1.

U.S. LAWMAKERS DEMAND BUSH ASK CONGRESS BEFORE INVADING IRAN

Agence France-Presse
January 18, 2007

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070118/ts_alt_afp/usiranmilitary_070118183348

WASHINGTON -- A resolution introduced in the US House of Representatives calls on President George W. Bush to obtain approval from Congress before using military force against Iran.

The bill, introduced by longtime Iraq war critic Walter Jones, a Republican, and five other U.S. lawmakers calls on the president obtain authorization for an attack on Iran, unless the United States or U.S. interests are attacked first.

Supporters said the legislation would prevent the United States from becoming embroiled in another intractable war like the one raging in Iraq.

"Congress will not stand by idly -- it won't be railroaded into another war that will only make America and the world less safe," Democratic Representative Martin Meehan said at a press conference Thursday.

He said recent administration statements and military maneuvers point to an imminent attack on Iran.

"The indications of the initial saber-rattling are everywhere," Meehan said.

"I'm not here to tell you that I trust Iran, but I am here to say that I don't trust the administration," Meehan said.

Bush announced last week he had ordered a second U.S. aircraft carrier battle group to the Gulf and announced the deployment of a Patriot missile defense battalion to the region to protect allies against potential Iranian missile strikes.

And in a speech unveiling his new strategy for Iraq, the U.S. president also vowed to "seek out and destroy" any networks funneling weapons or fighters from Syria or Iran into Iraq.

Those moves have fed speculation that a U.S. attack might be imminent, despite the administration's repeated denials.

"There is a growing concern -- justified or not -- that some U.S. officials are contemplating military action against Iran," Jones said, adding that an invasion of Iran would flout the U.S. Constitution.

"If the President is contemplating committing our blood and treasure in another war, then he and his administration must make the case to Congress and the American people why it would be in the national security interests of the United States to engage militarily in Iran," Jones said.

2.

Politics

LAWMAKERS SEEK TO BAR U.S. ATTACK ON IRAN
By Richard Cowan

Reuters
January 18, 2007

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2806373

WASHINGTON -- A bipartisan group of lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives pushed legislation on Thursday to prohibit a U.S. attack on Iran without congressional permission.

The effort, led by Rep. Walter Jones, a North Carolina Republican who in 2005 joined calls from many Democrats for a phased U.S. withdrawal from the Iraq war, came as lawmakers voiced concerns the Bush administration might provoke a confrontation with neighboring Iran.

"The resolution makes crystal clear that no previous resolution passed by Congress" authorizes a U.S. attack on Iran, Jones told reporters, referring to the 2002 vote by Congress authorizing the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

The joint resolution would have to be passed by the House and Senate and signed by President George W. Bush to acquire the force of law. It would waive the congressional authorization only if Iran attacked the United States or its armed forces, or if such an attack was "demonstrably" imminent.

So far, Jones' resolution has 11 co-sponsors in the 435-member House.

At the White House, Bush, asked whether there were any U.S. plans to take action against Iran, told Sinclair Broadcasting: "I have made it clear that if they're moving weapons inside Iraq that will hurt the cause of democracy and more particularly hurt our soldiers, we'll take care of business there.

We're not going to let them," he said on Thursday. "I made that abundantly clear the other day in my speech."

Bush's comment echoed remarks last week when he accused Iran and Syria of allowing the use of their territory for launching attacks inside Iraq.

The White House has since made clear the plan was to disrupt weapons supply lines inside Iraq and that the United States was not preparing for military action against Iran or Syria.

Rep. Martin Meehan, a Massachusetts Democrat, said that while he did not trust Iran or its intentions in the Middle East, he also did not trust the White House.

Meehan said the resolution on Iran was needed because the Bush administration had "lied so many times" in the run-up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Concerns about a U.S. attack against Iran increased after the United States moved an additional aircraft carrier into the Gulf region and the Bush administration told Arab allies it would do more to contain Tehran.

The legislation's backers said they hoped Democratic leaders in the House would advance their resolution in coming months, possibly as part of Iraq war funding legislation or other Iraq-related measures.

3.

