War of Aggression (continuation)

Endless War, Aggression and Terror

Once this policy of preemptive wars of aggression is invoked by the Bush Administration to justify unprovoked attacks against the centers of population in Iraq, the doctrine will be used by the hawks in the Administration time and time again, and will also be adopted by nations and individuals internationally as a justification for the preemptive use of catastrophic violence against centers of population worldwide. The legitimization of preemptive wars of aggression will be used to justify attacks against U.S. centers of population, and will bring greater violent retribution upon the cities and people of the United States for actions that the government is taking in their names, without their informed consent.

The risk of suffering harm because of this doctrine is, of course, not distributed equally among all residents of the United States. Those who will lose their lives fighting in wars of aggression will be the young, disproportionately persons of color, and those who must enlist in the U.S. military because of bleak economic opportunity. Those who derive their wealth and security from the transactions of war, from increased oil profits caused by global instability or conquest of oil rich regions, and from the constant re-building and re-arming necessary to conduct endless wars against countless peoples premised on imperceptible threats -- they will have the means to acquire seclusion, protection and greater safety.

Preemptive war will not stop with Iraq. Constant military interventions worldwide are necessary to enforce Bush's stated policy of global economic, political and military domination. Just four days after the September 11th attacks, the CIA presented its "Worldwide Attack Matrix" identifying scores of countries that the CIA wanted permission to attack. Bush approved the CIA wish list, and authorized immediate covert and lethal CIA operations in over sixty nations.9

Taking to the Streets

As the U.S. moves at breakneck pace in execution of its stated policy of global domination and overt military interventions, the need for the people to take action is urgent.

Congress will not stop this policy of aggressive warfare and global domination. Many in Congress are well served with the tithing of the war profiteers and their corporate sponsors who see U.S. military domination as a way to enforce their interests, to exploit human labor at starvation wages overseas and to drive down wages domestically, to mine vast sources of environmental resources globally, and to impose and expand the reach of their "free" markets.

The U.S. Constitutional framework provides that, regardless of who temporarily holds office, all power remains in the hands of the people. It is time now for the people to take the reins of power back from those who have stated their intention to act in violation of all laws that humankind has struggled to create to end global conflagration and prohibit wars of aggression.

When law will not restrain the government, the people must. We must take to the streets in mass numbers in organized and spontaneous acts of resistance. The message must be clearly conveyed that if the Bush Administration refuses to be accountable to U.S. domestic law, to the U.N. Charter, to international law, to all known standards of just conduct, then the people of conscience within the United States will rise up to demand accountability. And the message must be sent that the people of the U.S. will not allow the Bush Administration to spend the blood of the people of the United States and the people of Iraq who are not our enemies, in a needless war for oil.

[September 29, 2002]

[The authors, Carl Messineo and Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, constitutional law and human rights lawyers, are the co-founders of the Partnership for Civil Justice Legal Defense and Education Fund, a public interest legal organization in Washington, DC, and authors of the forthcoming book "Empire at Home: George W. Bush and John Ashcroft v. the Bill of Rights."]

Click here for a formatted, printable version of this article: [illegal_war.pdf]

For more information, contact: Partnership for Civil Justice LDEF 1901 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Suite 607 Washington, D.C. 20006 USA Telephone: 202-530-5630 Website: http://www.civil-rights.net

to learn more about

anti-war resources, visit:

http://www.InternationalANSWER.org

http://www.iacenter.org

http://www.votenowar.org

http://www.notinourname.net

Footnotes:

1. National Security Strategy of the United States,

September 2002, page 29.

2. National Security Strategy of the United States,

September 2002, page 30.

3. National Security Strategy of the United States,

September 2002, page 18.

4. Karen DeYoung and Mike Allen, The Washington Post,

"Bush Shifts Strategy from Deterrence to Dominance,"

September 21, 2001, A1.

5. Walter Pincus, The Washington Post, "U.S. Nuclear

Arms Stance Modified by Policy Study," March 23, 2002,

A14; Thomas E. Ricks and Vernon Loeb, The Washington

Post, "Bush Developing Military Policy of Striking

First," June 10, 2002, A1.

6. Principle III, Principles of International Law

Recognized in the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal

and in the Judgment of the Tribunal (Adopted by the

International Law Commission of the United States,

1950).

7. International Criminal Court Statute, Article 7,

paragraph 2.

8. National Security Strategy of the United States,

September 2002, page 31.

9. Bob Woodward and Dan Balz, The Washington Post, "At

Camp David, Advice and Dissent," January 31, 2002, A1;

Bob Woodward, The Washington Post, "President Broadens

Anti-Hussein Order," June 16, 2002, A1.

