Letter by group of Republicans warns Iran on agreeing to a nuclear deal

- A letter written to Iran by Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican, and signed by 46 other Republican senators warns Iran against agreeing to a nuclear deal.

+ Add Image

The signers claim that a future U.S. Congress or President might not honor the deal since they oppose it. The Senate has been trying for months to sabotage the talks. Republicans also, without consulting the Obama administration, invited Israeli prime minister Netanyahu to address the U.S. Congress and speak against an Iran nuclear deal. The Senate has been unsuccessfully trying to get "veto power" over the deal and also to impose sanctions in violation of the interim treaty.

The Logan Act makes it a felony for any US citizen to correspond with a foreign government "in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States." However, the Act has never been successfully used — it was passed in 1799 but is still on the books.

The Foreign Minister of Iran Javad Zarif took the letter for exactly what it is and how he described it. The letter. he said, was a "propaganda ploy" attempting to sabotage ongoing diplomacy with the Obama administration. Zarif pointed out that international law makes it clear that treaties are binding from one administration to another. This might not stop the U.S. from breaking the agreement however.

Several of the senators who signed the letter may hope to be presidential candidates for the Republicans including Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and Lindsey Graham. Republican Governors Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Rick Perry of Texas also supported the letter. Casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, an opponent of any nuclear deal with Iran, donates to many Republican campaigns as well as to Netanyahu's reelection campaign.

Just 24 hours after sending his letter to Iran, Senator Cotton is to appear at an "Off the Record and strictly non-Attribution" event sponsored by the lobbying and professional group for defense contractors the National Defense Industrial Association(NDIA). The NDIA is composed of executives from major military defense contractors. Cotton pushes for higher defense spending and a more aggressive foreign policy. He has called for military intervention in Iran. He has also suggested that the US Congress should supply Israel with B-52s, and "bunker-buster" bombs both manufactured by NDIA member Boeing.

Some Republicans were critical of the letter. One Republican aide described it as "lighthearted" and accused the Obama administration of lacking a sense of humor:“The administration has no sense of humor when it comes to how weakly they have been handling these negotiations,” said a top GOP Senate aide.As Obama points out, on the appended video, the Republicans who signed the letter are agreeing with the hardliners in Iran who say the U.S. cannot be trusted in any agreement.

Anti-terror legislation used in drug wars in US

The so-called "sneak and peek" powers of the Patriot Act allow investigators to do searches without informing the target of the searches.When these controversial powers were granted assurances were given that they would be used only to counter terrorism.

Those supporting the extended powers argued that investigators needed to probe the lives and finances of suspected terrorists without the knowledge of the suspects. Critics pointed out that the federal government already had these powers to use for national security investigations. The new provisions in the Patriot Act , critics argued, were far too broad and would be used for cases that had nothing to do with national security. The Patriot Act was passed right after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks and few were interested in what civil libertarian critics might say about the act. The huge Patriot Act was passed overwhelmingly even though only a few Congress members actually read it.
 In May of 2011 President Obama signed the PATRIOT Sunsets Extension Act of 2011 extending three key parts of the act for four years. The original act is the USA PATRIOT standing for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has numerous analyses of the Patriot Act including the sneak-and-peak powers which are now used for many different federal law enforcement purposes.The increase in the use of the powers is reflected in numbers. From September 2001 to April of 2003 the powers were used only 47 times. In 2010 alone 3,970 requests to use the powers were made. Within three years the number was 11,129. Instead of being used as a tool to be used in exceptional circumstances against terror suspects, the powers are being used regularly in a variety of different types of cases such as drug investigations. Of the 3,970 cases mentioned earlier, a remarkable 3,034 were for narcotics investigations. Only 37 were for terrorism cases.
 The patten remains the same in later reports. Out of the 11,129 requests in 2013 only 51 were for terrorism. For narcotics on the other hand there were 9,401 requests. The use of these powers beyond their original mandate shows that legislators should be careful to consider the implications of what they are passing. Any new powers given to legal investigators will be used as widely as possible and it is crucial to carefully define the scope of new powers before they are passed into law. An instructive example of the use and abuse of these new powers together with the new Stingray technology by the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington D.C. is given in this article.

ACLU sues Obama administration under Freedom of Information Act

The ACLU is suing under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The group seeks information on the guidelines Obama officials use in deciding on targets to be killed in drone attacks.

The request “seeks to find out when, where and against whom drone strikes can be authorized, and how the United States ensures compliance with international laws relating to extrajudicial killing”. The administration has refused to provide any information on these issues. The CIA is insisting to federal courts that it is unable even to confirm or deny the existence of the drone program.The CIA argues that revealing any of that information would endanger national security. This is such astonishing nonsense that it is almost beyond belief.

Consider this! A number of Obama administration officials have publicly not only recognised the existence of the program but praised it as being effective. Obama recently said:“we are very careful in terms of how it’s been applied,” and and the program is “a targeted, focused effort at people who are on a list of active terrorists, who are trying to go in and harm Americans, hit American facilities, American bases and so on.” Former CIA Director and current Defense Secretary Leon Panetta also spoke about the program noting that the drone program has “been very effective at undermining al Qaeda and their ability to plan those kinds of attacks.” Finally Attorney General Eric Holder in a speech tried to justify the program in legal terms.Should not all these officials be prosecuted for endangering the national security of the U.S. by revealing all this about a drone attack program that cannot be admitted even to exist?

