Hospitals & Asylums
Me, Myself and Iraq By Anthony J. Sanders Veteran’s Day HA-11-11-07
They beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. But they shall all sit under their own vines and fig trees and no one shall make them afraid…MICAH 4:3
1st Session H. Con. Res. 110 Expressing the sense of Congress that Iraq should vote to approve or disapprove the continued deployment of United States Armed Forces to Iraq and, unless Iraq votes to approve such continued deployment, the President of the United States should commence the phased redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq within 60 days of the Iraqi vote. Mr. SHAYS submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. In the House of Representatives on March 29, 2007. Concurrent Resolution, Expressing the sense of Congress that Iraq should vote to approve or disapprove the continued deployment of United States Armed Forces to Iraq and, unless Iraq votes to approve such continued deployment, the President of the United States should commence the phased redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq within 60 days of the Iraqi vote. Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that— 1. the Government of Iraq should hold a vote in the Iraqi Council of Representatives or among the Iraqi; and 2. unless 60 percent of the members of the Iraqi Council of Representatives or the Iraqi general voting public vote to approve the continued deployment of United States Armed Forces to Iraq, the President of the United States should commence the phased redeployment of United States Armed Forces to Iraq, the President of the United States should commence the phased redeployment of the United States Armed Forces from Iraq within 60 days of the Iraqi vote. Congress must pass and the President must sign this Concurrent Resolution for the 110th Congress to succeed. This bill is so critical to national security that until H. Con. Res. 110 is passed the 110th Congress shall be dissolved. It was an error for Mr. Shays to kill this parliamentary democracy permit for Iraqi self-determination that he sponsored. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi never relents in her censorship, apparently even bills that take less than four hours to read. Work is needed to pass this bill that may be amended to allow for a short title such as “The Me, Myself and Iraq Act” or “Expressing the Sense that Iraq Should Vote on Redeployment” although it is quite memorable as House Continuing Resolution 110. This half a page bill may be extremely short but its authorization for an Iraqi referendum on redeployment is more effective than hundreds of pages of conflicting redeployment plans by the Occupying power.
From the beginning of the occupation everyone has agreed that Coalition forces are there only until Iraq is back on its feet. On May 13, 2003, the President stated, “We will stay as long as necessary to make sure that the Iraqi people have a government of, by and for the Iraqi people. And then we'll come home”. In Annex I of the Resolution a letter dated 27 October 2005 from the Iraq Prime Minister Ibrahim Aleshaiker Al-Jaafari requested the Security Council, “to extend, for a period of 12 months starting 31 December 2005, the mandate of the Multinational Force and that it will terminate the mandate before the expiry of that period should the Government of Iraq so request”. Common Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights provides for the right of all peoples to self-determination. Let the Iraqi people decide when Coalition Forces should honor Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. To grant Iraq sovereign independence over their land, whereas no territorial acquisition by the use of force shall be considered legal, this manuscript sets forth a very simple trial in two parts, both of which fall to the responsibility of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, for reason of her obstructionism.
The first part was already mentioned in this introduction. Speaker Pelosi must advocate for the passage of H. Con. Res. 110 because Mr. Shays drafted the Concurrent Resolution to obligate her to do so. H. Con. Res. 110 is an excellent bill that is not controversial because it upholds the right of all peoples to self-determination in a simple and straightforward fashion. No one argues that Iraq belongs to the Iraqi people, only that the security and political situation may not be stable enough for them to go without the protection of Coalition Forces. However how are we to know about the psychological weather driving suicide attackers in Iraq from the United States where we have our own acts of terror? Let the Iraqi people decide when they are ready to defend themselves, with a 60 grace period. Now that H. Con. Res. 110 is supported in a thoughtful and thorough fashion with 332 pages, let Congress and the President print the final page liberating Iraq from the political process of a foreign nation.
The second part of Speaker Pelosi’s trial also involves her unjustified censorship. She removed the “Constitution in Crisis: The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retributions and Cover-ups in the Iraq War” that called for the censure and impeachment of the President and Vice President from the table. It is true that this is a very cantankerous motion that was very likely to disrupt the elections of 2006 when the decision to take it off the table was made. However it has come to light in the largely municipal elections of 2007 that inter-jurisdictional immunity serves an only limited and temporary purpose before law and order must be restored through federal paramountcy. Without a check to his power the President rebelled against the Report of the Iraq Study Group. On February 13, 2007 H.RES.157 was passed by the House, with the concurrence of the Senate, on Roll No. 97, 232-192, to disapprove of the decision of President George W. Bush announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional combat troops to Iraq. It is not so critical that the President be impeached at this moment but the next time that the President takes up arms against Congress or the United States let us not be defenseless.
