New School Politics

Yesterday Ben Smith and David Paul Kuhn of the Politico.com wrote that Rudy Giuliani’s defeat and subsequent endorsement of John McCain signaled the end of “9/11 politics.”

They went on to say,
_________

“Rudy Giuliani’s distant third-place finish in Florida may put an end to his bid for president, and it seems also to mark the beginning of the end of a period in Republican politics that began on Sept. 11, 2001.”
_________

The article does raise a valid point that 9/11 no longer has the emotional significance for most Americans’ that it once did. Despite this fact, the consequences of September eleventh are still with us in many forms; the war in the Afghani and Iraqi theaters, the expensive federal budget on national security, the straining of the United States military and intelligence infrastructure, and the threat of nuclear proliferation throughout the world are all issues brought to the forefront of America’s consciousness because of what happened at the World Trade Center. All of these issues are still discussed daily in the foreign policy and national security community and to say that they will go away simply because Rudy Giuliani’s campaign has come to an end is simply incorrect.

The sub-prime mortgage crisis has been exacerbated by the Fed’s continual rate cuts, which were a reaction by Greenspan to attempt and stabilize the financial markets after the uncertainty caused by 9/11.

There is no question that the Giuliani campaign collapsed because of his reliance on 9/11 as a political punch line; yet to suggest that September 11th will not hold a prominent place in both Republican and Democratic politics for many years to come is absurd. 9/11 has radically changed how American’s view the world and their perception of our place in it; it has given cause to two wars which have subsequently strained the nation’s relationship with other actors in the international system. The spot light that 9/11 put on the Middle East has also given rise to the massive amount of speculation in the oil markets and has provided dictators like Putin to exert more control over their populations.

Eight years after 9/11 we are still learning about the ramifications on the economy, international politics, war and peace, civil liberties, and our way of life as a whole. September 11th was an event that will define the first 20 years of this new millennium and to dismiss it based upon the incompetency of one political campaign is not only arrogant, but dangerous.

Popularity: 16% [?]

Last week, during their endorsement of John McCain as the Republican nominee, The New York Times included some choice words for a mayor they supported at one time, Rudy Giuliani.

“The real Mr. Giuliani, whom many New Yorkers came to know and mistrust, is a narrow, obsessively secretive, vindictive man who saw no need to limit police power…”

Giuliani, they asserted, was not the same man as he was during his mayoral tenure. While his campaign has not fared well in most states, Florida seems to be the fighting ground for his candidacy. As he’s currently in fifth place [without a win in any early primary or caucuses], Giuliani needs to hold Florida to show America that he is electable. Fortunately, if current trends hold, Mr. Giuliani will place third in tonight’s primary, behind established frontrunners John McCain and Mitt Romney.

That outcome is better not just for the other Republican candidates, but for America as well. With Giuiliani out of the race, America will be safe from a President who intended to encroach upon their vital Constitutional rights, and a President who would endanger relations with the international community. An America without Rudy Giuliani is an America prepared to confront fearmongering, and an America prepared to blaze the path to a successful future and a new American era. Below, you’ll find a more descriptive analysis of our viewpoints.

The Candidate of Fear

by Zach

As the Republican Party has moved more towards religious and social conservatism, only one candidate has managed to stay in the race without espousing his socially conservative beliefs. Rudolph Giuliani, former mayor of New York City, was that candidate. Unfortunately for his campaign, he’s proved to be far from the ideal social conservative most Republican voters are looking for.  His pro-choice beliefs, while in line with the ideals of many mainstream voters, did not play well with conservatives either.  While I admire Rudy’s resistance to conservative social pressures, the Republicans did not.

Voters should consider themselves lucky. The centerpiece of Giuliani’s campaign has been September 11th. Whereas most Republican candidates used the main focuses of their campaign as a jumping off point for other issues, Giuliani relied at times only on his “tough guy” national security viewpoint. When voters disagreed, Giuliani was always there to tell them that he was the mayor of New York City on 9/11. It’s true. False, however, are most of Giuliani’s comments about the aftermath of September 11th.

