Cheney Ran an "Executive Assassination Ring?"

[Rohirrim]

WTF? Looks like the CIA covering up the waterboarding was actually a deflection from more serious issues.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/09/was-the-cia-hiding-cheney_n_228864.html

[cutthemdown]

Yeah we talked about this before.

Who cares anyways, I want the CIA to be killing our enemies.

I have no fear that a vice pres will order me murdered by the CIA, or any of you either.

Russia does it also, if CIA plays nice they will lose.

[spdirty]

Why in the hell do you bltch and moan and plss about someone else using a heritage foundation source, completely ignoring the content of what was said in that other thread then you ****ing come back with a damn huffington post source claiming Cheney was in some assassination ring? Dipshlt.

[Rohirrim]

Why in the hell do you bltch and moan and plss about someone else using a heritage foundation source when you ****ing come back with a damn huffington post source claiming Cheney was in some assassination ring? Dipshlt.

The difference with mine, asshat, is that I put a question mark on it. For you illiterate troglodytes out there, that means it is a questionable statement where you read the sources and decide for yourself. To make that point even clearer, I put the "WTF?" Sorry that didn't get through to you. Next time, I'll use pictures. Besides, the other quoted sources are Seymour Hersh and the NY Times. Personally, I would require a lot more evidence before I bought the whole story, but what they have so far is good enough for an congressional investigation, IMHO.

[Rohirrim]

Yeah we talked about this before.

Who cares anyways, I want the CIA to be killing our enemies.

I have no fear that a vice pres will order me murdered by the CIA, or any of you either.

Russia does it also, if CIA plays nice they will lose.

How many of our ideals and laws do we violate before we aren't worth a ****?

[barryr]

Why in the hell do you bltch and moan and plss about someone else using a heritage foundation source, completely ignoring the content of what was said in that other thread then you ****ing come back with a damn huffington post source claiming Cheney was in some assassination ring? Dipshlt.

Because any source that says anything they don't like or agree with, the credibility must be attacked. Meanwhile they get crap off known lefty blog sites and believe it as Gospel. Just showing their continual hypocrisy is all.

[cutthemdown]

How many of our ideals and laws do we violate before we aren't worth a ****?

Hmm I don't think like that really. I mean the countries ideals have changed over time don't you think? IMO the USA has always been willing to do what it has to to insure American power and safety. I think that ideal outweighs things like the CIA killing someone they deem dangerous to our country.

What ideals did we use when we took land from Indians? What ideals do we use when we abort a baby? a life that will never get a chance?

[Rohirrim]

Hmm I don't think like that really. I mean the countries ideals have changed over time don't you think? IMO the USA has always been willing to do what it has to to insure American power and safety. I think that ideal outweighs things like the CIA killing someone they deem dangerous to our country.

What ideals did we use when we took land from Indians? What ideals do we use when we abort a baby? a life that will never get a chance?

I don't think our ideals have changed. I think our leadership has become corrupt. The Declaration was, IMO, a statement of ideals. I don't know if we've ever lived up to them yet, but as long as we keep trying, and keep that goal out there, we're on the right path. What's wrong is when our leaders mouth the words but no longer believe the message. That kind of cynicism will kill us faster than any external enemies. Yes, maybe the CIA does have to take out enemies who are committed to doing us harm, but the idea that the VP of the U.S. might be picking targets makes me highly uncomfortable. That is the crossing of so many lines...

[Smiling Assassin27]

How many of our ideals and laws do we violate before we aren't worth a ****?

Ask your President. Ha!

[Rohirrim]

Ask your President. Ha!

Honestly, Bush was such a foul example of bad governance, Obama couldn't come close, not to say I'm a big Obama supporter.

[Rigs11]

Yeah we talked about this before.

Who cares anyways, I want the CIA to be killing our enemies.

I have no fear that a vice pres will order me murdered by the CIA, or any of you either.

Russia does it also, if CIA plays nice they will lose.

Hilarious! So if our economic principles are somewhat like russia's were it's bad, but if the CIA's are it's ok?

[Miss I.]

Yeah we talked about this before.

Who cares anyways, I want the CIA to be killing our enemies.

I have no fear that a vice pres will order me murdered by the CIA, or any of you either.

Russia does it also, if CIA plays nice they will lose.

Do we really want to set Russia up as our example of how to behave? How well has it worked out for them really? The communist government that engaged in that behavior and much worse (the former USSR occupied countries still have their hate on well and good for the former soviet republic) collapsed. They bankrupted and destroyed their country. The KGB is possibly one of the most vile organizations ever established. I was just in Russia and let me tell you, while I found it fascinating to have the opportunity to vist a country once our sworn and deadly enemy, and the beautiful sites built by the aristocracy and churches quite beautiful, the majority of it's people live in poverty. St. Petersburg is as much known for it's pickpockets as it's tourist and other industries (ship building, etc). Chernobyl (not I went there, but I have read about it) is still a disaster leaching poisons into the soil because a corrupt government didn't give any more of a crap about it's people then did the aristocracy before them. So let me just say, we don't want to be like Russia, it didn't work all that well for them. We can sit in here and bitch and moan and yell about our government and have the freedom to know we won't be destroyed for it. Those people still walk softly through sadly impoverished city streets. And if our CIA becomes like Russia's police or KGB, we are done as any kind of American having any freedom or being an actual citizen and we will be loathed the world over in a way we only think we are now. There is a difference between being a bully and being strong, it's a fine line we have to walk if we want to be really conscientious citizens both at home and of the world.

[mhgaffney]

Check out the latest update on this -- posted at Raw Story.

Don't miss the video interview with Rep Eshoo -- who is calling for a bipartisan investigation.

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/07/10/lawmaker-wont-deny-cia-program-was-cheney-assassination-ring/

[mhgaffney]

It looks like Cheney may have been running his own private death squad.

[cutthemdown]

I don't think our ideals have changed. I think our leadership has become corrupt. The Declaration was, IMO, a statement of ideals. I don't know if we've ever lived up to them yet, but as long as we keep trying, and keep that goal out there, we're on the right path. What's wrong is when our leaders mouth the words but no longer believe the message. That kind of cynicism will kill us faster than any external enemies. Yes, maybe the CIA does have to take out enemies who are committed to doing us harm, but the idea that the VP of the U.S. might be picking targets makes me highly uncomfortable. That is the crossing of so many lines...

I don't like Cheney a whole lot either, but if I was President I could see myself saying I don't want to hear about that stuff unless its needed. I'm sure it is dirty business. As far as Miss Ind saying we shouldn't use Russia as our model. IMO that is putting words in my mouth. I said Russia does it, if we don't, then we could end up being the ones having important people we count on murdered. You really can't play nice in the international world of intelligence gathering.

