8/27/02

Dear Editor,

Why does a President of the United States have to ask his lawyers if he can personally, on his own with his own authority, use the uS military to attack a foreign nation? Mr. Bush, as he does not deserve the title, President, knows he does not have the power! A more likely set of questions he may have posed to his lawyers are, "Do you think I can get away with this? What would happen if I got sued by members of Congress, like Clinton did when he personally used the military to bomb the hell out of Kosovo?" Reuters reported yesterday that, "President Bush's lawyers believe he has authority to attack Iraq without advance approval from Congress."

Reuters also reported that, "White House officials told the newspaper that Bush could move without new congressional approval, in part, because a 1991 resolution giving his father, then President George Bush, authority to wage war in the Gulf remains in force." Daddy Bush never had a declaration of war from Congress either. So why does little Bush need one? Well folks anyone who can read will know that all Presidents, under any circumstances at all, need a declaration of war from Congress before they send troops overseas or anywhere else. Now this is exceedingly hard to swallow for anyone with just a little bit of knowledge of the Constitution. Am I supposed to be sad that the son was forced to sit on the side lines for an eight year time-out while another President is in office before the Bush family can resume their plans of taking over the entire Middle East?

The same news article stated that, "The conflict results from differing opinions on presidential power. As commander in chief, the president is in charge of the military but under the Constitution, only Congress can declare war." Well how about that? Well let me inform you one step further, the President does not become the "Commander in Chief" until there is a declaration of war. This is only logical folks. If a President had power to move and send troops as "Commander in Chief," why would he need any approval from Congress? Because he ainít "Commander in Chief" until Congress grants that power to him under a Declaration of War. The power to send troops in one man is monarchial power folks - wake to hell up out there! Why does Congress go along? because usurpers need supporters too. No one can be a usurper without help and without those willing to have their powers stolen.

It was reported in the same news article that, "Bush is determined to carry out U.S. policy calling for the ouster of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, whom the U.S. president has called a menace to the region with a determination to acquire and use weapons of mass destruction." Well let me ask you Patriots, who love liberty and hate tyranny and usurpation, can a president execute his own war plans without a declaration of war and call it "U.S. policy." How does he arrive at U.S. policy? Now the great Mr. Bush says that Saddam Hussein is a "menace to the region." Well guess who is a menace to the Constitution of the united States of America?

Sincerely,

Ronald F. Avery