Tag Archives: security

CIA chief: No more leaking

Washington (CNN) — The head of the Central Intelligence Agency sent a stern warning Monday to the nation’s spies and employees to button up the leaks.

In a memo sent to CIA employees, Director Leon Panetta said the government is taking “a hard line” and warned that unauthorized disclosure of information to media has done “incredible damage” and could endanger lives.

In the memo, Panetta references only one example, WikiLeaks, but writes that in other cases “CIA sources and methods have been compromised.”

The citing of Wikileaks is curious since the bulk of the 400,000 Iraq documents posted by the website are mostly military-related. There are some documents that refer cryptically to other agencies’ activities — some believed to be CIA-related — which appear under the label “OGA,” which stands for “other government agency.”

“Here at the Agency, we are a family, which means we depend on each other — sharing burdens, challenges, and successes,” Panetta writes in the memo. “But sharing cannot extend beyond the limits set by law and the ‘need to know’ principle.”

Panetta noted recent prosecutions for leaking information and said unauthorized information disclosure will be investigated by the CIA’s Office of Security and referred to the Justice Department.

There was no specific reason for releasing the memo now, a U.S. intelligence official said.

“A number of leaks over time — and across our government — prompted Panetta to remind agency employees of their obligation to protect America’s secrets,” the official said. “Unauthorized disclosures of classified information can harm national security, and he wanted to emphasize that important point.”

CNN’s Pam Benson contributed to this report.

CIA chief: No more leaking

Pelosi running for minority leader

Washington (CNN) — Outgoing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Friday she will run for minority leader in the new Congress, even as some moderate and conservative Democrats insisted she should step aside.

“Many of our colleagues have called with their recommendations on how to continue our fight for the middle class, and have encouraged me to run for House Democratic Leader,” she said in a written statement. “Based on those discussions, and driven by the urgency of protecting health care reform, Wall Street reform, and Social Security and Medicare, I have decided to run.”

Pelosi initially announced her intentions via Twitter.

In the wake of Tuesday’s Republican takeover of the House, Democrats will move into the minority positions in the new Congress, which convenes in January.

Shortly after Pelosi’s announcement, House Majority Whip James Clyburn announced that he would be running for minority whip. Pelosi’s No. 2 man, Maryland Rep. Steny Hoyer — who is widely considered to be more moderate — will “spend the next few days talking to [House] members and getting their thoughts on him being minority whip,” according to his spokeswoman, Katie Grant.

A senior Democratic source told CNN that Hoyer is “in a nice way saying he is going to run against Clyburn.”

Moderate Democratic Rep. Dan Boren of Oklahoma was the latest to urge Pelosi to step aside and not run for House minority leader. He said he would support a more centrist candidate.

“I cannot in good conscience support Nancy Pelosi as our leader,” Boren told CNN. “I think that it is important for the Democratic Party to move in a new direction for the sake of our country. Democrats and Republicans need leaders who are going to work together.”

Boren’s public pressure for Pelosi to go follows similar comments from Democratic Reps. Heath Schuler of North Carolina and Jim Matheson of Utah, who also have said they would prefer a new, more moderate Democratic leader.

“I think based on the outcome of this election, we should all acknowledge what the American people said — and they are looking for change. And I think when you, as a political party, suffer losses of historic proportions, it makes sense to change things up,” Matheson told CNN. “Therefore, I don’t think she should be running for leader.”

Rep. Jason Altmire, a moderate Democrat from a conservative district in western Pennsylvania, agreed. “I am not voting for Nancy Pelosi,” he said.

“I don’t get the sense that Speaker Pelosi understands what happened on Tuesday. We lost middle America. The Democratic party got crushed,” Altmire told CNN.

He noted that many of his fellow Democrats in districts near his lost their seats.

Despite his opposition, Altmire, who voted against major pieces of Democratic legislation, including the health care bill, said Pelosi will easily be victorious in her quest to be minority leader.

But Democratic Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. of Illinois said he would support Pelosi’s bid. “We’re in a political storm, but we don’t need to adopt an ‘any leader in a storm’ mentality,” Jackson said in a statement issued Friday. After Tuesday’s losses, moderate Democrats are now a very small part of the Democratic caucus. The bigger question, according to multiple Democratic sources, is what Pelosi’s fellow progressives want her to do. Americans United for Change, a progressive political organization, sent an e-mail notice to its members Friday morning asking them to send personal notes to Pelosi urging her to stay.

“Make sure she knows that we will support her,” said the e-mail.

“If she runs, she will win,” said one senior Democratic source.

A progressive Democrat told CNN he had talked to many of his colleagues about the situation in the past few days.

“It’s fair to say that for most progressives, their visceral place was that Nancy deserves to be the leader if she wants to be, but no one would have burst into tears if she decided not to,” said the congressman, who did not want to go on the record in order to protect private conversations.