September 11th was the worst terrorist tragedy America has ever seen. Yet there are some actions Giuliani took during his tenure as mayor that could have prevented dozens of casualties. Giuliani’s anti-terror headquarters, the $13 million Emergency Operations Center, opened in a building right across the street from the World Trade Center, ignoring the risks posed by terrorist attacks like that of Ramzi Yousef in 1993. Even Giuliani’s emergency management director, Jerome M. Hauer, has criticized his handling of the 9/11 tragedy, claiming Mr. Giuliani is running on a “Grand Illusion.” Giuliani made other errors that contributed to a slower emergency response on 9/11. Procedural lapses in the production of radios and flame retardant firefighter uniforms may have elevated the death toll for first responders. Giuliani’s been criticized for his reaction to the environmental and health concerns of the attacks as well. Giuliani ran a “slipshod, haphazard, uncoordinated, unfocused response” to the health challenges of the attacks. As a result, more than 70% of WTC first responders now suffer long term ills, mainly from breathing in debris that Mayor Giuliani told them was safe. As a result, many firefighters have spoken out against Mayor Giuliani’s campaign.

Without 9/11, there is no substance to Mayor Giuliani’s campaign for the presidency. Despite snags in the public perception of his performance post-9/11, he continues to exploit the fears of Americans in negative and fearmongering campaign advertisements. His “Ready” advertisement has caused a stir among thousands of disgruntled viewers, as it portrays marching terrorists with dangerous voiceovers like “Leaders assassinated. Democracy attacked.” Preying on the fears of Americans is not the way to win a presidency. On the Democratic side, Barack Obama is winning praise for his optimistic and hopeful message for the future of America. Those who endorse him applaud his forward thinking and plans for an America that fits neatly into the new international balance. A Rudy Giuliani presidency, meanwhile, would do the opposite, driving Americans further away from the ideals of freedom that our country is based on.

Giuliani is an avid proponent of the REAL ID Act, a plan to issue a national ID card to all Americans. The REAL ID Act would create the potential for an even larger surveillance state. After President Bush broke FISA precedents illegally, does America really want a president who is openly prepared to spy on them? The ACLU notes that issuing a REAL ID “does nothing to protect against terrorism.” Giuliani, however, still espouses its benefits, and says he’d require Americans to use their “tamper proof ID card” to “work, pay taxes, get online, become a citizen, follow the rules.” In a draconian police state like Giuliani is proposing, Americans would be deprived of crucial rights granted to them by the Constitution. Giuliani is running not just against the majority of Americans’ policies, but against those of the United States Constitution as well.

His inability to capture the interest of Americans in early primary and caucus states like Iowa and New Hampshire led him to focus his efforts on tonight’s Florida primary. Dismal results in the aforementioned early contests have diminished any hope for a Giuliani presidency, and tonight’s loss will hopefully be the death knell to his campaign. Giuliani has the support of neoconservative war hawks, but lacks the support of any American political base. The Republicans don’t support him, his own New York City firemen don’t support him, and, most importantly, Americans do not support Rudolph Giuliani’s candidacy for President of the United States.

Giuliani: Avoiding a Lasting Peace

by Eftychis

In Giuliani’s Foreign Policy essay in Foreign Affairs magazine entitled, “Towards a Realistic Peace” he outlines his plan for strengthening America’s position in the international system. Mayor Giuliani faces two dilemmas with his foreign policy stance. The first is that 9/11 occurred almost seven years ago. The second is that there is nothing in his plan that differentiates him from any of the other Republican candidates; in particular there is nothing to indicate he has more understanding of national security or foreign affairs than legendary, veteran Senator John McCain. As we approach Florida and the subsequent Super-Tuesday primaries it is apparent that the economy belongs to Mitt Romney, social conservatives have found themselves aligned Mike Huckabee, libertarians with Ron Paul, and military and national security conservatives divided between McCain and Rudy Giuliani. In his piece in Foreign Affairs Giuliani writes that we are the, “9/11-generation.” While in many ways this is true, the 2008 election is about the “Iraq generation.” It could be argued that the consequences and ramifications of September 11th 2001 are only just beginning to manifest them across the world, but it is evident that the most contentious event to occur after the mass murder of American citizens at the world trade center is the Iraq war. Yet, Rudy Giuliani does nothing to explain to voters why he is more capable of managing this war than Senator John McCain. McCain stood up to President Bush’s failed military policy in Iraq when Rudy Giuliani was still reading neo-con talking points and now most of the foreign policy advisors who engineered the failed Iraq war have shifted over to the Giuliani campaign. Giuliani has hoped that GOP primary voters will support him because of his national security credentials but I see no evidence for him to make the case that his are any greater than the other candidates and there is nothing he can do to convince GOP voters that he is more capable of winning the war in Iraq than John McCain. If McCain has the war and Romney has the economy, what does Giuliani embody to appeal to voters with?

Popularity: 61% [?]

