Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Message from the Director: Release of Department of Justice Opinions
CIA.GOV ^ | April 16, 2009 | n/a

Posted on 04/16/2009 3:09:04 PM PDT by Cindy

CIA Home > News & Information > Press Releases & Statements > Message from the Director: Release of Department of Justice Opinions RSS Message from the Director: Release of Department of Justice Opinions Statement to Employees by Director of the Central Intelligence Agency Leon E. Panetta on the Release of Department of Justice Opinions

April 16, 2009

This afternoon, the Department of Justice is releasing a series of opinions that its Office of Legal Counsel provided CIA between 2002 and 2005. They guided CIA’s detention and interrogation program, which ended this past January. Over the life of that initiative, CIA repeatedly sought and repeatedly received written assurances from the Department of Justice that its practices were fully consistent with the laws and legal obligations of the United States. Those operations were also approved by the President and the National Security Council principals, and were briefed to the Congressional leadership.

As this information is revealed, it is important to understand the context in which these operations occurred. In the wake of September 11th, the President turned to CIA—as Presidents have done so often in our history—and entrusted our officers with the most critical of tasks: to disrupt the terrorist network that struck our country and prevent further attacks. CIA responded, as duty requires.

Although this Administration has now put into place new policies that CIA is implementing, the fact remains that CIA’s detention and interrogation effort was authorized and approved by our government. For that reason, as I have continued to make clear, I will strongly oppose any effort to investigate or punish those who followed the guidance of the Department of Justice.

The President and the Attorney General have also made clear that there will be no investigation or prosecution of CIA personnel who operated within the legal system. In addition, the Department will provide legal representation to CIA personnel subject to investigations relating to these operations.

This is not the end of the road on these issues. More requests will come—from the public, from Congress, and the Courts—and more information is sure to be released. We cannot control the debate about the past. But we can and must remain focused on our mission today and in the future. The President and the rest of our citizens are counting on all of us to help disrupt, destroy, and dismantle al Qa’ida—and to learn the plans of our other adversaries. We have an obligation to this nation and to each other to do all we can to protect America.

This is an exceptional organization of talented men and women, dedicated to our national security. It is an extraordinarily capable organization that quietly defends our country while following its laws and upholding its values. For that reason, I am proud to stand beside you as your Director. And for that reason, this President—and future Presidents—will continue to ask us to undertake the hard missions that only we can. This is an opportunity for CIA to begin a new and great chapter in our history of service to the nation.

You need to be fully confident that as you defend the nation, I will defend you.

Leon E. Panetta

The President has sent a letter to the officers of CIA, which I share with you now:

April 16, 2009

To the Men and Women of CIA:

I want to take this opportunity to thank you for the work you are doing for the country. Your work has informed every President dating back to President Truman and it protects our people. I have come to rely on your service and I believe strongly that it is vital to the security of our country. Given the threats, challenges, and opportunities facing America, the CIA remains as critical today as it has ever been to our Nation’s security. While necessity requires that the country may not know all of your names or the work that you do, all of us enjoy the freedom that you have helped secure.

I also wanted to share with you a decision that I made last night. Later today, the Department of Justice will release certain memos issued by the Office of Legal Counsel between 2002 and 2005. I did not make this decision lightly. As you may know, the release is part of an ongoing court case. I have fought for the principle that the United States must carry out covert activities and hold information that is classified for the purposes of national security and will do so again in the future. But the release of these memos is required by our commitment to the rule of law.

Much of the information contained in the memos has been in the public domain, and the previous Administration has acknowledged portions of the program – and some of the practices – associated with them. My judgment on this is a matter of record. I have prohibited the use of these interrogation techniques, and I reject the false choice between our security and our ideals.

In releasing these memos, the men and women of the CIA have assurances from both myself, and from Attorney General Holder, that we will protect all who acted reasonably and relied upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that their actions were lawful. The Attorney General has assured me that these individuals will not be prosecuted and that the Government will stand by them.