The Pelosi supporter said she should not be blamed for the losses. Rather the setback was the result of a bad economy and, the supporter said, an ineffective job by the White House in selling Democratic achievements.

While Pelosi’s tireless fundraising has built a reservoir of support among Democratic lawmakers, several sources within the party said there are a number of progressive Democrats also who do not want her to run. Meanwhile, Rep. John Yarmuth, a Kentucky Democrat who had been a staunch supporter of Pelosi, told a local television station that he wants Pelosi to step down as Democratic leader.

“I know that there is some thought that Nancy Pelosi may stay around,” Yarmuth said Thursday. “As good a leader as she has been, I don’t think she’s the right leader to take us forward.”

Shuler is considering challenging Pelosi if she runs, according to a number of Democratic sources. Because of the makeup of the Democratic caucus, few think he would win.

Several Democratic sources say they worry about this dragging out, especially given how public the Democrats’ dispute over Pelosi’s future is becoming.

On Thursday, Pelosi told the Huffington Post that she is getting a positive response from Democratic lawmakers because she has “kept the caucus together” and increased Democratic numbers in 2006 and 2008.

Matheson told CNN one of the political concerns is that it will be harder to recruit candidates to run in 2012 with Pelosi as the Democratic leader — especially those who just lost and may want to try to get their old seats back.

CNN’s Evan Glass contributed to this report.

Pelosi running for minority leader

GOP unveils ‘Pledge to America’

Sterling, Virginia (CNN) — House Republicans sought to recapture the spirit of their 1994 election landslide Thursday, unveiling a 21-page “Pledge to America” that includes promises to slash taxes, cut government and reverse President Barack Obama’s health care reforms.

Among other things, House GOP leaders pledged to permanently extend all of the Bush-era tax cuts due to expire at the end of this year — including for individuals making over $250,000.

They also proposed giving small businesses a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their income, while requiring Congress to review any new federal regulations that add to the deficit.

They pushed a domestic spending freeze, with the exception of certain politically sensitive programs such as veterans’ benefits.

While stressing the need to reduce spiraling deficits, they did not offer specifics on how to restrain the growth of entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

The document also lacks a pledge against unrelated pet projects that members of Congress often insert in spending bills to bring funding to their home districts — known as earmarks. Banning earmarks is typically a staple of Republican policy.

“The federal government is too big, it spends too much, and it’s out of control,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. The current federal government “isn’t listening” and “doesn’t get it.”

“Our government has failed us,” said Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-California. “The land of opportunity has become the land of shrinking prosperity. … People are outraged.”

The House GOP leadership unveiled its proposal at a lumber company in northern Virginia.

Some provisions in the GOP document match positions of the conservative Tea Party movement that has helped defeat mainstream Republican candidates in several primary elections this year. For example, the document calls for a federal hiring freeze on nonsecurity employees and requiring all legislation to include a clause showing that it is authorized under the Constitution.

Other items would cancel unspent funding authorized by the economic stimulus bill, roll back spending to levels before the stimulus bill and earlier federal bailout legislation and repeal the health care reform bill passed in March.

The document also calls for permanently prohibiting taxpayer funding for abortion.

Several Republican sources said there was no intention to directly address social issues because the electorate is so heavily focused on jobs and spending.

Republican leaders settled on a line that states: “We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values.”

This language was a late addition, according to a GOP source, after conservative Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana argued that social issues should be included in the document representing the agenda of House Republicans.

The top Republican in the Senate immediately endorsed the plan, calling it a key step in the GOP’s push to cut the overall size of the federal government.

“The House Republican plan is a clear and forceful response to these concerns, and working together, House and Senate Republicans will continue to fight for the principles upon which it is based,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky.

House Democratic leaders, in contrast, said the document showed that Republicans want to return to what they called failed policies of the past. A statement from House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer’s office on Wednesday mocked the GOP positions, saying they showed that Republicans pledged allegiance to hedge fund managers on Wall Street, insurance companies, the “wealthiest of the wealthy,” oil companies and big corporations that outsource jobs, “with a recession and huge deficits for all.”

The GOP document represents an updated version of the 1994 “Contract with America.” That much shorter, 10-item document, with specific bills attached to each item that would be passed with a Republican victory, was rolled out on the steps of the U.S. Capitol and signed by GOP members of Congress and candidates.

The 2010 version has more than 20 items, including changes to how Congress works and broad policy goals such as tougher sanctions against Iran. While it does contain legislative proposals, it does not include specific bills that would be introduced and passed if Republicans gain control of the House.

A GOP lawmaker involved in putting together the document told CNN Wednesday that House Republicans realize voters are angry with both Democrats and Republicans. The agenda contained in the “Pledge to America” is intended to convince such voters that their concerns are taken seriously by Republicans, who will act differently if returned to power than they did when controlling Congress during parts of the Bush administration, the legislator said.