The United States has the
best-trained, most effective military in the world. The military is an all-volunteer force of dedicated, patriotic
men and women who reflect the best values and spirit of our Nation. Since 2001, approximately 1,500,000 members of the Armed Forces
have been deployed in support of the conflicts in Iraq (Public Law 107-243) and
Afghanistan (Public Law 107-40), of whom approximately one-third have served at
least two tours of duty, 70,000 have served three tours of duty, and 20,000
have served at least five tours of duty.
At this time more than 137,000 United States military personnel are bravely
and honorably serving in Iraq. Over
3,100 members of the Armed Forces have died, and over 22,500 members of the
Armed Forces have been wounded. Congress has a responsibility to ensure that the members of
the Armed Forces are provided for to the fullest extent possible and to make
certain that the lives of the members of the Armed Forces are never put at risk
without careful consideration. The Congressional Research
Service estimates that $379 billion have already been appropriated by Congress
to finance ongoing combat operations in Iraq.
Article
I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution grants Congress the power `to
declare war,' to lay and collect taxes, to `provide for the common defense' and
general welfare of the United States, to `raise and support armies,' to
`provide and maintain a navy,' to `make rules for the regulation for the land
and naval forces,' to `provide for calling forth the militia to execute the
laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions,' to `provide for
organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia,' and to `make all laws
necessary and proper for carrying into execution all powers vested by the
Constitution in the Government of the United States'. The Constitution also grants Congress exclusive power over the
purse, `No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of
appropriations made by law'. The sole
war power granted to the executive branch through the President can be found in
Article II, Section 2, which states, `the President shall be the Commander-in-Chief
of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several
States, when called into actual Service of the United State’. The Constitution of the United States
provides that the President, in an emergency, may act to defend the country,
but reserved the matter of offensive war to Congress as the representatives of
the people.
In Federalist Paper Number 69, while comparing the lesser war-making power of the United States President versus King George III of Great Britain, Alexander Hamilton wrote, `the President is to be commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy of the United States. In this respect his authority would be nominally the same with that of the King of Great Britain, but in substance much inferior to it. It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces, as first General and admiral; while that of the British king extends to the declaring of war and to raising and regulating of fleets and armies, all which, by the Constitution under consideration, would appertain to the legislature.' James Madison declared that it is necessary to adhere to the `fundamental doctrine of the Constitution that the power to declare war is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature'. In 1793, President George Washington, when considering how to protect inhabitants of the American frontier, instructed his Administration that `no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after Congress has deliberated upon the subject, and authorized such a measure'. In 1801, Thomas Jefferson sent a small squadron of frigates to the Mediterranean to protect against possible attacks by the Barbary powers; he told Congress that he was `unauthorized by the Constitution, without the sanction of Congress, to go beyond the line of defense' and that it was up to Congress to authorize `measures of offense also’.
During
the summer of 2006, General George Casey, the top United States military
commander in Iraq, proposed a plan for the deployment from Iraq of a
substantial portion of United States Armed Forces and briefed the President
accordingly. U.S. Central Command
Commander General John Abizaid testified to Congress on November 15, 2006, `I
met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the Corps Commander, and
General Dempsey. We all talked together. And I said, in your professional
opinion, if we were to bring in more American troops now, does it add
considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said no.
And the reason is, because we want the Iraqis to do more. It's easy for the
Iraqis to rely upon us to do this work. I believe that more American forces
prevent the Iraqis from doing more, from taking more responsibility for their
own future.' Iraq Prime Minister Nouri
al-Maliki stated on November 27, 2006, that `the crisis is political, and the
ones who can stop the cycle of aggravation and bloodletting of innocents are
the politicians’. The objective of this
manuscript is for Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to restore checks and balances
to the federal government.
I would like to thank the parties to the Madrid Conference in September 2003 that settled the largest reparation in the history of international law - $20 billion from the United States, $33 billion total - pursuant to my estimates in Afghanistan & Iraq v. USA as documented in Vol. 3 Is. 1 and the Iraqis who capitalized upon my New Iraq Constitutional Elections (NICE) draft Iraqi Constitution in Vol. 3 Is 2 to create a fully sovereign nation with their own democratic constitution. I would like to thank the Armed Forces Retirement Home for running the finest political lobbying organization in Washington DC and for enforcing their Trust Fund under 24USC(10)§419 that facilitates peace treaties by making satisfactory accommodation for veterans in the reparations. I would also like to thank the Veteran’s of Foreign Wars for their clean hands in the leadership of armed forces policy.