The men and women of our intelligence community serve courageously on the front lines of a dangerous world. Their accomplishments are unsung and their names unknown, but because of their sacrifices, every single American is safer. They need to be fully confident that as they defend the Nation, I will defend them. We will protect their identities as vigilantly as they protect our security.

This is a time for reflection, not retribution. We have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history. But at a time of great challenges and disturbing disunity, nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past. The national greatness that you so courageously and capably uphold is embedded in America’s ability to right its course in concert with our core values, and to move forward with confidence.

It is a core American value that we are a Nation of laws, and the CIA protects and upholds that principle under extraordinarily difficult circumstances every day. My Administration will always act in accordance with the law, and with an unshakeable commitment to our ideals. That is why we have released these memos, and that is why we have taken steps to ensure that the actions described within them never take place again.

Thank you for your service, and God bless the work that you do.

Sincerely, Barack Obama

Posted: Apr 16, 2009 03:54 PM Last Updated: Apr 16, 2009 03:54 PM Last Reviewed: Apr 16, 2009 03:54 PM


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cia; ciainterrogationmemo; democrats; doj; ericholder; gwot; holder; nancypelosi; nowot; obama; pelosi; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-70 next last

1 posted on 04/16/2009 3:09:06 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

April 16, 2009

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2009/April/09-ag-356.html

Department of Justice Releases Four Office of Legal Counsel Opinions

In connection with ongoing litigation, the Department of Justice today released four previously undisclosed Office of Legal Counsel (”OLC”) opinions – one that OLC issued to the Central Intelligence Agency in August 2002 and three that OLC issued to the CIA in May 2005.

“The President has halted the use of the interrogation techniques described in these opinions, and this administration has made clear from day one that it will not condone torture,” said Attorney General Eric Holder. “We are disclosing these memos consistent with our commitment to the rule of law.”

Holder also stressed that intelligence community officials who acted reasonably and relied in good faith on authoritative legal advice from the Justice Department that their conduct was lawful, and conformed their conduct to that advice, would not face federal prosecutions for that conduct.

The Attorney General has informed the Central Intelligence Agency that the government would provide legal representation to any employee, at no cost to the employee, in any state or federal judicial or administrative proceeding brought against the employee based on such conduct and would take measures to respond to any proceeding initiated against the employee in any international or foreign tribunal, including appointing counsel to act on the employee’s behalf and asserting any available immunities and other defenses in the proceeding itself.

To the extent permissible under federal law, the government will also indemnify any employee for any monetary judgment or penalty ultimately imposed against him for such conduct and will provide representation in congressional investigations.

“It would be unfair to prosecute dedicated men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned in advance by the Justice Department,” Holder said.

After reviewing these opinions, OLC has decided to withdraw them: They no longer represent the views of the Office of Legal Counsel.

###

09-356


2 posted on 04/16/2009 3:10:44 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: basil

Page holder for later.


3 posted on 04/16/2009 3:12:56 PM PDT by basil ( It's time to eliminate all "Gun Free Zones")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/16/cia-chief-hayden-criticizes-release-memos-detailing-interrogation-techniques/

Former CIA Chief Hayden Criticizes Release of Memos Detailing Interrogation Techniques
Former CIA Director Michael Hayden says release of the memos will give terrorists a precise guide for what to expect in a CIA interrogation if those methods are ever approved for use again.

AP
Thursday, April 16, 2009

“No Charges Against CIA Officials for Waterboarding”

SNIPPET: “WASHINGTON — Former CIA Director Michael Hayden says the Obama administration is endangering the country by releasing Justice Department memos that detail the CIA’s interrogation techniques authorized by the Bush administration.

Hayden tells The Associated Press the release will give terrorists a precise guide for what to expect in a CIA interrogation if those methods are ever approved for use again.”


4 posted on 04/16/2009 3:13:07 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
SNIPPET from the link in post no. 4:

"Hayden tells The Associated Press the release will give terrorists a precise guide for what to expect in a CIA interrogation if those methods are ever approved for use again.”