CNN’s Tom Cohen, Alan Silverleib and Deirdre Walsh contributed to this report

GOP unveils ‘Pledge to America’

Meek gets a hand from pal Clinton

(CNN) — It’s been a long time since U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek and former President Clinton met at the Suwanee Swifty store in Tallahassee, Florida.

Clinton, during his 1992 presidential bid, needed to make a stop for deodorant after landing at the airport. Meek, then a state trooper, was assigned to Clinton’s detail and accompanied the Arkansas governor.

It’s a visit both would remember for a long time — and something that would solidify a friendship lasting nearly two decades.

“We stopped at the Suwanee Swifty on Lake Bradford Road, where then-Gov. Clinton picked up some underarm deodorant roll-on. And he commenced putting it on in front of the Suwanee Swifty. As the protector of the governor, I didn’t want him to go down putting on roll-on, but we bonded through the process,” Meek recently told reporters.

A year later, Clinton, now president, was in Miami for an event at a hotel, and Meek, still a state trooper, was again part of Clinton’s security detail. As the two were walking, the president turned around to Meek and made a comment along the lines of “We’re a long ways away from Suwanee Swifty,” said Adam Sharon, Meek’s campaign communications director.

“I think that really just stood out for him as being a remarkable memory — that President Clinton in all that he had gone through that year to become president — remembers a moment in time from a year prior with Kendrick, who was a state trooper at the time,” Sharon said.

Meek, 44, now faces a tough battle to become Florida’s next senator. The Democrat, first elected to Congress in 2002, faces off against Gov. Charlie Crist, an independent, and Republican Marco Rubio.

When I first met Kendrick Meek, I knew he had the potential to become a strong leader and a fine public servant.
–Former President Clinton

The congressman has received overwhelming support from Clinton on the campaign trail and at fundraisers before the August 24 Democratic primary. Meek squared off against billionaire Jeff Greene and won the race by double digits.

Clinton has made nine appearances for Meek. On Tuesday, the ex-president headlined a fundraiser that raked in $175,000, according to the campaign.

Clinton repeatedly has heaped praised on Meek, who represents the 17th Congressional District in South Florida.

“Almost 20 years ago, when I first met Kendrick Meek, I knew he had the potential to become a strong leader and a fine public servant,” Clinton said in a statement on Meek’s election website. “Kendrick has spent the last two decades faithfully serving the people of Florida, staying true to his core beliefs and giving everything he has to improving the lives of others.”

At a campaign event in Delray Beach in mid-August, Clinton said flat-out, “I love Kendrick Meek,” adding that “I also believe in my heart that he should be the next United States senator from Florida.”

And part of that love seems to stem from their commitment to Haiti.

Meek has been a vocal advocate on issues affecting the struggling nation. The former president’s affection for the nation and its people goes back to his honeymoon spent in the country and to his recent work there helping earthquake victims.

“There are many ways that they have come together. Obviously Florida is a critical state for any election and politics in general — but Haiti as well,” said Sharon, the campaign communications director. “Kendrick has always stood out as a leader on issues affecting the Haitian-American community and the nation of Haiti. Obviously, President Clinton has had a very long and deep tie to that nation and now in many ways more than ever.”

And then there is the relationship that further developed during the 2008 presidential election.

Kendrick spent months with the ex-president on the campaign trail in support of Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid.

The congressman said at the time that she was the Democratic candidate with the “perfect blend of leadership, talent and intellect to lead our nation in a new direction,” according to a Clinton campaign press release. He added that it was his “honor” to endorse her to become the next president.

Meek also was a senior adviser to the campaign.

His ringing endorsement and campaign help was certainly not lost on Clinton’s husband, a man known for cherishing loyalty among his ranks.

“Often on campaigns, that’s where relationships are only further cemented, and the ties become that much stronger,” Sharon said. “In all sorts of ways he has shown his support of Kendrick, and in large part it’s due to a friendship that is long-lasting, stretching back now almost two decades when both men were at different stages in their lives.”

Meek gets a hand from pal Clinton

Biden marks transfer of U.S. command in Iraq

(CNN) — U.S. Vice President Joe Biden and Defense Secretary Robert Gates helped usher in the next chapter for the United States in Iraq on Wednesday, presiding over a ceremony launching a new military operation designed to train, assist and advise the Iraqis.

The ceremony, held at Al Faw Palace in Baghdad, marked the conclusion of the U.S. combat mission dubbed Operation Iraqi Freedom and the transfer to the assistance mission, named Operation New Dawn.

Army Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III replaced Gen. Raymond T. Odierno as commander of U.S. Forces-Iraq in the changeover, held at one of the many palaces of late Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein — whose regime was ousted from power in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Biden said Operation Iraqi Freedom is over, but promised that “American engagement with Iraq will continue” with the new stability mission.

“This change of mission, to state the obvious, would never have been possible without the resolve and tremendous sacrifice and competence of our military — the finest, if our Iraqi friends will forgive us, the finest fighting force in the world, and I would argue the finest fighting force that ever has existed,” Biden said.