To better understand the
four D’s – democracy, diplomacy, disarmament and development - I, had seven American
dreams after receiving a call and email from Joshua Samuels of the ABA CLE
program regarding the ORACLE, the Organization
Regulatory of Administrators of Continuing Legal Education, on November
28, 2005, that
I wish to acknowledge, to properly thank Honorable Anthony J. Principi, former
Secretary of Veteran’s Affairs and former Chairman of the BRAC Commission. I first became aware of Mr. Principi’s
glorious career as a soldier, lawyers, veteran and military contractor, August
14-20 2004 when Mr. Principi visited my hometown, Cincinnati, to speak on
Democracy with Bush and Kerry at the 105th Convention of Veteran’s
of Foreign Wars. 2004 was the first year, and so far only year since the First
Plenary Perseid Party in 2002, that my sister and I won the election for King
and Queen of Comet-Swift Tuttle according to the rules that require our
birthday, August 11, to be the most prolific meteor shower of the year, for us
to be elected.
The first dream came within days of the call and honorable mention of Hon. Anthony J. Principi as being the general consultant of dreams in a letter. In the dream we were at an all night party at Mr. Principi’s small two story red brick suburban home. There were fireworks and lights in the sky. The pillow talk in the bedroom where the author was going to sleep in red silk sheets was memorable as a somber party. Mr. Principi, was so somber by the door that he did not send me into the paralyzed state between waking and asleep I had been entrapt in for several months and could not awake from without screaming although I did not panic. Still dreaming, I ate breakfast at dawn after most people had gone home. A table of disgruntled African American workers were complaining at one of the picnic tables. When I awoke, an unshaven Appalachian man had just joined the party.
In
the second dream, at the end of December 2005, I was walking at a fast clip
down a dirt road at the side of the President Judge of the International Court
of Justice. He was dressed in full
pirate gear and although he was himself unarmed. He warned me that I was being attacked, just before an arrow
struck a log, whereupon we parted ways. The arrow striking the log was a
reference to the theory that Art. 26(1)(e)(n)(d) of the Rules of Court was codified
by the International Court of Justice with information intercepted from my
library card in reference to the Permanent Court of October 1945 (I.C.J. Yearbook
1946-1947, p. 26), and the Archives of the Trial of the Major War Criminals
before the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg (1945-1946), entrusted
to the Court by decision of that Tribunal of 1 October 1946. This was the cleverest codification of the law the Court has
invented and one can find therein, the end of all war. I awoke knowing that the
UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1984 would
apply.
In
the third dream, shortly after the Valentine’s Day 2006 greeting of Anita J. Douglas had launched a ship of Marines to go the assistance of the
Phillipino military in the search for survivors of the most lethal mudslide in
recent history, I was sitting in the shade by the side of the dirt road
separated from the water by a stand of trees when Anthony J. Principi and the
blonde BRAC Information Officer Audrey Jones, cheerfully walked up in matching
khaki shorts, frame backpacks, and hiking boots to tell me that they were
crossing the water on a journey to South America.
In the fourth dream, in early May 2006, Paul Wolfowitz, then President of the World Bank, followed up on the Naval dispatch to the Phillipines, with a tour of the naval ship. After the tour I slept in a pup tent, in a campground of pup tents more akin to a cabbage patch than a traditional campground, with my high school girlfriend.
In the fifth dream, the next night, we went for a walk in a verdantly green deciduous forest with two children. Mr. Principi was operating a heavy bulldozer in a clearing with other heavy machinery, by himself. He was clearing away weapons and war machinery from the world war. After talking about how relieved we were that the war was over the children’s eyes became as wide as peacock tails and I woke. The message seemed to be that we have a responsibility to witness all war contracts with the intention that weapons of mass destruction be completely eliminated.
In the sixth dream, on 14 May 2006, tiring of army life, AJ
Stephani Professor of Law and Psychiatry at the University of Cincinnati, who
was appointed in honor of a case of mine in 1998 and was my mentor from the
time I graduated in 2000 until the 2nd International Conference on
Therapeutic Jurisprudence, two months before the suicide attacks, failed to
appear. In
the dream I went to visit the Executive Director of the Glenn M. Weaver
Institute for Law and Psychiatry who had just opened a storefront near where I
lived, at the time, but he was nowhere to be seen. After waiting silently in the lobby for some time I went to play
with the cords strung along steel pegs and accidentally undid the ropes on the
left side, but whereas the artwork was, in its entirety, encased in plastic and
AJ Stephani was nowhere to be seen, I left a mess. I walked passed a pretty typist in the storefront window without
telling her of my error and left the building.
