President Barack Obama’s governance – observations & opinions

* our deteriorating infrastructure … the bill must someday come due … in dollars and in lives

Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 19, 2009

CASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question “Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?” … Here’s an excerpt from the CASE CLOSED story; the (fictional) DIA team reviews the connection between the anthrax attack and the subsequent invasion of Iraq …

“After the nationwide panic caused by the anthrax mailings settled down, pretty much nothing happens in the FBI’s anthrax investigation. The next we hear about anthrax is in February 2003, when Secretary of State Abner Grant goes to the United Nations and holds up a vial of something – it wasn’t actually anthrax – claiming that Saddam can deliver biological weapons of mass destruction to the eastern seaboard of the U.S. Of course, we learn later that Saddam had neither WMD nor any way to reach our shores. U.N. arms inspector Blix said something much like that a few days before we invaded Iraq.”

*** click here to buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

******

our deteriorating infrastructure

… the bill must someday come due

… in dollars and in lives

******

Cain Burdeau writes for AP (11-19-09)

  • The federal government could be vulnerable to billions of dollars in claims after a judge ruled that the Army Corps of Engineers’ failure to properly maintain a navigation channel led to massive flooding in Hurricane Katrina.
  • U.S. District Judge Stanwood Duval on Wednesday awarded seven plaintiffs $720,000, but the government could eventually be forced to pay much more. The ruling should give more than 100,000 other individuals, businesses and government entities a better shot at claiming damages.
  • Duval sided with six residents and one business who argued the Army Corps’ shoddy oversight of the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet led to the flooding of New Orleans’ Lower 9th Ward and neighboring St. Bernard Parish.
  • Duval referred to the corps’ approach to maintaining the channel as “monumental negligence.”

read the entire article at … http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091119/ap_on_re_us/us_katrina_flood_lawsuit

LMW COMMENT …

Our federal and state governments have built up a huge liability in failing to properly maintain our infrastructure of roads, bridges, dams, etc. Politicians vote for popular (and campaign contribution producing) construction projects but almost never provide the funding for subsequent maintenance.

Eventually, we will pay … in dollars and in lives.

In this case, government is the problem, but the answer is more government rather than less.

We live together in a country and world where we are dependent on government for many things we cannot do for ourselves. Unfortunately, we too often elect politicians based on factors that have nothing to do with competence, which many voters apparently find boring.

******

Posted in management | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

* terror trial in NYC … another step in cleaning up the disgraceful legacy of the Bush/Cheney years

Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 14, 2009

CASE CLOSED - smallCASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question “Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?” … Here’s an excerpt from the CASE CLOSED story; the (fictional) DIA team reviews the connection between the anthrax attack and the subsequent invasion of Iraq …

“After the nationwide panic caused by the anthrax mailings settled down, pretty much nothing happens in the FBI’s anthrax investigation. The next we hear about anthrax is in February 2003, when Secretary of State Abner Grant goes to the United Nations and holds up a vial of something – it wasn’t actually anthrax – claiming that Saddam can deliver biological weapons of mass destruction to the eastern seaboard of the U.S. Of course, we learn later that Saddam had neither WMD nor any way to reach our shores. U.N. arms inspector Blix said something much like that a few days beforewe invaded Iraq.”

*** click here to buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

******

terror trial in NYC

… another step in cleaning up the disgraceful legacy

of the  Bush/Cheney years

******

NYT editorial (11/14/09) …

Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. took a bold and principled step on Friday toward repairing the damage wrought by former President George W. Bush with his decision to discard the nation’s well-established systems of civilian and military justice in the treatment of detainees captured in antiterrorist operations.

  • On Friday, Attorney General Holder announced that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, and four others accused in the plot will be tried in a fashion that will not further erode American justice or shame Americans.
  • It promises to finally provide justice for the victims of 9/11.
  • Mr. Holder said those prisoners would be prosecuted in federal court in Manhattan.
  • It was an enormous victory for the rule of law, a major milestone in Mr. Obama’s efforts to close the detention camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and an important departure from Mr. Bush’s disregard for American courts and their proven ability to competently handle high-profile terror cases.

