Green Energy
I fully support President Bush's Veto on this bill. Becoming a kinder and gentler, "squishy" country, will not keep us safe. Our enemies have no morals, no fear and no incentive to stop trying to attack us. We must STOP THEM.
If it means that some people don't like us, think we are mean, than so be it.
The people who are pushing this bill, are obviously in a dream world. The only "fear mongers" out there are those who attacked us on 9/11. Those "fear mongers" will continue to look for weaknesses here. We must find their weaknesses, first.
Protecting our country is not pretty and nice. I expect our government to be extremely tough when dealing with our enemies. Since we have not been attacked in nearly 7 years, they must be doing something right.
If it ain't broken, don't fix it.
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. This week, I addressed the Department of Homeland Security on its fifth anniversary and thanked the men and women who work tirelessly to keep us safe. Because of their hard work, and the efforts of many across all levels of government, we have not suffered another attack on our soil since September the 11th, 2001.
This is not for a lack of effort on the part of the enemy. Al Qaida remains determined to attack America again. Two years ago, Osama bin Laden warned the American people, "Operations are under preparation, and you will see them on your own ground once they are finished." Because the danger remains, we need to ensure our intelligence officials have all the tools they need to stop the terrorists.
Unfortunately, Congress recently sent me an intelligence authorization bill that would diminish these vital tools. So today, I vetoed it. And here is why:
The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror -- the CIA program to detain and question key terrorist leaders and operatives. This program has produced critical intelligence that has helped us prevent a number of attacks.
The program helped us stop a plot to strike a U.S. Marine camp in Djibouti, a planned attack on the U.S. consulate in Karachi, a plot to hijack a passenger plane and fly it into Library Tower in Los Angeles, and a plot to crash passenger planes into Heathrow Airport or buildings in downtown London.
And it has helped us understand al Qaida's structure and financing and communications and logistics. Were it not for this program, our intelligence community believes that al Qaida and its allies would have succeeded in launching another attack against the American homeland.
The main reason this program has been effective is that it allows the CIA to use specialized interrogation procedures to question a small number of the most dangerous terrorists under careful supervision.
The bill Congress sent me would deprive the CIA of the authority to use these safe and lawful techniques. Instead, it would restrict the CIA's range of acceptable interrogation methods to those provided in the Army Field Manual. The procedures in this manual were designed for use by soldiers questioning lawful combatants captured on the battlefield. They were not intended for intelligence professionals trained to question hardened terrorists.
Limiting the CIA's interrogation methods to those in the Army Field Manual would be dangerous because the manual is publicly available and easily accessible on the Internet. Shortly after 9/11, we learned that key al Qaida operatives had been trained to resist the methods outlined in the manual. And this is why we created alternative procedures to question the most dangerous al Qaida operatives, particularly those who might have knowledge of attacks planned on our homeland. The best source of information about terrorist attacks
is the terrorists themselves. If we were to shut down this program and restrict the CIA to methods in the Field Manual, we could lose vital information from senior al Qaida terrorists, and that could cost American lives.
The bill Congress sent me would not simply ban one particular interrogation method, as some have implied. Instead, it would eliminate all the alternative procedures we've developed to question the world's most dangerous and violent terrorists. This would end an effective program that Congress authorized just over a year ago.
The fact that we have not been attacked over the past six-and-a-half years is not a matter of chance. It is the result of good policies and the determined efforts of individuals carrying them out. We owe these individuals our thanks, and we owe them the authorities they need to do their jobs effectively.
We have no higher responsibility than stopping terrorist attacks. And this is no time for Congress to abandon practices that have a proven track record of keeping America safe.
-
Airport security stepped up in Britain over bomb plot fears...How 'Safe' is the staff working at Airports? From Will at THE OTHER NEWS: Airport security stepped up in Britain over bomb plot fears...How 'Safe' is the staff working at Airports? (Guardian)....
- Mirandizing Mutallab "deprived Our Intelligence Agencies Of Valuable Information"
Abdulmutallab's lawyer may prove to be very expensive indeed as security agencies here and in Europe scramble to gather intelligence on probable pending attacks by al Qaeda. More background from the In From the Cold site via The Jawa Report. (Don't...
-
Washington Post: Obama admnistration takes several wrong paths in dealing with terrorism By Michael V. Hayden Sunday, January 31, 2010 In the war on terrorism, this country faces an enemy whose theory of warfare ends the hard-won distinction in modern...
- Tsa Hands Al-qaeda Its Playbook
From Pajamas Media: Terrorists love details. Al-Qaeda’s U.S. embassy bombers knew the thickness of the embassy walls — a key detail in figuring out how much explosives were necessary to take the buildings down. The Mumbai terrorists had copies of...
- Ex-cia Director: Obama Compromised National Security With Memo Release
Michael Hayden says what we've all been thinking and saying the last few days. Newsmax: Ex-CIA Director: Obama Compromised National Security with Memo Release Sunday, April 19, 2009 10:00 PM WASHINGTON - A former head of the Central Intelligence Agency...