“Not long ago, the satirical newspaper The Onion ran a fake news story that began like this:
‘At a well-attended rally in front of his new ground zero headquarters Monday, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani officially announced his plan to run for president of 9/11. ‘My fellow citizens of 9/11, today I will make you a promise,’ said Giuliani during his 18-minute announcement speech in front of a charred and torn American flag. ‘As president of 9/11, I will usher in a bold new 9/11 for all.’ If elected, Giuliani would inherit the duties of current 9/11 President George W. Bush, including making grim facial expressions, seeing the world’s conflicts in terms of good and evil, and carrying a bullhorn at all state functions.’
Like all good satire, the story made me both laugh and cry, because it reflected something so true — how much, since 9/11, we’ve become “The United States of Fighting Terrorism.” Times columnists are not allowed to endorse candidates, but there’s no rule against saying who will not get my vote: I will not vote for any candidate running on 9/11. We don’t need another president of 9/11. We need a president for 9/12. I will only vote for the 9/12 candidate.

Here is the link to the rest of the column.

Popularity: 16% [?]

I was pissed when I first saw this. From the NYT:

NEW YORK (AP) — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad asked permission to lay a wreath at the World Trade Center site when he comes to New York City next week, but the request was denied, a police official said Wednesday.

Pardon my French, but what an asshole. Keep in mind that this is from the nation that was founded on the slogan “death to America,” behind terrorist attacks in ‘83 and ‘96 respectively that killed 243 and 16 Americans respectively, the leading state sponsor of terrorism, and who is ordering the killings of many Americans in Iraq today. For years they have been the lead patron to many organizations who would have done anything to execute an attack such as the one that killed 3000 Americans. At least, however, we know that Iranian backed organizations such as Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, et al. were jubilant on the day just over six years ago; and we have all the reason to believe that the Ahmadinejad was beside himself too.

Iran should have been taken down long ago; at least we should not allow them to mock our great national tragedy.

Popularity: 29% [?]

On the anniversary of 9/11, young muslim apostates are launching a campaign to make it easier for Muslims to leave Islam–which is considered an offense punishable by death according to Islamic literature. From The Times:

 The Committee for Ex-Muslims promises to campaign for freedom of religion but has already upset the Islamic and political Establishments for stirring tensions among the million-strong Muslim community in the Netherlands.

Ehsan Jami, the committee’s founder, who rejected Islam after the attack on the twin towers in 2001, has become the most talked-about public figure in the Netherlands. He has been forced into hiding after a series of death threats and a recent attack…

“Sharia schools say that they will kill the ones who leave Islam. In the West people get threatened, thrown out of their family, beaten up,” Mr Jami said. “In Islam you are born Muslim. You do not even choose to be Muslim. We want that to change, so that people are free to choose who they want to be and what they want to believe in.”

The article’s afternote sites the Koran:

Sura 4: 88-89 reads: “Whosoever turns back from his belief, openly or secretly, take him and kill him wheresoever ye find him, like any other infidel. Separate yourself from him altogether. Do not accept intercession in his regard.”

The scary thing is that Europe faces intimidation from Islam even if they do not have the same Islamist governments as in the Middle East. We saw this from the murder of Dutch film maker Theo Van Gogh, from the massive riots and deaths from the Danish Cartoon controversy, from the (Muslim) youth riots in France, to many other instances. It demonstrates both the growing force of Islam across the world as well as Europe’s tolerance for it.

I do not really see how this amnesty movement for apostates however could work in the Muslim world. Where Sharia’a is present the teachings of the Koran are beyond question. I do however think that Mr. Jami’s campaign is valuable because it points out the danger of Islamic mysticism on a continent where criticizing the religion is politically incorrect (a crime punishable by social ostracizing). There is always a place for people to call out religion when it is used as a political tool; if nobody does so there is no stop to the havoc it can wreak.

Popularity: 30% [?]

California Senator Dianne Feinstein recently sponsored an amendment to the 2008 Defense Authorization Bill which would close down the Defense Department’s detention center in Guantanamo Bay and prohibit the practice of rendition, in which prisoners are shipped to states whose interrogation techniques are more, well, direct. The effect of the Feinstein Amendment would be to integrate jihadist detainees into the federal prison system where they would receive further legal protections. Presumably, the good folks at the American Bar Association would rush to the defense of these misunderstood individuals and put up a spirited legal defense in the name of the rule of law.

What in fact the Feinstein Amendment shows is that a significant portion of the American legislative community is dangerously ignorant to even the most fundamental aspects of counter-insurgency warfare. If the Feinstein Amendment passes—which, fortunately, it likely will not—al Qaeda and other jihadist groups would be irreparably strengthened in what would be a cataclysmic abdication of all semblance of rational policy.