He acknowledged the pain Iraqis endured during the long war, saying tens of thousands of troops and civilians died, and many more were wounded and displaced.

Video: Jones: Not going to be reckless

Video: Begala: Bush told lies about Iraq

Video: Robert Gates talks Iraq

Video: Ex-POW on troop withdrawal

However, he said, “I believe that their darkest days are now behind them.”

Noting the divided opinion toward the war in the United States, he said people from both parties had always backed the troops for their “extraordinary service” after “a high-speed invasion that toppled a tyrant became a grinding struggle against violent extremists.”

“Our fighting men and women were given a mission in Iraq that was as complicated as any in our history, an assignment that taught us that war is the realm of uncertainty,” he said. “Troops steeped in military doctrine were asked to deal with challenges ranging from electricity to unemployment, currency exchange to trash collection.”

The vice president also praised the new electoral system in Iraq, urging political parties there to settle their differences and form a government soon.

“Iraqis have cast their lot as well as their ballots for a better future,” he said.

Biden highlighted Gates’ contributions, saying the defense secretary’s decision to serve under both Republican and Democratic administrations during the war is a testament to his patriotism.

Odierno, who said Iraqi security forces are ready to take the lead there, recalled the wartime period as one of Iraqi heroism.

“This period in Iraq’s history will probably be remembered for sacrifice, resiliency and change. However, I remember it as a time in which the Iraqi people stood up against tyranny, terrorism and extremism, and decided to determine their own destiny, as a people and as a democratic state,” he said.

As Biden did, Odierno urged Iraqi political blocs to form a government, which has yet to be established since elections six months ago.

“It is time for Iraq to move forward,” Odierno said.

Odierno said a democratic Iraq “can become an engine for peace and stability” in the Middle East.

“We can no longer dwell on our past accomplishments, but must remain focused on the tremendous opportunity at hand. Iraq has always played a vital role in this uncertain part of the globe,” he said.

Austin said Iraq still faces hostile threats from insurgents working to undermine the country. But he said that “the past few years in Iraq have been marked by steady progress” and he envisions a “stable, secure and unified Iraq.”

“Operation New Dawn marks the next phase of an enduring relationship” between the United States and Iraq, he said.

While the U.S. combat mission is ending, roughly 50,000 American troops will remain in the country until the end of 2011 for the assistance mission.

When asked Wednesday if the United States is still at war in Iraq, Gates responded, “No, we’re not.” Gates added it is up to historians to determine whether the war was worth it.

Along with U.S. political and military dignitaries, Iraqi officials — including Interior Minister Jawad al-Bolani, Defense Minister Mohammed Abdul Qader al-Obeidi and the Kurdish region’s Prime Minister Barham Saleh — attended the ceremony.

The U.S. combat mission in Iraq officially ended at 5 p.m. ET Tuesday. The drawdown and end to the U.S. combat phase marks a new page in what has been a controversial seven-year conflict. Weapons of mass destruction, a major justification by the Bush administration for going to war, were never found. Saddam Hussein was toppled, along with his massive Baghdad statue, but sectarian violence soon erupted.

On Tuesday night, U.S. President Barack Obama addressed Americans about the transition in a televised speech.

“The United States has paid a huge price to put the future of Iraq in the hands of its people,” Obama said from the Oval Office. “We have sent our young men and women to make enormous sacrifices in Iraq, and spent vast resources abroad at a time of tight budgets at home. We have persevered because of a belief we share with the Iraqi people — a belief that out of the ashes of war, a new beginning could be born in this cradle of civilization.”

The war in Iraq has claimed the lives of more than 4,400 U.S. troops.

Obama said he was “awed” by the sacrifices of service members and their families and that the U.S. has met its responsibility.

“Operation Iraqi Freedom is over, and the Iraqi people now have lead responsibility for the security of their country,” Obama said. “We have removed nearly 100,000 U.S. troops from Iraq. We have closed or transferred hundreds of bases to the Iraqis. And we have moved millions of pieces of equipment out of Iraq.”

Before Obama’s speech, some Republicans had urged him to acknowledge that the 2007 U.S. troop surge in Iraq ordered by then-President George W. Bush had worked. Obama, as a U.S. senator and candidate for the presidency, had opposed it.

Obama, who spoke with Bush in a phone call earlier in the day, did not mention the former president’s role in the surge.

Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, delivered a speech Tuesday suggesting Bush deserves more credit for reaching this milestone.

“You might recall that the surge wasn’t very popular when it was announced,” McConnell said. “You might also recall that one of its biggest critics was the current president. So it makes it easier to talk about fulfilling a campaign promise to wind down our operations in Iraq when the previous administration signs the security agreement with Iraq to end our overall presence there.”

Obama said the most urgent matter now is restoring the economy and “putting millions of Americans who have who have lost their jobs back to work.”

To strengthen the middle class, he said, “we must give all our children the education they deserve, and all our workers the skills that they need to compete in a global economy.”

