Fact-Checking the National Security Strategy
Fact-Checking the National Security Strategy
Today, the White House released its long-overdue National Security Strategy (NSS). Like the National Strategy for Victory in Iraq before it, the NSS is a pure public relations stunt that has little basis in reality. Here is a quick fact-check of the document:
NSS: “A multinational coalition joined by the Iraqis is aggressively prosecuting the war against the terrorists in Iraq.â€
FACT: “The past two weeks have changed the war in Iraq, shifting its focus from a U.S.-driven fight against Sunni insurgents to a direct battle for power and survival between Iraq’s empowered Shiite majority and disempowered Sunni minority.” [Washington Post, 3/13/06]
NSS: “The al-Qaida network has been significantly degraded.â€
FACT: “Al Qaeda terrorism remains the most serious threat to U.S. national security, and the insurgency in Iraq shows no sign of abating, the nation’s top intelligence official told the Senate yesterday. … The merger of al Qaeda with the Iraq-based terror group headed by Abu Musab al Zarqawi has extended the reach of the group and broadened its ideological appeal.” [Washington Times, 2/3/06]
NSS: “Terrorism is not simply a result of hostility to U.S. policy in Iraq.â€
FACT: Former neocon Francis Fukuyama, author of a new book highly critical of Bush’s handling of Iraq, writes: “By invading Iraq, the Bush administration created a self-fulfilling prophecy: Iraq has now replaced Afghanistan as a magnet, a training ground and an operational basis for jihadists, with plenty of American targets to shoot at.” [Christian Science Monitor, 3/15/06]
NSS: “Iraqi soldiers are sacrificing to defeat al-Qaida in their own country.â€
FACT: The State Department’s newly released Human Rights Report condemns Iraq’s police for “intimidation, beatings, and suspension by the arms or legs, as well as the reported use of electric drills and cords and the application of electric shocks.†[New York Times, 3/9/06]
NSS: “Al-Qaida has lost its safe haven in Afghanistan.â€
FACT: “Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida network has increased its activities in Afghanistan, smuggling in explosives, high-tech weapons and millions of dollars in cash for a resurgent terror campaign, the defense minister said Wednesday.” [AP, 11/16/05]
American Progress has its own progressive National Security Strategy — check it out here.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
The view in this document that democracy is a cure-all to our national security ills is serverely distressing and ignorant.
March 16th, 2006 at 2:12 pmFACT: This administration is clueless.
March 16th, 2006 at 2:16 pmYou know, whatever the administration is smoking, I’d wish they’d share.
March 16th, 2006 at 2:20 pmLet’s try alittle honety, shall we? This is Hillary’s war, too. It’s not Feingold’s. It’s not Murtha’s. It’s Hillary’s.
Dumb Democrat: I’ve been thinking about doing a spot on Fox.
Normal Person Fox? Don’t they perpetuate messages that anti-War people are traitors?
Dumb Democrat I’ve been thinking about doing a spot on Fox.
March 16th, 2006 at 2:22 pmThe administration has taken a huge, deadly and costly dump. By sorting thru the waste it tries in vain to guess what it was they ate and no amount of secrecy, executive pomp and bluster can hide the ultimate truth. Why did Bill Kristol wait 3 years to complain about the execution of the war? Because he didn’t care before what it had morphed into. They hadn’t planned for anything other than shock &awe and We’ll be welcomed as Liberators scenarios.Opportunistic, reckless, aristocratic douchebags.
March 16th, 2006 at 2:28 pmStill, the cover is well designed and it’s nice and thick. Here in NYC, we feel safer already!
March 16th, 2006 at 2:30 pmI’m sure this will be a fine edition to the Judith Miller wing of the George W. Bush Presidential Library. Financing made available thru a generous gift from Alcoa.
March 16th, 2006 at 2:31 pmNot enough people listen to George Bush. On November 30th he clearly said that the major fighting in Iraq was between the US and the occupation resistance, whom he called rejectionists. Next came Ba’athists, and the smallest part of our opposition are terrorists, according to Bush’s own statement.