The Obama administration has yet to completely figure out how to rectify the disgraceful Bush detention policies, but it is getting there.

Read the entire editorial at … http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/14/opinion/14sat1.html?ref=opinion

LMW COMMENT …

Another Bush/Cheney mess that President Obama must clean up, all of which have severely impeded accomplishing the positive agenda which Obama would, I am sure, much rather be addressing.

Once healthcare is accomplished, however, I think we will see faster progress on other issues raised during the campaign.

For those of us who support our President, we must remember to be patient as he works his way through the disgraceful Bush/Cheney legacy.

******

Posted in justice, leadership, war & terror | Tagged: , , , | 3 Comments »

* The Catholic Church should be severely condemned for over-stepping its bounds on the issue of abortion restrictions in healthcare legislation

Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 11, 2009

CASE CLOSED - smallCASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question “Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?” … click here to … buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

Here’s what readers say about CASE CLOSED  …

“CASE CLOSED is a must read for anyone who wondered … what really happened? … Who did it? … why?” … and finally, why didn’t they tell us the truth?”

“Fiction?? Maybe?? But I don’t think so!! More likely an excellent interpretation of what may have really happened.”

******

The Catholic Church should be severely condemned

for over-stepping its bounds

on the issue of abortion restrictions

in healthcare legislation

******

Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Associated Press (11/11/09) …

  • Catholic bishops have emerged as a formidable force in the health care overhaul fight, using their clout with
    Health Care Overhaul Catholic Lobby

    Cardinal Theodore McCarrick ... on the phone with Nancy Pelosi

    millions of Catholics and working behind the scenes in Congress to get strong abortion restrictions into the House bill.

  • “The Catholic Church used their power — their clout, if you will — to influence this issue. They had to. It’s a basic teaching of the religion,” said Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., a leading abortion foe and architect of the health measure’s restrictions.
  • The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the church’s Washington-based advocacy organization, which is staffed by more than 350 lay people, derives its power in large part from the sheer number of Catholics in this country — 68 million — but also from the special moral and religious standing of its members. Many of them are in regular contact with lawmakers, weighing in on issues from immigration policy to benefits for low-income people.
  • The group distributed fliers to every parish in the nation asking people to pray for abortion restrictions and to call their congressmen and senators asking them to “fix these bills with pro-life amendments.”
  • And in recent days, the conference staff got elbow-deep in the legislative machinations on the health measure, even having bishops intervene with Republicans — who were loath to help Democrats pass their bill — to make sure they supported the abortion provisions.
  • Another factor that undoubtedly helped: Democrats are keenly aware of the power of Catholic voters, more than 50 percent of whom embraced Obama in the 2008 election.
  • And Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., a prominent abortion rights supporter who has gathered the signatures of more than 40 representatives who refuse to back a health bill that contains the restrictions, said the bishops had been allowed to overstep their bounds.
  • “No one group should get to dictate the outcome of legislation in Congress,” DeGette said. “Every group should be listened to, but I don’t think one group should be given veto authority over what we do.”

read the entire article at … http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091111/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_overhaul_catholic_lobby

LMW COMMENTS …

Catholic bishops are certainly entitled to tell Catholics what the Church says about abortion or any other issue. But it is offensive to all non-Catholics to be told by leaders of another religion what we should do or support. We have been blessed in this country by a separation of Church and state. The importance of this can be seen in Muslim countries where religious rule prevails, and women are treated like chattel. The Catholic Church should be severely condemned for over-stepping its bounds on this issue.