Obama administration officials are free to say whatever they like about the program for their own political ends. But when the public seeks basic information it cannot be revealed for reasons of national security. For much more see the full article in Salon.

Obama administration supports quickly sending bunker buster bombs to Israel

U.S. officials report that Netanyahu the Israeli Prime Minister has formally asked the Defense Secretary Panetta to approve the sale of GBU-28 bunker buster bombs to Israel. These bombs could be used in an attack on Iran.

In added pressures President Obama according to reports told Panetta to work directly with Israeli officials and to consider the request favorably. The aim is to send the weapons as soon as possible.

Along with the refueling aircraft, also requested, the bunker bombs would be key to any Israeli attack on Iran. Many Iranian nuclear facilities are highly reinforced.

Israel did receive some of the bombs in 2009 but receiving more has not just practical value but also is symbolic in that Obama can be seen as on side with the hawkish Netanyahu government.

Although Obama has so far opted for diplomacy and severe sanctions he has also said that he will not allow Iran to have nuclear weapons. In particular he rejected the idea of containment of a nuclear Iran. This certainly keeps an attack on the table. Sending bunker-bombs is also a sign of support for an attack on Iran.

At present however Iran has agreed to negotiations and also has agreed to let IAEA inspectors in to a secret military facility. For more see this article.

Retired Generals and Intelligence Officers tell Obama not to attack Iran

An ad by the National-Iranian council in the Washington Post has a letter to President Obama urging him to resist pressures to attack Iran. The ad is signed by a number of former military and intelligence officials. The ad can be accessed here

Signers of the letter include: ""Retired Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, retired Army Lt. Gen. Robert G. Gard Jr., retired Marine Gen. Joseph Hoar, retired Army Brig. Gen. John H. Johns, retired Army Maj. Gen. Rudolph Ostovich III, former deputy director of National Intelligence for analysis Thomas Fingar, former CIA national intelligence officer Paul Pillar, and retired Army Col. Lawrence Wilkerson.""

The letter claims that war should be undertaken only if the U.S. or an ally is attacked. However Obama is following in the footsteps of Bush with a doctrine of pre-emptive war. Although Obama is certainly more willing than many Republicans to follow a diplomatic route he has assured Netanyahu that a military attack is still on the table. Obama specifically said that he would not settle for containment of a nuclear Iran.

The ad has statements by U.S. officials including Leon Panetta Secretary of Defense and form Defense Secretary Gates that argue attacking Iran would be a mistake.

Opposition to attacking Iran is common both among military and intelligence leaders but it seems their point of view is drowned out by hawkish politicians especially among the Republicans and by lobbyists for the Israeli viewpoint. For more see this article.

Oil Billionaire Harold Hamm to head Romney Energy Adviser Group

The 66-year-old Hamm is CEO of Continental Resources Inc. (CLR). Hamm ranked 36th on Forbes magazine list of the 400 wealthiest Americans. His stake in Continental Resources alone is worth 11.2 billion.

It is only fitting that the rich Republican front runner should look to the advice of the one per cent on energy policy. Romney has been busy attacking Obama's energy policies which he claims have increased energy prices. Of course Romney perhaps did not notice that it is Iran policies and problems in Syria and other oil-producing countries that are causing prices to rise. However with gasoline prices hitting $3.56 U.S. a gallon and Obama in power that is probably enough to convince some people it is Obama's doing.

Hamm said:"Mitt's goal of cheap, plentiful energy for the American economy offers the American people a stark alternative to President Obama's goal of driving prices higher," Romney wants to streamline the approach to regulation that would include excluding carbon dioxide from regulation!

Romney spouted the Republican line on Obama whom he claims follows a "course of restricting supply, increasing regulation, and hoping for miraculous new technologies to save the day," Romney would of course abandon such a policy. For more see this article.

U.S. to sell arms to South Sudan

  President Obama has decided to sell arms to South Sudan. The paramilitary Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) is excited at the prospect. This will probably encourage war with the north. Although the south has achieved independence there is still disagreement as to where the border is. Also, there are constant internal conflicts.
    Obama claims that the sales will promote world peace. Given that logic I suppose Iran could claim that developing nuclear weapons would promote world peace. South Sudan is desperately poor and yet it seems that the government will concentrate on equipping itself with high tech expensive weaponry. The country has rich oil reserves so no doubt it will be able to pay for its weaponry through deals with foreign oil companies.
   Meanwhile the president Omar al-Bashir the president in the north of Sudan who is wanted for war crimes at the Hague has visited Libya. Bashir helped arm the rebels who overthrew Gadaffi. Of course those enforcing the UN prohibition of the import of weapons did not stop these weapons. Bashir hated Gadaffi because he supported the South Sudan rebels. Now the U.S. is carrying on with Gadaffi's mission and at the same time helping out the bottom line of the military industrial complex. For more see this article.