I don't know who it was Cheney ordered killed, if he did it at all, so how can I comment. What happens when you guys find out the people they whacked were bad bad killers of Americans? Or some guy in Somalia responsible for killing our marines? Or some guy who helped out people who bombed the cole? or some big international drug dealer that lives in come country above the law?

Anyone who thinks we haven't been doing things like that for a long long time in naive.

[cutthemdown]

So they are saying know today it was a program targeting Al Queda operatives and leaders. They never actually pulled it off. Seriously you people really have a problem with that?

[TailgateNut]

So they are saying know today it was a program targeting Al Queda operatives and leaders. They never actually pulled it off. Seriously you people really have a problem with that?

If that's all it was, no biggie. I suspect there more than meets the ear (eye).

[Doggcow]

If that's all it was, no biggie. I suspect there more than meets the ear (eye).

Transformer murder conspiracy!

[gyldenlove]

It is funny how people are all up in arms about how holy the constitution is when it comes to the owning guns or teaching creationism, but when the vice president takes a huge dump all over it, it is just business.

Make up your minds, either you consider the constitution and outdated allegorical philosophical text about how things should be and you have to find actual arguments for why you want things to be that way, or you have to come down hard on people like Cheney who put it in the blender and hit Frappe. This dilly-dallying is so undignified.

[TailgateNut]

It is funny how people are all up in arms about how holy the constitution is when it comes to the owning guns or teaching creationism, but when the vice president takes a huge dump all over it, it is just business.

Make up your minds, either you consider the constitution and outdated allegorical philosophical text about how things should be and you have to find actual arguments for why you want things to be that way, or you have to come down hard on people like Cheney who put it in the blender and hit Frappe. This dilly-dallying is so undignified.

It's no different than their interpretation of the Bible. Whatever fits their current agenda.

[Bob]

The difference with mine, asshat, is that I put a question mark on it. For you illiterate troglodytes out there, that means it is a questionable statement where you read the sources and decide for yourself. To make that point even clearer, I put the "WTF?" Sorry that didn't get through to you. Next time, I'll use pictures. Besides, the other quoted sources are Seymour Hersh and the NY Times. Personally, I would require a lot more evidence before I bought the whole story, but what they have so far is good enough for an congressional investigation, IMHO.

That's fair -- What do you know about Seymour Hersh? I dont think I would put this stuff beyond the Bush Admin...

[cutthemdown]

If that's all it was, no biggie. I suspect there more than meets the ear (eye).

Right I agree. If it was people that didn't deserve it, or elected leaders of other countries then we have a problem. But if it was terrorists then who really cares?

I do think Cheney's name being linked to makes people worry more, because he comes off as cold and evil even to republicans.

[TailgateNut]

because he comes off as cold and evil even to republicans.


Comes off as cold and EVIL???

He's EVIL personafied! He a modern day Hitler.

[cutthemdown]

Comes off as cold and EVIL???

He's EVIL personafied! He a modern day Hitler.

You say things every once in awhile just so off base you lose people and they ignore the good points you make.

Hitler, cmon, Cheney never had that much power. Saddam way better example of someone who thought Hitler was the greatest.

[elsid13]

more to the story

Officials: CIA program targeted al-Qaida leaders

<cite class="vcard"> By PAMELA HESS, Associated Press Writer Pamela Hess, Associated Press Writer </cite> <abbr title="2009-07-13T11:10:38-0700" class="recenttimedate">2 hrs 46 mins ago</abbr>
<!-- end .byline --> <iframe style="display: none;" id="yui-gen0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" frameborder="0"></iframe>

WASHINGTON – A secret intelligence program canceled by CIA Director Leon Panetta in June was meant to find and then capture or kill al-Qaida leaders at close range rather than target them with air strikes that risked civilian casualties, government officials with knowledge of the operation said Monday.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the program, said the spy agency's program never got off the ground.

Panetta canceled the effort on June 23 after learning of its existence, its failure to yield results, and the fact that Congress had been unaware of the program since its inception in 2001, according to one official with direct knowledge of the plan.

That official said former President George W. Bush authorized killing al-Qaida leaders shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, and that Congress was made aware of that. However, the official said, Panetta also told members of Congress that according to notes that he had been given on the early months of the program, then-Vice President Dick Cheney directed the CIA not to inform Congress of the specifics of the secret program.

Panetta told the committees there was no indication that there was anything illegal or inappropriate about the effort itself, the official said.

CIA directors since 2001 agreed with Cheney's decision not to inform Congress because the highly classified operation, described as "sporadic" and "embryonic," never managed to turn up the intelligence needed to carry out a kill and was not considered a covert operation, according to a former intelligence official. That official also was not authorized to discuss the program and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Congress has a right to know everything the CIA does, but the president can by law limit those told about covert operations to just the top four members of the House and Senate from the two parties and the senior members of the intelligence committees. Democrats on the House intelligence committee are pushing for a legal provision that would require the president to brief both committees in their entirety more often, but the White House has threatened to veto the move.

The Wall Street Journal, anonymously citing former intelligence officials, first reported Monday that the secret program was a plan to kill or capture al-Qaida operatives. The Journal's sources said the plan was an attempt to carry out a presidential finding authorized in 2001 by President George W. Bush.

The Journal said the agency spent money on planning and maybe some training for the highly classified effort, but it never became fully operational.

Most attempts to kill al-Qaida's leaders, believed to be hiding in Pakistan's troubled western border region, use armed drones because it is difficult terrain controlled by sometimes hostile armed tribes. But those strikes have sometimes killed and injured innocent civilians and have caused outrage in Pakistan.

The government official said the CIA effort was meant to avoid such collateral damage.

Panetta revealed the CIA program to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees in emergency briefings he called June 24 and told them he had begun an internal inquiry to determine why Congress — and he — had not been told sooner.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_cia_concealment

[TailgateNut]

You say things every once in awhile just so off base you lose people and they ignore the good points you make.

Hitler, cmon, Cheney never had that much power. Saddam way better example of someone who thought Hitler was the greatest.

I consider him to be the most evil VP to preside during my lifetime which spans almost 5 decades. His actions may not have been quite as bad as Hitler, but was just as evil.

[Rohirrim]

Cheney discovered a broad range of vice-presidential authority that isn't found in the Constitution. I guess you could say he was an "activist" VP. ;D

[cutthemdown]

I consider him to be the most evil VP to preside during my lifetime which spans almost 5 decades. His actions may not have been quite as bad as Hitler, but was just as evil.

Not quite as bad as probably the most evil leader the world has seen? Yeah that makes sense.

[Miss I.]

Not quite as bad as probably the most evil leader the world has seen? Yeah that makes sense.

Stalin would put up a fight for worst leader of all time I am thinking, particularly as that country is still reeling from the damage inflicted not only by him but the regimes to follow.

