SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tejek who wrote (479298)5/8/2009 5:29:52 PM
From: jlallen2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1575604
 
Obama and the 9/11 Families
The president isn't sincere about 'swift and certain' justice for terrorists.
By DEBRA BURLINGAME

In February I was among a group of USS Cole and 9/11 victims' families who met with the president at the White House to discuss his policies regarding Guantanamo detainees. Although many of us strongly opposed Barack Obama's decision to close the detention center and suspend all military commissions, the families of the 17 sailors killed in the 2000 attack in Yemen were particularly outraged.

Over the years, the Cole families have seen justice abandoned by the Clinton administration and overshadowed by the need of the Bush administration to gather intelligence after 9/11. They have watched in frustration as the president of Yemen refused extradition for the Cole bombers.

Now, after more than eight years of waiting, Mr. Obama was stopping the trial of Abu Rahim al-Nashiri, the only individual to be held accountable for the bombing in a U.S. court. Patience finally gave out. The families were giving angry interviews, slamming the new president just days after he was sworn in.

The Obama team quickly put together a meeting at the White House to get the situation under control. Individuals representing "a diversity of views" were invited to attend and express their concerns.

On Feb. 6, the president arrived in the Roosevelt Room to a standing though subdued ovation from some 40 family members. With a White House photographer in his wake, Mr. Obama greeted family members one at a time and offered brief remarks that were full of platitudes ("you are the conscience of the country," "my highest duty as president is to protect the American people," "we will seek swift and certain justice"). Glossing over the legal complexities, he gave a vague summary of the detainee cases and why he chose to suspend them, focusing mostly on the need for speed and finality.

Many family members pressed for Guantanamo to remain open and for the military commissions to go forward. Mr. Obama allowed that the detention center had been unfairly confused with Abu Ghraib, but when asked why he wouldn't rehabilitate its image rather than shut it down, he silently shrugged. Next question.

Mr. Obama was urged to consult with prosecutors who have actually tried terrorism cases and warned that bringing unlawful combatants into the federal courts would mean giving our enemies classified intelligence -- as occurred in the cases of the al Qaeda cell that carried out the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and conspired to bomb New York City landmarks with ringleader Omar Abdel Rahman, the "Blind Sheikh." In the Rahman case, a list of 200 unindicted co-conspirators given to the defense -- they were entitled to information material to their defense -- was in Osama bin Laden's hands within hours. It told al Qaeda who among them was known to us, and who wasn't.

Mr. Obama responded flatly, "I'm the one who sees that intelligence. I don't want them to have it, either. We don't have to give it to them."

How could anyone be unhappy with such an answer? Or so churlish as to ask follow-up questions in such a forum? I and others were reassured, if cautiously so.

News reports described the meeting as a touching and powerful coming together of the president and these long-suffering families. Mr. Obama had won over even those who opposed his decision to close Gitmo by assuaging their fears that the review of some 245 current detainees would result in dangerous jihadists being set free. "I did not vote for the man, but the way he talks to you, you can't help but believe in him," said John Clodfelter to the New York Times. His son, Kenneth, was killed in the Cole bombing. "[Mr. Obama] left me with a very positive feeling that he's going to get this done right."

"This isn't goodbye," said the president, signing autographs and posing for pictures before leaving for his next appointment, "this is hello." His national security staff would have an open-door policy.

Believe . . . feel . . . hope.

We'd been had.

Binyam Mohamed -- the al Qaeda operative selected by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) for a catastrophic post-9/11 attack with co-conspirator Jose Padilla -- was released 17 days later. In a follow-up conference call, the White House liaison to 9/11 and Cole families refused to answer questions about the circumstances surrounding the decision to repatriate Mohamed, including whether he would be freed in Great Britain.

The phrase "swift and certain justice" had been used by top presidential adviser David Axelrod in an interview prior to our meeting with the president. "Swift and certain justice" figured prominently in the White House press release issued before we had time to surrender our White House security passes. "At best, he manipulated the families," Kirk Lippold, commanding officer of the USS Cole at the time of the attack and the leader of the Cole families group, told me recently. "At worst, he misrepresented his true intentions."