5 posted on 04/16/2009 3:14:25 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: All
FOX NEWS.com: "OBAMA MAY RELEASE DETAILS OF CIA's INTERROGATION METHODS USED ON TERROR SUSPECTS" by Brit Hume (SNIPPET: "The president's decision will tell us much about him.") (April 15, 2009) (Read More...)

6 posted on 04/16/2009 3:16:14 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cindy

I fart in Obama’s general direction.


7 posted on 04/16/2009 3:17:54 PM PDT by don-o (My son, Ben - Marine Private First Class - 1/16/09 - Parris Island, SC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o
I fart in Obama’s general direction.

His mother was a hamster, and his father was a elder-berry.

I was holding out slight hope that Obama would not do this... since, it serves ZERO beneficial purpose for our country.

Now.. I am released from ANY belief that this man care at all for this country.

8 posted on 04/16/2009 3:46:48 PM PDT by SomeCallMeTim ( When you find yourself going through Hell, keep going!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cindy

What a disgusting POS! Traitorous Marxist President...


9 posted on 04/16/2009 4:05:52 PM PDT by blasater1960 ( Dt 30, Ps 111, The Torah is perfect, attainable, now and forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cindy
that we will protect all who acted reasonably

them's weasel words if i ever heard any...

10 posted on 04/16/2009 5:22:39 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - Obama is basically Jim Jones with a teleprompter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Statement-of-President-Barack-Obama-on-Release-of-OLC-Memos/

THE BRIEFING ROOM

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

____________________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 16, 2009

Statement of President Barack Obama on Release of OLC Memos

The Department of Justice will today release certain memos issued by the Office of Legal Counsel between 2002 and 2005 as part of an ongoing court case. These memos speak to techniques that were used in the interrogation of terrorism suspects during that period, and their release is required by the rule of law.

My judgment on the content of these memos is a matter of record. In one of my very first acts as President, I prohibited the use of these interrogation techniques by the United States because they undermine our moral authority and do not make us safer. Enlisting our values in the protection of our people makes us stronger and more secure. A democracy as resilient as ours must reject the false choice between our security and our ideals, and that is why these methods of interrogation are already a thing of the past.

But that is not what compelled the release of these legal documents today. While I believe strongly in transparency and accountability, I also believe that in a dangerous world, the United States must sometimes carry out intelligence operations and protect information that is classified for purposes of national security. I have already fought for that principle in court and will do so again in the future. However, after consulting with the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, and others, I believe that exceptional circumstances surround these memos and require their release.

First, the interrogation techniques described in these memos have already been widely reported. Second, the previous Administration publicly acknowledged portions of the program – and some of the practices – associated with these memos. Third, I have already ended the techniques described in the memos through an Executive Order. Therefore, withholding these memos would only serve to deny facts that have been in the public domain for some time. This could contribute to an inaccurate accounting of the past, and fuel erroneous and inflammatory assumptions about actions taken by the United States.

In releasing these memos, it is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution. The men and women of our intelligence community serve courageously on the front lines of a dangerous world. Their accomplishments are unsung and their names unknown, but because of their sacrifices, every single American is safer. We must protect their identities as vigilantly as they protect our security, and we must provide them with the confidence that they can do their jobs.

Going forward, it is my strong belief that the United States has a solemn duty to vigorously maintain the classified nature of certain activities and information related to national security. This is an extraordinarily important responsibility of the presidency, and it is one that I will carry out assertively irrespective of any political concern. Consequently, the exceptional circumstances surrounding these memos should not be viewed as an erosion of the strong legal basis for maintaining the classified nature of secret activities. I will always do whatever is necessary to protect the national security of the United States.

This is a time for reflection, not retribution. I respect the strong views and emotions that these issues evoke. We have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history. But at a time of great challenges and disturbing disunity, nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past. Our national greatness is embedded in America’s ability to right its course in concert with our core values, and to move forward with confidence. That is why we must resist the forces that divide us, and instead come together on behalf of our common future.