As for Cheney, he's quite possibly the most manipulative, devious leader the US has had in charge for a while, but the worst of the world of all time, don't think that would be accurate.

[cutthemdown]

Stalin would put up a fight for worst leader of all time I am thinking, particularly as that country is still reeling from the damage inflicted not only by him but the regimes to follow.

As for Cheney, he's quite possibly the most manipulative, devious leader the US has had in charge for a while, but the worst of the world of all time, don't think that would be accurate.

Yeah Stalin was different from Hitler, but just as ruthless and cruel. Probably a lot smarter then Hitler though. Stalin though like Hitler had a convoluted structure to his govt because he didn't trust anyone.

Also Pol Pot was really bad.

Cheney may be a cold, and like you said a manipulator, but his statement that he is like hitler IMO shows how stupid his points are.

You can't even have a good argument with him because he goes off and such a tangent. Cheney probably the most powerful VP in us history, I will agree with that. He turned the office of VP into a power spot, where before it really wasn't.

[Miss I.]

Yeah Stalin was different from Hitler, but just as ruthless and cruel. Probably a lot smarter then Hitler though. Stalin though like Hitler had a convoluted structure to his govt because he didn't trust anyone.

Also Pol Pot was really bad.

Cheney may be a cold, and like you said a manipulator, but his statement that he is like hitler IMO shows how stupid his points are.

You can't even have a good argument with him because he goes off and such a tangent. Cheney probably the most powerful VP in us history, I will agree with that. He turned the office of VP into a power spot, where before it really wasn't.

Actually Cheney reminds me of Nixon and not in a good way. I don't like him and I don't like the direction we went in for 8 years and I don't like the VP undermining the President's power with his own. That is not a good thing and I wouldn't doubt to some degree that doesn't help Obama coming out the gate, who with his youth and less experience and yes the race will be an issue too, is already going to find it difficult. Cheney is maybe not evil, at the very least was not good for this country.

[cutthemdown]

Well future VP will appreciate the added power he bestowed on them. Obama picking Biden just shows he agrees with VP being a spot of power.

You just don't see the Dan Quayle choices anymore.

Whatever about Cheney though, IMO he hasn't damaged the country. He just obviously was called upon to do Bush's dirty work.

[Rohirrim]

"Congress has no oversight of it. It’s an executive assassination ring essentially, and it’s been going on and on and on," Hersh said at the time. He added: "Under President Bush’s authority, they’ve been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving. That’s been going on, in the name of all of us."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-07-14/the-man-who-knew-cheneys-secret/

He also reports these were not working CIA agents, but retired CIA and military personnel carrying out kill orders for Cheney.

Cheney as Colonel Kurtz? Hmmmm. ;D

[Miss I.]

Well future VP will appreciate the added power he bestowed on them. Obama picking Biden just shows he agrees with VP being a spot of power.

You just don't see the Dan Quayle choices anymore.

Whatever about Cheney though, IMO he hasn't damaged the country. He just obviously was called upon to do Bush's dirty work.

No Dan Quayle choices? Really, kind of think Palin was in that vein (though that may have hurt McCain). And VP's have had considerable power before this. Kennedy never would have been elected without Lyndon Johnson on the ticket. Johnson had way more influence and power in Washington then Kennedy. And Nixon was a very powerful VP. Whatever, it is what it is. We'll see how well Obama does. I hope for the best.

[cutthemdown]

Hard for me to fault Bush JR, I lost job under Clinton, made a comeback under Bush and was making the most money I ever had. So a lot of it is from your own perspective. I struggled when Clinton was President but it probably wasn't his fault. I just got caught up in the outsourcing thing.

[cutthemdown]

Also Palin in my opinion different from Quale. Much different in fact. True she was unknown to most of the USA, she has that in common. But she was chosen because McCain didn't do well with religious people. In reality she was the church choice.

In reality McCain had no chance to win. We had minorities voting for Obama in droves no matter what, and basically a guy in McCain who didn't get the conservatives very excited. The election was lost way before November came around.

[Miss I.]

Also Palin in my opinion different from Quale. Much different in fact. True she was unknown to most of the USA, she has that in common. But she was chosen because McCain didn't do well with religious people. In reality she was the church choice.

In reality McCain had no chance to win. We had minorities voting for Obama in droves no matter what, and basically a guy in McCain who didn't get the conservatives very excited. The election was lost way before November came around.


Well, the reason I see her aligned with Quayle is the persona she brought. Though I dont' actually think she's stupid, anymore then I thought Quayle was actually stupid, they both came across that way. She, however, I think might be more deliberately manipulative then Quayle, He reminds me a lot of Bush Jr, easily maniuplated figurehead type. Cheney to me always seemed to be the real power in this presidency, not Bush.

8 years ago I wanted McCain, but things have changed a lot. And you were right, I think McCain never had a shot, but I think he did that to himself. He used to be a Maverick, but seemingly sold out during the 8 years under Bush to get on the ticket. I don't think the Republicans wanted him to win because he isn't conservative enough. I used to like him specifically because he wasn't so tied to it. Oh well, we'll see how it goes.

[elsid13]

<cite class="vcard"> By PAMELA HESS, Associated Press Writer Pamela Hess, Associated Press Writer </cite> – <abbr title="2009-07-14T13:05:35-0700" class="recenttimedate">55 mins ago

</abbr>
<!-- end .byline --> WASHINGTON – The House Intelligence Committee has asked the CIA to provide documents about the now-canceled program to target al-Qaida leaders, congressional officials said Tuesday. The move is a precursor to what will almost certainly become a full-blown investigation into the secret operation and why the program was not disclosed to Congress, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.


CIA Director Leon Panetta told Congress on June 24 that he had canceled the effort to kill al-Qaida leaders with hit teams soon after learning about the operation. Panetta also told lawmakers that former Vice President Dick Cheney directed the CIA not to inform Congress of the specifics of the secret program.


Intelligence officials say the operation never progressed passed a planning stage and therefore didn't merit congressional notification.


President George W. Bush authorized the killing of al-Qaida leaders in 2001. Congress was aware of that notification.


A congressional official said the secret CIA program was meant to carry out ground attacks. Most attempts to kill al-Qaida's leaders, believed to be hiding in Pakistan's troubled western border region, have used armed drone aircraft because it is difficult terrain controlled by sometimes hostile tribes. But those strikes have sometimes killed and injured innocent civilians and caused outrage in Pakistan.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090714/ap_on_go_co/us_cia_secret_program

[Rohirrim]

Now, there are key differences between Hersh's reporting and the Times' latest piece. Hersh suggested that the assassination ring was conducted out of the Joint Special Operations Command rather than the CIA. Moreover, according to Hersh's sources the program was operational, leaving a trail of bodies, while The Times cited officials saying that the CIA hit squad never actually carried out a mission. The Times and Hersh could conceivably be reporting two distinct squads.

