Blog Home |  Email Author  |  About this Blog       Welcome to Community Server Sign in | Join

It's Hemmer Time


Another 9/11 coming?

By Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer
Friday, Apr 24 2009, 07:57 AM

Yet another campaign promise tossed under the bus, and this one is a biggie.

 On Tuesday, April 21st, President Obama stated that he could support an inquiry into the methods used to gather information from terrorists after 9/11.  Specifically, Obama left the door wide open to go after certain Bush Administration officials for prosecution.  This is in direct opposition to what Obama had originally said while running for President.  During that time, Obama claimed he did not want to see any prosecution of CIA agents and/or other interrogators who took part in certain interrogation tactics that some disapproved of.  Obama wanted to "move forward."

So now a complete turnaround.  This should come as no surprise, since Obama just cannot seem to adhere to many of his pre-election promises.  Obama tends to say something one day, then do a complete about-face later on.  It's a pattern that is becoming very common.  However, in breaking this promise, Obama is leaving America very vulnerable to another terrorist attack.  Another 9/11.  What the president is doing is wrong.  He is trying to placate the folks at moveon.org and other rabid lefties, while neglecting the national security of America.  Obama has to realize that he cannot keep lefties happy and America safe at the same time.  It doesn't work.  The two are like oil and water.  Here are several reasons why America is less safe because of our President:

1)  The CIA and others will be hesitant in going forward to get information out of captured terrorists.  They realize they need to protect themselves from future prosecution from the very people they are trying to keep safe. 

2)  Our enemies are getting specific information on what the CIA/military will be allowed to do to them if they are captured.  They can prepare.  They don't have to worry about being captured and giving up valuable information anymore.

3)  Rather than focusing on combating terrorists and protecting America, the President has chosen to placate the left.  In the process, he is further dividing the country.  Obama is the most polarizing president this nation has ever seen, and this recent action does not help in bringing the country together.  The fact is, we are being driven further apart.

4)  America seems to be headed back to the pre-9/11 days.  Terrorists and terrorism were looked upon like criminal activities.  The war on terror didn't exist.  America wasn't paying attention.  We seem to be going in that direction again, and we seem more intent on punishing the people who are risking their lives to keep us safe than focusing on fighting the terrorists that want to kill us.

5)  The  United States military already has to adhere to "rules of engagement," giving the enemy a slight edge in combat situations.  How in the future will such investigations and thoughts of liability affect our fighting men and women?  Will they be hesitant in doing their jobs?  Will they be  second-guessing  everything they do?  They may eventually refuse to do anything that could lead to their own prosecution - at the hands of their own government.  How reprehensible.  Rather than supporting our fighting efforts, our own President seems to be undermining them.

One key issue that revealed Obama's true intentions is the fact that he recently chose to release four memos detailing terrorist interrogation techniques.  It is by the release of these memos that the left has gone apoplectic and is now demanding to see Bush officials prosecuted.  Unfortunately, the so-called "transparent" governing style of Barack Obama didn't allow for the release of other memos clearly showing that the interrogation techniques used in the war on terror worked.   In addition, a memo that Dennis Blair, Obama's Director of National Intelligence, released was actually altered by the Obama Administration before it was published.  The Obama administration left out Blair's assessment that the interrogations produced actionable and critical information.  What Blair had to say contradicted Obama's claim that the interrogation methods produced no data.  This was a lie on Obama's part. 

There are also many memos out there waiting to be de-classified that tell how several terrorist attacks were thwarted due to information gathered from harsh interrogation techniques.  How many American lives were saved?  Hundreds?  Thousands?     The American people have the right to see these results from these interrogations, rather than just the information Obama is providing on the techniques themselves.

 How convenient for Obama and his administration to publish memos that only present one side of the issue.  Does anyone really remember 9/11?  It appears as though Mr. Obama and many on the left have forgotten.  Maybe Barack should be forced to sit and listen to the 911 calls which came out of the World Trade Center towers on that fateful day.  America was attacked.  Thousands of innocent lives were lost.  And at the time, it was believed that another major attack was imminent.  The Bush Administration acted immediately in the best interests of protecting our country.  The interrogation methods approved - not just by our President - but by many of our highest-ranking Democrat and Republican politicians, served to allow intelligence gathering that prevented further mass killings on our soil.  That is a fact.  As mentioned before, even Obama's Director of National Intelligence agreed.  Dennis Blair pointed out that most of what America learned about al-Qaeda after 9/11 came from waterboarding Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah.  To quote Blair:  "High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qaeda organization that was attacking this country."