Posted in church & government, church and state | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

* Obama’s poll numbers rise

Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 7, 2009

Obama 2

Beth Fouhy writes for AP (10-7-09) …

  • President Barack Obama’s approval ratings are starting to rise after declining ever since his inauguration, new poll figures show as the country’s mood begins to brighten.
  • But concerns about the economy, health care and war persist, and support for the war in Afghanistan is falling.
  • Overall, 39 percent said they disapproved of Obama’s performance in office, down from 49 percent last month.
  • To be sure, the poll found persistent and deep partisan divisions over Obama.
  • While 88 percent of Democrats said they approved of his performance in office, just 18 percent of Republicans approved. But that GOP figure was up six points since September, when only 12 percent of Republicans said they approved.
  • Obama’s job approval has also gone up among independents. Fifty-three percent said they approved of the president’s job performance, a nine point increase since September.
  • Even more strikingly, the percentage of independents who said they disapproved plunged 16 points, from 53 percent last month to 37 percent now.

read the entire article at … http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091007/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_ap_poll

LMW COMMENT …

These poll ratings reflect what I believe has been an outstanding performance by President Obama and his administration in dealing with a horrendous set of problems handed to them by the incompetent Bush/Cheney group.

And the Republican attitude that everything about Obama is to be opposed, regardless of what’s good for the country, is a disgrace. The Republican glee that America did not get the 2016 Olympics was disgusting. And, I believe, self-defeating for a Republican party that will not succeed by opposing everything with no plans of their own and no concern for the needs of the American people.

I think most Americans known Obama is doing a good jib and that the Republican attitude is a disgrace; hence the poll numbers cited above.

I think also that many Americans see in the Republican opposition to Obama more than a touch of racism, and they find it disgusting.

Posted in politics | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

* Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech to the UN

Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 6, 2009

Below is the text of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech.

To see a video of this speech, click …

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44HkjBDQz_k

******

Netanyahu

Mr. President,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland.

I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people.

The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust.  It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events.  Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth.

Yesterday the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants.  Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie.

Last month, I went to a villa in a suburb of Berlin called Wannsee.  There, on January 20, 1942, after a hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided how to exterminate the Jewish people.  The detailed minutes of that meeting have been preserved by successive German governments.

Here is a copy of those minutes, in which the Nazis issued precise instructions on how to carry out the extermination of the Jews.   Is this a lie?

A day before I was in Wannsee, I was given in Berlin the original construction plans for the Auschwitz-Birkenauconcentration camp.  Those plans are signed by Hitler s deputy, Heinrich Himmler himself.  Here is a copy of the plans for Auschwitz-Birkenau, where one million Jews were murdered.  Is this too a lie?

This June, President Obama visited the Buchenwald concentration camp.  Did President Obama pay tribute to a lie? And what of the Auschwitz survivors whose arms still bear the tattooed numbers branded on them by the Nazis? Are those tattoos a lie?

One-third of all Jews perished in the conflagration.  Nearly every Jewish family was affected, including my own.  My wife’s grandparents, her father s two sisters and three brothers, and all the aunts, uncles and cousins were all murdered by the Nazis.  Is that also a lie?
Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium.  To those who refused to come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you.  You stood up for moral clarity and you brought honor to your countries.

But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame?  Have you no decency?

A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state. What a disgrace!  What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations!

Perhaps some of you think that this man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews.  You’re wrong.  History has shown us time and again that what starts with attacks on the Jews eventually ends up engulfing many others.

This Iranian regime is fueled by an extreme fundamentalism that burst onto the world scene three decades ago after lying dormant for centuries.

In the past thirty years, this fanaticism has swept the globe with a murderous violence and cold-blooded impartiality in its choice of victims.   It has callously slaughtered Moslems and Christians, Jews and Hindus, and many others.  Though it is comprised of different offshoots, the adherents of this unforgiving creed seek to return humanity to medieval times. Wherever they can, they impose a backward regimented society where women, minorities, gays or anyone not deemed to be a true believer is brutally subjugated.

The struggle against this fanaticism does not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization.  It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death. The primitivism of the 9th century ought to be no match for the progress of the 21st century.  The allure of freedom, the power of technology, the reach of communications should surely win the day.