[elsid13]

Now, there are key differences between Hersh's reporting and the Times' latest piece. Hersh suggested that the assassination ring was conducted out of the Joint Special Operations Command rather than the CIA. Moreover, according to Hersh's sources the program was operational, leaving a trail of bodies, while The Times cited officials saying that the CIA hit squad never actually carried out a mission. The Times and Hersh could conceivably be reporting two distinct squads.

What I don't like how this is being reported, is how it makes the soldiers,sailors, marines and agents sound like murderous cowboys. Those guys were operating under legal orders removing enemies of the United States and protecting the country.

People are saying this about removal of individuals, but in truth this about congressional oversight and reporting.

[NUB]

Now, there are key differences between Hersh's reporting and the Times' latest piece. Hersh suggested that the assassination ring was conducted out of the Joint Special Operations Command rather than the CIA. Moreover, according to Hersh's sources the program was operational, leaving a trail of bodies, while The Times cited officials saying that the CIA hit squad never actually carried out a mission. The Times and Hersh could conceivably be reporting two distinct squads.

That's really irrelevant.

The issue here is a Vice-President working outside the bounds of the Constitution/American law.

http://www.dvorak.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/cartoon20070625.gif

[watermock]

Cheney had balls.
Obama is A WIMP.

[TailgateNut]

Cheney had balls.
Obama is A WIMP.


.....and you're an ass.

[Rohirrim]

Cheney had balls.
Obama is A WIMP.

Plus, he was a lying, conniving, criminal SOB - a perfect representative of the "new" America.

[Rohirrim]

What I don't like how this is being reported, is how it makes the soldiers,sailors, marines and agents sound like murderous cowboys. Those guys were operating under legal orders removing enemies of the United States and protecting the country.

People are saying this about removal of individuals, but in truth this about congressional oversight and reporting.

"Legal" orders? How easily you lap that up. Oh, and "removing enemies?" How do you know who they were removing? Isn't that the problem? Hersh reports we had "retired" CIA and military personnel killing people on orders from the VP's office. What part of that could possibly be legal? Are we now so stupid that the government can simply say, "We were killing terrorists" and everybody nods like a bunch of sheep? How does Congress know who was doing what, and who was being killed, if the VP decides he doesn't have to tell anybody? What this reminds me of more than anything is Colonel Kurtz employing "unsound methods." The fact that Congress won't do anything about it is just one more death knell for this republic.

[elsid13]

"Legal" orders? How easily you lap that up. Oh, and "removing enemies?" How do you know who they were removing? Isn't that the problem? Hersh reports we had "retired" CIA and military personnel killing people on orders from the VP's office. What part of that could possibly be legal? Are we now so stupid that the government can simply say, "We were killing terrorists" and everybody nods like a bunch of sheep? How does Congress know who was doing what, and who was being killed, if the VP decides he doesn't have to tell anybody? What this reminds me of more than anything is Colonel Kurtz employing "unsound methods." The fact that Congress won't do anything about it is just one more death knell for this republic.

I believe they were legal orders because of the following reasons:

1. Because, people in both the CIA and SOCOM have policy shops that vet all directives. There are number of command and control processes in place that ensure everyone ass is covered. Legal council is always brought into the things. This isn't Tom Clancy novel were president order something and policy shop/legal council aren't involved.
2. I know that we don't have number of blood soaked thugs protecting us from threats. While there have a few outliers, most of the folks in uniform have been trained in ethical behavior and act honorable. They are not mindless robots as some make them out to be.
3. If operations did occur then you are correct vetted members of Congress should have been informed. But if no action occurred then executive branch has the right not to provide working papers on any program. There is large amount of case law on that.

[BroncoLifer]

Now, there are key differences between Hersh's reporting and the Times' latest piece. Hersh suggested that the assassination ring was conducted out of the Joint Special Operations Command rather than the CIA. Moreover, according to Hersh's sources the program was operational, leaving a trail of bodies, while The Times cited officials saying that the CIA hit squad never actually carried out a mission. The Times and Hersh could conceivably be reporting two distinct squads.

Or Hersh's reporting could conceivably be full of **** -- which wouldn't be the first time. He is the Geraldo Rivera of print journalism. Are you familiar with Arthur Schlesinger's assessment of him?

[Rohirrim]

Or Hersh's reporting could conceivably be full of **** -- which wouldn't be the first time. He is the Geraldo Rivera of print journalism. Are you familiar with Arthur Schlesinger's assessment of him?

True. In which case a Congressional investigation should clear it all up real quickly. If it's not true, then no harm, no foul.

[SleepingTiger]

Plus, he was a lying, conniving, criminal SOB - a perfect representative of the "new" America.

i agree about the lying and conniving part, but in no way is Obama a criminal.

[BroncoLifer]

True. In which case a Congressional investigation should clear it all up real quickly. If it's not true, then no harm, no foul.

Disagree. If all we have is Hersh's reporting citing unnamed sources, then we've established (or reinforced) the precedent of starting a Congessional fishing expedition in the absence of probable cause. Not too different from the actions of the House Un-American Activitites Committee in that respect.

Earlier, you wrote this: "Personally, I would require a lot more evidence before I bought the whole story, but what they have so far is good enough for an congressional investigation, IMHO."

You seem to have a low bar for what's good enough for a congressional investigation. Unless, of course, you value politics over due process.

[cutthemdown]

It is funny how people are all up in arms about how holy the constitution is when it comes to the owning guns or teaching creationism, but when the vice president takes a huge dump all over it, it is just business.

Make up your minds, either you consider the constitution and outdated allegorical philosophical text about how things should be and you have to find actual arguments for why you want things to be that way, or you have to come down hard on people like Cheney who put it in the blender and hit Frappe. This dilly-dallying is so undignified.

what part of the constitution is violated when the VP is the white house contact when CIA briefs the admin on a covert operation? They say this one not big enough to warrant notifying congress. Aren't laws like that just that laws, and not really written into the constitution?

Tell me what ideal in our Constitution was so badly damaged or broken by not notifying congress of this covert operation?

[Bronco Bob]

Tenet canceled secret CIA hit teams.


WASHINGTON – As CIA director in 2004, George Tenet terminated a secret program to develop hit teams to kill al-Qaida leaders,
but his successors resurrected the plan, according to former intelligence officials.

Tenet ended the program because the agency could not work out its practical details, the officials told The Associated Press.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the classified program.

Porter Goss, who replaced Tenet in 2005, restarted the program, the former officials said.
By the time Michael Hayden succeeded Goss as CIA chief in 2006 the effort was again flagging because of practical challenges.