SO: We don’t have a war on terror in Iraq, according to The Chimp, we have a war on rejection. One makes as much sense as the other.
Here are excerpts of what Bush said in November:
“The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists, Saddamists and terrorists. The rejectionists are by far the largest group. These are ordinary Iraqis, mostly Sunni Arabs, who miss the privileged status they had under the regime of Saddam Hussein. . . .The second group that makes up the enemy in Iraq is smaller but more determined. It contains former regime loyalists who held positions of power under Saddam Hussein, people who still harbor dreams of returning to power. . . The third group is the smallest but the most lethal: the terrorists affiliated with or inspired by Al Qaida.”
http://www.marinecorpsmars.com/THEWORD/TW_bush_annapolis_speech_113005.htm
March 16th, 2006 at 2:36 pm“Terrorism is not simply a result of hostility to U.S. policy in Iraq.â€
*****No Faiz, there are MANY factors that result in hating the US and our national policy – most of them are discussed here at TP. Culture, Religion, type of government, economic realities, educational bias, self- hating Americans….
“Iraqi soldiers are sacrificing to defeat al-Qaida in their own country.â€
“Iraqi soldiers are sacrificing to defeat al-Qaida in their own country.â€
March 16th, 2006 at 2:40 pm*****Naturally Faiz, like many progs “bad news” (which reiterates a viewpoint) is easier to digest. I am sure their have been reprisal killings – but I was interested to hear this morning that the latest air assault near Samarra found a large stash of Iraqi military uniforms – could those who wish to fulment Civil War actually have stolen them?? Could some of them be trying to stir the cauldron??? Nah……
The strategy changes as public relations dictate.
March 16th, 2006 at 2:41 pmThe polls tell the real story…this bunch of whackos
are corrupting America’s image globally, but here
at home people are starting to see throught the BS.
I want the America I grew up in & defended back!
#4 – I’ll try a little “honety,” if you’ll try a little honesty. Just click on the red dates on the end of each FACT and read for yourself. Go ahead, none of the other trolls will know.
March 16th, 2006 at 2:47 pmA nice little ditty of Reguritated Rhetoric that’s all.
March 16th, 2006 at 2:53 pmCan you say “mission accomplished?”
‘Operation Swarmer’ Expected to Last Days
AP – 28 minutes ago
BAGHDAD, Iraq – U.S. forces and Iraqi troops launched what the military described as the largest air assault since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion Thursday, targeting insurgent strongholds north of the capital. The U.S. military said the raid, dubbed Operation Swarmer, was aimed at clearing “a suspected insurgent operating area” northeast of Samarra and was expected to last several days. The Pentagon said 41 people were arrested but it was not clear if suspected insurgents put up any resistance.
March 16th, 2006 at 2:54 pm[...] Think Progress Today, the White House released its long-overdue National Security Strategy (NSS). Like the National Strategy for Victory in Iraq before it, the NSS is a pure public relations stunt that has little basis in reality. Here is a quick fact-check of the document: [...]
March 16th, 2006 at 2:56 pmThe question would have to be asked how did they come by the uniforms? Stolen from an intercepted shipment? stripped of the bodies of dead Iraqi soldiers? Given out by sympathetic Iraqi soldiers?
Also who was using the uniforms? Foriegn terrorists? Iraqi Sunnis?
Please (not so)mighty aphrodite what point are you trying to make, and what facts are you using?
March 16th, 2006 at 3:01 pm“The terrorists today see Iraq as the central front of their fight against the United States. They want to defeat America in Iraq and force us to abandon our allies before a stable democratic government has been established that can provide for its own security. (The same thing the liberal useful idiots want!) The terrorists believe they would then have proven that the United States is a waning power and an unreliable friend. In the chaos of a broken Iraq the terrorists believe they would be able to establish a safe haven like they had in Afghanistan, only this time in the heart of a geopolitically vital region. Surrendering to the terrorists would likewise hand them a powerful recruiting tool: the perception that they are the vanguard of history.”