Ultimately, the past cannot triumph over the future.  And the future offers all nations magnificent bounties of hope.   The pace of progress is growing exponentially.  It took us centuries to get from the printing press to the telephone, decades to get from the telephone to the personal computer, and only a few years to get from the personal computer to the internet.

What seemed impossible a few years ago is already outdated, and we can scarcely fathom the changes that are yet to come.

We will crack the genetic code.  We will cure the incurable.  We will lengthen our lives.  We will find a cheap alternative to fossil fuels and clean up the planet.

I am proud that my country Israel is at the forefront of these advances by leading innovations in science and technology, medicine and biology, agriculture and water, energy and the environment.  These innovations the world over offer humanity a sunlit future of unimagined promise.

But if the most primitive fanaticism can acquire the most deadly weapons, the march of history could be reversed for a time.   And like the belated victory over the Nazis, the forces of progress and freedom will prevail only after a horrific toll of blood and fortune has been exacted from mankind.

That is why the greatest threat facing the world today is the marriage between religious fanaticism and the weapons of mass destruction, and the most urgent challenge facing this body is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Are the member states of the United Nations up to that challenge?  Will the international community confront a despotism that terrorizes its own people as they bravely stand up for freedom?

Will it take action against the dictators who stole an election in broad daylight and gunned down Iranian protesters who died in the streets choking in their own blood?

Will the international community thwart the world’s most pernicious sponsors and practitioners of terrorism?

Above all, will the international community stop the terrorist regime of Iran from developing atomic weapons, thereby endangering the peace of the entire world?

The people of Iran are courageously standing up to this regime.  People of goodwill around the world stand with them, as do the thousands who have been protesting outside this hall.   Will the United Nations stand by their side?

Ladies and Gentlemen,
The jury is still out on the United Nations, and recent signs are not encouraging.

Rather than condemning the terrorists and their Iranian patrons, some here have condemned their victims.  That is exactly what a recent UN report on Gaza did, falsely equating the terrorists with those they targeted.

For eight long years, Hamas fired from Gaza thousands of missiles, mortars and rockets on nearby Israeli cities.   Year after year, as these missiles were deliberately hurled at our civilians, not a single UN resolution was passed condemning those criminal attacks.

We heard nothing absolutely nothing from the UN Human Rights Council, a misnamed institution if there ever was one.

In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza.  It dismantled 21 settlements and uprooted over 8,000 Israelis.

We didn’t get peace.  Instead we got an Iranian backed terror base fifty miles from Tel Aviv.   Life in Israeli towns and cities next to Gaza became a nightmare.

You see, the Hamas rocket attacks not only continued, they increased tenfold. Again, the UN was silent.

Finally, after eight years of this unremitting assault, Israel was finally forced to respond.  But how should we have responded?

Well, there is only one example in history of thousands of rockets being fired on a country’s civilian population.  It happened when the Nazis rocketed British cities during World War II.

During that war, the allies leveled German cities, causing hundreds of thousands of casualties.   Israel chose to respond differently.  Faced with an enemy committing a double war crime of firing on civilians while hiding behind civilians Israel sought to conduct surgical strikes against the rocket launchers.

That was no easy task because the terrorists were firing missiles from homes and schools, using mosques as weapons depots and ferreting explosives in ambulances.

Israel, by contrast, tried to minimize casualties by urging Palestinian civilians to vacate the targeted areas.  We dropped countless flyers over their homes, sent thousands of text messages and called thousands of cell phones asking people to leave.

Never has a country gone to such extraordinary lengths to remove the enemy’s civilian population from harm’s way.   Yet faced with such a clear case of aggressor and victim, who did the UN Human Rights Council decide to condemn? Israel.

A democracy legitimately defending itself against terror is morally hanged, drawn and quartered, and given an unfair trial to boot.