Opinion

Iran

WHO WILL REFUSE TO SIGN THE JONES RESOLUTION?
By Patrick J. Buchanan

Creators Syndicate
January 19, 2007

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/opinion/16485184.htm

America is four years into a bloody debacle in Iraq not merely because President Bush and Vice President Cheney marched us in, or simply because neocon propagandists lied about Saddam Hussein's nuclear program and WMDs, and Iraqi ties to al Qaeda, anthrax attacks and 9/11.

We are there because a Democratic Senate voted to give Bush a blank check for war. Democrats in October 2002 wanted the war vote behind them so they could go home and campaign as pro-war patriots.

And because they did, 3,000 Americans are dead, 25,000 are wounded, perhaps 100,000 Iraqis have lost their lives, 1.6 million have fled, $400 billion has been lost, and America stands on the precipice of the worst strategic defeat in its history.

Yet Sens. Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John Kerry and John Edwards -- all of whom voted to give Bush his blank check -- are now competing to succeed him. And how do they justify what they did?

"If only we had known then what we know now," they plead, "we would never have voted for the war." They are thus confessing to dereliction in the highest duty the Founding Fathers gave Congress. They voted to cede to a president their power to take us to war.

Now they wash their hands of it all and say, "It's Bush's war!"

And now Bush has another war in mind.

In his Jan. 11 address, Bush said that to defend the "territorial integrity" of Iraq, the United States must address "Iran and Syria."

"These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq."

The city sat bolt upright. If Bush was talking about Iranian agents inside Iraq, he has no need of a second aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf, nor for those Patriot missiles he is sending to our allies.

But does Bush have the authority to take us to war against Iran?

On ABC last Sunday, National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, while denying that Bush intends to attack Iran, nonetheless did not deny Bush had the authority to escalate the war -- right into Iran.

George Stephanopoulos: "So you don't believe you have the authority to go into Iran?"

Hadley: "I didn't say that. That is another issue. Any time you have questions about crossing international borders, there are legal questions."

Any doubt how Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would come down on those "legal questions"? Any doubt how the Supreme Court would rule?

Biden sputters that should Bush attack Iran, a constitutional crisis would ensue.

I don't believe it. If tomorrow Bush took out Iran's nuclear facilities, would a Senate that lacks the courage to cut funds for an unpopular war really impeach him for denying a nuclear capability to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Bush's lawyers would make the same case that Richard Nixon made for the 1970 "incursion" into Cambodia -- and even a Nixon-hating Democratic House did not dare to impeach him for that.

Bush's contempt for Congress is manifest and, frankly, justified.

Asked if Congress could stop him from surging 21,500 troops into Iraq, Bush on "60 Minutes" brushed aside Congress as irrelevant.

"I fully understand (the Congress) could try to stop me from doing it. But I've made my decision. And we're going forward." Asked if he had sole authority "to put the troops in there no matter what the Congress wants to do," Bush replied, "In this situation, I do, yeah."

Is Congress then impotent, if it does not want war on Iran?

Enter Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C. The day after Bush's threat to Iran, Jones introduced a Joint Resolution, "Concerning the Use of Military Force by the United States Against Iran." Under HJR 14, "Absent a national emergency created by attack by Iran, or a demonstrably imminent attack by Iran, upon the United States, its territories, possessions or its armed forces, the president shall consult with Congress, and receive specific authorization pursuant to law from Congress, prior to initiating any use of force on Iran."

Jones' resolution further declares, "No provision of law enacted before the date of the enactment of this joint resolution shall be construed to authorize the use of military force by the United States against Iran."

If we are going to war in Iran, Jones is saying, we must follow the Constitution, and Congress must authorize it.

If Biden, Kerry, Clinton and Barack Obama refuse to sign on to the Jones resolution, they will be silently conceding that Bush indeed does have the power to start a war on Iran. And America should pay no further attention to the Democrats' wailing about being misled on the Iraq war.

4.