Walking down the street with some friends we passed hundreds of children
of all races hurrying down the cobblestone, canal-side, alley. We arrived at the house where an elderly
gentleman with gray hair and several nicely dressed women were living. I told the gentleman of the folly of drugs
and he went to the neighbor to purchase some.
Then, we were walking down the street and all the families in the
suburbs were dancing in conga lines on the street, dressed for prom. I awoke happy.
In the seventh dream, sometime in
July 2006, I was sitting in patio furniture outside of an apartment I had lived
in with a girlfriend and her son, at the time of the suicide attacks of
September 11, 2001, shortly before she relapsed on alcohol and threw me out, in
a fit of rage. The yard ended abruptly
in a tangled gnarl of bushes. In the
dream a stone path cut through the undergrowth up many flights of stairs on the
way to the BRAC Commission headquarters on the other side of the hill. A very disheveled girl came walking down
this path. I spoke to her and offered
her a drink. She could not speak any
coherent sentences, although she tried.
I asked her if she came from the BRAC Commission. She only smiled and looked at the
flowers. I awoke thinking she must be
mentally retarded. This was the last
dream in the sequence at roughly the time the BRAC Commission censured the
humble petitioner for a balanced budget rather then the telemarketing
retaliation.
Mr. Principi furthered our collaboration in a diplomatic journey in Spring of 2007 to disarm the nuclear ambitions of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea under Art. 53 of my Draft Treaty Establishing a Constitution for the Korean Union whereby dictatorial Kim Jong Il is eligible to become King of all Korea for the price of only 500,000 veterans, minimum income of 1,000 South Korean won a day, a Single Korean Yearbook and the popular vote of the Koreans themselves. Mr. Principi himself is herein tried for negligence whereas he has failed to retire his troops from the war theatre nor has he arranged for any royalties for me. He may wish to commission the development of the debate herein.
To achieve a harmonious
balance of power the United States and the European Union must come to perceive
themselves as the competitors for military superiority. Since the end of the Cold War the United
States has come to believe that the US is the greatest military superpower in
the world. This is wrong. There is a nearly equal balance of power
between the United States and the European Union militaries. The US is also not the only super power to
make indiscriminate use of their military force. The EU acting under NATO, with the accord of the US, attacked
Yugoslavia after there was a tacit peace undermined by EU sponsored terrorists. US military expenditure is estimated by the
CIA World Fact Book at $518 billion in 2006, at this same time the EU was
estimated to spend $550 billion. After
a second major devaluation in September of 2007 the spending gap widens. The EU is far and away the biggest military
spender. The US and EU must come to
respect each other as military competitors so that disarmament could be achieve
bilaterally and competition managed without any colonial bullying. The US desperately needs to restrain
military spending to less than $400 billion annually to balance the budget and EU
respect for human rights barely covers up the great cost of their breeches of
the Geneva Conventions to the taxpayer and intellectual. There is a balance of power between the USA
and the EU that must be mastered to overcome the brief throwback to colonialism
at the turn of the millennium and harmonize 21st century
international affairs.
Her Majesty
Queen Elizabeth II visited the United States for the first time in 16 years, one
month before Tony Blair resigned from office as Prime Minister. After failing to do Manuel Antonio Noriega justice
the currency exchange market no longer sustains the un-parliamentary language
of a 110th Congress that kills H. Con. Res. 110. The United States must take action to
restore their standing in international and domestic affairs by overthrowing
their reputation as an occupying power.
The foundation of Africa Command on October 1, 2007 was a great
start. By finishing the international
command structure of the US military in a deliberately diplomatic fashion the
improved mental health kept US casualties the lowest since the beginning of the
war in Iraq. The Iraqi government
reported on AP radio, that civilian casualties were 77% lower than in June. The time is clearly ripe to permit Iraqi
democracy to conclude the peace. If the
redeployment is done in a dignified fashion it is conceivable that some African
nations would authorize the establishment of a US military base or peacekeeping
force so that our adventurous volunteer soldiers could move on.
Sanders, Tony J. Me, Myself and Iraq. Hospitals & Asylums. 332 pgs. HA-11-11-07. www.title24uscode.org/Principi.doc