Last week, Attorney General Eric Holder told German reporters that 30 detainees had been cleared for release. This includes 17 Chinese fundamentalist Muslims, the Uighurs, some of whom admit to having been trained in al Qaeda and Taliban camps and being associated with the East Turkistan Islamic Party. This party is led by Abdul Haq, who threatened attacks on the 2008 Olympics Games in Beijing and was recently added to the Treasury Department's terrorist list. The Obama administration is considering releasing the Uighurs on U.S. soil, and it has suggested that taxpayers may have to provide them with welfare support. In a Senate hearing yesterday, Mr. Holder sidestepped lawmakers' questions about releasing detainees into the U.S. who have received terrorist training.

What about the terrorists who may actually be tried? The Justice Department's recent plea agreement with Ali Saleh al-Marri should be of grave concern to those who believe the Obama administration will vigorously prosecute terrorists in the federal court system.

Al-Marri was sent to the U.S. on Sept. 10, 2001, by KSM to carry out cyanide bomb attacks. He pled guilty to one count of "material support," a charge reserved for facilitators rather than hard-core terrorists. He faces up to a 15-year sentence, but will be allowed to argue that the sentence should be satisfied by the seven years he has been in custody. This is the kind of thin "rule of law" victory that will invigorate rather than deter our enemies.

Given all the developments since our meeting with the president, it is now evident that his words to us bore no relation to his intended actions on national security policy and detainee issues. But the narrative about Mr. Obama's successful meeting with 9/11 and Cole families has been written, and the press has moved on.

The Obama team has established a pattern that should be plain for all to see. When controversy erupts or legitimate policy differences are presented by well-meaning people, send out the celebrity president to flatter and charm.

Most recently, Mr. Obama appeared at the CIA after demoralizing the agency with the declassification and release of memos containing sensitive information on CIA interrogations. He appealed to moral vanity by saying that fighting a war against fanatic barbarians "with one hand tied behind your back" is being on "the better side of history," even though innocent lives are put at risk. He promised the assembled staff and analysts that if they keep applying themselves, they won't be personally marked for career-destroying sanctions or criminal prosecutions, even as disbelieving counterterrorism professionals -- the field operatives and their foreign partners -- shut down critical operations for fear of public disclosure and political retribution in the never-ending Beltway soap opera called Capitol Hill.

It worked: On television, his speech looked like a campaign rally, with people jumping up and down, cheering. Meanwhile, the media have moved on, even as they continue to recklessly and irresponsibly use the word "torture" in their stories.

I asked Cmdr. Kirk Lippold why some of the Cole families declined the invitation to meet with Barack Obama at the White House.

"They saw it for what it was."

Ms. Burlingame, a former attorney and a director of the National September 11 Memorial Foundation, is the sister of Charles F. "Chic" Burlingame III, the pilot of American Airlines flight 77, which was crashed into the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

Obama and the 9/11 Families - WSJ.com (8 May 2009)

online.wsj.com



To: tejek who wrote (479298)5/8/2009 6:23:33 PM
From: one_less1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1575604
 
UN Ambassador Rice: Nations Want to 'Work with America Again'

NEW YORK – My question – lifted from Barack Obama's last prime time press conference – was a reporter's ploy to extend a Wednesday afternoon interview that had already run past its scheduled half hour. But United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, the Obama campaign veteran with the most high-profile foreign policy post in the new administration, mulled it carefully, reluctant to offer a flip answer.

"What's humbled me the most (in this job) are the outsized expectations that the rest of the world has of the Obama administration, which I think only God and the three trinities would be able to meet," she said in a soft voice. "What has surprised me – although it is not entirely a surprise – has been the degree to which there has been this opening and welcoming hand, and the desire to renew relations and cooperation with the United States."

The 44-year-old Rice, who was assistant secretary of state for African affairs in the Clinton administration, can point to tangible examples at the United Nations of the world community's eagerness "to work with America again and to trust and respect our leadership." She is particularly gratified by the Security Council's strong statement (supported by China and Russia) last month deploring the recent North Korean missile launch over Japan – and the consensus agreement to tighten international sanctions against the Pyongyang government and its nuclear program.

"Is this the best (deal) we could get?" she asked rhetorically. "Yes. Is it pretty damn good? Yes. And do the North Koreans hate it? Apparently, because they have reacted very negatively and seem to have seen this as a significant step by the Security Council."

