* I support President Obama’s decision in Afghanistan

Peter Baker and Adam Nagourney write in the NYT (12-2-09) …

• President Obama went before the nation on Tuesday night to announce that he would escalate the war in Afghanistan.
• And Mr. Obama went before the nation to announce that he had a plan to end the war in Afghanistan.
• If the contrasting messages seemed jarring at first, they reflect the obstacles Mr. Obama faces in rallying an increasingly polarized country that itself is of two minds about what to do in Afghanistan.
• For those who still support the war, he is sending more troops. For those against it, he is offering the assurance of the exit ramp.
• Yet his answer to perhaps the most vexing decision to confront him yet in his presidency is one that may frustrate both sides more than it satisfies them

read the entire article at … http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/02/world/asia/02assess.html?hp

LMW COMMENT …

President Obama has made an excruciatingly difficult decision in a measured, intelligent manner. He has listened and he has decided. All of us, including those politicians and media who gratuitously criticize aspects of the decision, know less about the facts and consequences than does the President, and I for one am more than willing to support Mr. Obama as he struggles to deal with one war which should have been over long ago (Afghanistan) and another which should never have been started (Iraq).

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

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 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.

******

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

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.

* PGA urged to boycott Scotland; no American should play golf in Scotland until there is a full apology and a termination of the Justice Minister

I have sent the following email to the PGA …

I would like to urge the PGA to issue a statement encouraging all U.S. golfers, professional and amateur, to boycott Scotland, until and unless there is a full apology and a termination of the Justice Minister responsible for the despicable release of the Lockerbie bomber.

In addition, I urge all U.S. golfers to send similar messages, and to indicate to Scotland’s sponsers of golf events and clubs that they will not be coming to Scotland to play golf.

* the Israeli settlements in the West Bank: natural growth or a policy of expansion?

Ethan Bronner writes in today’s NYT (6-6-09) …

Israel showing Gaza & the West Bank

• Why is President Obama focusing such attention on the building of homes by Israeli Jews in the West Bank?
• While every administration has objected to Israeli settlement building in occupied lands, the Obama administration has selected it as the opening issue that could begin to untie the Gordian knot of the conflict.
• “Obama may have found the soft underbelly of Israel, because ending settlements is a consensus issue in the world, among American Jewry and even among a majority of Israelis,” said Yossi Beilin, a former leftist minister and member of Parliament.

natural growth?

• The issue of natural growth has surfaced so prominently because while the Israeli government presents it as a simple humane need to make room for expanding families, the data show that settler growth has been enormous in recent years and nearly all of it has been labeled natural growth.

In 2003, Israel and the Palestinians signed the so-called road map for a two-state solution, calling on

• Israel to freeze all settlements,
• and on the Palestinians to dismantle terror networks.
• Neither has done so.

The Israelis say they had unwritten agreements with the Bush administration to continue building, as long as no new settlements were built.

• Bush officials say that is only partially true.
• The Obama administration says such winks and nods are over.

It is signaling the Arab world that it is shifting policy. Whether it does so, and how the Netanyahu government responds, will make for high drama in the coming months.

read the entire article at … http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/06/world/middleeast/06mideast.html?hp

* a new beginning: President Obama’s speech in Cairo (6-4-09)

President Obama’s speech in Cairo (6-4-09) …

CLICK THIS LINK TO HEAR THE ENTIRE SPEECH …

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/06/04/obama_calls_for_new_beginning_between_us_and_muslims_.html

 

 

LMW COMMENT …

You can listen to the entirety of the President’s speech by clicking above, and I urge you to do so. It is a brilliant speech, facing head-on a series of difficult issues, and dealing with each in a thoughtful, intelligent, and compelling manner. I am so proud of our President; he continues to grow every single day.

Extracted below are some of the major points of President Obama’s speech, including his remarks about 7 specific areas of tension: violent extremism, Israel & Palestine, nuclear weapons, democracy, religious freedom, women’s rights, and economic development and opportunity.

Mr. Obama does not avoid what is difficult or that which makes some people uneasy.

He states his views, he teaches, he convinces, he leads.

Extracts from President Obama’s speech in Cairo – 6-4-09 

• I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions.
• We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world – tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate.
• I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.
• But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors.
• As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam – at places like Al-Azhar University – that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment.
• I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco.
• I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.
• But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America.
• Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people.
• That does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the opposite: we must face these tensions squarely.

