al Qaeda

Afghanistan, al Qaeda, Barack Obama, Gitmo, McChrystal, Rahm Emanual, Taliban

Obama’s missed memo to Rahm, ‘Afghanistan is a war of necessity’ (updated)

by  • 

Did Rahm Emanuel miss President Barack Obama’s speech two months ago on Afghanistan or is he just working from the latest talking points? Bill Kristol (see Keep America Safe) has a few thoughts along those lines yet his third point seems the most likely explanation to me:

3. It’s presumptuous. Wasn’t the White House just complaining about Gen. McChrystal offering his judgment in public while internal administration debates were ongoing? I suppose one can’t say that Emanuel should have confined himself to privately offering his view up the chain of command — the only person above him is the president. But are we then to conclude Emanuel was speaking for the president today? Are Sunday talk show declarations by Emanuel and political advisor David Axelrod an appropriate way to announce the considered judgment of the president at this stage of a long Cabinet-level review process? Or is Emanuel end-running the process? Do Secretaries Gates and Clinton agree with Emanuel? Were they consulted before Rahm popped off?

We have a White House that wanted to pass national health care without a written bill, a Congress approving Obama’s plan — without being presented one — to bring Gitmo’s terrorists to the U.S., and Rahm Emanual telegraphing the President’s change of thinking on Sunday morning TV.

If Rahm Emanual is the administration’s deception plan before 100,000 fresh American troops pour across the border into Pakistan’s tribal areas next spring to destroy the Taliban and al Qaeda there, I hope someone at least sends the Pentagon a secret memo right away.

Update: Obama and Rahm do know how to keep a secret (from our side).

al Qaeda, Barack Obama, Democrats, detainees, Gitmo, Guantanamo, Homeland Security, Keep Gitmo Open, Ron Paul

House Dems vote to bring Gitmo detainees into U.S. (63 Dems switched)

by  • 

Yesterday, 223 House Democrats (and Ron Paul) voted down a motion to recommit H.R. 2892. In effect, they voted:

1) to bring Guantanamo al Qaeda detainees into the U.S. and 2) to delete this additional requirement: “the Secretary of Homeland Security shall conduct a threat assessment for each such individual who is proposed to be transferred to the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, the District of Columbia, or the United States Territories.”

President Barack Obama and his administration applauded the House vote:

The Obama White House hailed a House vote Thursday to defeat a GOP-led effort to block the transfer of any Guantanamo Bay detainee to US soil — even for prosecution. “This was the most important legislative vote out there and it gives us a sense of victory,” said a senior administration official close to White House deliberations on closing the detention facility.

(Victory? Hurray! President Obama finally knows how to define victory.)

“It give [sic] us the fundamental ability to close down Guantanamo,” the official said. “And on the political side of it at least we’ve stabilized and we’ re dealing with the hysteria we dealt with this spring.” But the White House was not so celebratory as to release a formal statement praising the House vote. Another top White House aide said it’s too early to draw attention to Guantanamo policy because variables dealing with security, detention and trial of suspected terrorists remain unsettled. “We don’t want to be spiking the football on the 20 yard line,” the aide said. “We still have a ways to go.”

The House voted 224-193 to allow detainees to moved to the US for trial. The vote came on a amendment to the $42.8 billion Homeland Security spending bill. That overall bill passed 307-114 and now moves to the Senate, where swift passage is expected. Obama could sign the bill as early as next week.
…
In fact, a non-binding vote to that effect on Oct. 1 temporarily scuttled the Homeland Security spending bill. In that vote, 88 Democrats broke ranks and sided with Republicans who pushed the measure to derail Obama’s attempt to close Guantanamo. Today, 63 Democrats switched sides, clearing the way for the Homeland Security spending bill. … [also read this]

Who exactly are the Democrats who likely used their previous vote to tout to their constituents that they are “tough on terror?”