CIA Director Leon Panetta drove the final stake into the effort in June after learning about the program.
He called an emergency meeting with the House and Senate Intelligence committees the next day,
informing lawmakers about the program and saying that as vice president Dick Cheney had directed the CIA not to inform Congress about the operation.

The CIA declined to comment on the officials' comments.

One former senior intelligence official said Wednesday that the idea never quite died because it was a capability —
the details of which remain classified — that the CIA wanted in its arsenal. But as time wore on, the official said, its need became less urgent.

Another former official said that the CIA's reliance on foreign intelligence services and on drone-launched missile strikes
proved over time to be less risky yet effective in targeting al-Qaida chiefs for death or capture. President George W. Bush authorized the killing of al-Qaida leaders in 2001.

According to one congressional official, the agency spent more than $1 million over the eight years that
the CIA considered launching the hit teams. The official would not detail the exact amount or how it was spent.

The House Intelligence Committee is laying the groundwork for a possible investigation of the program and its concealment
from Congress. In late June it asked the CIA to provide documents about the now-canceled program to kill al-Qaida leaders.

Agency officials say it is complying with the request. Panetta has at the same time ordered a thorough internal review of the program.

The committee will try to establish how much was spent on the effort, whether any training was conducted and whether any officials
traveled in association with the program, a committee official said.
Those factors would determine whether the program had progressed enough to require congressional notification.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, is expected to decide as early as this week
whether to press ahead with a full investigation.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090715/ap_on_go_ot/us_cia_secret_program

[frerottenextelway]

Yeah we talked about this before.

Who cares anyways, I want the CIA to be killing our enemies.

I have no fear that a vice pres will order me murdered by the CIA, or any of you either.

Russia does it also, if CIA plays nice they will lose.

It's great that you see America as a moral equivalent to Russia and have no problems with that.

[SPfloppy]

"Asshat"? "Dip****"? Wow calm down guys.

For me I always figured this was happening anyway and didn't care enough to bother to check up on it. Now that it's out in the open I wish they didn't have to worry about congressional BS interfering with good buisiness. This is a war. If you don't fight on the offensive you will always be behind and on the defense. That logic will lead to your enemy dictating the pace of the fight and you stay behind. Then once they've gotten enough confidence and experience from kicking your ass in every corner of the world they will likely be ready enough to throw you a knockout punch on your doorstep. So I say let the spooks kill em. A bullet behind the ear is alot less painful than waterboarding

[alkemical]

http://www.alternet.org/rights/141337/it%27s_wasn%27t_only_cheney_who_had_assassination_ programs:_clinton_did_it,_and_obama_does_it,_too/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=alternet

It's Wasn't Only Cheney Who Had Assassination Programs: Clinton Did It, and Obama Does It, Too

[SPfloppy]

^Thanx buddy

[alkemical]

It wasn't for you - i just happened to see it my RSS feeds.

[SPfloppy]

Geez pay a guy a compliment and you get a mild version of mind your own bizness. Ok man sorry

[alkemical]

I just want to be clear, it's not that i'm picking sides or for anyone's argument...that's more or less it.

I haven't been keeping up with the thread as a whole.

Nothing personal, just wanted to be clear.

[SPfloppy]

coo

[cutthemdown]

It's great that you see America as a moral equivalent to Russia and have no problems with that.

You think Presidents don't have people killed? You are just naive. It's why we do it that makes it moral to our values. We don't see killing a terrorist as immoral. If you do fine but I know the President doesn't.

You think Obama hasn't already killed people? The CIA probably using a missile as we speak to take out some guy walking his goat down to the terrorist meeting hut. What's the difference?

[BroncoLifer]

You think Presidents don't have people killed? You are just naive.

Didn't we all learn that from Michael Corleone?

[cutthemdown]

Didn't we all learn that from Michael Corleone?

Yep!!!!! We sure the **** did.

Just the other day the CIA launched some missiles into a funeral for some terrorists, and killed more terrorists. You think Obama hasn't approved that, or at least told whoever does they can approve it?

Meh who the **** cares kill em all.

[frerottenextelway]

You think Presidents don't have people killed? You are just naive. It's why we do it that makes it moral to our values. We don't see killing a terrorist as immoral. If you do fine but I know the President doesn't.

You think Obama hasn't already killed people? The CIA probably using a missile as we speak to take out some guy walking his goat down to the terrorist meeting hut. What's the difference?

It's my understanding that this program wasn't to ''kill terrorists'' (isn't that what the whole War on Terror is about?), but to kill "terrorist sympathizers" in ally countries, possibly including our homeland. And the Vice (Vice, wtf) President ordered the CIA to not inform Congress about this. If true, that is sick and explicity illegal in several ways.

But of course, nobody except Dick knows the details for sure. That's why this should be investigated, and if true, prosecuted.

[elsid13]

It's my understanding that this program wasn't to ''kill terrorists'' (isn't that what the whole War on Terror is about?), but to kill "terrorist sympathizers" in ally countries, possibly including our homeland. And the Vice (Vice, wtf) President ordered the CIA to not inform Congress about this. If true, that is sick and explicity illegal in several ways.

But of course, nobody except Dick knows the details for sure. That's why this should be investigated, and if true, prosecuted.

Once again, I think folks are getting caught up in internet bloggers' (who don't really know what going on) reports. The program was not as sinister as people are making it out to be. I believe it was program that never got off the ground due to a number of reasons.

WASHPOST article on what it was doing

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/15/AR2009071503856.html?sub=AR

[frerottenextelway]

Once again, I think folks are getting caught up in internet bloggers' (who don't really know what going on) reports. The program was not as sinister as people are making it out to be. I believe it was program that never got off the ground due to a number of reasons.

WASHPOST article on what it was doing

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/15/AR2009071503856.html?sub=AR

Two things:

1.) It's classified. So we don't know for sure. Not me, not you, not the WaPo.

2.) My description wasn't from bloggers. It was largely from the initial whistleblower on this (before the recent Pennetta/Congress leak) whose name completely escapes me at the moment.

Okay, three things... from that article... "The finding imposed no geographical limitations on the agency's actions".

[cutthemdown]

It's my understanding that this program wasn't to ''kill terrorists'' (isn't that what the whole War on Terror is about?), but to kill "terrorist sympathizers" in ally countries, possibly including our homeland. And the Vice (Vice, wtf) President ordered the CIA to not inform Congress about this. If true, that is sick and explicity illegal in several ways.

But of course, nobody except Dick knows the details for sure. That's why this should be investigated, and if true, prosecuted.

not true the cia operatives that briefed him know. Also didn't they say that many programs don't get reported to congress? seems there is a gray area that gives white house and cia some wiggle room.

Now from what I read the operatives said the program never amounted too much. Are they now saying that it was bigger, and actually carried out a bunch of killings?