Obama’s emphasis on the economy appears to dovetail with the mood of the American public.

In a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll earlier this month, 56 percent of respondents said the economy would be extremely important to their vote for Congress this year. Fewer than four in 10 said that the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan were extremely important to them.

CNN’s Ed Henry, Dan Lothian, Dana Bash, Jason Hanna and Alan Silverleib contributed to this report.

Biden marks transfer of U.S. command in Iraq

More Guard troops deployed to Arizona border

(CNN) — Additional National Guard troops assigned to the Mexican border under President Barack Obama’s border security initiative have started reporting to their posts, officials said Monday.

More than 30 National Guard members have begun their deployment as part of the administration’s border protection plan, according to Special Agent Mario Escalante with U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Troops will continue to arrive over the next two months, with an expected force of 532 members by the end of October, said Lt. Valentine Castillo of the Arizona National Guard.

Top Republicans — including Arizona Sen. John McCain and Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer — have repeatedly accused Obama of failing to provide sufficient security along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The president signed a bill on August 13 providing $600 million in emergency funding to help secure the border.

Among other things, the bill provides for roughly 1,500 new law enforcement agents, new unmanned aerial vehicles, new forwarding operating bases, and $14 million in new communications equipment.

Predator Unmanned Aerial System flights will begin Wednesday out of Corpus Christi, Texas, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced Monday. Those flights will give the department unmanned aerial capabilities from California to the Gulf of Mexico in Texas.

Castillo said the troops participating in the operation will be assisting Customs and Border Protection with criminal intelligence and entry identifications. They will not have law enforcement powers, he said.

CNN’s David Alsup and Devon Sayers contributed to this report.

More Guard troops deployed to Arizona border

Clinton to announce direct Mideast talks to resume

Washington (CNN) — Leaders of Israel and the Palestinian Authority will meet in Washington in September to resume direct talks to address core issues in their long-running dispute, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Friday.

They are to meet in Washington in September, she said.

President Obama’s special envoy for Middle East peace talks, former Sen. George Mitchell, joined Clinton at a briefing at 11 a.m.

The peace talks will be the first since December 2008, when negotiations broke down over Israel’s three-week offensive in Gaza.

Obama has also invited Jordan, Egypt and members of the International Quartet — the United States, Russia, the United Nations and the European Union — to the table, diplomatic sources said.

The parties have agreed to complete the talks within a year, the sources said.

A senior diplomatic official said that U.S. engagement had led to a lot of traction in the last few months and that talks were urged before a moratorium on Jewish settlements ends and the U.N. General Assembly adjourns.

Oscar Fernandez-Taranco, U.N. assistant secretary-general for political affairs, called on Israel this week to continue the moratorium on all settlement activity — including in East Jerusalem — beyond September 26, when it is set to end.

“We are nearing a turning point in the efforts to promote direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians,” Fernandez-Taranco told the Security Council.

At a news briefing Thursday, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said that details on restarting the talks were still being worked out.

“We think we’re very, very close,” he said.

“Should the parties come to an agreement to enter into direct negotiations? How will they — when will they happen? Where will they happen? What will be the agenda for the first meeting?” he said. “There are still things that we’re working through.”

Saeb Erakat, chief Palestinian negotiator, said the Palestine Liberation Organization’s executive committee will meet about the issue Friday night.

CNN’s Kareem Khadder contributed to this report.

Clinton to announce direct Mideast talks to resume

Obama mosque issue a gift for GOP

Washington (CNN) — By wading into the issue of an Islamic center and mosque near ground zero, President Barack Obama provided Republicans with an emotion-ridden attack vehicle while diverting attention from campaign themes of fellow Democrats.

A senior Republican strategist told CNN that GOP candidates are being encouraged to talk about the issue as much as possible.

In Florida, Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Scott launched a statewide television ad Monday criticizing Obama for backing the right of Muslims to build an Islamic center and mosque two blocks from where the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks killed more than 2,700 people.

“Barack Obama says building a mosque at ground zero is about tolerance,” Scott says in the ad, looking directly into the camera. “He’s wrong. It’s about truth.”

The “truth,” Scott claims, is this: “Muslim fanatics murdered thousands of innocent Americans on 9/11, just yards from the proposed mosque.”

“The fight against terrorism isn’t over,” Scott concludes. “Mr. President, ground zero is the wrong place for a mosque.”

Video: Obama’s comments stir debate

Video: Lawmakers react to Obama remarks

Video: Obama mum on ‘wisdom’ of center

Video: CNN poll: Most oppose mosque

Meanwhile, a House Democratic leadership aide said the issue was dominating the political conversation when Democrats need to stress campaign themes such as economic recovery and saving social security.

“We understand why the president would want to talk about this issue, but the timing couldn’t have been any worse,” the House Democratic leadership aide told CNN.

Despite the concerns of Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada on Monday came out against building the Islamic center and mosque.