March 16th, 2006 at 3:06 pmGotta hand it to Mighty for the perseverence.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:11 pmAnyone else find it ‘ironic’ that mighty moron complains about others printing negative news, but fixates on all of the ‘negative’ actions of her side against their ‘enemy’.
A sane person would recognize that they were schizophrenic, but who ever said Mighty Moron was sane – DOH!
March 16th, 2006 at 3:13 pmThe terrorists believe they would then have proven that the United States is a waning power and an unreliable friend.
Since when has Iraq been our “friend” or “ally”? Is that like our “friends” in the UAE or Saudi Arabia?
We told you this wasnt going to go well. You thumped your chests and said “Oh ya! Watch this!”
Now look at you. Looking around all desperate and saying things like “This is you lefties fault! You WANT this to happen!!!”….
Look in the mirror…hear your own words from the past…look in the mirror… and then look at Iraq. You broke…you own it… lefties have no reason to want anything other than you listening to them in the first place.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:15 pmWe dont want things to go bad in Iraq, it went bad the minute we invaded. We only want to tell the war monkeys that we toldjah so.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:17 pmbushies, bushies, bushies……lying gets you nowhere.
16 – damn foolish post. I’m not familiar with ANY terrorist attacks from Iraq prior to King dumbya’s attacking and occupying their country for 9/11, WMD, Al Queada links (none of which turned out to be true). Oh, btw, we liberals do not like you inferring that we would like chaos and death over there of any one. We will just continue to point out that King dumbya invaded and occupied a foriegn country that posed the US no harm.
4 – my you are a twit. You should sue Monty Python, because they obviously got their ideas from you. I don’t remember Hillary telling americans that Iraq was a threat that deserved invasion and occupation. Sorry, but that was your feuhrer King dumbya that you so blindly follow. PS- take off the blinders already, you’re gonna get killed walking around like that.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:19 pmThe global elite is the greatest threat to the American people. What rose colored glasses is everyone reading from anyway? The securing and controling of commerce and power is going quite well. We, the sheeple don’t have the slightest vision as to what has been happening which should be obvious since the practice runs up to the first gulf war.
Just as ignorance is no excuse to break the law, putting the fact that there was no forensic research done on the dropping of three skyscrapers in a matter of hours out of mind doesn’t justify that it didn’t need to be done. The beast has been in the halls of government for around 60 years and there is little left of what it used to stand for. Eisenhower understood it, but couldn’t stop it. That is (was?) the people’s responsibility.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:20 pmBTW – Many of us supported (not liked, but supported) the invasion of Afganistan, cause, well, the Talibahn had to go.
We Didn’t and Don’t support the invasion of countries that haven’t harmed us.
Got that?
March 16th, 2006 at 3:22 pmYou got the wrong people. We don’t like Hillary, because her stance on the war. We do not agreee with her one bit. We agree with Russ Feingold and Jack Murtha.
Then again, I am not sure that many of the people here would consider themselves straight up Democrats.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:24 pm#16,
Red and Curley Pube,
Stop manipulating and twisting. The logic you are using is like saying those who oppose the war are causing the problems and setbacks, metaphyisically, just because they think it. So if this war goes bad (like it already hasn’t) you are going to blame people who didn’t want it to begin with? We never wanted this war, we knew it would not be as simple as you thought, now we are telling you so. How does that make us responsible for your fvck ups?
March 16th, 2006 at 3:24 pmto make an anology to #16 post.
I know we drove into the ditch when we didn’t need, but if we don’t stay in the ditch then the ditch has won.
The problem with you statements, is we never needed to attack Iraq. they had no WMD’s, they did not attack us, and they did not have ties to Al Qaida.
Lord have mercy
March 16th, 2006 at 3:25 pmFine Red and Curley pube, stay the course, however, I would want those who are for it to pay an extra “war tax” and those who are for it have to send family members to fight it. Don’t whine and cry if it is not going as planned either. On second thought you and your wife should go fight it together, if you want it so much.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:28 pmHey trolls,
You wanna know how terrorists are created?