You seem to think maybe some in our own country? seems to me what happens is if you want to defend it, your like me, believing it maybe wasn't a big deal, if you hate Bush and Cheney you go over board and picture them killing people all over the world that merely sent money to a terror group.

If anything things are going badly for Obama. His projections on unemployment are way off. His health care bill is facing problems, his speech on Israel and open palm to Iran resulted in more settlements and the worst Iranian crack down on human rights in 20 yrs.

N Korea firing missiles everywhere and a coup in Honduras the USA should probably support but doesn't have the balls to do it.

What better time then to drudge up the Bush era, everyones favorite scapegoat. Sounds like a bit of a democratic wag the dog to me.

If stimulus and the auto bailout had helped then I doubt we would be hearing about this. I don't believe for one minute that holder isn't doing exactly what Obama tells him to. They are like peas and carrots those 2.

[frerottenextelway]

Okay, I've taken the time to research to give references. Here you go. :)

not true the cia operatives that briefed him know. Also didn't they say that many programs don't get reported to congress? seems there is a gray area that gives white house and cia some wiggle room.

There is no wiggle room if Cheney ordered Congress not be told.

from the NYT

The Central Intelligence Agency withheld information about a secret counter terrorism program from Congress for eight years on direct orders from former Vice President Dick Cheney, the agency’s director, Leon E. Panetta, has told the Senate and House intelligence committees, two people with direct knowledge of the matter said Saturday


Now from what I read the operatives said the program never amounted too much. Are they now saying that it was bigger, and actually carried out a bunch of killings?

I don't know how far along the program got.

But....

From the Guardian:

The CIA apparently did not put the plan in to operation but the US military did, carrying out several assassinations including one in Kenya that proved to be a severe embarrassment and helped lead to the quashing of the programme.

and the New Yorker:

Under President Bush’s authority, they’ve been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving. That’s been going on, in the name of all of us.



You seem to think maybe some in our own country? seems to me what happens is if you want to defend it, your like me, believing it maybe wasn't a big deal, if you hate Bush and Cheney you go over board and picture them killing people all over the world that merely sent money to a terror group.

Here's from the WaPo above:

The finding imposed no geographical limitations on the agency's actions

Here's from the Guardian:

Dick Cheney, the former vice president, ordered a highly classified CIA operation hidden from Congress because it pushed the limits of legality by planning to assassinate of al-Qaida operatives in friendly countries without the knowledge of their governments, according to former intelligence officials.

There is more to this, but I can't find what I read/heard on a quick search, so I'll leave it at that.


If anything things are going badly for Obama. His projections on unemployment are way off. His health care bill is facing problems, his speech on Israel and open palm to Iran resulted in more settlements and the worst Iranian crack down on human rights in 20 yrs.

N Korea firing missiles everywhere and a coup in Honduras the USA should probably support but doesn't have the balls to do it.

What better time then to drudge up the Bush era, everyones favorite scapegoat. Sounds like a bit of a democratic wag the dog to me.

If stimulus and the auto bailout had helped then I doubt we would be hearing about this. I don't believe for one minute that holder isn't doing exactly what Obama tells him to. They are like peas and carrots those 2.

We're starting to experience positive GDP growth (which is what recessions are technically marked by, so we may not technically be in a recession anymore). Hopefully UE drops soon, although that'll probably begin in the first or second quarter of 2010 (right in time for the mid-term elections!!!).

But how absurd is it to point to the present day UER and blame Obama? It's a lagging indicator, and if you think about it, it's common sense. A company needs sustained growth before they begin to hire more people, so it takes time and a positive GDP first. Yeah, he was wrong on predicting on exactly how bad of a mess he was left. It was a bigger cluster**** left for him than he stated it was. Thank God we're turning that around though, I say (USA, USA, USA).

[elsid13]

not true the cia operatives that briefed him know. Also didn't they say that many programs don't get reported to congress? seems there is a gray area that gives white house and cia some wiggle room.



The way it works, is very simple. If the program is not active and in pre-decisional stage (i.e in the planning but not programming stages) then you don't have to tell Congress or anyone. There are many ideas/strategies that are discussed, researched and debated that never go further then that Department or Agency meeting rooms.

[Rohirrim]

The way it works, is very simple. If the program is not active and in pre-decisional stage (i.e in the planning but not programming stages) then you don't have to tell Congress or anyone. There are many ideas/strategies that are discussed, researched and debated that never go further then that Department or Agency meeting rooms.

I see. In other words, let's just believe whatever they tell us. :thumbsup:

[elsid13]

I see. In other words, let's just believe whatever they tell us. :thumbsup:

In national security not everyone gets to know everything. And the executive branch needs the freedom to explore ideas, policies and having open internal debate without having Congress staffers hovering over their shoulders.

If something was going on then top 4 Senators on Select Committee on Intelligence should have been informed, but if the program was in planning phase then CIA and WH didn't have to report anything.

[elsid13]

The top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee asserted Wednesday that Democrats are wrong when they say Congress was never informed about a now-canceled secret CIA program to assassinate terrorists.


"One of the things that all these smart guys ought to do is go back and take a look at the records that they have on the committee," said Senate Intelligence ranking member Christopher (Kit) Bond, R-Mo., taking aim at

Democrats in an interview Wednesday.


Democrats on the Senate and House Intelligence committees contend they did not learn about the classified program until CIA Director Leon Panetta informed them of it on June 24. Panetta said he only learned about it a day earlier and put an end to it, adding that former Vice President Dick Cheney told the CIA to keep it secret from Congress.


Several Democrats believe Congress should launch an investigation into the program, arguing that it is an example of how the CIA has repeatedly misled Congress.


But Bond disputed the Democrats' allegations about the program.
"We are looking at the Senate records. I've just looked at parts of them and I definitely don't think their accusations against [former] Vice President Cheney or the CIA hold water," he said. "Having looked at that I do not agree that this was never discussed with Congress."


Bond said Democrats has shown "no reluctance to tar the CIA" to give political cover to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who said in May that Congress had been misled.


Late Wednesday, Senate Intelligence Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., rejected Bond's claims."There is no evidence that the Senate Intelligence Committee was ever briefed on the existence, or specific aspects, of the program in question," Feinstein said. "I know of what [Bond] is speaking, and it does not reflect this program."


A senior Democratic House aide shot back. "Director Panetta told the committee that this matter had never been briefed to the committee in the past and the committee is reviewing its own records to confirm that and thus far has uncovered no record of ever having been briefed on this matter," the aide said.


Bond's remarks came as the Senate Intelligence Committee was weighing amendments to the fiscal 2010 intelligence authorization bill to increase the number of lawmakers who could be briefed on covert intelligence operations.


http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=43180&dcn=todaysnews

[mhgaffney]

In national security not everyone gets to know everything. And the executive branch needs the freedom to explore ideas, policies and having open internal debate without having Congress staffers hovering over their shoulders.