Deep Blade Archive Cutting through the machinations and effects of the U.S. empire

	2003 Archive RETURN HOME Deep Blade Journal (current postings) Deep Blade Journal Blog (8/21/2003–5/21/2004) Issue #1 02/11/2003, revised 03/12/2003 Why this war is wrong Powell’s credibility collapse Issue #2 03/12/2003 Why war? The role of oil Aftermath? I Issue #3 08/21/2003 Aftermath II U.S. Bases in Iraq? Archive of 2003 War Resources Alexander Cockburn’s war diary for March 29/30, 2003. U.S.-Iraq Chronology mostly covering the period 1980-1991 Going to War by Doug Allen 02/10/2003 A Failure of Skepticism in Powell Coverage Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) 02/10/2003 Why People Must Stop Bush's "Preemptive" War of Aggression by Carl Messineo and Mara Verheyden-Hilliard 09/29/2002 You Wanted to Believe Him: Colin Powell Does Sam Beckett by Robert Fisk 02/06/2003 UMaine and War Profiteering Op-Ed Bangor Daily News November 8, 2003 Archive of 1991 Gulf War Articles 1. Essay on the first Persian Gulf war, February 1991 2. Story from the Bangor Daily News March 9–10, 1991 by Tom Weber and Steve Kloehn concerning troops returning from the Persian Gulf War 3. The Persian Gulf War as Myth by Doug Allen, April 1991 911 Archive Why? Examining the Roots of the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack on the United States They can't see why they are hated: Americans cannot ignore what their government does abroad	<<<---War of Aggression continued Endless War, Aggression and Terror Once this policy of preemptive wars of aggression is invoked by the Bush Administration to justify unprovoked attacks against the centers of population in Iraq, the doctrine will be used by the hawks in the Administration time and time again, and will also be adopted by nations and individuals internationally as a justification for the preemptive use of catastrophic violence against centers of population worldwide. The legitimization of preemptive wars of aggression will be used to justify attacks against U.S. centers of population, and will bring greater violent retribution upon the cities and people of the United States for actions that the government is taking in their names, without their informed consent. The risk of suffering harm because of this doctrine is, of course, not distributed equally among all residents of the United States. Those who will lose their lives fighting in wars of aggression will be the young, disproportionately persons of color, and those who must enlist in the U.S. military because of bleak economic opportunity. Those who derive their wealth and security from the transactions of war, from increased oil profits caused by global instability or conquest of oil rich regions, and from the constant re-building and re-arming necessary to conduct endless wars against countless peoples premised on imperceptible threats -- they will have the means to acquire seclusion, protection and greater safety. Preemptive war will not stop with Iraq. Constant military interventions worldwide are necessary to enforce Bush's stated policy of global economic, political and military domination. Just four days after the September 11th attacks, the CIA presented its "Worldwide Attack Matrix" identifying scores of countries that the CIA wanted permission to attack. Bush approved the CIA wish list, and authorized immediate covert and lethal CIA operations in over sixty nations.9 Taking to the Streets As the U.S. moves at breakneck pace in execution of its stated policy of global domination and overt military interventions, the need for the people to take action is urgent. Congress will not stop this policy of aggressive warfare and global domination. Many in Congress are well served with the tithing of the war profiteers and their corporate sponsors who see U.S. military domination as a way to enforce their interests, to exploit human labor at starvation wages overseas and to drive down wages domestically, to mine vast sources of environmental resources globally, and to impose and expand the reach of their "free" markets. The U.S. Constitutional framework provides that, regardless of who temporarily holds office, all power remains in the hands of the people. It is time now for the people to take the reins of power back from those who have stated their intention to act in violation of all laws that humankind has struggled to create to end global conflagration and prohibit wars of aggression. When law will not restrain the government, the people must. We must take to the streets in mass numbers in organized and spontaneous acts of resistance. The message must be clearly conveyed that if the Bush Administration refuses to be accountable to U.S. domestic law, to the U.N. Charter, to international law, to all known standards of just conduct, then the people of conscience within the United States will rise up to demand accountability. And the message must be sent that the people of the U.S. will not allow the Bush Administration to spend the blood of the people of the United States and the people of Iraq who are not our enemies, in a needless war for oil. [September 29, 2002] [The authors, Carl Messineo and Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, constitutional law and human rights lawyers, are the co-founders of the Partnership for Civil Justice Legal Defense and Education Fund, a public interest legal organization in Washington, DC, and authors of the forthcoming book "Empire at Home: George W. Bush and John Ashcroft v. the Bill of Rights."] Click here for a formatted, printable version of this article: [illegal_war.pdf] For more information, contact: Partnership for Civil Justice LDEF 1901 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Suite 607 Washington, D.C. 20006 USA Telephone: 202-530-5630 Website: http://www.civil-rights.net to learn more about anti-war resources, visit: http://www.InternationalANSWER.org http://www.iacenter.org http://www.votenowar.org http://www.notinourname.net Footnotes: 1. National Security Strategy of the United States, September 2002, page 29. 2. National Security Strategy of the United States, September 2002, page 30. 3. National Security Strategy of the United States, September 2002, page 18. 4. Karen DeYoung and Mike Allen, The Washington Post, "Bush Shifts Strategy from Deterrence to Dominance," September 21, 2001, A1. 5. Walter Pincus, The Washington Post, "U.S. Nuclear Arms Stance Modified by Policy Study," March 23, 2002, A14; Thomas E. Ricks and Vernon Loeb, The Washington Post, "Bush Developing Military Policy of Striking First," June 10, 2002, A1. 6. Principle III, Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal (Adopted by the International Law Commission of the United States, 1950). 7. International Criminal Court Statute, Article 7, paragraph 2. 8. National Security Strategy of the United States, September 2002, page 31. 9. Bob Woodward and Dan Balz, The Washington Post, "At Camp David, Advice and Dissent," January 31, 2002, A1; Bob Woodward, The Washington Post, "President Broadens Anti-Hussein Order," June 16, 2002, A1.