The United States is a nation of laws. My Administration will always act in accordance with those laws, and with an unshakeable commitment to our ideals. That is why we have released these memos, and that is why we have taken steps to ensure that the actions described within them never take place again.

##


11 posted on 04/16/2009 6:20:52 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cindy
Sounds like Obama is into Tea Bagging Terrorists.
12 posted on 04/16/2009 6:33:07 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (If Hitler used a TelePrompter, we would all be speaking German...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-to-CIA-employees-at-CIA-Headquarters/

THE BRIEFING ROOM

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release
April 20, 2009

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
TO CIA EMPLOYEES

CIA Headquarters
Langley, Virginia

3:41 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, everybody. (Applause.) Thank you. Thank you. (Applause.) Well, thank you for the extraordinary welcome. And thanks, for those of you who prepared from the CIA gift shop — (laughter) — the t-shirts, the caps, the water bottles. (Laughter.) Michelle and the girls will appreciate that very much. (Laughter.)

It is a great honor to be here with the men and women of the CIA. I’ve been eager to come out here to Langley for some time so I can deliver a simple message to you in person on behalf of the American people: Thank you. Thank you for all the work that you do to protect the American people and the freedom that we all cherish.

The CIA is fundamental to America’s national security. And I want you to know that that’s why I nominated such an outstanding public servant and close friend, Leon Panetta, to lead the agency. He is one of our nation’s finest public servants, he has my complete confidence, and he is a strong voice in my national security team, as well as a strong advocate for the men and women of the CIA.

I also benefit from the counsel of several agency veterans — chief among them, Steve Kappes, who’s stayed on to serve as Leon’s Deputy, and he’s done outstanding work. (Applause.) I have to add just as an aside, by the way, I just met with a smaller group of about 50 so we could have a dialogue, and all of you look really young. (Laughter.) And so to have a graybeard literally and figuratively — (laughter) — like Steve Kappes here I think is absolutely critical.

I also want you to know that we have one of your own, John Brennan, who is doing a terrific job as my advisor for counterterrorism and homeland security. And we are very grateful for the work that he does and the insights that he brings from his long years of service here at the CIA.

And I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the extraordinary former CIA officer and Director of Central Intelligence, Bob Gates, who is also part of our Cabinet and every once in a while gives me a few tips. (Applause.)

Let me share with you just a few thoughts about the situation in which we find ourselves. First, I want to underscore the importance of the CIA. When the CIA was founded, you were focused on one overarching threat: the Soviet Union. And for decades, the CIA carried out a critically important mission. With the end of the Cold War, some wondered how important the CIA would be to our future. Now we know.

Here in the 21st century, we’ve learned that the CIA is more important than ever, for, as Leon mentioned, we face a wide range of unconventional challenges: stateless terrorist networks like al Qaeda, the spread of catastrophic weapons, cyber threats, failed states, rogue regimes, persistent conflict, and now we have to add to our list piracy.

The CIA is unique in the capabilities of collection, analysis and operation that you bring to bear. So you are an indispensable tool, the tip of the spear, in America’s intelligence mission and our national security. It is because of you that I can make good decisions. You prove that the key to good intelligence is not simply technology — it’s the quality of the men and women who have signed up to serve.

You’re on the front lines against unconventional challenges. You help us understand the world as it is. You support the work of our troops and our diplomats and law enforcement officers. You disrupt terrorist plots and you’re critical to our efforts to destroy terrorist networks. You serve capably, courageously, and from here in Virginia to dangerous outposts around the globe, you make enormous sacrifices on our behalf. So you should be proud of what you do.

Second, you need to know that you’ve got my full support. For decades, the American people have counted on you to protect them. I know that I’ve come to personally count on your services; I rely on your reporting and your analysis, which finds its way onto my desk every single day.

And I know you’ve got a tough job. I know there’s no margin for error. And I know there are endless demands for intelligence and there is an urgent necessity to collect and analyze information, and to work seamlessly with other agencies to act on it. And what makes it tougher is when you succeed –- as you so often do — that success usually has to stay secret. So you don’t get credit when things go good, but you sure get some blame when things don’t. Now — (laughter) — I got a “Amen” corner out here. (Laughter.)