Obama is putting the desires of some of his supporters above the safety of our country.  What kind of leader is Obama?  Judging from this recent plan to go after and prosecute lawyers who simply wrote their opinions on terrorist interrogation techniques, it doesn't appear that Obama has the best interest of America at heart.  Coming at the heels of his recent "apology tours" - in which Obama went to various foreign countries and apologized for all the wrongs of America (or what Obama perceives to be the evils of his own country), should really have many Americans concerned.  Embracing our enemies like Hugo Chavez doesn't help, either.  And now this. 

America has a weak President, intent on making  America weaker.  Another 9/11 is indeed a real possibility. 

 

Comments

abcabc   

You are weak and so un-american! O and bitter to!
April 24, 2009 10:25 AM

Jacob Pickard   

Amy - If the use of torture techniques is against the Law, should these people not be held accountable for their actions? Why is prosecuting broken laws appeasing the the left? We have an inerntational treaty that states that water torture is against the law, we adopted this. I remember this Rule of Law phrase you guys used in the 1990's agaisnt Clinton, I don't see it playing out now. Do you beleive that froms of torture should be our policy for interegating prisoners?
April 24, 2009 11:25 AM

American citizen   

Jacob Pickard: Is the use of torture techniques against the law? Or is that an opinion? Seems to me almost 100% of our government was behind President Bush and the actions he took immediately following 9/11 in order to protect us from another attack. What International Treaty claims water torture is against the law? Is there a law saying you cannot behead prisoners? Slit their throats on television? I'd be more apt to say that murder is against the law than a proven effective questioning technique that saves American lives.
April 24, 2009 12:31 PM

Jeff Blackwell   

So, can we state this plainly? You believe that the President of the United States of America is a traitor? Please answer, yes or no.
April 24, 2009 8:47 PM

Victor Ponelis   

@AMY: ALL presidents promise something during a campaign, then change when in office, either because they were previously disingenuous or now understand things from a fresh perspective. Sure, Reagan campaigned against taxes, cut them in 1981...then raised them in 1982 and 1983. So what? Ditto Obama. He's really trapped, actually. How to protect the prerogatives of the President AND defend this country's honor and principles? If a former president tortured, you can't do both. As for your points: 1. If the CIA is hesitant to use torture, good. We should ALWAYS be hesitant to use torture. 2. So what? We live by our principles, and die by them. Let terrorists capture and torture their own prisoners...but the US should follow the Geneva conventions. We show our moral superiority by NOT torturing. 3. I am a member of the left, and Obama does not placate me. He's defended some Bush policies, and I didn't want Obama to defend Bush policy. BTW, I think he should issue a blanket pardon against CIA or other officers for past torture....we need to move on. 4. Good. Making it a "war on terror" elevates terrorists from the base criminals they are and gives them a lofty perch. It IS a crime...and Europe, in their treatment of terrorism in this way, have found a way to live by their democratic principles, not instilling in their populations overwhelming fear. How doe we punish those defending us? You saying that is not proof. 5. I am not a member of the military...my former boss was a Navy captain, however, and in our many discussions, he led me to believe that military folks follow orders. If they are told to do something, they do something. Their individual beliefs are irrelevant. You actually slight our military by insinuating the would rebel against orders (I know that's not your intent). Your final point regarding torture that works? For each session of torture that occurred, where real intelligence was gathered...was there a non-torture method available to get the same information? Wouldn't NOT TORTURING preserve American honor and moral superiority? If we torture, then Al Queda has won....it wanted to destroy America...and we oblige with our behavior.
April 24, 2009 9:13 PM

jmark   

"America wasn't paying attention". So, it appears that you have finally owned up to the fact that Bush was asleep at the wheel. On August 6, 2001 Bush received a Daily Brief title "Bin Laden Determined To Strike In Us". According to the 911 Report: "it was the 36th PDB item briefed so far that year that related to Bin Laden". Where was Waldo? Why, he was on a month's vacation to his photo-op ranch in Texas -- and after the vacation--he went to a photo-op at the Booker Elementary School in Florida to read to kindergartners. Had your glorious leader been "paying attention", we wouldn't be having a torture debate.
April 25, 2009 7:33 AM

Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer   

Sorry jmark:  9/11 was planned entirely under the presidency of Bill Clinton - who did little, if anything, to address threats of terrorism.  And give it up with the PDB from August 6th, 2001.  I've already refuted that in several posts.  Condoleezza Rice testified under oath that the PDB you reference told the Bush Administration nothing - nothing new, no facts, just vague suggestions that another terrorist attack MIGHT happen sometime and they MIGHT use airplanes.