If something was going on then top 4 Senators on Select Committee on Intelligence should have been informed, but if the program was in planning phase then CIA and WH didn't have to report anything.

Someone hit this guy with a brick. In the head. Maybe the jolt will wake him up. (IT could kill him -- but from his statements that would be no great loss. His brain has already ceased to function = death.)

"Not everyone gets to know everything." How quaint.

But what about the elected representatives on the Senate and House Intelligence Committees? They are authorized to do legal oversight of the intelligence community (i.e., CIA).

Maybe elsid can explain why the CIA routinely lies to and deceives these folks-- who are empowered under law to do oversight.

One member of the Senate intel committee, Slade Gorton, later ended up on the 9/11 Commission -- He said he resigned from the Intel Committee because he never learned anything in committee that he hadn't already read in the Washington Post.

I did not say it. He said it.

[mhgaffney]

July 15, 2009

Mister Fixer

Cheney Sweating Bullets

By RAY McGOVERN

So far the summer has been mild in the Washington, D.C., area. But for former Vice President Dick Cheney the temperature is well over 100 degrees. He is sweating profusely, and it is becoming increasingly clear why.

Cheney has broken openly with former President George W. Bush on one issue of transcendent importance — to Cheney. For whatever reason, Bush decided not to hand out blanket pardons before they both rode off into the sunset.

Cheney has complained bitterly that his former chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, should have been pardoned, rather than simply having his jail sentence “commuted.” The former Vice President told the press that Bush left Libby "sort of hanging in the wind" by refusing to issue Libby a pardon before Bush left office. Libby had been convicted of perjury, obstruction of justice, and lying to federal agents investigating the leak of a former CIA operations officer's identity.

"I believe firmly that Scooter was unjustly accused and prosecuted and deserved a pardon, and the President disagreed with that," Cheney said. He would disclose no details of his efforts to lobby Bush on Libby's behalf, saying they would be "best left to history."

It is getting close to history time. You do not need to be a cracker-jack analyst to understand that Cheney is feeling betrayed — that he is thinking not of Libby, but of himself, and fearing that, if our system of justice works, he could be in for some serious, uncommuted jail time.

His situation has grown pathetic. Aside from the man himself, it has fallen almost solely to faithful daughter Liz to defend her dad and to start a political backfire to keep him out of prison. She is to be admired for her faithfulness. In the process, though, she has unwittingly given much away.

Liz on the Offensive

On Washington Times’ “America’s Morning News” radio program Monday, Liz acted again as designated hitter, responding to the recent New York Times report that her father had given “direct orders” to the CIA to withhold “information about a secret counterterrorism program for eight years.” Not for the first time, Liz Cheney disclosed what has her father so worried and agitated. She said he is “very angry” over recent press reports that Attorney General Eric Holder may be about to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Bush administration’s interrogation practices.

She branded this “shameful” — worse still, “un-American.” Not the interrogation practices, mind you, but the notion that her father should be held to account for them.

Typically, Ms. Cheney did well in sticking closely to her talking points, arguing that the issue is “somebody taking office and then starting to prosecute people who carried out policies that they disagreed with, you know, in the previous administration.” As if unprecedented decisions to torture, in violation of international law and the War Crimes Act of 1996, can be accurately described as “policies” over which there can be honest disagreement. This is about crimes, not “policies.”

Pulling out all the stops, Ms. Cheney worried aloud over what this does to “morale at the CIA,” where the practitioners of what Bush called “an alternative set of procedures” for interrogation were told they were acting with the blessing of the Justice Department.

Liz Cheney went on to argue that this could in the future inhibit CIA functionaries from various actions, out of fear of criminal liability. (Not a bad idea, it seems to me.)

The Decider

What has pretty much escaped notice in the Fawning Corporate Media (FCM) is that the former Vice President has also reminded us all that President Bush was the “decider.” That unusual word sounded quite macho as Bush strutted around and about reminding us regularly that he was also “commander in chief.” But now, it could be the kiss of death — for Bush, as well as for Cheney.

Here’s what Cheney allowed himself to tell Face the Nation’s Bob Schieffer about “enhanced interrogation techniques” on May 10:

SCHIEFFER: How much did President Bush know specifically about the methods that were being used? We know that you – and you have said – that you approved this…

CHENEY: Right.

SCHIEFFER: … somewhere down the line. Did President Bush know everything you knew?

CHENEY: I certainly, yes, have every reason to believe he knew — he knew a great deal about the program. He basically authorized it. I mean, this was a presidential-level decision. And the decision went to the President. He signed off on it.

Small wonder that Republicans are wincing, although the winces have been largely suppressed. The Washington Post reported recently that many Republicans now consider Cheney a major problem, but cannot say so.

The Post quoted one Republican strategist on the Cheney dilemma: “He continues to be a force among many members of our base, and while he is entirely unhelpful, no one has the standing to show him the door."

Spending four days in Dallas last week, I learned that George W. Bush continues to be a lofty hero among many folks there — with the notable exception of the hardy activists of the Dallas Peace Center and Code Pink. Hefty donations keep pouring in for his library and institute, and any “mistakes” that may have been made during the Bush/Cheney administration are laid at the door of the former Vice President.

Leading Republicans are passionate about this. And the phenomenon is not limited to Dallas. Cheney is smart enough to know that he, too, may soon be “sort of hanging in the wind” along with his former subordinate, Libby.

It’s Also About “Fixing” Intelligence

Approval of torture, assassination, warrantless eavesdropping — hey, there is quite enough to go on, and increasing signs that Cheney will be called on the carpet.

What we have been focusing on, however, glosses over Cheney’s key role in purveying lies to get our representatives in Congress to approve a war that qualifies for what the post-WWII Nuremberg Tribunal called the “supreme international crime” — a war of aggression.

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) were on to Cheney very early. Exactly six years ago, we took the unusual step of sending a formal recommendation to President Bush that he “ask for Cheney’s immediate resignation.”

Our unprecedented appeal even caught the eye of the FCM, since our Memorandum for the President reviewed some of the deceit engineered by the Vice President in concocting a rationale for war on Iraq and leading the cheerleading for it.

We noted that Cheney, skilled at preemption, had stolen a march on his vacationing colleagues by launching, in a major speech on Aug. 26, 2002, a meretricious campaign to persuade Congress and the American people that Iraq was about to acquire nuclear weapons. That campaign mushroomed, literally, in early October, with Bush and senior advisers raising the specter of a “mushroom cloud” threatening our cities. On the inside of the synthetic clouds one could almost read the label — “manufactured out of thin air in the Office of the Vice President.”

