleagues as of Thursday, promises Obama: "We stand ready to work with you," and another Congressional letter [PDF], the one with the most signatories on it (140 as of Thursday afternoon), written by Rep. Scott Rigell (R-VA) vows: "Congress can reconvene at your request," the leadership in Congress --- Republican House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid --- haven't bothered to call members back to session. They are perfectly capable of doing so without waiting for a request from the President.
What democracy? What rule of law?: Americans Oppose Criminal US Syrian Attack, But Obama is Set to Launch It
By Dave Lindorff
By John Grant
Here we go again.
Polls suggest the American people are fed up after two full-bore wars and the killing of an ambassador in Benghazi following our escapade in Libya. Yet, the Obama administration seems poised to launch another war in Syria.
“We can’t do a third war in 12 years!"
By Dave Lindorff
Confronting the latest attack on our privacy and freedom: Lavabit's Profile in Corporate Principles and Personal Courage
By Alfredo Lopez
The term "collateral damage" is most frequently applied to the "non-targeted" death and destruction brought by bombs and guns. But it seems that our government, the master of collateral damage, is now doing it in "non-violent" ways. Take the recent situation at Lavabit.
By Dave Lindorff
Like an obnoxious drunk harassing everyone and spilling drinks at a party, the US has continued to make itself both loathed and laughed at in the wake of the revelations about the National Security Agency’s global spying program as revealed by NSA leaker Edward Snowden.
By Dave Lindorff
I have been deeply ashamed of my country a number of times. The Nixon Christmas bombing of Hanoi and Haiphong was one such time, when hospitals, schools and dikes were targeted. The invasion of Iraq was another. Washington’s silence over the fatal Israeli Commando raid on the Gaza Peace Flotilla--in which a 19-year-old unarmed American boy was murdered--was a third. But I think I have never been as ashamed and disgusted as I was today reading that US Attorney General Eric Holder had sent a letter to the Russian minister of justice saying that the US would “not seek the death penalty” in its espionage case against National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden, promising that even if the US later brought added charges against Snowden after obtaining him, they would not include any death penalty, and vowing that if Snowden were handed over by Russia to the US, he would “not be tortured.”
So it has come to this: That the United States has to promise (to Russia!) that it will not torture a prisoner in its control -- a US citizen at that -- and so therefore that person, Edward Snowden, has no basis for claiming that he should be “treated as a refugee or granted asylum.”
Why does Holder have to make these pathetic representations to his counterpart in Russia?
Because Snowden has applied for asylum saying that he is at risk of turture or execution if returned to the US to face charges for leaking documents showing that the US government is massively violating the civil liberties and privacy of every American by monitoring every American’s electronic communications.
Snowden has made that claim in seeking asylum because he knows that another whistleblower, Pvt. Bradley Manning, was in fact tortured by the US for months, and held without trial in solitary confinement for over a year before being finally put on trial in a kangaroo court, where the judge is as much prosecutor as jurist, and where his guilt was declared in advance by the President of the United States -- the same president who has also already publicly declared Snowden guilty too...
For the rest of this article by DAVE LINDORFF inThisCantBeHappening!, the new independent three-time Project Censored Award-winning online alternative newspaper, please go to:www.thiscantbehappening.net/
Across the nation, Head Start programs have ended their school years early, canceled summer programs, cut staff pay and benefits, and have begun to announce reductions in the number of children who will be served in the fall. Programs serving meals to seniors have started to reduce days of home delivery and have closed or reduced hours for dining rooms. The long-term unemployed have lost federal jobless benefits, while job training programs that might have helped them are cut back. Federal funds for education have been cut, with particularly harsh results for schools most reliant on these resources: those on Indian reservations or near military bases. Students counting on college work-study jobs are learning they will not get them. Poor families or people with disabilities perilously close to homelessness after waiting years for a rental voucher have been told they will have to wait longer.
These are just some of the impacts of sequestration. At a time when we need to invest in education, rebuild infrastructure, protect people from hardship, and jumpstart economic growth that finally reaches most of us, sequestration is taking us backwards.
While many are reeling from these impacts of sequestration, the appropriations levels set by the House Republicans for FY 2014 are taking even bigger steps in the wrong direction. Their plan not only assumes next year’s budget continues the devastating sequestration reductions, but it ignores the Budget Control Act’s requirement that half of the $110 billion in additional annual cuts must be imposed on military programs and half imposed on the other areas of government. Instead, the Pentagon budget is increased by 5.4 percent over this year’s spending. In marked contrast, the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education are slashed 18.6 percent below this year’s funding, including sequestration. Other important domestic areas are also cut deeply: energy, conservation, and environmental protection programs are cut between 11 – 22 percent.
