[Sosfbay-discuss] Old Iran Resolution
Gerry Gras
gerrygras at earthlink.net
Thu Oct 25 12:10:28 PDT 2007
As most of you know, some months ago (April) we approved
a resolution against attacking Iran, based on a resolution
approved by Berkeley. And recently I decided to try to
get approval of a new resolution, because the Iran issue
is still important and urgent. So I referred to a sample
resolution from Code Pink for discussion at the last
business meeting, (which I did not attend).
I have heard that at the business meeting, people
expressed a preference for the old Iran resolution.
I did not try to work with that because I thought it was
rather outdated.
Due to the interest in the old resolution, I am including
it below for review.
Here are the out of date aspects:
- all of the dates are March, 2007 or earlier
- since April, the IAEA has actually made a more reassuring
statement (I think they concluded that Iran is in
compliance)
- I don't know whether 5 generals / admirals are still ready
to resign over this (I would guess that the number is higher
now, but it might be less)
- I don't know whether H.R. 770 or S. 759 are still available
options
What would you like to do next?
Gerry
--------------- old resolution -----------------
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS,
Iran poses no imminent nuclear threat as it could take Iran
eight years to manufacture a nuclear device (1), or in
extreme worst-case scenario, three years (2), and the
International Atomic Energy Agency has found no proof that
Iran diverted nuclear material to a weapons program (3),
and a senior United Nations (U.N.) diplomat in Iran said
regarding Western spy services' tips about secret Iranian
weapons, "Pretty much all the intelligence that's come to
us has proved to be wrong" (3); and
WHEREAS,
up to five United States (U.S.) generals and admirals are
willing to resign rather than approve what they see as a
reckless attack on Iran (4), and an attack on Iran could
backfire (5), and Senators Boxer and Feinstein have both
called for diplomacy in accordance with international law
rather than preemptive war (6); and
WHEREAS,
the U.S. has ratified the U.N. Charter which states that no
nation shall use force or threat of force against the
territorial integrity or political independence of any
nation (Article 2.4) and that, only if attacked, a nation
may respond only once before informing the UN and bringing
the conflict before the U.N. Security Council (Article 51);
and
WHEREAS,
Article I Section 8 of the United States Constitution
provides that only the Congress has the authority to
declare war; and
WHEREAS,
inflammatory rhetoric may discourage diplomacy, it does not
necessarily constitute a security threat.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
that the Green Party of Santa Clara County recommend to the
four Representatives of Santa Clara County (Anna Eshoo,
Mike Honda, Zoe Lofgren, and Jerry McNerney) that they support
H.R. 770 (7) "To prohibit the use of funds to carry out any
covert action for the purpose of causing regime change in Iran
or to carry out any military action against Iran in the absence
of an imminent threat, in accordance with international law and
constitutional and statutory requirements for congressional
authorization," and request that Senators Barbara Boxer and
Dianne Feinstein cosponsor Senator Jim Webb's bill (S. 759)
prohibiting funds for military operations in Iran without
the consent of Congress (8), and that they recommend an
appropriations amendment or rider to restrict funds, such as:
[1] No funds from any source shall be used for any military
action against Iran, Syria, or any new target, and
[2] Any executive violation shall be construed as a high
crime and misdemeanor.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,
that the Green Party of Santa Clara County supports the
International Atomic Energy Agency's efforts to verify Iran's
nuclear activities, encourages Iran to cooperate fully with
those efforts, and applauds the action of the United Nations
General Assembly in condemning Holocaust denial.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,
that the Green Party of Santa Clara County send
copies of this signed Resolution promptly to U.S. Senators
Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Jim Webb, Bernard Sanders,
Robert Byrd, Chair Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Joseph Biden, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid;
U.S. Representative Barbara Lee, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi,
and Chair House Foreign Affairs Committee Tom Lantos.
(1) reprinted from NY Times in SF Chronicle on 1/27/07
"Iran going ahead with nuclear program, UN official says
- ElBaradei urges all sides to ratchet down tensions"
by Mark Landler and David Sanger
www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/01/27/MNG9DNQ6KP1.DTL
(2) Federation of American Scientists,
www.fas.org/cgi-bin/ucountdown.pl;
11th clause of Senator Bernard Sanders' Concurrent
Resolution 13:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.CON.RES.13:
(3) "UN Calls US Data on Iran's Nuclear Aims Unreliable"
by Bob Drogin and Kim Murphy LA Times 2/25/07
www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-usiran25feb25,0,4451045.story?coll=la-home-headlines
(4) "US Generals `Will Quit' If Bush Orders Iran Attack"
by Michael Smith and Sarah Baxter Sunday Times Online 2/25/07
www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1434540.ece
(5) "Attack on Iran would backfire, warns report" 3/5/07
www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329734502-111322,00.html
(6) "Confronting Iran: Will we learn from our mistakes and
apply tough diplomacy-or rely once again on the failed
doctrine of preemption?"
by Dianne Feinstein, LA Times 4/15/06
http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/59/19119
On 2/26/07 Sen. Boxer wrote to a Berkeleyan that she
believes the U.S. and the international community must
continue to pursue diplomatic options and that she will
continue to push for a diplomatic solution re Iran.
(7)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.00770:
(8) Press release on Senator Webb's website:
http://webb.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=270138
More information about the sosfbay-discuss
mailing list