Now, in that context I know that the last few days have been difficult. As I made clear in releasing the OLC memos — as a consequence of a court case that was pending and to which it was very difficult for us to mount an effective legal defense — I acted primarily because of the exceptional circumstances that surrounded these memos; particularly the fact that so much of the information was public, had been publicly acknowledged, the covert nature of the information had been compromised.

I have fought to protect the integrity of classified information in the past, and I will do so in the future. And there is nothing more important than protecting the identities of CIA officers. So I need everybody to be clear: We will protect your identities and your security as you vigorously pursue your missions. I will be as vigorous in protecting you as you are vigorous in protecting the American people.

Now, I have put an end to the interrogation techniques described in those OLC memos, and I want to be very clear and very blunt. I’ve done so for a simple reason: because I believe that our nation is stronger and more secure when we deploy the full measure of both our power and the power of our values –- including the rule of law. I know I can count on you to do exactly that.

There have been some conversations that I’ve had with senior folks here at Langley in which I think people have expressed understandable anxiety and concern. So I want to make a point that I just made in the smaller group. I understand that it’s hard when you are asked to protect the American people against people who have no scruples and would willingly and gladly kill innocents. Al Qaeda is not constrained by a constitution. Many of our adversaries are not constrained by a belief in freedom of speech, or representation in court, or rule of law. I’m sure that sometimes it seems as if that means we’re operating with one hand tied behind our back, or that those who would argue for a higher standard are naïve. I understand that. You know, I watch the cable shows once in a while. (Laughter.)

What makes the United States special, and what makes you special, is precisely the fact that we are willing to uphold our values and our ideals even when it’s hard, not just when it’s easy; even when we are afraid and under threat, not just when it’s expedient to do so. That’s what makes us different.

So, yes, you’ve got a harder job. And so do I. And that’s okay, because that’s why we can take such extraordinary pride in being Americans. And over the long term, that is why I believe we will defeat our enemies, because we’re on the better side of history.

So don’t be discouraged by what’s happened in the last few weeks. Don’t be discouraged that we have to acknowledge potentially we’ve made some mistakes. That’s how we learn. But the fact that we are willing to acknowledge them and then move forward, that is precisely why I am proud to be President of the United States, and that’s why you should be proud to be members of the CIA. (Applause.)

Third point — third point: I want you to know how much the American people appreciate your service. Sometimes it’s hard to acknowledge sacrifices made by the people whose work or even identity must remain secret. And that’s part of the enormous burden that you carry when you sign up. You make extraordinary sacrifices giving up parts of your life in service to your country. Many of you take long deployments overseas. You miss seeing your families. You miss weekend barbecues and the birthday parties, watching your children grow up. You can’t even exchange in the simplest pleasure of talking about your job or complaining about your job openly. (Laughter.)

There are few signs of patriotism more powerful than offering to serve out of the limelight. And so many of you have signed up to serve after 9/11 — that’s partly why you’re all so young — fully aware of the dangers before you. You serve courageously, but your courage is only known to a few. You accomplish remarkable things, but the credit you receive is the private knowledge that you’ve done something to secure this country.

That’s a sacrifice that’s carved into those marble walls. Those 89 stars stand as a testament to both the men and women of the CIA who gave their lives in service to their country, and to all who dedicate themselves to the mission of this Agency.

Now we must look forward to the future with confidence. All that you’ve achieved, I believe that the CIA’s best days are still yet to come. And you will have my support and appreciation as you carry on this critical work. We live in dangerous times. I am going to need you more than ever, precisely because we’re seeing changes in our foreign policy and we want to send a new message to the world. That requires better intelligence, not less of it. That means that we’re going to have to operate smarter and more effectively than ever.

So I’m going to be relying on you and the American people are going to rely on you. And I hope that you will continue to take extraordinary pride in the challenges that come with the job.