“The First Amendment protects freedom of religion. Sen. Reid respects that but thinks that the mosque should be built some place else,” said a statement issued by Reid’s spokesman, Jim Manley.

Reid is involved in a tough re-election campaign against conservative Republican Sharron Angle. The statement on the ground zero issue also called for Republicans to back a Democratic bill that would provide health care aid and compensation for firefighters, police officers and other first responders to the 9/11 attacks.

For its part, the White House sought to tamp down the discussion Monday. Speaking to reporters, White House spokesman Bill Burton sidestepped a question on Republican strategy and tried to declare the debate over.

“The president didn’t do this because of the politics,” Burton said, adding: “I think that it’s a debate that was had and we’ve weighed in.”

On Sunday, the topic dominated morning talk shows, with Republicans calling Obama insensitive for supporting the right of Muslims to build the Islamic center so close to ground zero.

Some predicted political repercussions for Democrats in November’s congressional election, even though they agreed with Obama that freedom of religion is a vital part of American democracy.

“The Muslims have, as everyone else does, the right to practice their religion and they have the right to construct a mosque at ground zero if they wish,” Rep. Peter King, R-New York, said on CNN’s “State of the Union” program. “What I’m saying, though, is they should listen to public opinion, they should listen to the deep wounds and anguish this is causing to so many good people.”

Republican strategist Ed Rollins, a senior political contributor to CNN, summed up the GOP perspective.

“Intellectually, the president may be right, but this is an emotional issue, and people who lost kids, brothers, sisters, fathers, what have you, do not want that mosque in New York, and it’s going to be a big, big issue for Democrats across this country,” Rollins said on the CBS program “Face the Nation.”

On the same program, Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine challenged the Republican logic.

“You know, we see an awful lot of Republicans going out and saying we’ve got to respect the Constitution, and that means we have to respect it,” Kaine said. “We can’t tarnish people’s First Amendment rights.”

Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania said on the CBS program that the Islamic center issue shouldn’t have political resonance.

“I can’t imagine that any American — given the challenges facing this country — is going to vote based on what he said about the mosque,” Rendell said of the November election. “The mosque is an unfortunate situation, but we do have a right to practice our religion freely wherever we choose. Rights are not subject to the popular vote or majority vote.”

In his speech at a White House dinner Friday marking the start of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, Obama said Muslims “have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country.”

“That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances,” the president added.

The next day, Obama told CNN Chief White House Correspondent Ed Henry that he was “not commenting on the wisdom” of the project, just the broader principle that the government should treat “everyone equal, regardless” of religion.

His comments were considered by some to backtrack from what he said at the dinner, prompting a White House spokesman to further clarify the president’s remarks later Saturday.

Both the topic and Obama’sneed to clarify his initial remarks evoked criticism from Republicans.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, told “FOX News Sunday” that Obama’s stance demonstrated how “Washington, the White House, the administration, the president himself seems to be disconnected from the mainstream of America.”

“This is sort of the dichotomy that people sense, that they’re being lectured to — not listened to — and I think that’s the reason why a lot of people are very upset with Washington,” Cornyn said.

On the CNN program, King said Obama’s lack of clarity further muddied the issue.

“If the president was going to get into this, he should have been much more clear, much more precise, and you can’t be changing your position from day to day on an issue which does go to our Constitution, and it also goes to extreme sensitivity,” King said.

Democrats responded that critics fail to distinguish between the al Qaeda terrorists who carried out the 9/11 attacks and the Islam religion, which includes peaceful adherents all over the world, including the United States.

“It is only insensitive if you regard Islam as the culprit as opposed to al Qaeda as the culprit,” Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, said on the CNN program. “We were not attacked by all Muslims. …. There were Muslims killed there. There were Muslims who ran in as first responders to help.”

The issue was one of personal rights, not political popularity, Nadler said, adding: “We do not put the Bill of Rights, we do not put the religious freedom to a vote.”

The House Democratic leadership aide lamented that the topic was getting so much attention.

“We were supposed to be talking about Social Security in this coming week,” the aide said, referring to Democratic criticism of Republican calls to privatize the government-run pension program. “This is a really good issue for us. And instead, we’re talking about the mosque.”

Obama’s remarks Friday drew praise from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who announced his support for the Islamic center last week. Bloomberg compared Obama’s speech to a letter former President George Washington wrote more than two centuries ago in support of a Jewish congregation in Newport, Rhode Island.

In the speech, Obama called the 9/11 attacks “a deeply traumatic event for our country.”

“The pain and suffering experienced by those who lost loved ones is unimaginable,” Obama continued. “So I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground.”

The Islamic center’s leaders say they plan to build the $100 million, 13-story facility called Cordoba House two blocks from the site of the 9/11 attacks. The developer, Sharif el-Gamal, describes the project as an “Islamic community center” that would include a 500-seat performing arts center, a lecture hall, a swimming pool, a gym, a culinary school, a restaurant and a prayer space for Muslims.

