Im-mi-nent: (Adj, DOJ) 20 Months

Michael Isikoff has obtained and posted the white paper DOJ gave to the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees to stave off giving them the OLC memos that actually authorized Anwar al-Awlaki’s killing. I noted its mention in an SJC markup last year.

While the memos they are hiding are almost certainly far more damning (as I’ll lay out tomorrow), this is utterly damning in itself.

It effectively defines imminence so as to have no meaning.

First, the condition that an operational leader present an “imminent” threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future. Given the nature of, for example, the terrorist attacks on September 11, in which civilian airliners were hijacked to strike the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, this definition of imminence, which would require the United States to refrain from action until preparations for an attack are concluded, would not allow the United States sufficient time to defend itself. The defensive options available to the United States may be reduced or eliminated if al-Qa’ida operatives disappear and cannot be found when the time of their attack approaches. Consequently, with respect to al-Qa’ida leaders who are continually planning attacks, the United States is likely to have only a limited window of opportunity within which to defend Americans in a manner that has both a high likelihood of success and sufficiencly reduces the probabilities of civilian casualties.

[snip]

By its nature, therefore, the threat posed by al-Qa’ida and its associated forces demands a broader concept of imminence in judging when a person continually planning terror attacks presents an imminent threat, making the use of force appropriate. In this context, imminence must incorporate considerations of the relevant window of opportunity, the possibility of reducing collateral damage to civilians, and the likelihood of heading off future disastrous attacks on Americans.

[snip]

With this understanding, a high-level official could conclude, for example, that an individual poses an “imminent threat” of violent attack against the United States where he is an operational leader of al-Qa’ida or an associated force and is personally and continually involved in planning terrorist attacks against the United States. Moreover, where the al-Qa’ida member in question has recently been involved in activities posing an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States, and there is no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities, that member’s involvement in al-Qa’ida’s continuing terrorist campaign against the United States would support the conclusion that the members is an imminent threat.

Even assuming this is the justification they used to kill Anwar al-Awlaki, they killed him about 20 months after the alleged attacks (the UndieBomber and plotting against British Airways) in which they sort of have evidence against him (though DOJ has always managed to make sure that evidence was not challenged in an antagonistic setting).

If you measure from the toner cartridge plot — in which other AQAP members seem to have been the operational leaders — it was a year between the plot and the killing.

Anwar al-Awlaki may have been dangerous and surely was a hateful man. But it appears clear that DOJ had no evidence he was an imminent threat — at least as traditionally defined.

So they just redefined it.

Update: See Opino Juris for an assessment of this definition from an IHL and IHRL perspective.

Update: I’ve corrected my transcription of the imminent passage above (I had had “Second” instead of “Moreover”).

 

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

2 Responses to Im-mi-nent: (Adj, DOJ) 20 Months

  • 1
  • 2
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel @abrams Why link to the knock off when you can link to the original? http://t.co/tUAWikd8mo
3mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @cfarivar: German Justice Minister Maas terminates Federal Prosecutor Range http://t.co/bBbfEuWlU0 #Netzpolitik
9mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @ZackPohl Plus I think both my Denial and Bargaining stages were better. @Voxdotcom
20mreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV Trying to eat responsibly today. Only got the regular size, not the extra long chili cheese coney. So I got tater tots as compensation.
21mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @ZackPohl: This @Voxdotcom piece... http://t.co/TaKNr6gUPN Is pretty much a ripoff of this @emptywheel piece from last week http://t.co
21mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @RosenzweigP Okay by me!
49mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz iPhones, the FBI, and Going Dark. http://t.co/QXeT8SkbgW via @RosenzweigP - Yes iPhones really are better, get that Android junk outta here
51mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @AblativMeatshld @ScottGreenfield @SheriffClarke Right. Clarke is everything thats wrong w/competent+decent policing. Gives cops a bad name.
52mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @ScottGreenfield @SheriffClarke Clarke is a thoroughly horrible man.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @p2wy gotta do better than that to be an MLive commenter.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @nickmanes1 at the gym...
2hreplyretweetfavorite
February 2013
S M T W T F S
« Jan   Mar »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728