Thank you very much. God bless you, and God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

END
3:48 P.M. EDT


13 posted on 04/20/2009 6:13:14 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/09/04/20/What-Makes-the-United-States-Special/

THE BRIEFING ROOM • THE BLOG

Monday, April 20th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
“What Makes the United States Special”

Last week the President released memos issued by the Office of Legal Counsel between 2002 and 2005 as part of an ongoing court case. The memos discussed techniques that were used in the interrogation of terrorism suspects during that period, techniques that President Obama has disavowed. Today the President visited CIA Headquarters in Langley, Virginia to speak to CIA employees directly. Telling them of his great faith in them, and the faith that the American people have in them, he went on to discuss precisely why he has decided to change interrogation policy for the United States:

Now, I have put an end to the interrogation techniques described in those OLC memos, and I want to be very clear and very blunt. I’ve done so for a simple reason: because I believe that our nation is stronger and more secure when we deploy the full measure of both our power and the power of our values –- including the rule of law. I know I can count on you to do exactly that.

There have been some conversations that I’ve had with senior folks here at Langley in which I think people have expressed understandable anxiety and concern. So I want to make a point that I just made in the smaller group. I understand that it’s hard when you are asked to protect the American people against people who have no scruples and would willingly and gladly kill innocents. Al Qaeda is not constrained by a constitution. Many of our adversaries are not constrained by a belief in freedom of speech, or representation in court, or rule of law. I’m sure that sometimes it seems as if that means we’re operating with one hand tied behind our back, or that those who would argue for a higher standard are naïve. I understand that. You know, I watch the cable shows once in a while. (Laughter.)

What makes the United States special, and what makes you special, is precisely the fact that we are willing to uphold our values and our ideals even when it’s hard, not just when it’s easy; even when we are afraid and under threat, not just when it’s expedient to do so. That’s what makes us different.

So, yes, you’ve got a harder job. And so do I. And that’s okay, because that’s why we can take such extraordinary pride in being Americans. And over the long term, that is why I believe we will defeat our enemies, because we’re on the better side of history.

So don’t be discouraged by what’s happened in the last few weeks. Don’t be discouraged that we have to acknowledge potentially we’ve made some mistakes. That’s how we learn. But the fact that we are willing to acknowledge them and then move forward, that is precisely why I am proud to be President of the United States, and that’s why you should be proud to be members of the CIA. (Applause.)


14 posted on 04/20/2009 6:14:05 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=C860E5C8-E88A-4C53-9E61-500546583075

“This is Torture?”
By Jacob Laksin
FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, April 21, 2009

SNIPPET: “The Obama administration got one thing right – and a great deal wrong – with its release last week of the so-called “interrogation memos,” a series of legal documents produced by the Bush-era Office of Legal Counsel and detailing some of the harsher interrogation methods used by the CIA against high-level al-Qaeda operatives.

To its credit, the administration vetoed the possibility of legal prosecution for either the memos’ Justice Department authors or the CIA personnel who conducted the interrogations, rejecting appeals from the anti-anti-terror Left, most prominently the ACLU, which had sued for the memos’ release. Despite a backlash from its partisan base, the administration has stood firm on that decision, with White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel being only the latest figure to affirm that the administration will not be pursuing the “retribution” that many of its supporters demand.

Nevertheless, the administration erred in releasing the memos. The reason has been most compellingly stated by former CIA director Michael Hayden. Hayden points out that disclosing details of U.S. interrogation tactics will only allow terrorist suspects to resist intelligence questioning in the future by revealing “the outer limits that any American would ever go in terms of interrogating an al-Qaeda terrorist.” Hayden’s argument holds true even if the tactics described in the memos are no longer used, and even if, as the administration argues, many of the details had previously been made public in reports on detainee treatment by the Red Cross. Interrogation techniques are effective only to the extent that they confound a detainee’s expectations about the kinds of treatment he may receive. By revealing the precise boundaries of that treatment, and by making them official, the administration has made al-Qaeda’s job that much easier.