By these twisted standards, the UN Human Rights Council would have dragged Roosevelt and Churchill to the dock as war criminals.  What a perversion of truth!  What a perversion of justice!

Delegates of the United Nations,
Will you accept this farce?    Because if you do, the United Nations would revert to its darkest days, when the worst violators of human rights sat in judgment against the law-abiding democracies, when Zionism was equated with racism and when an automatic majority could declare that the earth is flat.

If this body does not reject this report, it would send a message to terrorists everywhere: Terror pays; if you launch your attacks from densely populated areas, you will win immunity.

And in condemning Israel, this body would also deal a mortal blow to peace.  Here’s why.  When Israel left Gaza, many hoped that the missile attacks would stop.  Others believed that at the very least, Israel would have international legitimacy to exercise its right of self-defense.

What legitimacy?  What self-defense?

The same UN that cheered Israel as it left Gaza and promised to back our right of self-defense now accuses us my people, my country – of war crimes?  And for what?  For acting responsibly in self-defense.  What a travesty!

Israel justly defended itself against terror.  This biased and unjust report is a clear-cut test for all governments.   Will you stand with Israel or will you stand with the terrorists?

We must know the answer to that question now.   Now and not later.  Because if Israel is again asked to take more risks for peace, we must know today that you will stand with us tomorrow.

Only if we have the confidence that we can defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace.

Ladies and Gentlemen,
All of Israel wants peace.   Any time an Arab leader genuinely wanted peace with us, we made peace.   We made peace with Egypt led by Anwar Sadat.  We made peace with Jordan led by King Hussein.

And if the Palestinians truly want peace, I and my government, and the people of Israel, will make peace.  But we want a genuine peace, a defensible peace, a permanent peace.

In 1947, this body voted to establish two states for two peoples a Jewish state and an Arab state.  The Jews accepted that resolution.  The Arabs rejected it.   We ask the Palestinians to finally do what they have refused to do for 62 years:  Say yes to a Jewish state.

Just as we are asked to recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, the Palestinians must be asked to recognize the nation state of the Jewish people.   The Jewish people are not foreign conquerors in the Land of Israel.   This is the land of our forefathers.

Inscribed on the walls outside this building is the great Biblical vision of peace: “Nation shall not lift up sword against nation.  They shall learn war no more.”   These words were spoken by the Jewish prophet Isaiah 2,800 years ago as he walked in my country, in my city – in the hills of Judea and in the streets of Jerusalem.   We are not strangers to this land.  It is our homeland.

As deeply connected as we are to this land, we recognize that the Palestinians also live there and want a home of their own.   We want to live side by side with them, two free peoples living in peace, prosperity and dignity.

But we must have security.  The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves except those handful of powers that could endanger Israel.

That is why a Palestinian state must be effectively demilitarized.   We don’t want another Gaza, another Iranian backed terror base abutting Jerusalem and perched on the hills a few kilometers from Tel Aviv.

We want peace.

I believe such a peace can be achieved.  But only if we roll back the forces of terror, led by Iran, that seek to destroy peace, eliminate Israel and overthrow the world order.

The question facing the international community is whether it is prepared to confront those forces or accommodate them.

Over seventy years ago, Winston Churchill lamented what he called the “confirmed unteachability of mankind,” the unfortunate habit of civilized societies to sleep until danger nearly overtakes them.

Churchill bemoaned what he called the “want of foresight, the unwillingness to act when action will be simple and effective, the lack of clear thinking, the confusion of counsel until emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong.

I speak here today in the hope that Churchill’s assessment of the “unteachability of mankind” is for once proven wrong.
I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history — that we can prevent danger in time.

In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good courage.  Let us confront this peril, secure our future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for generations to come.