Green Energy
Why President Bush Vetoed the Intelligence Authorization Bill
I fully support President Bush's Veto on this bill. Becoming a kinder and gentler, "squishy" country, will not keep us safe. Our enemies have no morals, no fear and no incentive to stop trying to attack us. We must STOP THEM.If it means that some people don't like us, think we are mean, than so be it.
The people who are pushing this bill, are obviously in a dream world. The only "fear mongers" out there are those who attacked us on 9/11. Those "fear mongers" will continue to look for weaknesses here. We must find their weaknesses, first.
Protecting our country is not pretty and nice. I expect our government to be extremely tough when dealing with our enemies. Since we have not been attacked in nearly 7 years, they must be doing something right.
If it ain't broken, don't fix it.
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. This week, I addressed the Department of Homeland Security on its fifth anniversary and thanked the men and women who work tirelessly to keep us safe. Because of their hard work, and the efforts of many across all levels of government, we have not suffered another attack on our soil since September the 11th, 2001.
This is not for a lack of effort on the part of the enemy. Al Qaida remains determined to attack America again. Two years ago, Osama bin Laden warned the American people, "Operations are under preparation, and you will see them on your own ground once they are finished." Because the danger remains, we need to ensure our intelligence officials have all the tools they need to stop the terrorists.
Unfortunately, Congress recently sent me an intelligence authorization bill that would diminish these vital tools. So today, I vetoed it. And here is why:
The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror -- the CIA program to detain and question key terrorist leaders and operatives. This program has produced critical intelligence that has helped us prevent a number of attacks.
The program helped us stop a plot to strike a U.S. Marine camp in Djibouti, a planned attack on the U.S. consulate in Karachi, a plot to hijack a passenger plane and fly it into Library Tower in Los Angeles, and a plot to crash passenger planes into Heathrow Airport or buildings in downtown London.
And it has helped us understand al Qaida's structure and financing and communications and logistics. Were it not for this program, our intelligence community believes that al Qaida and its allies would have succeeded in launching another attack against the American homeland.
The main reason this program has been effective is that it allows the CIA to use specialized interrogation procedures to question a small number of the most dangerous terrorists under careful supervision.
The bill Congress sent me would deprive the CIA of the authority to use these safe and lawful techniques. Instead, it would restrict the CIA's range of acceptable interrogation methods to those provided in the Army Field Manual. The procedures in this manual were designed for use by soldiers questioning lawful combatants captured on the battlefield. They were not intended for intelligence professionals trained to question hardened terrorists.
Limiting the CIA's interrogation methods to those in the Army Field Manual would be dangerous because the manual is publicly available and easily accessible on the Internet. Shortly after 9/11, we learned that key al Qaida operatives had been trained to resist the methods outlined in the manual. And this is why we created alternative procedures to question the most dangerous al Qaida operatives, particularly those who might have knowledge of attacks planned on our homeland. The best source of information about terrorist attacks
is the terrorists themselves. If we were to shut down this program and restrict the CIA to methods in the Field Manual, we could lose vital information from senior al Qaida terrorists, and that could cost American lives.
The bill Congress sent me would not simply ban one particular interrogation method, as some have implied. Instead, it would eliminate all the alternative procedures we've developed to question the world's most dangerous and violent terrorists. This would end an effective program that Congress authorized just over a year ago.
The fact that we have not been attacked over the past six-and-a-half years is not a matter of chance. It is the result of good policies and the determined efforts of individuals carrying them out. We owe these individuals our thanks, and we owe them the authorities they need to do their jobs effectively.
We have no higher responsibility than stopping terrorist attacks. And this is no time for Congress to abandon practices that have a proven track record of keeping America safe.
-
Airport security stepped up in Britain over bomb plot fears...How 'Safe' is the staff working at Airports? From Will at THE OTHER NEWS: Airport security stepped up in Britain over bomb plot fears...How 'Safe' is the staff working at Airports? (Guardian)....
- Mirandizing Mutallab "deprived Our Intelligence Agencies Of Valuable Information"
Abdulmutallab's lawyer may prove to be very expensive indeed as security agencies here and in Europe scramble to gather intelligence on probable pending attacks by al Qaeda. More background from the In From the Cold site via The Jawa Report. (Don't...
-
Washington Post: Obama admnistration takes several wrong paths in dealing with terrorism By Michael V. Hayden Sunday, January 31, 2010 In the war on terrorism, this country faces an enemy whose theory of warfare ends the hard-won distinction in modern...
- Tsa Hands Al-qaeda Its Playbook
From Pajamas Media: Terrorists love details. Al-Qaeda’s U.S. embassy bombers knew the thickness of the embassy walls — a key detail in figuring out how much explosives were necessary to take the buildings down. The Mumbai terrorists had copies of...
- Ex-cia Director: Obama Compromised National Security With Memo Release
Michael Hayden says what we've all been thinking and saying the last few days. Newsmax: Ex-CIA Director: Obama Compromised National Security with Memo Release Sunday, April 19, 2009 10:00 PM WASHINGTON - A former head of the Central Intelligence Agency...