The administration’s other mistake was to endorse the view, promulgated by the Left, that the techniques described in the memos deserve to be called “torture.” Even a cursory examination indicates otherwise.”


15 posted on 04/21/2009 3:26:43 AM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: All

STATE OF THE UNION WITH JOHN KING
Interview With Janet Napolitano; Interview With Senators Klobuchar, Ensign
Aired April 19, 2009 - 09:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.”


16 posted on 04/21/2009 3:41:38 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: All

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/conyers-to-hold-hearings-on-torture-memos-2009-04-21.html

“Conyers to hold hearings on ‘torture’ memos”
By Jared Allen
Posted: 04/21/09 06:07 PM [ET]

SNIPPET: “House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) on Tuesday announced that he will soon hold hearings on the Bush administration’s legal memos justifying the use of numerous enhanced interrogation techniques.

Conyers and other Democrats have labeled as torture the techniques explained in the memos...”


17 posted on 04/21/2009 4:12:49 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: All

Link for post no. 16:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0904/19/sotu.01.html


18 posted on 04/21/2009 4:15:26 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: All

QUOTE:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2235499/posts

Obama Damages National Security by “Muddled” “Confused” Policy
Flopping Aces ^ | Wednesday, April 22nd, 2009 at 1:28 pm | Mike’s America
Posted on April 22, 2009 1:59:13 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

The damage at CIA may have deadly consequences!

The Politico reports that Obama’s missteps on “torture” are “muddled” and “confused.” The idea that an incoming Administration will investigate and prosecute it’s predecessor is wrong on so many levels. In this case, the direct impact may be felt hardest by those charged with the difficult job of discovering where the next terrorist attack will come.

Slow Roll Time At Langley
By David Ignatius
Washington Post
Wednesday, April 22, 2009

…Sad to say, it’s slow roll time at Langley after the release of interrogation memos that, in the words of one veteran officer, “hit the agency like a car bomb in the driveway.” President Obama promised CIA officers that they won’t be prosecuted for carrying out lawful orders, but the people on the firing line don’t believe him. They think the memos have opened a new season of investigation and retribution.

The lesson for younger officers is obvious: Keep your head down. Duck the assignments that carry political risk. Stay away from a counterterrorism program that has become a career hazard.

Obama tried personally to reassure the CIA workforce during a visit to Langley on Monday. He said all the right things about the agency’s clandestine role. But it had the look of a campaign event, with employees hooting and hollering and the president reading from his teleprompter with a backdrop of stars that commemorate the CIA’s fallen warriors. By yesterday, Obama was deferring to the attorney general whether to prosecute “those who formulated those legal decisions,” whatever that means.

For a taste of what’s ahead, recall the chilling effects of past CIA scandals. In 1995, then-Director John Deutch ordered a “scrub” of the agency’s assets after revelations of past links to Guatemalan death squads.

(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net ...


19 posted on 04/22/2009 2:22:47 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: All

QUOTE:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2235048/posts

Cheney: Obama Doesn’t Recognize Terrorism Threat
NEWSMAX.com ^ | April 21, 2009, 9:08 pm | n/a
Posted on April 22, 2009 4:26:51 AM PDT by Cindy

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:08 PM

Former Vice President Dick Cheney says the Obama administration no longer believes that America is threatened by terrorists and is making dangerous mistakes in lowering U.S. defenses.

“The threat is there. It’s very real and it’s continuing,” Cheney told Fox News’ Sean Hannity in the second part of a two-part interview Tuesday night. “And what the Obama people are doing, in effect, is saying, well, we don’t need those tough policies that we had.

“That says either they didn’t work, which we know is not the case — they did work, they kept us safe for seven years — or that now somehow the threat’s gone away. There’s no longer a threat out there, we don’t have to be as tough and aggressive as the Bush administration was.”