Knight Ridder
March 16, 2006
Order, peace elusive in Iraqi city of Samarra
But I am sure that it is somehow Bill Clinton’s fault right?
March 16th, 2006 at 3:29 pm#16,
What allies are left over there for us to abandon? Seems they are pulling out regularly.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:30 pmWrong tense.
That should read:
March 16th, 2006 at 3:31 pm
Another analagy to #16,
“I’m gonna sit in a pool and try to keep water away from me, and if you don’t support me in this, then you want me to drown.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:32 pmHold onto your hats, there’s a storm rising….
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Report_32_Congressmen_call_for_impeachment_0316.html
………and we have an escalation of activity in Iraq, coinidental? Doubt it.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:34 pmI am pretty sure that pissing off people is what creates enemies.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:34 pmNeo-conservatives who believe that progressives that question American policies and tactics are terrorists are either really stupid who have been listening to too much Rush.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:35 pmIts not that useful to think of where the uniforms came from. In order of probability, I would argue they came from (a) theft, either secretive or with the aid of sympathetic insiders (which is more likely to me) or (b) defectors. Stripping the dead only works in the movies. To make someone dead usually affects the uniform they are wearing significantly, especially when your prefered weapon is the IED.
What is interesting is the question “what we’re they planning on doing with the uniforms?” I think the answer is obvious. Its much easier to sneak around doing reprisal killings under the guise of official government business than dressed as heavily armed civilians.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:36 pm#32
Thanks, is it really true?
March 16th, 2006 at 3:38 pmthe big storm will be, what is going to happen in Iran. anyone notice that the war drums are being banged again? I am unsure what forces we can use to invade Iran since most of our military is pretty busy, but at least they are close by.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:41 pmNot to mention the fact that we would see a lot more stories about naked dead.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:44 pmThe war was botched from the start. The evidence was a pack of lies, the UN did not approve (so punch then next Rightwinger who says the UN was a major justification in the mouth) and the race to the capital left plenty of opposition to escape into the sands, to turn guerilla.
It was a war of conquest, and you have largely won. You destroyed the old order, you just haven’t established a real new one. The Iraqi government that Bush created is a bullshit government which the people of Iraq probably think of in the same way the French thought of Vichi France. Years from now, unless the current atmosphere is cleared, you could end up with the same view of the Iraqi resistance as the French have with theirs.
And you cannot leave. Bush has locked America’s leg in a bear trap, he has via unjust war, trapped you there. If you just leave, you will have handed Iraq over to Iran, or worse, and if you stay you will remain the villains of the story. There is no easy answer, there never is when an injustice so great as war is engaged. I am not a pacifist, but I know that war is basically a failure, the last resort of the incompetent.
You must remain, and amend your plans to ones which will allow you to withdraw without betraying the Iraqi people, for whom you are now responsible. You must remain even as it costs you so heavily, and this is why Bush and the entire neocon movement must be destroyed. They are to blame for this tragedy, and the blame must be placed.
The hardest years of this war are ahead of you, the years when the resistance gets organised beyond mere bombs at the roadside. Make no mistake, what you see now is but the rumblings before the storm. Find a solution, find a MacArthur to lead Iraq, and pray, pray that this does not turn into a second Vietnam.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:54 pm#38- I dont trust what we hear coming out of that place. There very well may be higher casualties in the Iraqi army. For one, western reporters cannot report accurately because they cant move around, leaving much of the info to come from the US military, which has and will continue to color the public info for obvious reasons. For two, I keep hearing on the news about ‘XX bodies found in a shallow grave’ where XX is usually some number larger than 10. You gotta wonder what graves arent being found because of the limited mobility due to security concerns/allegiance issues with the locals in whatever neighborhood it happens to be.
Progressives either didnt want this war or were duped into it by our leaders. Now that we know, we dont want it to end badly, but that may not be up to us. Perhaps the US is not the best choice to stabilize Iraq. No doubt about it though, our grandkids will be paying their hard earned dollars to clean this mess up- and deservedly so.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:55 pm[...] The newest Blueprint to Invade Iran, I mean National Security Strategy which says, “The al-Qaida network has been significantly degraded.â€, and [...]