Posted in Israel, international | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

* will we ever learn what we already know … Cheney is the one who outed Valerie Plame

Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 2, 2009

CASE CLOSED - smallCASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question “Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?” … click here to … buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

Here’s what readers say about CASE CLOSED  …

“The whole Anthrax episode is unquestionably a dark moment in American history. But what makes it fascinating is how it was handled (or should I say mishandled) by the administration and the various agencies involved. CASE CLOSED is a must read for anyone who wondered … what really happened? … Who did it? … why?” … and finally, why didn’t they tell us the truth?”

******

will we ever learn what we already know

… Cheney is the one who outed Valerie Plame

Nedra Pickler writes for Huffington Post (10/1/09) …

  • A federal judge ruled Thursday that the FBI must publicly reveal much of its notes from an interview with former Vice President Dick Cheney during the investigation into who leaked the identity of a CIA operative (Valerie Plame).
  • Both the Bush and Obama administrations said they wanted to keep the interview confidential because future presidents, vice presidents and their senior staff may not cooperate with criminal investigations if they know what they say could became public.
  • But U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan ruled there was no justification to withhold the entire 67 pages of FBI records documenting Fitzgerald’s interview since the Plame leak investigation has concluded. He said that limited parts could be withheld to protect national security and private communications between the president and vice president.
  • The Justice Department told Sullivan in a hearing this summer that if he ordered the documents released, they would appeal and seek to withhold them until the matter is resolved.

Read more at …http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/01/cheney-fbi-interview-must_n_306329.html?view=print

LMW COMMENT …

First of all, Dick Cheney has lied again and again and should be punished.

Second, I am disappointed that the Obama Justice Department seems no different from the Bush group on issues like this.

Posted in justice | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

* Dick Cheney has no respect for the law and has it all backwards with regard to the CIA’s morale

Posted by Lew Weinstein on August 30, 2009

Cheney 2

Lara Jakes (AP) writes  (8/30/09) …

  • Former Vice President Dick Cheney says politics are driving the Justice Department’s decision to investigate whether CIA interrogators abused terror suspects detained after the Sept. 11 attacks.
  • “It’s clearly a political move,” Cheney said in an interview aired on “Fox News Sunday.” “I mean, there’s no other rationale for why they’re doing this.”
  • He added: “I just think it’s an outrageous political act that will do great damage, long term, to our capacity to be able to have people take on difficult jobs, make difficult decisions, without having to worry about what the next administration is going to say.”

read the entire article at … http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090830/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_cheney_3

John Amick wrote in the Washington Post (8/30/09)

  • Not only does Cheney believe the changes in tactics are bad policy, he said the review, if it travels up the chain of command, will set a dangerous precedent for future administrations to seek prosecutions for opinions a previous administration has cleared through the Department of Justice.
  • “I guess the other thing that offends the hell out of me, frankly … is we had a track record now of eight years of defending the nation against any further mass casualty attacks from Al Qaida,” Cheney said. “The approach of the Obama administration should be to come to those people who were involved in that policy and say, ‘How did you do it? What were the keys to keeping this country safe over that period of time?’”

LMW COMMENT …

Dick Cheney never hesitated to break any law he thought was in the way of what he wanted to accomplish, so of course he would think the CIA should be able to do the same. But we are a nation of laws, and the Vice President, the President and the CIA are not excused from obeying them when they deem it inconvenient to do so.

My guess is that the overwhelming majority of CIA officers want to obey the law and are furious with the attitude that says some of their colleagues don’t have to. What is damaging to morale is the lack of standards, not the enforcement of them.

Beyond that, for Cheney to brag about the Bush/Cheney record of protecting our country for 8 years totally ignores the fact that the worst two attacks against this country since Pearl Harbor happened on their inattentive watch. They were warned about 9-11 and ignored the warnings. They had 7 years to solve the anthrax case and failed. Cheney as a protector of America is a bad joke.

Cheney will never get it. It is so good that he is out of public office.

Posted in war & terror | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

* Bolton says Brits involved in Lockerbie release; was the U.S.?

