REMOVE the Resident - National Security Speech - We the People - Definitive

[Charles Kolb]

...

REMOVE the Resident - National Security Speech - We the People - Definitive

Text annd Commentary at: http://www.teamsarah.org/profiles/blogs/remove-the-resident-national

...

...

REMOVE the Resident - National Security Speech - We the People - Definitive

~ copy links below ~

We the People are:

We the People ARE: the meek, without interruption, removing the Resident, of NO secret societies or agendas, Geneva compassionate without Constitutional privilege to Our prisoners of war and enemy combatants, Laus Deo, the Magna Carta, the Mayflower Compact, on the March with George Washington, the Declaration of Independence, the Pre-ambles, the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Abraham Republicans, the Proclamation of Emancipation, the JFK Democrats, the Independents, the Attornies Restoring our Government, the Oath-Keepers, the Militias, the Central Command, the National Intelligence Services, the Law Enforcement Services, Won by One, the Pathways Illuminated by the Lampstands of Lord - God Almighty, the Tablets of the Ark and of the Vine, One Nation made Indivisible by and to the Glory of Lord - God Almighty !!!

Cheney's National Security Speech - entire video and text

~ entire video here ~
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/21/cheneys-speech-obama-dese_n_206165.html

~ entire text here without Arianna comment ~
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/21/raw-data-text-dick-cheneys-national-security-speech-aei/

... excerpted ... To make certain our nation country never again faced such a day of horror, we developed a comprehensive strategy, beginning with far greater homeland security to make the United States a harder target. But since wars cannot be won on the defensive, we moved decisively against the terrorists in their hideouts and sanctuaries, and committed to using every asset to take down their networks. We decided, as well, to confront the regimes that sponsored terrorists, and to go after those who provide sanctuary, funding, and weapons to enemies of the United States. We turned special attention to regimes that had the capacity to build weapons of mass destruction, and might transfer such weapons to terrorists.
We did all of these things, and with bipartisan support put all these policies in place. It has resulted in serious blows against enemy operations … the take-down of the A.Q. Khan network … and the dismantling of Libya's nuclear program. It's required the commitment of many thousands of troops in two theaters of war, with high points and some low points in both Iraq and Afghanistan - and at every turn, the people of our military carried the heaviest burden. Well over seven years into the effort, one thing we know is that the enemy has spent most of this time on the defensive - and every attempt to strike inside the United States has failed. ... continued at above link

Obama's National Security Speech - entire video and text

~ entire video here ~
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/21/obama-national-archives-s_n_206189.html

~ entire text here without Arianna comment ~
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/21/raw-data-text-president-obamas-speech-national-security/

... excerpted ... I knew when I ordered Guantanamo closed that it would be difficult and complex. There are 240 people there who have now spent years in legal limbo. In dealing with this situation, we do not have the luxury of starting from scratch. We are cleaning up something that is - quite simply - a mess; a misguided experiment that has left in its wake a flood of legal challenges that my Administration is forced to deal with on a constant basis, and that consumes the time of government officials whose time should be spent on better protecting our country.
Indeed, the legal challenges that have sparked so much debate in recent weeks in Washington would be taking place whether or not I decided to close Guantanamo. For example, the court order to release seventeen Uighur detainees took place last fall - when George Bush was President. The Supreme Court that invalidated the system of prosecution at Guantanamo in 2006 was overwhelmingly appointed by Republican Presidents. In other words, the problem of what to do with Guantanamo detainees was not caused by my decision to close the facility; the problem exists because of the decision to open Guantanamo in the first place.

There are no neat or easy answers here. But I can tell you that the wrong answer is to pretend like this problem will go away if we maintain an unsustainable status quo. As President, I refuse to allow this problem to fester. Our security interests won't permit it. Our courts won't allow it. And neither should our conscience. ... continued at above link

~ Special commentary thanks to Lynfreedom ~

Yikes! Cheney kicks Obama’s

Posted on May 21, 2009 by freemenow
I must have the swine flu or have slipped into the outer limits – I just heard two speeches neither of which I would bother to listen to if I were not home sick in bed.

Obama first. With his Teleprompters and well scripted and delivered speech he was fresh off his first big loss and it was a bi partisan loss at that. I saw right through his pretty words – I found myself wishing his tellies would go down so he wouldn’t know where to go next. Anyway I have never seen such a display of “I” this, “I” that and “I” the other thing- boy has this guy got a case of omnipotence.

And while talking transparency on one hand and bashing the last administration on the other it became apparent Obama was on the defense himself ( more on that later) he brought on but did not seem to be expecting the last administration to defend itself. In other words what a load of hog wash – so far he has accomplished lots of great words but very little positive action and we are still waiting for him to do more that yak at us all day every day.

When will this guy shut the hell up and do something besides blame everything on past administrations. He started his speech by telling us what a hard job this is and what challenges he has to face- helllllo- we could have told him that! That is exactly why we wanted the more experienced Hillary Clinton to be president!

Cheney who was already scheduled to speak on national defense weeks ago found himself preempted by Obama and oddly enough and without teleprompter nor any time to draft a well thought out retort served up a tough and resounding reply that I thoroughly enjoyed.

Cheney’s defense was sound and made Obama’s attack on them sound foolish compared to Cheney’s reasoning and when Cheney clarified ( several times) that Obama reserved only to himself the right to put back into use the same enhanced interrogation techniques he just claimed to have completely outlawed based on a fifteen minute Constitutional and moral dissertation , I could hardly breathe.