March 16th, 2006 at 3:59 pmFor Truth
Another analagy to #16,
“I’m gonna sit in a pool and try to keep water away from me, and if you don’t support me in this, then you want me to drown.
Uh, that’s not an anology. That’s a classic case of liberal false logic. See: Straw Man
March 16th, 2006 at 4:05 pm#42- Is the idea that the left’s lack of enthusiasm for this failed venture in Iraq is what is responsible for its failure an example of a supposedly superior conservative logic?
America needs a serious wakeup call- ‘victory’ in Iraq is not possible. Never was. A ‘draw’ isnt even possible- not by us anyway. By the UN, perhaps…. but the Admin has to give up all its designs (oil revenue, perm. bases, etc) on Iraq.
March 16th, 2006 at 4:12 pmUh, that’s not an anology. That’s a classic case of liberal false logic. See: Straw Man
Comment by Gothic Serpent
See that right there lefties? That is how the right has taken over. They take everything that the left has used so skillfully to shoot down the righties in the past and they adopt the SAME language but reverse the meaning or history of so that it casts the left in a bad light…. now a days they say the LEFT …are racists! (LAUGH) and that the left doesnt use logic they use “false logic straw man” … and the left is attacking other peoples religion! …think about that …this is how they have tricked the sheep to follow them. They have used all the same WORDS of the left and twisted them against you.
March 16th, 2006 at 4:12 pmGothic
No, that is an analogy. Straw man is what happens when Conservatives imply that Liberals are against all morality and decency, and then go on to attack their own construct.
Strange thing is, I may have ended up a conservative if I had been born in America. Instead, I was born in Apartheid South Africa. I got to see first hand what conservative really means.
March 16th, 2006 at 4:15 pmToday’s republicans are just salesmen with good timing. They aren’t diplomats and most of the neocons aren’t even schooled in the law. They are high school wrestling coaches and bug killers that know how to “sell it.”
Problem is some will buy any damn thing. A good schtick goes a long way for some. But, alas, a lemon is a lemon and that is what we have bought. It looked good enough, ran fine for a very short time and then the inevitable – failure.
March 16th, 2006 at 4:17 pmRemember in November that there are only 122 members of the House who deserve re-election. They are the Representatives who voted against the AUMF. Make this the first issue to be discussed with them,there is no better indicator of someone with your interests in mind than their vote on the AUMF.
March 16th, 2006 at 4:24 pmYou can find the votes on the Thomas website or through the washingtonpost.com site. Check out your Rep and if he/she voted for the AUMF do your best to work for the opponent even if you have to cross Party lines.
My Rep voted against it but one of my Senators (Rick Santorum) voted for it and despite being a life-long Republican,I’ve been donating and working to defeat Rick.
I have to admit,though,Rick is easy to want out,I mean,how many reasons does one have to have!!!
#47-
I think this is a very well reasoned position. Do not support people because of what party they embrace. Look at their record.
On that note, I suspect there are only 10 in the senate who actually deserve re-election- those who voted against the patriot act renewal. I don’t care if they are Dems or Repubs- they clearly arent American and thus need to be gone from office.
March 16th, 2006 at 4:30 pmI meant to imply those who voted for the renewal, including Obama and Hillary, need to be removed. The way I wrote it it reads like the 10 should go. Those 10 are the only true Americans in the senate.
This of course would take some serious cajones on the part of party leadership of course, so dont hold your breath waiting for it.
March 16th, 2006 at 4:33 pmWell given the NEOCON, Fukuyama’s reaction to King George’s handling of Iraq. I’ll be anxious to see what he says after we pre-emt a strike on Iran. This is the beginning of the end folks. George Bush is the anti-christ.
March 16th, 2006 at 4:33 pmSorry, I got the number of Reps wrong who voted against the AUMF. The number was 133 (126 Dems,1 Independent,6 Repubs).
March 16th, 2006 at 4:34 pmThe vote for the House is here
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/107/house/2/votes/
#40
drtomaso,
Very well said. I agree 100%.