Posted by Lew Weinstein on August 25, 2009

Worldwide News Agency AFP writes (8/25/09) …

  • John Bolton, the former US ambassador to the United Nations who has criticised his release, accused Brown’s government of being heavily involved in reaching the decision.
  • “The notion that somehow the government in London didn’t participate in the decision that Secretary MacAskill made is just fanciful,” Bolton told the BBC’s Newsnight late Monday.
  • “This was a decision that the government in London wanted and it’s the decision they got.”

read the entire article at … http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090825/wl_uk_afp/britainlibyausattackslockerbie_20090825083109

LMW COMMENT …

It is looking more and more that this was far from a loose-cannon decision by a Scottish official. And if the Brits were involved, can U.S. hands be far behind? And, if so, where will President Obama’s outrage be directed?

Posted in international | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

* was the Lockerbie murderer released because he was, in his planned and imminent appeal, about to release some inconvenient information?

Posted by Lew Weinstein on August 25, 2009

In addition to this political blog, I also produce an blog on the anthrax case and my novel CASE CLOSED (http://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/), and a travel blog (http://patandlewtravel.wordpress.com/).

A recent post on the CASE CLOSED blog raised some frightening questions about why the Lockerbie murderer was released. Here’s an extract from that post …

“The Libyans could learn some good tips from the FBI. If you are going to accuse someone of an act of terrorism, ensure they are dead first. That way their lawyers can’t ask awkward questions afterwards. The Libyan was about to have his case appealed which was apparently going to raise some embarrassing details that neither the US or UK governments were keen to have known.”

It is known that an appeal was pending. It will be interesting to see if there is any further discussion related to the possible disclosure of inconvenient information.

In addition, our British friends tell us that many in Scotland believe that Abdel Baset al-Megrahi was falsely convicted on very sketchy evidence, and that he is in fact innocent. If so, that would surely be grounds for an appeal and possible reversal of his conviction. It is not grounds for his release, which suggests that some other logic may have been at play.

Stay tuned.

Posted in international | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

* is Great Britain also culpable in the despicable release of the Lockerbie murderer?

Posted by Lew Weinstein on August 25, 2009

John Burns writes in the NYT (8-25-09) …

  • The uproar in Britain over the release of the only person convicted in the Lockerbie bombing gathered momentum on Monday, with critics saying at an emergency session of the Scottish Parliament that the Scottish justice secretary, Kenny MacAskill, had brought shame on Scotland and jeopardized its relations with the United States.
  • The fury in Edinburgh, the Scottish capital, echoed indignation in the United States from President Obama, the FBI director; prominent senators; and relatives of those who died on Pan Am Flight 103 when it exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland, on Dec. 21, 1988, killing 270 people, including 189 Americans.
  • The release has developed into the most abrasive issue between Britain and the United States in years, and, opposition critics said in Edinburgh, one that could damage Scotland’s tourism and investment from the United States.
  • Mr. MacAskill said Mr. Megrahi’s release was approved solely because of his illness and not because of “economic considerations” relating to Libyan oil deals, as opposition politicians and newspaper editorials in Britain have suggested.
  • The government of Prime Minister Gordon Brown ducked for cover, declining to say whether it supported the decision to return Mr. Megrahi home.
  • Mr. MacAskill said he had received a perfunctory answer this summer when he wrote to Jack Straw, justice minister in the Brown government, asking the government to “make representations or provide information” regarding the proposed release.
  • “They declined to do so,” he said. “They simply informed me that they saw no legal barrier to transfer and that they gave no assurances to the U.S. government at the time. They declined to offer a full explanation. I found that highly regrettable.”

read the entire article at … http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/world/europe/25lockerbie.html?_r=1&ref=world

LMW COMMENT …

It now appears that the Scottish Justice Minister did ask the government of Great Britain for input and received no indication that the Brown administration opposed the release. In my mind, until further word is heard from the Brits, that makes the Brown administration culpable in this despicable act.

Posted in international | Leave a Comment »