Nearly 70 percent of Americans oppose the plan, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll released Wednesday.

CNN’s Mark Preston contributed to this story

Obama mosque issue a gift for GOP

Midterms put focus on Afghan draw-down

Washington (CNN) — Less than a year from the scheduled start of withdrawing some troops from Afghanistan, opinions remain varied about exactly what will happen when the transition begins at the end of June 2011.

The Obama administration has made clear some troops — no one can say how many — will start withdrawing by next July from stable areas where Afghan forces can provide security.

However, questions over how to measure success and whether the almost 9-year-old war is worth the continuing U.S. investment in lives and resources are gaining prominence as congressional midterm elections approach in November.

In interviews with military and political leaders broadcast Sunday, scenarios presented on what happens next year ranged from guarded optimism to serious concern. While most views followed expected party talking points, all appeared grounded in the common belief that success is vital even as they differed on what it would be.

On CNN’s “State of the Union,” Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan defended the planned troop drawdown next year as a necessary part of strategy.

Video: Levin: ‘Mixed picture’ in Afghanistan

RELATED TOPICS

“That date is very visible now,” Levin said, adding: “It’s critical that that date was set to show that it isn’t a blank check, it’s not an open-ended commitment of American troops in the same numbers that we’re going to have there.”

Already, he said, the Afghan army is taking over some aspects of security, which gives a psychological boost to the local population while denying the Taliban insurgents of a propaganda tool.

“When their own people see that, it is going to make a difference,” Levin said. “And when the Taliban sees that they are not able now to just paint this as … a lot of foreign troops present in Afghanistan, but now it’s their own Afghan army, a popular, respected army, that they are taking on more and more during this next year, that that is going to make a difference. That’s a real nightmare for the Taliban to be up against an Afghan-led effort.

On the same program, however, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina worried that the Afghan forces and central government may not be ready to assume the necessary responsibilities within a year.

“[G]enerally speaking, this time next summer, we’re still going to be engaged in one hell of a fight,” Graham told CNN. “We’re going to need every troop we have today, I think, still in Afghanistan next year.”

According to Graham, it will be clear by the end of this year where things stand in Afghanistan.

“If, by December, we’re not showing some progress, we’re in trouble,” he said. “And the question is: what is progress? Without some benchmarks and measurements, it’s going to be hard to sell to the American people a continued involvement in Afghanistan.”

Other Republicans are harsher critics of President Barack Obama’s war strategy, saying that any withdrawal date — regardless of intention — provides a strategic and psychological boost to the enemy.

” … (W)e don’t tell the enemy when it is that we’re going to essentially wave that white flag and say we’re leaving,” former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said on “Fox News Sunday.”

“No, we’re in it to win it. And if we’re not, then the American public needs to know that, too,” Palin said.

Palin acknowledged the nation was tiring of the war that started in October 2001 in response to the September 11 terrorist attacks that year.

“We want to know that if we’re engaged in such activity where we are protecting our own country, we’re helping to protect our allies, we had better be in it for … the long haul,” Palin said. “But we had better be in it to win it or, no, we’re not going to keep supporting this idea of sending innocents, our young men and women, America’s finest, over there for some futile effort.”

In an interview with CBS conducted last week and broadcast Sunday, Obama insisted the mission to prevent terrorists from operating out of Afghanistan was worth the current deployment, including 30,000 additional U.S. troops he ordered in last year to increase the eventual total to about 100,000.

“If I didn’t think that it was important for our national security to finish the job in Afghanistan, then I would pull them all out today,” the president said.

Top military officials emphasized that the draw-down date is part of a strategy, with the actual number of troops withdrawn depending on conditions on the ground. Asked about remarks last month by Vice President Joe Biden that the figure could be “as few as a couple of thousand” troops, Defense Secretary Robert Gates seemed to agree.

“My personal opinion is that drawdowns early on will be of fairly limited numbers, and as we are successful, we’ll probably accelerate,” Gates said on the ABC program “This Week.” But, again, it will depend on the conditions on the ground.”

At the same time, Gates emphasized that it was crucial for the United States to demonstrate a long-term commitment in order to ensure the trust and cooperation of Afghanistan.

“We need to re-emphasize the message that we are not leaving Afghanistan in July 2011,” he said. “We are beginning a process… and the pace will be set by conditions on the ground.”

He welcomed the prognostication by critics that the Taliban fighters will simply hunker down until next July in order to strike after U.S. troops start leaving, saying: “We will be there with a lot of troops.”

The purpose is to ensure stability in order to turn over control to the Afghan government and people, not to embark on nationwide reconstruction, Gates said.

U.S. efforts will focus on “those civilian efforts and governance that help us in our security objectives,” he said.

Adm. Mike Mullen, the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that the main goal is to prevent Afghanistan from again becoming a safe haven for al Qaeda.