These are upside-down priorities.
Continuing deep cuts made even worse by shifting funds from vital programs to the Pentagon is wrong. These cuts to needed investments and protections passed in the House in a partisan vote trample on the core American values of providing opportunity for our children, security for our elders, and a strong future for all of our communities. Instead of more cuts to vital programs and more pork for Pentagon contractors, it is time to end tax breaks for the rich and for big corporations.
We urge you to oppose appropriations based on the House-passed levels. Congress should enact a budget based on the values of opportunity and security, to build an America that works for all of us.
A World Fit for Kids!
Action for the Common Good
Advocacy for Justice and Peace Committee of the Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia
African American Health Alliance
Alliance for a Just Society
Alliance for Children and Families
Alliance for Global Justice
American Association of School Administrators
American Association of State Colleges and Universities
American Counseling Association
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)
American Friends Service Committee
Americans for Democratic Action (ADA)
Bernardine Franciscan Sisters
Campaign for America’s Future
Catholic Internet Television Network
Center for Effective Government
Center for Family Policy and Practice
Center for Law and Social Policy
Children’s Defense Fund
Church of the Brethren
Citizens Council for Human Rights & Salaam Legal Network
Coalition for Peace Action
Coalition for Quality Care
Coalition of Labor Union Women
Coalition on Human Needs
Committee for Education Funding
Community Action Partnership
Community of St. Francis
Council for Opportunity in Education
Democratic Socialists of America
Democratic Talk Radio
Direct Care Alliance
Dominican Sisters of Peace
Every Child Matters Education Fund
Fellowship of Reconciliation
Foreign Policy In Focus
Franciscan Action Network
Franciscan Sisters of Little Falls Justice Commission
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
Grey Nuns of the Sacred Heart
Historians Against War
Jobs with Justice / American Rights at Work
Just Foreign Policy
Khmer Health Advocates
Ladies of Charity
Leadership Conference of Women Religious
Sinsinawa Dominican Sisters, Leadership Council
Lutheran Peace Fellowship
Magnet Schools of America
Methodist Federation for Social Action
Metropolitan Community Churches
Missionary Sisters of the Immaculate Conception, US Province
National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd
National Association for College Admission Counseling
National Association for Music Education (NAfME)
National Association of Graduate-Professional Students
National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials
National Association of Private Special Education Centers
National Association of State Directors of Career Technical Education Consortium
National Black Justice Coalition
National Center for Healthy Housing
National Coalition for Literacy
National Coalition for the Homeless
National Community Tax Coalition
National Council of Jewish Women
National Council of La Raza
National Disability Rights Network
National Education Association
National Employment Law Project
National Fair Housing Alliance
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Action Fund
National Health Care for the Homeless Council
National Immigration Law Center
National Low Income Housing Coalition
National People’s Action
National Priorities Project
National Rural Social Work Caucus
National Senior Citizens Law Center
National Women’s Health Network
National Women’s Law Center
Native Parent Network
Network for Environmental & Economic Responsibility of United Church of Christ
NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby
On Earth Peace
Orthodox Catholic Church
Peace Action Education Fund
Peace Action West
Paraprofessional Healthcare Institute (PHI)
Physicians for Social Responsibility
Presentation Sisters, Justice Contacts
Preservation of Affordable Housing
Progressive Democrats of America (PDA)
Progressive States Network
Promise the Children (Unitarian Universalist)
Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities Coalition
Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice
Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law
School of the Americas Watch (SOA Watch)
School Social Work Association of America
Service Employees International Union (SEIU)
Sinsinawa Dominican Congregation
Sisters of Mary Reparatrix
Sisters of Mercy of the Americas
Sisters of St. Francis
Sisters of the Holy Spirit & Mary Immaculate
Sky High Productions
Social Security Works
Sugar Law Center for Economic & Social Justice
U.S. Labor Against the War (USLAW)
U.S. Peace Council
Union of Presentation Sisters US Province
United For Peace and Justice
United Neighborhood Centers of America
US Missionary Oblates, JPIC
USAction Education Fund
Violence Intervention Program
Voices for America’s Children
Voices for Progress
War Resisters League
Wider Opportunities for Women
Win Without War
Women Legislator’s Lobby
Women’s Action for New Directions (WAND)
Voting on 2014 Defense Appropriations Bill may come as early as Wednesday afternoon
STOP FUNDING WAR BUSINESS AS USUAL!
Call your Representative!
Time to stop favoring the Pentagon over urgent human needs at home.
Ask Them to Vote NO! on HR 2397.
Call 202 224 3121 (Capitol Switchboard) and ask for your Rep.
To Find Out your Rep : http://www.