March 16th, 2006 at 4:35 pmNice work. This preemptive nonsense is going to be the death of America.
March 16th, 2006 at 4:36 pmThe Senate vote (77 for 23 against) is here:
March 16th, 2006 at 4:37 pmhttp://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/107/senate/2/votes/237/
FACT: “Al Qaeda terrorism remains the most serious threat to U.S. national security, and the insurgency in Iraq shows no sign of abating, the nation’s top intelligence official told the Senate yesterday.
This is one of those “facts” that I expect the Washington Times to print, but is NOT something that I expect a progressive blog to parrot.
FACT: U.S. military imperialism is the most serious threat to U.S. national security.
March 16th, 2006 at 4:38 pmFor Truth
Another analagy to #16,
“I’m gonna sit in a pool and try to keep water away from me, and if you don’t support me in this, then you want me to drown.
Uh, that’s not an anology. That’s a classic case of liberal false logic. See: Straw Man
Comment by Gothic Serpent
This is like in a sitcom on TV where the young teens are in a talent contest they practiced very hard to get their act right and then the “bad guy” peers get up on stage and do the very same act …thereby making the next group of people about to get on stage and perform look stupid because they are using the same song…the same dance… etc… They have stolen truth by saying the same words, but casting a different meaning to them … then when the left screams out about liberty! The right says WE JUST SAID WE ARE GIVING THE IRAQIS LIBERTY! SO WE ARE THE PARTY OF LIBERTY!!! ….
March 16th, 2006 at 4:54 pm[...] Fact-Checking the National Security Strategy Think Progress, DC – 3 hours ago Today, the White House released its long-overdue National Security Strategy (NSS). Like the National Strategy for Victory in Iraq [...]
March 16th, 2006 at 6:14 pm[...] ThinkProgress does a little fact checking. They also have their own answer in a progressive National Security Strategy. [...]
March 16th, 2006 at 6:15 pmDismatling the Security Report…
Amazing what a little research can turn up….
March 16th, 2006 at 8:28 pmHe continues to push for the pre-emptive attack being the policy of the US.As if we haven’t been in trouble for the last five years he has to threaten every country on the planet,except Israel.He has to go,one way or another we must be released.
March 16th, 2006 at 10:18 pmDon’t blame liberals and progressives for the unholy mess in Iraq. Let’s give credit where credit is due. Georgie, you’re doin a heckuva job!
March 16th, 2006 at 11:36 pmThing that got me was that was clearly not Straw man. A argument could prehaps be made for reductio ad absurdum (Which isn’t always a logical fallacy), but not straw man. Straw man is where you define your opponent based upon made up facts and spin, and then attack your opponent based on that definition.
It is in essence, precisely what Bush did to Kerry in 2004, and precisely what the conservatives have been doing to liberals from time imemorial.
March 17th, 2006 at 6:10 amcould those who wish to fulment (SIC) Civil War actually have stolen them?? Could some of them be trying to stir the cauldron??? Nah……
Comment by mighty hypocrite —
To Mighty Hypocrite,
Someone already pointed out to you on a previous thread that “fulment” is not an English word and that perhaps you mean “foment.” For a so-called attorney wiho boasts about her/his excellent private school school education, you certainly are a slow learner–that is, if you learn at all.
March 17th, 2006 at 9:29 amI also noticed you and the other usual trolls posted nothing on the news about the GOP’s defeat of a Rep. Sabo’s bill to increase funding for port security. It seems that you reichwingers shut up when real proof of how little the GOP is actually doing to protect the US pops up.
Attorney? I don’t think so. There are stupid attorneys all over the nation but as I am in the legal field, I’ve never seen one with such a weak grasp of the English language. The over punctuation says mail clerk, at best. And I don’t want to insult any mail clerks.
Aphro is no woman and no attorney. I’m thinking, by the over the top emoting, he is just a pimply-faced college kid. You know the young republican type.