Even though CIA Director Leon Panetta has said only 50 to 100 al Qaeda figures remain in Afghanistan, Mullen made clear that a hard fight remains to enable the Afghan government to defeat Taliban insurgents who harbored al Qaeda in the past.

“We’re at a point now where over the course of the next 12 months, it really is going to, I think, tell the tale which way this is going to go,” Mullen said, later adding: “Certainly the longterm goal is to make sure that, with respect to the population in Afghanistan, that there’s a governance structure that treats its people well. … But to say exactly how that’s going to look and what specifics would be involved, I think it’s just way too early.”

Influential Democrats, meanwhile, signaled the growing impatience in their ranks for a war effort that continues to inflict an economic and human toll.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told the ABC program that she hopes that next year’s withdrawal brings home more than the “couple of thousand” troops Biden had predicted.

At the same time, Pelosi acknowledged “it’s not going to be turn out the lights and let’s all go home in one day.”

Democratic Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts told CNN that Obama was determined to bring the conflict to a new phase that allows a U.S. drawdown.

“He is also determined not to undermine his own effort and not to undermine the military effort on the ground, and the sacrifice that our troops have made,” Kerry said. “The president is not going to suddenly pull the rug out from under the very efforts that we’ve all been engaged in over these years. That would be folly. And I don’t see him doing that.”

Graham, who has sided with Democrats on some issues, expressed concern that some anti-war elements of both the political left and right could undermine the war effort.

“You know what I worry most about: an unholy alliance between the right and the left,” Graham said. “That there are some Republicans who are not going to take a, you know, do-or-die attitude for Obama’s war. There are some Republicans that want to make this Obama’s war. … There will be some Republicans saying you can’t win because of the July 2011 withdrawal date, he’s made it impossible for us to win, so why should we throw good money after bad?”

Graham added that liberals could also refuse to back the president’s plans in Afghanistan.

“You’ve got people on the left who are mad with the president because he is doing exactly what [former President George W.] Bush did and we’re in a war we can’t win,” Graham said, adding: “My concern is that, for different reasons, they join forces and we lose the ability to hold this thing together.”

Midterms put focus on Afghan draw-down

Mullen: WikiLeaks may have blood on hands

Washington (CNN) — The top U.S. military officer said Thursday that Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, was risking lives to make a political point by publishing thousands of military reports from Afghanistan.

“Mr. Assange can say whatever he likes about the greater good he thinks he and his source are doing, but the truth is they might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family,” Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at a news conference at the Pentagon.

In equally stern comments and at the same session, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said the massive leak will have significant impact on troops and allies, giving away techniques and procedures.

“The battlefield consequences of the release of these documents are potentially severe and dangerous for our troops, our allies and Afghan partners, and may well damage our relationships and reputation in that key part of the world,” Gates said. “Intelligence sources and methods, as well as military tactics, techniques and procedures will become known to our adversaries.”

Gates said the United States has been contacted by Afghanistan, Pakistan and “other governments” concerned about the leak. One of the lasting impacts, he said, is rebuilding trust that the U.S. military can keep secrets secret.

Assange has refused to say where his whistle-blower website got about 91,000 United States documents about the war. Some 76,000 of them were posted on the site Sunday in what has been called the biggest leak since the Pentagon Papers about the Vietnam War.

“I spent most of my life in the intelligence business, where the sacrosanct principle is protecting your sources. And that involves your sources trusting you to protect them and to protect their identities,” Gates said. “That is one of the worst aspects of this, as far as I’m concerned. Will people trust us? Will people’s whose lives are on the line trust us to keep their identities secret? Will other governments trust us to keep their documents and their intelligence secret?”

Gates said he called the FBI director to partner with the Pentagon in investigating the leak.

The defense secretary said the Pentagon is also reviewing procedures for handling classified information, which could affect the flow of valuable information to troops.

“In the wake of this incident, it will be a real challenge to strike the right balance between security and providing our frontline troops the information they need,” Gates said. “We want those soldiers in a forward operating base to have all the information they possibly can have that impacts on their own security but also being able to accomplish their mission.”

Perhaps surprisingly, the defense secretary said it was “only very recently” that he was made aware of the magnitude of the number of documents” that had been leaked. One of the main suspects in the current document leak investigation, according to military officials, had been arrested back in the spring and eventually charged with downloading thousands of documents and a video of a 2007 airstrike in Iraq that was published earlier this year by WikiLeaks.

Gates said the defense department did not know how many more documents were out there.

“The reality is, at this point, we don’t know how many more there are out there … it could be a substantial additional number of documents, and we have no idea what their content is, either,” he said.

For those put at risk by the documents, the defense secretary said the U.S. has a “moral obligation” to protect those whose names appear in the documents.

WikiLeaks’ founder has said the organization held back thousands of documents in order to redact information that could put people at risk. But CNN’s own review of documents found instances of names of informants and those who cooperated against the Taliban, as well as names of suspected insurgents who were being watched.

Mullen: WikiLeaks may have blood on hands