Background: On June 13, the House Appropriations Committee passed H.R. 2397, the FY 2014 Department of Defense Appropriations Act approving $512.5 billion for the Pentagon base budget (not counting the cost of military construction and nuclear weapons), and $85.8 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations, which is largely for waging war in Afghanistan. For text: http://www.govtrack.us/
Despite countless floor speeches full of moral platitudes about democracy, social justice and peace and hard evidence that the US' imperial model is unsustainable, the majority in Congress continues to vote for the needs of a powerful military industry at the expense of the needs of most Americans.
It is not just militaristic Republicans who are the problems. When the House of Representatives voted on the 2014 Defense Authorization bill last month, the majority of Democrats voted in favor (103-90). See Roll Call http://www.gop.gov/votes/113/ Defense Contractors Are Making the Noise!
The DoD Budget ignores the Budget Control Act’s requirement that half of the $110 billion in additional annual cuts must be shared between military and non-military programs. Instead, the Pentagon budget is 5.4 percent over this year’s spending while the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education are slashed 18.6 percent below this year’s already reduced funding. Energy, conservation, and environmental protection programs will be cut between 11 – 22 percent. These choices are neither wise nor fair.
Under sequestration it's business as usual for the Pentagon and upheaval for the poor and vulnerable as more cuts to critical human need programs are imposed to protect funding for war, weapons and spying. During this fiscal year, the cuts to programs like Head Start, Meals on Wheels, student grants, affordable housing, furthe cut into vitally important services for some of our most vulnerable people- including families, children, low income mothers, students and elders. Our allies at the Coalition for Human Needs are keeping track of the impact across all 50 states here: http://www.chn.org/background/
Below is a recent example of how the Pentagon and it's private sector partners deal with the sequester and waste billions of taxpayer dollars:
...Northrop Grumman’s political strategy “is entirely predictable — hire the right people, target the right people, contribute to the right people, then link them together with subcontractors and go for the gold,” said Gordon Adams, who served as the senior White House budget official for national security from 1993 to 1997 … To read more: http://www.publicintegrity.
Members of Congress Need to Hear From Us !
Call 202 224 3121 (Capitol Switchboard) and ask for your Representative
Tell them to Vote NO on another $598 bill Pentagon Spending Bill
It is not just militaristic Republicans who are the problems. When the House of Representatives voted on the 2014 Defense Authorization bill last month, the majority of Democrats voted in favor (103-90). See Roll Call http://www.gop.gov/votes/113/
Defense Contractors Are Making the Noise!
After nearly 12 years, the House is on the verge of a historic vote that would put a nail in the coffin of George W. Bush's War on Terror. The legal foundation for what has become a global, endless war is the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). Later today the House will vote on an amendment by Congressman Adam Schiff that would bar any funds from being spent on the 2001 AUMF after December 31, 2014, when the war in Afghanistan is scheduled to conclude. This vote is the first time Congress will vote on repealing the 2001 AUMF and it is going to happen this afternoon! Your Member of Congress needs to hear from you!
Take 30 seconds and call your Member of Congress now!
Call the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected to your Member of Congress. Then tell them:
"I'm calling today to ask you to support the Schiff amendment #73 to the Defense Appropriations Act. After more than 12 years of war, it is time to repeal the AUMF. Thank you."
More than a decade ago, Congress responded to the attacks of 9/11 by passing the 2001 AUMF. No one could have imagined what would be done over the next 12 years allegedly under that authority. From drone strikes in Somalia and Yemen to special forces operations in the Phillipines, the AUMF has been interpreted to allow for a global, endless war against not just Al Qaeda but countless other groups, many of whom have no intention of attacking America. Congressman Schiff's amendment would simply say that after the war in Afghanistan ends in 2014, the AUMF will come to an end. America would still have ample ability to defend ourselves and protect our interests, but there would no longer be a sweeping legal authority to go to war anywhere, at anytime, against nearly anyone in the world.
Tell your Member of Congress you support ending the AUMF. Call at (202) 224-3121 now!
Thank you for working for peace,
-Stephen, Tom, and the Win Without War Team
By John Grant
We now have clarity from a full-bird colonel in judicial robes that Bradley Manning is to be charged with “aiding the enemy.” OK, not much of a surprise here. Colonel Denise Lind’s ruling seems pretty predictable.
Congresswoman Barbara Lee Releases Report on Presidential Utilization of 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force
Washington, D.C.— Today, Congresswoman Barbara Lee released a report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) surrounding the presidential utilization to undertake military and other actions under the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which was enacted in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States.