Reasonable minds can differ on subjects such as Guantanamo Bay and the legal status of jihadist detainees. The legal community, while misguided, can be patriotic while insisting that greater access to legal resources be provided to detainees. What is not patriotic, nor rational, is granting al Qaeda unhindered access to the ideal recruitment demographic on a permanent basis. The unwavering lesson of every insurgency in history is that prison is the ideal recruitment ground for insurgent factions. Prisoners are necessarily in constant communication with each other, and all it takes is one radical to evangelize the message of radicalism amongst a population which is already at odds with the government.

Simply put, there is no better recruiting ground than prison. Every insurgency—from the IRA famously training and conducting exercises behind British prison bars in full defiance of powerless guards, to the terrible school of French Indo-China, to the FLN radicalizing common Algerian criminals against the French, has directly utilized the unparalleled access that prison provides to convert and radicalize its target demographic. If you put members of terrorist cells in standard prisons, they will recruit more followers. There’s no gray area here: either we want to contribute further to the propagation of jihadist ideology or we wish to isolate the Islamist prophets of doom from the general population—especially the segments which would most receptive to these ideas.

The genius of Guantanamo Bay is that it segregates insurgents from the rest of prison population. Individuals in Guantanamo (with the few inevitable exceptions) are already radicalized and consequently no harm is done in detaining them. However, the minute that radical population is mixed with common inmates, the jihadists will have scored a tremendous victory on a scale far greater than September 11^th ever was. If one purposely set out to loose a counter-insurgency, the absolute first thing one would do would be to provide guerrillas the human resources that are the sinews of any insurgency. Senator Feinstein, has, unwittingly, proposed this very thing.

Popularity: 17% [?]

The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 is among the greatest laws ever passed by the legislature of the United States. Passed on October 24, 2001 by the House of Representatives, and the next day by the Senate, it was signed into law by President George W. Bush (fittingly, one of the greatest presidents in the history of the United States) on October 26. Though typically said to be passed in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11 that same year, the PATRIOT Act was something the government of the United States has needed for a long time. For too many years, the citizens of the United States had been running the government, rather than the other (proper) way around. The citizens and their ACLU lackeys, always bandying about liberal toy phrases like “Congressional inquiry”, “transparency in government”, “human rights”, and worst of all “judicial review”, were collectively running train all over the powers of the executive branch and its agencies. This situation was entirely unacceptable. When citizens control the government, all sorts of bad things can happen - particularly change.

The main problem plaguing the executive branch for the first 200 years or so of its existence was a particularly inconvenient piece of legislation, passed very early in the government’s existence, commonly referred to as the Constitution. This piece of blatantly partisan legislation supposedly enumerates what the executive, judicial, and legislative branches of the federal government of the United States are and are not allowed to do. There is an obvious fundamental problem with legislation such as this. Why is there something the government (especially the executive branch, which is the only part that matters) shouldn’t be allowed to do? Government is supposed to make law, not follow it. If government is supposed to follow law, then why doesn’t it pay taxes? Moreover, whenever the government is not allowed to do something, our enemies, especially our terrorist enemies, can exploit that restriction as a weakness. It would give the terrorists nothing less than pure joy to know that our own citizens are stopping the U.S. government from extracting necessary information from them. Vice-President Dick Cheney wisely notes that a “vital requirement in the war on terror is that we use whatever means are appropriate to try to find out the intentions of the enemy.” Every time we refuse to ‘torture’ an unlawful enemy combatant sitting in Guantanamo Bay, planning the next 9/11, a terrorist celebrates. If we insist on preserving their human rights, their human dignity, and the Geneva Convention which we signed, then they will win. If we do any less than condescend to precisely the measures they use against us, they will win. After all, when they can’t tell the difference between them and us, they won’t be able to attack us. It’s impeccable strategy. The PATRIOT Act gives the government these necessary tools to descend to the level of terrorists and dictators.

As mentioned before, the USA PATRIOT Act was introduced and passed in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. In fact, the bill was introduced to the House of Representatives as a whole by F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. on October 23, passed the House the next day, the Senate the day after that, and signed into law by the 26th. The marvelous advantage to the fact that this bill was passed almost immediately after its proximate cause and quite immediately after its introduction is that there was neither the need nor the time for anyone actually to read it. As the misguided individuals who oppose Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism suggest, it is completely unreasonable to expect members of Congress to have staff read 342 pages of legal text overnight, so that they might form a reasonable, well-considered decision for voting the next day. What these critics also realize is that if the representatives actually read the bill, they might be tempted to object, instead of accumulating political brownie points. If they objected, they would be performing their Constitutionally-given duty to exercise due diligence - and as has been mentioned before, the Constitution is not something to which attention should be paid.