March 17th, 2006 at 10:03 am#64
March 17th, 2006 at 10:26 amI was just being sarcastic in referring to Mighty Hypocrite as an attorney, as he/she claims. I already made my case on another thread for why I don’t think Mighty is a woman–especially a woman with a professional degree. A “professional woman” of another sort perhaps, but definitely not one with a professional degree. And, yes, let’s not insult mail clerks.
In Americas pursuit of its “manifest destiny” all nations should be concerned with our intensions.
March 17th, 2006 at 10:46 amOOPS! concerned with our intentions.
March 17th, 2006 at 10:59 am[...] Think Progress does some basic fact-checking and calls the new NSS what it is- a PR stunt to rehabilitate Bush’s piss-poor poll numbers. And the only way the GOP thinks they can do that is by reminding Americans that we are at war (and of course, it’s unpatriotic to criticize a President while we are at war! How convenient!) and that well, we are at war. [...]
March 17th, 2006 at 6:47 pmCan you say “The Long Bambozzle.”
March 22nd, 2006 at 4:58 amI come from Nixon’s old congressional district and as God is my Fuhrer believe that:
We are in a state of constitutional crisis. For Rumsfeld to lobby on intelligence reform and now have military acts off the books means that the “linchpin” of the constitution, the taxing and spending powers of Congress, of raising standing armies, has now been violated. My Congressman David Dreier now has no way to effect my Liberty nor my Republic.
Our constitution was specifically designed to avoid this combination of the President’s office with the Defense Department; that the King shall not have his own standing army to send willy-nilly to wherever he thinks he has the pleasure too. That is why I can never believe the neo-cons or Alitos et al., claims to absolute presidential power as Commander-and-Chief even during war. The claim of inherent power of the president has already been settled under Nixon’s attempt during the so-called Vietnam War. As Nixon’s assistant attorney general Rehnquist made the argument of inherent power to wiretap the White Panther Party without a warrant – during a war. This power, which was claimed to be held, under the President’s Oath of Office, was rejected by the Supreme Court in a unanimous decision against suspending all or parts of the Constitution. Because this was Rehnquist’s argument as assistant attorney general he had to recuse himself from his very first decision after being appointed to the Supreme Court and rightly so. And guess what? America was still standing in the morning after this and Nixon’s resignation avoiding his impeachment. This is in spite of a average of 6 bombings a day, 86 killed policemen, and a record 33,604 thousand injuries between the fall of 1969 and spring of 1970 by our own citizens protesting over the illegal invasion of Cambodia.
Unfortunately, Rehnquist conveniently ignores this when he reviews his history of the power of the President during war. He brings up WWI and WWII in this review. But, for some reason, he completely skips how his “inherent†argument on presidential power was slapped down by the Supreme Court during the undeclared, illegal and immoral so-called Vietnam War. This is bald face intellectual dishonesty, if not outright historical revisionism, that completely belies the important decision on the necessity of War – not to mention the young lives thrown willy-nilly into harm’s way. And so much for a responsible versus an irresponsible debate Mr.Bush. That is why I completely reject the neo-con’s medieval thesis that constitutional government is too weak to survive in a difficult world and that we should defer to a sole sovereign power since 9/11. We have become weaker since taking on this post 9/11 repeat of Rehnquist’s “in terrorem” position. (I would like to read his memo on the subject of presidential power and the invasion of Cambodia but alas that memo has disappeared, nowhere to be found on the Internet. The persuasive force of his ideas no longer count I can only suppose). I only fear that our new Supreme Court justices Roberts and Alito will take what was a tragedy we survived and turn a repeated claim of 18th century inherent power into a farce that destroys the sheet anchor of our Republic – our precious Constitution – along with the Bill of Rights.
Censure is indeed warranted. Nixon would have approved!
March 22nd, 2006 at 5:03 amTeen Girls Black Teens Kiss Lesbian Teen
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 8th, 2008 at 8:33 amJack
Brilliant information and great site to visit. Informative and attractive layout.
April 9th, 2008 at 4:06 pmNaked Girls Naked Black Men Girls Naked
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 13th, 2008 at 1:26 am