“As the only Member of Congress to vote against the AUMF on September 14th, 2001, I have been deeply concerned about this overly-broad blank check for war,” said Congresswoman Lee. “I knew then, as I know now, that it gives any president the nearly unlimited authority to wage limitless war at anytime, anywhere, for any reason, in perpetuity. Until this report, we did not have a public accounting of the number of times that it had been cited. I’m certain this will prove a useful tool for my colleagues and the American people and help shine a spotlight on the uses of the AUMF.”
The report lists 30 instances where the AUMF has invoked by Presidents Bush and Obama, including to deploy troops in Ethiopia, Djibouti, Georgia, and Yemen, justify detentions at Guantanamo Bay, and conduct military commissions. The data from this report includes information gleaned solely from two publicly available GPO publications: Federal Register and Compilation of Presidential Documents.
“What continues to concern me, however, is that this information is based on what is only publically reported. We don’t know the further, full extent, including the ongoing use of lethal drones, surveillance, unlimited detention, and other actions where the AUMF has been used as justification,” said Congresswoman Lee.
Congresswoman Lee has consistently called for repeal of the AUMF; to that end, in the 113th Congress, Congresswoman Lee introducedHR 198. In addition to her ongoing efforts, this week, Congresswoman Lee will introduce an amendment to the 2014 Defense Appropriations Bill which would require the Department of Defense to produce a comprehensive report on the uses of AUMF, in both classified and unclassified forms, to bring further accountability and Congressional oversight on this issue.
The full text of the report can be viewedhere.
His 'Crime' is Patriotism, not Betrayal Like Hale's Philip Nolan, Snowden has Become a 'Man Without a Country'
By Dave Lindorff
In Edward Everett Hale's short story "The Man Without a Country," US Army Lt. Philip Nolan, following a court-martial, is exiled from his country, his citizenship snatched away, leaving him doomed to sail the seven seas confined to a Navy vessel, unable to make any country his home. His crime: being seduced by a treacherous leader to betray the US of A, the country of his birth.
Senate Set to Confirm New FBI Head Who Ok'd Waterboarding, Defends Mass Spying, Indefinite Detention
By Dave Lindorff
It’s little wonder that despite his disclosure of an unprecedented KBG-like or Stasi-like spying program targeting all Americans, fully half of all Americans polled are saying that National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden is a “spy” or “traitor” who should be brought to justice.
Why would this be, when a solid majority also say they oppose the spying program?
On this, the anniversary of the U.S.’s independence from Great Britain, some observations:
Biden/Obama full-court press on Snowden is a bad joke: The Real Traitors to America are in Washington and New York
By Dave Lindorff
It's hard to know whether to laugh or cry as the US goes all out to get its hands on National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden.
New Bill Would Block War and Weapons to Syria Without Congressional Authorization -- Just Like the Constitution Does
From Rep. Peter Welch:
Welch Leads Bipartisan Coalition in Congress to Block U.S. Intervention in Syria
Legislation Would Block Intervention Without Prior Congressional Approval
Washington, DC (June 27th) - Rep. Peter Welch joined with Rep. Chris Gibson (R-NY), Rep. Rick Nolan (D-MN), Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), and Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) at a press conference today to unveil bipartisan legislation to block U.S. military intervention in Syria without an affirmative vote of Congress.
Specifically, Welch and his colleagues’ bill would require military intervention in Syria, including military assistance, to first be authorized by a joint resolution of Congress. It would exempt ongoing humanitarian assistance from the requirement of Congressional approval.
“It is vitally important that we recognize the lessons learned from Iraq and Afghanistan,” said Welch. “Syria is in a brutal and tragic civil war the roots of which go back hundreds of years. To the extent that America can help with humanitarian assistance to ease this tragic refugee crisis, we should do so. But sending military assistance to Syrian rebels, or intervening directly in this conflict, will lead to the Americanization of this Sunni-Shia conflict. If America walks down this path, Congress and the American people should first be part of a vigorous debate. Congress has the constitutional responsibility to authorize any action and it should do its job.”
Identical legislation has been introduced in the Senate by Senators Tom Udall (D-NM), Chris Murphy(D-CT), Rand Paul (R-KY) and Mike Lee(R-UT). Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) is also a cosponsor of the House bill.
Welch recently traveled to the region on a congressional oversight trip from April 28-May 4. He visited a refugee camp on the Syrian-Turkey border.
By Dan DeWalt
“If people can't trust not only the executive branch but also don't trust Congress, and don't trust federal judges, to make sure that we're abiding by the Constitution with due process and rule of law, then we're going to have some problems here.”
By Dave Lindorff
Just for the sake of argument, let's suspend our disbelief for a moment and pretend (I know it's a stretch) that the Obama administration and the apologists for the nation's spy apparatus in Congress, Democratic and Republican, are telling us the gods' honest truth.