Next Cheney took on Obama’s claims regarding the release of enhanced interrogation techniques but his refusal to release the results of the use of those procedures. Obama had just explained since the notion of water boarding was already out there he thought releasing that tidbit was appropriate however releasing the results may incite terrorists.

Cheney debunked that as ridiculous stating until Obama released the information – it was only conjecture and that the releasing thereof would incite both at home without releasing the benefits. He again stressed if Obama was going to be that morally and constitutionally opposed then he should not have reserved for himself the right to reinstitute its use.

One other thing, in the beginning, Obama’s speech sounded an awful lot like the Bush speeches in many ways in terms of we have a war on terror, my job is to keep you safe etc etc. for a few minutes I thought he was a Republican until he turned partisan and started attacking them. But in using that old rhetoric he made a few errors- he blamed us the US and our interrogation techniques, Abu Grab, other mistakes etc .

Cheney called him on that – I agree with Cheney, they attacked us on 911 after 7 or more other attacks on our property or facilities around the world beginning in the late 80’s because of ideology. Because of our freedoms and rights and religions etc as well as our spreading of democracy. So who’s side is this guy on? Is he still apologizing for us around the world?

I hate Cheney- how can it be that I enjoyed this dressing down of Obama by Cheney? I hate Bush and Cheney and that administration but I so enjoyed Cheney taking on Obama and without benefit of speechwriters polishing up a responses for days on end coming back at Obama and leaving him impotent!

Quite obviously Obama is wet behind the ears and anticipated cutting Cheney off at the knees and it backfired – that is probably what I really enjoyed – surely it could not have been Cheney himself- please tell me – I am forgiven for enjoying Darth Vader annihilation of The One? Heheheheheheehh.

Only one thing could have been better- if Bush could have pulled it off but I would have to be on LSD to see that! Pure and simple – I am tired of partisan politics – I just want my country back. I just want a competant president and competant house and senate damned it – they work for us.

Where’s the change Obama? It sounds like partisan politics to me stop blaming and start leading!

Update: 9 pm 5/21 - Even at Huffington Post we see complaining

Civil Libertarian Rips Obama’s Speech: All Bells and Whistles http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/21/civil-libertarian-rips-ob_n_206343.html

Obama’s lengthy and detailed national security address was designed, in part, to tamp down criticism that his administration was abandoning core promises and constitutional principles. But while early reviews of the president’s speech among members of the press were adulatory, the people Obama most needed to placate were decidedly unimpressed.

“Obviously, he is a very effective speaker, but of course we have major problems with what he is doing,” said Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights. “He wraps himself in the Constitution, talks about American values and then proceeds to violate them.”

In an interview with the Huffington Post shortly after Obama concluded his remarks at the National Archives, Ratner expressed disappointment and even a tinge of anger at the approach the president had outlined on detainee policy, military tribunals, and even accountability.

He praised Obama for wanting to close Guantanamo Bay, but called his overall position on detaining and trying suspected terrorists “a road to perdition,” primarily because of the use of military commissions. “Military commissions are used when you want an easy way to convict people,” he said. “You write up new rules after the fact. That’s what military commissions represent. His history was just flawed. They were not used very often. They are used on the battlefield or shortly thereafter in a real war. “

Even more troubling for Ratner, however, was the notion of preventive detention — which he called “the real road to hell,” and compared to something from the movie Minority Report. “[Obama] said some people are just too dangerous to let go and that we have to keep them,” said Ratner. “Though we’d do it differently then Bush. We will set up rules. Well no matter how you repackage Guantanamo, with all kinds of rules on top of it — that is what he is doing, he is re-wrapping a preventive detention scheme and giving it some more due process. In the end, it still comes down to holding people — much like Minority Report or pre-crime stuff — for being dangerous, and that is not something that I think is constitutional or this country should be engaged in.”

On Obama’s oft-repeated preference to not set up an investigative commission to look at the authorization of torture, Ratner was equally biting. “We think a future without torture is one in which those who engage in torture are held accountable,” he said. “And what [Obama] has said so far on this issue and what he said today was, ‘Well, the Justice Department will do what it needs to.’ We need a special prosecutor, there is no issue about it. When Cheney can get on the air and say, ‘I waterboarded and would do it again,’ you know you have a problem because the next administration can go back to what Cheney did.”

Similarly, on the Obama administration’s decision to oppose the release of photos showing detainee abuse, Ratner called the president to task for undermining his own claim to transparency: “I always believe that democracy dies behind closed doors, and the fact that these photos are being hidden right now — if anything, it makes people think that there is a lot being hidden right now and that there is much more to this.”

Overall, it was not the type of review that Obama wanted following his nearly hour-long speech. The president addressed all of the aforementioned topics, framing them in a way that positioned his administration as dually committed to security and the rule of law. Unlike his predecessor, Obama proclaimed, he wanted to set up a framework that satisfied both principles and concerns. For Ratner, however, the speech was mostly bells and whistles, designed to cover up policies that only moderately improve upon those of the Bush years.

“What is unfortunately effective about Obama is that he is able to use a setting like the National Archives, talk about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and all that, get people to sincerely believe he is [committed to these principles] and then go ahead and in my view undercut the core aspects of those documents,” he said.

~ commentary link at ~
http://freemenow.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/yikes-cheney-kicks-obama%E2%80%99s-ass/

...