1. violent extremism

• The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms.
• America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam.
• We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security.
• Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice.
• Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future – and to leave Iraq to Iraqis.

2. Israel & Palestine

• The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.
• America’s strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable.
• Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful.
• Threatening Israel with destruction – or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews – is deeply wrong.
• On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people – Muslims and Christians – have suffered in pursuit of a homeland.
• So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable.
• America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.
• the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.
• That is in Israel’s interest, Palestine’s interest, America’s interest, and the world’s interest.
• Palestinians must abandon violence.
• Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel’s right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine’s.
• The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.
• Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society.
• Finally, the Arab States must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities.

3. nuclear weapons

• The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.
• This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran.
• It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.
• I strongly reaffirmed America’s commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons.

4. democracy

• The fourth issue that I will address is democracy.
• I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other.
• But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose.
• Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.

5. religious freedom

• The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom.
• Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.
• People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul.
• Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together.

6. women’s rights

• The sixth issue that I want to address is women’s rights.
• I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal
• but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality.
• Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity – men and women – to reach their full potential.
• I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice.

7. economic development and opportunity

• Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity.
• I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory.
• The Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence.
• Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities.
• In all nations – including my own – this change can bring fear.
• But I also know that human progress cannot be denied.
• all of us must recognize that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century, and in too many Muslim communities there remains underinvestment in these areas.

All these things must be done in partnership.

• The issues that I have described will not be easy to address.
• But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek – a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God’s children are respected.
• We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written.
• The Holy Koran tells us, “O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another.”
• The Talmud tells us: “The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace.”
• The Holy Bible tells us, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.”
• The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God’s vision.
• Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God’s peace be upon you.

* Frank Rich: Cheney lies and Democrats in Congress are cowed

Frank Rich writes in the New York Times (5-31-09) …

• Once again Cheney and his cohort were using lies and fear to try to gain political advantage — this time to rewrite history and escape accountability for the failed Bush presidency rather than to drum up a new war.
• Once again Democrats in Congress were cowed.
• even before Cheney spoke, Congressional Democrats were quaking in fear
  • purporting with straight faces that the transfer of detainees to “supermax” American prisons constituted a serious security threat.
  • Many of the same senators who signed on to the Iraq war resolution in the fall of 2002 joined the 90-to-6 majority that put a hold on Obama’s Gitmo closure plans.
• The Bush administration did not make us safer either before or after 9/11.
• Obama is not making us less safe.
• If there’s another terrorist attack, it will be because the mess the Bush administration ignored in Pakistan and Afghanistan spun beyond anyone’s control well before Americans could throw the bums out.

read Frank Rich’s entire column at … http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/31/opinion/31rich.html?ref=opinion

 LMW COMMENT … There is clearly a lack of courage among Democrats in Congress. This was evident in the last two years of the Bush administration, when majority Democrats led by Namcy Pelosi and Harry Reid did as little as they possibly could to advance issues critical to our nation. Now, with an intelligent courageous Democratic President, the Congress still dithers. It will take all of Obama’s enormous leadership skills to bring the Democrats in Congress to positions they should recognize as being in their own interests, as well as the countries.

* investigation and prosecution of the criminals of the Bush administration, right to the top if necessary, must go forward

Tom Friedman writes in the NYT (4/29/09) …

• Weighing everything, President Obama got it about as right as one could when he decided to ban the use of torture, to release the Bush torture memos for public scrutiny and to not prosecute the lawyers and interrogators who implemented the policy.
• The president’s decision to expose but not prosecute those responsible for this policy is surely unsatisfying.
• Then why justify the Obama compromise? Two reasons:
• the first is that because justice taken to its logical end here would likely require bringing George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and other senior officials to trial, which would rip our country apart;
• and the other is that Al Qaeda truly was a unique enemy, and the post-9/11 era a deeply confounding war in a variety of ways.