In his memoir, the pitiable former CIA Director George Tenet complains that Cheney’s assertion that Iraq would acquire nuclear weapons “fairly soon” did not square with the intelligence community’s assessment. Tenet adds, “I was surprised when I read about Cheney’s assertion that, ‘Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.’”

Tenet whines that the Vice President did not send him a copy of the speech for clearance. But the malleable CIA director quickly got over it, and told CIA analysts to compose the kind of National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that would provide ex post facto support for Cheney’s bogus assertions. Just what Cheney (and Bush) ordered.

Tenet explains lamely, “I should have told the Vice President privately that, in my view, his speech had gone too far ... and not let silence imply agreement.”

Yes, George; and you should have resisted White House pressure for a dishonest NIE to grease the skids to unnecessary war.

In fact Cheney, as well as Tenet, knew very well that Cheney’s assertions were lies.

How? Saddam’s son-in-law, Hussein Kamel, whom Saddam had put in charge of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, as well as missile development, told the United States when he defected in mid-1995 that all (that’s right, all) such weapons had been destroyed at his order by the summer of 1991.

And in mid-2002, the Iraqi foreign minister, whom CIA operatives had recruited and persuaded to remain in place, was telling us the same thing.

Unwelcome Intelligence

When they briefed the President and his senior advisers on this, CIA operations officers were astonished to learn first-hand that this intelligence was unwelcome. These officers, who had used every trick in the book to “turn” the foreign minister and get him working for us, were told that further reporting from this source was not needed: “This isn’t about intel anymore. This is about regime change,” they were told.

Tenet was hardly astonished at reports of the non-existence of WMD. From documentary evidence in the Downing Street Minutes we know that Tenet on July 20, 2002, told the chief of British intelligence that the intelligence was being “fixed” around the policy. And former UN inspectors like Scott Ritter could verify that some 90 percent of the WMD Iraq earlier possessed had been destroyed — some during the Gulf War in 1991, but most as a result of the inspections conducted by the UN.

The reporting from Hussein Kamel and the Iraqi foreign minister, sources with excellent access, was suppressed in favor of “evidence” — from forgeries, for example, like the infamous Iraq-Niger yellowcake report. When finally U.S. officials were forced to concede that the Iraq-Niger information was based on a forgery, lawmakers like Rep. Henry Waxman, D-California, protested loudly — but too late.

Three days before President Bush let slip the dogs of war, NBC’s Tim Russert braced Cheney with the assertion by the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that Saddam Hussein did not have a nuclear weapons program.

Cheney strongly disagreed and claimed support for his view from the CIA and other parts of the intelligence community. He even ratcheted up his bogus assessment of Iraq’s nuclear capability: “We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.”

We? Maybe his wife, Lynne, and Liz were on board for that judgment; few others believed it.

Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni, retired CENTCOM commander but still enjoying access to the most sensitive information on Iraq, was sitting in the audience on Aug. 26, 2002, and later described himself as astonished at the way Cheney hyped the Iraqi threat. And the most knowledgeable analysts — those who knew Iraq and nuclear weapons — scoffed at Cheney’s faith-based intelligence.

In our July 14, 2003, appeal to President Bush to ask for Cheney’s resignation, we warned of the likelihood that intelligence analysts would conclude that the best way to climb the ladder of success is to acquiesce in the cooking or “fixing” of their judgments, since neither senior nor junior officials would ever be held accountable.

This remains as acute a concern as the tolerance for torture and the like.

We shall have to demand that Attorney General Eric Holder do his duty and move quickly to start the process to hold accountable those responsible for dragging our country down into a moral abyss.

Ray McGovern was an Army officer and CIA analyst for almost 30 year. He now serves on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. He is a contributor to Imperial Crusades: Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, edited by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair (Verso). He can be reached at: rrmcgovern@aol.com

[alkemical]

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/Blog/?p=2616

Was Dr. David Kelly a Target of Dick Cheney’s “Executive Assassination Ring”?

Antifascist - July 17, 2009

Revelations that the Central Intelligence Agency launched a world-wide assassination program, and then concealed its existence from the U.S. Congress and the American people for eight years, carries an implication that death squads may have been employed against political opponents.

The Wall Street Journal reported July 13 that “A secret Central Intelligence Agency initiative terminated by Director Leon Panetta was an attempt to carry out a 2001 presidential authorization to capture or kill al Qaeda operatives, according to former intelligence officials familiar with the matter.”

Investigative journalist Siobhan Gorman writes, “The precise nature of the highly classified effort isn’t clear, and the CIA won’t comment on its substance.”

The Washington Post however, revealed July 16 that the assassination plan was sanctioned by President Bush. Unnamed “intelligence officials” told the newspaper that “a secret document known as a ‘presidential finding’ was signed by President George W. Bush that same month, granting the agency broad authority to use deadly force against bin Laden as well as other senior members of al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups.”

[Rohirrim]

If you've ever seen the movie Michael Clayton it has one of the most chilling assassination scenes I've ever seen. It really shows that if some powerful entity (government, corporate, whatever) wants to take you out, there is not likely to be any evidence. The movie going public expects blood and silencers and/or bombs. That's not necessarily true.

[barryr]

Hilarious. First it was Cheney is in charge and tells Bush waht to do. Then it was Cheney is evil since he's always in hiding and he's not doing anything. Now he was in charge of telling the CIA what to do. Great evidence we have here too. Lefty blogs. Meanwhile, there are tons of people without jobs and losing their houses, among other things, but let's worry about what Cheney may have done or didn't do or wasn't doing enough of, which effected the ecomony in no way and again, we have no memos to support any of this. Looks like more deflection time for Obama than anything else. Heat gets too hot for Obama and friends, let's play the Bush and admin. was stupid and evil bit again.

[alkemical]

Hey.....it's a bird, no a plane...wait - it's the point flying over your head!

[TailgateNut]

If you've ever seen the movie Michael Clayton it has one of the most chilling assassination scenes I've ever seen. It really shows that if some powerful entity (government, corporate, whatever) wants to take you out, there is not likely to be any evidence. The movie going public expects blood and silencers and/or bombs. That's not necessarily true.

Great movie!

[TailgateNut]

Hilarious. First it was Cheney is in charge and tells Bush waht to do. Then it was Cheney is evil since he's always in hiding and he's not doing anything. Now he was in charge of telling the CIA what to do. Great evidence we have here too. Lefty blogs. Meanwhile, there are tons of people without jobs and losing their houses, among other things, but let's worry about what Cheney may have done or didn't do or wasn't doing enough of, which effected the ecomony in no way and again, we have no memos to support any of this. Looks like more deflection time for Obama than anything else. Heat gets too hot for Obama and friends, let's play the Bush and admin. was stupid and evil bit again.


Erasing all doubt with each post!