Always remember that satire > satyr, and that this work is licensed GFDL.

Popularity: 28% [?]

1. Initiate a National Service
2. A single State Solution between Palestine and Israel
3. Ensuring an end to energy dependence in the Middle East
4. Increasing abilities of non-governmental organizations, and US government organizations to provide immediate and effective disaster relief around the world that promotes pro-American imagery.
5. Outlawing Shari Law in the United States
6. Forming a joint anti-terrorism act with China, Russia, Japan, and the EU to ensure a task force greater than Interpol with no objective but to prevent global terrorism and also to create a multinational counter-terrorism task force capable of responding to nuclear, biological, chemical, and hostage crisis’s in every corner of the globe within 24 hours.
7. Providing cold-war level funding to form and operate pro-American television, Internet, and print sources outside of the United States.
8. Using covert military action and government sponsored economic means to open up rogue terrorist states to capitalism and western values.
9. Securing major American sea and airports to scan one hundred percent of cargo, also ensuring that the southern boarder of the United States is secure.
10. Rebuilding the national intelligence, enforcement, and emergency response community from the ground up to increase response time, preparedness, and capabilities, while balancing cost.

In the coming days I will create an in dept explanation of how to accomplish the steps I have outlined.

Popularity: 36% [?]

I was watching a special on Fox News about the six imam incident that occurred last fall. One must wonder, however, why these Imams have acted so inappropriately and then broke the story to the press so quickly that they were discriminated against.

One possibility is that the goal of the imams might not only be to raise funds for terrorism by suing American citizens and corporations, but also to scare people from reporting suspicious behavior aboard flights in the future, which may lead to new terrorist attacks. The United States cannot allow activity by any group to threaten the public and all Americans should be encouraged to report suspicious behavior, especially in sensitive locations.

The six imams are suing US Airways and are threatening to sue the passengers who were concerned by their behavior. Not only should there be a law protecting people who report suspicious behavior and not only should airlines be immune from law suits relating to the removal of passengers on the suspicion of terrorism, but additionally such behavior should not be allowed in the first place.

Liberals in this country are too willing to accept the intolerance of Muslims and that acceptance is what leads to the rise of authoritative regimes and theocracies.

Editor’s Note: Some spelling and punctuation fixed at 6PM EST 4/8/07.

Popularity: 15% [?]

A recent letter obtained by Fox News reveals that Rudy Giuliani is the only Democratic or Republican candidate not invited to the Firefighters Presidential Forum of 2008. The letter by the New York firefighters blames Giuliani for disgracing their brothers and sisters after the attack of September Eleventh.
The writers of the letter explained their anger with Giuliani by writing,

“Prior to November 2001, 101 bodies or remains of fire fighters had been recovered. And those on the horrible pile at Ground Zero believed they had just found a spot in the rubble where they would find countless more that could be given proper burial.

Nevertheless, Giuliani, with the full support of his Fire Commissioner Thomas Von Essen, decided on November 2, 2001, to sharply reduce the number of those who could search for remains at any one time. There had been as many as 300 fire fighters at a time involved in search and recovery, but Giuliani cut that number to no more than 25 who could be there at once.”

While I have tremendous respect for the brave men and women who compose the FDNY, I find that the topic and their reasons for disagreement is ridiculous. I cannot imagine that there would be any value to searching for more bodies while putting more men at risk. As it turns out now all of those who worked at ground zero are facing serious health repercussions that for many will prove fatal. There was no need for more firefighters to risk their lives and damage their lungs two months after the towers had fallen so that a few more pieces of DNA could be found. Is it worth finding a partial limb to ease a family members pain if it will cause lung cancer in another healthy firefighter and destroy his family too? No, it is not. In addition, the idea that Giuliani ordered the bulldozing of the site only after gold and silver had been removed is insulting. Two months of mourning is enough for America and by November we were taking the war to our enemy, the families of all those lost got all the closure they would ever get, and it is selfish for those family members to want others to risk their lives on a dangerous pile of rubble to find the remaining molecules of their husbands and fathers.

As someone who has lost a father I can say that it doesn’t matter if you get to bury them, they are still gone. The firefighters should be ashamed of their behavior and it is even a graver insult that they did not at least ask Giuliani to attend the conference so that he could be questioned and justify his actions to the IAFF.

The letter can be seen after the jump.
Lire le reste de cet article »

Popularity: 16% [?]