LMW COMMENT … Friedman’s justification for failing to prosecute those who broke the law falls flat. First, we must recognize there is no evidence that torture of prisoners accomplished anything useful, and may have done great harm by producing false information. In fact, it appears that the Bush/Cheney torture objective was precisely to produce false information – linking Saddam and bin Laden – to justify their horrendously stupid decision to invade Iraq. To excuse those who knowingly broke the law, not for high purposes of national interest, but to further their own low goals of a war of choice for political and personal reasons, is in itself inexcusable. I am hopeful that President Obama will eventually allow himself to be convinced that investigation and prosecution of the criminals of the Bush administration, right to the top if necessary, must go forward.

read Friedman’s entire column at … http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/29/opinion/29friedman.html?ref=opinion

 

* torture to make the case for the Iraq invasion … despicable … and there must be accountability

Frank Rich writes in the NYT (4-26-09) …

• Maj. Paul Burney, a United States Army psychiatrist assigned to interrogations in Guantánamo Bay that summer of 2002, told Army investigators: “A large part of the time we were focused on trying to establish a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq and we were not being successful.” 
• As higher-ups got more “frustrated” at the inability to prove this connection, the major said, “there was more and more pressure to resort to measures” that might produce that intelligence. 
• In other words, the ticking time bomb was not another potential Qaeda attack on America but the Bush administration’s ticking timetable for selling a war in Iraq; it wanted to pressure Congress to pass a war resolution before the 2002 midterm elections. 
• But there were no links between 9/11 and Iraq, and the White House knew it. 
• Torture may have been the last hope for coercing such bogus “intelligence” from detainees who would be tempted to say anything to stop the waterboarding. our government methodically authorized torture and lied about it … it did so not just out of a sincere, if criminally misguided, desire to “protect” us but also to promote an unnecessary and catastrophic war. 
• Instead of saving us from “another 9/11,” torture was a tool in the campaign to falsify and exploit 9/11 so that fearful Americans would be bamboozled into a mission that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda. 
• The lying about Iraq remains the original sin from which flows much of the Bush White House’s illegality. 
• President Obama can talk all he wants about not looking back, but this grotesque past is bigger than even he is. 
• What we must have are fair trials that at long last uphold and reclaim our nation’s commitment to the rule of law. 

LMW COMMENT … Frank Rich is so right. President Obama might prefer not “looking back,” but he really has no choice. As constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley has stated so clearly and often, to be a nation of laws we must enforce the law. The laws that were broken, purposely and knowingly, by the Bush administration are not trivial matters. Bush and Cheney and their cabal broke laws in order to convince the American people to support an invasion of Iraq which Bush and Cheney had long before determined as their war of choice. Linking Saddam and Al- Qaeda was one part of their strategy. Linking Saddam and anthrax, as I portray in my soon-to-be-published novel CASE CLOSED, was another part of the infuriating pattern of lies that led us to Iraq and all of the horrific consequences that then flowed.

read Rich’s entire column at … http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/26/opinion/26rich.html

* they tortured for lies to justify the invasion of Iraq

Jonathan Landay writes in McClatchy Newspapers (4/22/09) …

• The Bush administration applied relentless pressure on interrogators to use harsh methods on detainees in part to find evidence of cooperation between al Qaida and the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s regime, according to a former senior U.S. intelligence official and a former Army psychiatrist.
• Such information would’ve provided a foundation for one of former President George W. Bush’s main arguments for invading Iraq in 2003.
• In fact, no evidence has ever been found of operational ties between Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network and Saddam’s regime.
• “Cheney’s and Rumsfeld’s people were told repeatedly, by CIA . . . and by others, that there wasn’t any reliable intelligence that pointed to operational ties between bin Laden and Saddam, and that no such ties were likely because the two were fundamentally enemies, not allies.”
• Senior administration officials, however, “blew that off and kept insisting that we’d overlooked something, that the interrogators weren’t pushing hard enough, that there had to be something more we could do to get that information,” he said.
• A former U.S. Army psychiatrist, Maj. Charles Burney, told Army investigators in 2006 that interrogators at the 
• Bush and his top lieutenants charged that Saddam was secretly pursuing nuclear, biological and chemical weapons in defiance of a United Nations ban, and had to be overthrown because he might provide them to al Qaida for an attack on the U.S. or its allies.

LMW COMMENT … George Bush and Dick Cheney were intent on invading Iraq before the 9/11 attacks. After the 9/11 attacks, they were desperate to find reasons to justify their already planned invasion. When the reasons did not exist, they made them up. After 9/11, they lied that there were links between Saddam and Osama bin Laden. After the anthrax attacks, they lied that there was anthrax in Iraq and that Saddam had the means to deliver biological weapons to the U.S. These people were despicable in their continuing desperate (and successful) attempts to deceive the American people and the Congress, at the ultimate cost of over 3,000 American lives and hundreds of billions of unnecessary expenditures. They had no moral scruples about torture, which is against the law, or about telling lies, which was just the normal way they did their business.

 

Read the entire article at … http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/66622.html