 Wow!  Now you tell me, jmark.  What was Bush supposed to do?  Profile?  No!  Can't have that - the ACLU would be up in arms!  Shut down all the airports?  For how long?  

Come back when you have something worthwhile to say, rather than the same old garbage that is meaningless.

April 25, 2009 7:57 AM

Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer   

Jeff Blackwell:  I will go as far to say that President Obama appears to have made efforts to make America less safe.  Whether his actions are intentional or just plain stupid would determine if he is acting like a traitor or not.

April 25, 2009 7:58 AM

jmark   

Sorry Amy, your argument doesn't absolve Bush. A responsible President would have cut his vacation short, called a meeting of his cabinet, brought in the security analysts, the FBI, CIA, and say "we've got a serious threat to our national security, what are we going to do about it?" But that's not what George did. He remained on vacation. The truth of the matter is he didn't take the threat seriously. When the planing took place is irrelevant. If an attack occurred tomorrow and it was discovered to have been planed in 2008 do we hold Bush accountable? Your logic never fails to escape me.
April 25, 2009 10:59 AM

jmark   

Why is Cheney asking for the release of additional classified documents? Doesn't he realize he will only be making America less safe if the information in those documents is made available to our enemies? Is Cheney a traitor? Boy, he sure could use some of your insight.
April 25, 2009 11:47 AM

Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer   

jmark:  Bush had no information to go on regarding 9/11.  I don't think our President possesses ESP powers, so other than a few vague memos from the Clinton Administration (who again, did NOTHING to address terrorism during eight years in office), it is disengenous at best to hold Bush responsible for 9/11.  Clinton put up all the walls between the CIA and FBI so they could not even compare notes on terrorist threats.  Clinton never went after terrorists or reacted.  Clinton had several chances to kill bin Laden but opted not to.  Now, if bin Laden had been killed, 9/11 would not have happened.  

I'm not sure when you are referring to Bush cutting a vacation short - before 9/11?  or after?  

Cheney is obviously asking for the release of the classified documents showing what intel was learned from the terrorists that saved American lives.  This would really be a knock-down and take the wind out of the four hand-picked memos Obama chose to release only to incite Americans who don't know the half of it.  And Cheney's memos refer to info. that terrorists gave us.  I don't see how that information would be aiding the enemy, since it is what the enemy already knew.   Your logic never fails to escape me, jmark.

April 25, 2009 12:03 PM

jmark   

It's absurd to suggest Obama hand-picked the memos to be released. Is this the spin they're putting on things in the rightwingosphere? Not surprising you bought it. The Cheney memos would have to reveal the methods used for extracting the info that terrorists gave us. Otherwise, how could Cheney make the argument that torture works? Once again, using your logic, the declassification of the Cheney memos would further endanger our fighting men and women. When Obama releases memos he's undermining our troops. When Cheney does it, it's, well, no big deal.
April 25, 2009 12:47 PM

Jacob Pickard   

@AC - It's called the Geneva convention. We signed it after WW2. It wasn't supposed to be a trick question.
April 28, 2009 6:27 AM

Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer   

Jacob Pickard:  Since when have terrorists been covered under the Geneva Convention?  Not a trick question...

From Rich Lowry/National Review On-line:  "The Geneva Convention of 1949 was meant to regulate international warfare between states, with some basic provision for civil wars as well.

What the U.S. is engaging in today is something different, a war against an organization of terrorists who do not constitute a government, rendering the Geneva Convention essentially irrelevant."

Yet, our country still bends over backwards to make accomodations for terrorists wishing to kill us.

April 28, 2009 7:26 AM

Jacob Pickard   

Amy - So you are saying that the our country should use torture?
April 28, 2009 9:13 PM

Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer   

Jacob Pickard:  No, I am saying our country should use the enhanced interrogation techniques that were reviewed and approved by President Bush as well as many other Democrat and Republican political leaders.

April 29, 2009 7:29 AM

Leave a Comment

Please Sign In to post comment.

About Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer

Amy Geiger-Hemmer has lived in Merton since 1992 with her husband and three children, who all attend Merton Intermediate and Primary Schools. She enjoys family activites, volleyball, reading, and bike riding. During the school year, she works as a substitute teacher/instructional assistant, and also volunteers with the Merton PTO. She is proud to be a conservative Republican.