As the only Cabinet member required to reside outside the Washington area, Rice's mastery of the logistical details of her new post remains a work in progress. Her original theory was to spend virtually every Friday at the State Department, which would allow her to have a semi-normal Washington workaholic weekend with her husband, ABC News producer Ian Cameron, and their 6-year-old daughter and 11-year-old son. But with weekend sessions of the Security Council and international trips, so far that orderly plan is more an aspiration than a reality.

Rice admits she is also grappling with the social aspects of her U.N. post, which comes with a sprawling apartment in the Waldorf Towers on Park Avenue that predecessors like Richard Holbrooke used adroitly to set a very high profile for the U.S. mission in both diplomatic and social circles. "I'm up here as essentially a single ambassador with family obligations in Washington," Rice said. "So the advantage of that is that when I'm here in New York, I could do the social aspects of the job. And I think it's fair to say that I've been all but overwhelmed by the number of invitations that I've had for receptions and dinners and events in my honor. So in the early months, I've been eating and drinking my way through other people's homes."

When Michelle Obama dropped by the U.S. mission Tuesday afternoon, she pointedly praised Rice as someone whom the president "trusts and respects and admires." These personal ties to Obama were forged during the marathon quest for the Democratic presidential nomination, when Rice was an indefatigable foreign policy coordinator and surrogate speaker for the campaign. And it is perhaps these bonds of loyalty that serve as Rice's best protection against the risk of being marginalized by the larger-than-life Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Dating back to the Kennedy era when Adlai Stevenson was all but exiled to New York, the U.N. post often comes equipped with more prestige (like the Cabinet-level title) than actual decision-making power.

Asked about her relationship with Clinton – the candidate whom she opposed in the primaries-Rice made no effort to sidestep the question. "I think we have an excellent working relationship. That's not spin, that's reality. It's been collegial and professional from Day One. We've worked together before, not as peers at the same table (but in the White House). I've known her; I respect her enormously. I think she was a brilliant choice for this job. And she has been nothing other than respectful and supportive of me. So we have yet to have a difficult patch."

And yet Rice inadvertently signaled her heightened sensitivity to even the slightest hint of a rift with Clinton. "I read somewhere today that we had a 'fractious' relationship. That was in the National Journal." Indeed it was – exactly one sentence referring to Rice and Clinton buried in a lengthy article about the nomination of a new assistant secretary of state for African affairs. But Rice insisted on treating it seriously. "I don't know where that comes from," she said. "It's just not true. And I know that my people are not saying that. And I don't think that hers are saying that."

The daughter of a former Federal Reserve Board governor, Rice is also sophisticated enough in the ways of Washington to understand that a certain number of turf battles with the State Department are inevitable no matter who is the nation's chief diplomat. "There have sometimes been difficult institutional relations between USUN (the acronym used to describe the UN Mission) and State," Rice conceded. "We're working very hard not to let that happen. If I get through my tenure and it never happens, that will be close to miraculous."

With Clinton at State and short memories in the White House, senior positions have not been plentiful for veterans of the early Obama foreign policy team. "I certainly feel a personal desire and obligation to do as much as I can for those good people, particularly those who started off at the very beginning when (the campaign) was only about vision and conviction," Rice said, referring to the veterans of the 2008 foreign policy team who are still compulsively checking their Blackberries in hopes of a message from the White House personnel office. "A number of them have, thankfully, landed well and there are others that we hope to see land. But the painful reality is that there are more good people than good jobs – jobs that people feel are worthy...I think inevitably there will be some who are disappointed and I will be disappointed on their behalf."

Rice gave a wrenching talk at the UN last month commemorating the 15th anniversary of the genocide in Rwanda. Rice, who handled African issues on the staff of the national security council in the Clinton White House at the time, recalled a visit to Rwanda in which she was forced to walk around "the decomposing bodies of those who had been so cruelly murdered" in a churchyard. "For me," she said, "the memory of stepping around and over those corpses will remain the most searing reminder imaginable of what our work here must aim to prevent."

Memories like that may help explain the idealism that Rice brings to a job that will inevitably bitterly disappoint those unable to accept the incremental steps that come within working with the framework of the United Nations –even in the Age of Obama.