For immediate release

JONES ANNOUNCES COSPONSORS OF RESOLUTION REQUIRING CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL PRIOR TO USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAN

United States House of Representatives
January 18, 2007

http://jones.house.gov/release.cfm?id=473

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- At a press conference today on Capitol Hill, Congressman Walter B. Jones (R-NC) was joined by Reps. Ron Paul (R-TX), John Larson (D-CT), Richard Neal (D-MA), Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD), Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) and Marty Meehan (D-MA) to announce their co-sponsorship of H. J. Res. 14, a joint resolution concerning the use of force by the United States against Iran.

Congressman Walter Jones’ Statement on H. J. Res. 14 follows below:

"The people of Eastern North Carolina, who I have the privilege to represent, believe in the Bible and the Constitution. James Madison, who was well-known for his position on the Constitution and the War Powers provision, once said: 'The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature . . . The executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war.'

"Too many times this Congress has abdicated its Constitutional duty. Our Constitution states that -- while the Commander in Chief has the power to conduct wars -- only Congress has the power to authorize war. It’s time for Congress to meet its Constitutional responsibility. H. J. Res. 14 is about Congress meeting its responsibility by requiring specific Congressional authorization before the use of military force against Iran.

"One of the many lessons from our involvement in Iraq is that Congress needs to ask the right questions prior to exercising its Constitutional authority to approve the use of military force. Today, there is growing concern -- justified or not -- that Administration officials are contemplating military action against Iran. We are not naïve. We understand the serious threats posed by Iran, and we know that extreme elements in Iran’s leadership may even welcome military conflict with the United States. The question is how best to address those threats.

"This resolution makes it crystal clear that no previous resolution passed by Congress authorizes such a use of force. And -- absent a national emergency or an imminent attack by Iran upon the United States or its armed forces -- the President must consult with Congress and receive specific authorization before initiating any use of military force against Iran. If the President is contemplating committing our blood and treasure in another war -- then he and his administration must come to Congress and make their case. The Congress answers to the American people and must justify why it would be in our national security interests to engage militarily in Iran.

"It is our Constitutional responsibility, for both chambers of Congress, to hold hearings, to ask questions, to evaluate the threats and to determine the best way to counter these threats. If military action against Iran is necessary, then we in Congress will meet our Constitutional responsibility and authorize it. If no military action is contemplated, then there should be no objection to this commonsense resolution."

For additional information or to schedule an interview with Congressman Walter B. Jones please contact Kathleen Joyce at (202) 225-3415.

5.

For immediate release

JONES INTRODUCES RESOLUTION REQUIRING CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL PRIOR TO USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAN

United States House of Representatives
January 12, 2007

http://jones.house.gov/release.cfm?id=472

WASHINGTON, DC -- Today Representative Walter B. Jones (R-NC) introduced H. J. Res. 14, a joint resolution concerning the use of force by the United States against Iran. The resolution requires that -- absent a national emergency created by an attack, or a demonstrably imminent attack, by Iran upon the United States or its armed forces -- the President must consult with Congress and receive specific authorization prior to initiating any use of military force against Iran.

“Today, there is a growing concern -- justified or not -- that some U.S. officials are contemplating military action against Iran,” Jones said. “This resolution makes it crystal clear that no previous resolution passed by Congress authorizes such use of force. The Constitution of the United States declares that, while the Commander in Chief has the power to conduct wars, only Congress has the power to authorize them.”

“One of the many lessons from our involvement in Iraq is that Congress needs to ask the right questions prior to exercising its Constitutional authority to approve the use of military force,” Jones said.

“It was for this same reason that, in 1999, I joined 25 members of Congress in going to the U.S. Supreme Court to compel President Clinton to follow the Constitution and halt U.S. military action in Yugoslavia unless Congress granted him the authority to use military force in that manner,” Jones said.

“If the President is contemplating committing our blood and treasure in another war, then he and his administration must make the case to Congress and the American people why it would be in the national security interests of the United States to engage militarily in Iran,” Jones said.

“If a military venture against Iran is necessary, it should be easily justifiable to Congress,” Jones said. “If no military action is contemplated, then there should be no objection to this commonsense resolution.”

For additional information or to schedule an interview with Congressman Walter B. Jones please contact Kathleen Joyce at (202) 225-3415.