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
JimWhiteGNV RT @AlsBoy: This woman took her cats to a department store to visit Santa and as you can see it went quite well http://t.co/fOH32OHZvo
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @CosFot No, but, jee bus, I can imagine. Bleech!!
2hreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV It was very nice of Cuba to take this step. Not many countries will take chance of normalizing relations with a regime notorious for torture
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Cuba Libre! A Momentous Shift in Relations https://t.co/kdMQlWuD4t A look at a new day in the Caribbean.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @bungdan Menendez?
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @The_Old_Hack That's part of the problem. If rules abt Good and Evil aren't pre-ordained they might have to look in the mirror @WarOnWarOff
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel First Obama told Republicans they couldn't torture anymore then he took away their certainty abt who the Evil Empire is. #KenyanKonspiracy
3hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @carolrosenberg They're going to rearrange that whole island before they let you off that beat.
3hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel These people bitching about doing business with a dictator ... they're driving on Saudi oil, no? (Yes, I know fungible...)
3hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @csoghoian Didn't Schmidt say that right before you asked him an uncomfortable question?
3hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel It's so nice that every single Cuba dead-ender has just taken their Iran dead-ender TPs and search and replaced Cuba for Iran. #FourLetters
4hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @matthewstoller Good question. Already seeing Cubans worried about us overrunning their beach but we'd be better to use Cuba for good care.
4hreplyretweetfavorite
February 2013
S M T W T F S
« Jan   Mar »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728