It’s that post-9/11 mindset that most concerns him, Cheney said.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


20 posted on 04/22/2009 2:23:59 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2235538/posts

“CIA memos: Clinton Attacks Cheney Rather Than Reveal Truth”
Start Thinking Right ^ | April 22, 2009 | Michael Eden

#

VIDEO:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIlRiOag_ZM

“Secretary Clinton on Torture Memos”

Video Description:

CSPAN
April 22, 2009
(less info)
Secretary of State Clinton responded to questions from Rep. Rohrabacher about information shared with her about torture memos as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. In her remarks she also said that she did not view Former Vice President Cheney as “a particularly reliable source of information.”
Category: News & Politics
Tags: C-SPAN


21 posted on 04/22/2009 3:01:27 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: All

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2009/04/exclusive-text-what-waterboarding.html

Tuesday, April 21, 2009
“Exclusive Text: What Waterboarding Revealed”


22 posted on 04/22/2009 6:50:23 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46949

“CIA Confirms: Waterboarding 9/11 Mastermind Led to Info that Aborted 9/11-Style Attack on Los Angeles”
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief

SNIPPET: “Khalid Sheik Mohammad, a top al Qaeda leader who divulged information — after being waterboarded — that allowed the U.S. government to stop a planned terrorist attack on Los Angeles.

(CNSNews.com) - The Central Intelligence Agency told CNSNews.com today that it stands by the assertion made in a May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that the use of “enhanced techniques” of interrogation on al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) — including the use of waterboarding — caused KSM to reveal information that allowed the U.S. government to thwart a planned attack on Los Angeles.

Before he was waterboarded, when KSM was asked about planned attacks on the United States, he ominously told his CIA interrogators, “Soon, you will know.”

According to the previously classified May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that was released by President Barack Obama last week, the thwarted attack — which KSM called the “Second Wave”— planned “ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles.”

KSM was the mastermind of the first “hijacked-airliner” attacks on the United States, which struck the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Northern Virginia on Sept. 11, 2001.”


23 posted on 04/23/2009 1:39:57 AM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2236360/posts

#

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/04/goss_obama_decision_crossed_a.asp

“Goss: Obama Decision “Crossed a Red Line””

SNIPPET: “Porter Goss, former CIA Director and past chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, blasted the Obama administration for releasing Justice Department memos on harsh interrogation techniques. “For the first time in my experience we’ve crossed the red line of properly protecting our national security in order to gain partisan political advantage,” Goss said in an interview.”

Posted by Stephen F. Hayes on April 23, 2009 01:53 PM | Permalink


24 posted on 04/23/2009 2:52:20 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: All

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2236404/posts

“Pelosi on waterboarding: I knew nothing”
Hot Air ^ | April 23, 2009 | ALLAHPUNDIT
Posted on April 23, 2009 3:19:58 PM PDT by RobinMasters


25 posted on 04/23/2009 3:28:47 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: All

Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dXgtEYuh8E

“Nancy Pelosi: CIA Briefing- I did not know they would use waterboarding”
(Added April 23, 2009)


26 posted on 04/23/2009 5:40:47 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cindy
Related thread:

2007: Torture update: What did Nancy Pelosi know and when did she know it?

27 posted on 04/23/2009 11:44:38 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Thank you Ernest.


28 posted on 04/23/2009 11:45:13 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: All

Note: The following post is a quote:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2236731/posts

Skip to comments.

Boehner: CIA Methods No Secret on Hill
The Washington Times ^ | April 23, 2009 | S.A.MILLER
Posted on April 24, 2009 4:34:09 AM PDT by kellynla

House Minority Leader John A. Boehner on Thursday chided Democrats for seeking an investigation of the Bush administration’s treatment of captured terror suspects, noting a long list of lawmakers from both parties were briefed about the use of harsh interrogation methods years ago.

“Not a word was raised at the time,” said Mr. Boehner, Ohio Republican, adding that he has seen a partial list of Democrats and Republicans briefed on CIA interrogation techniques as far back as 2002.

“There is nothing here that should surprise them,” he said.

Mr. Boehner continued: “If you look at the effort that was undertaken by our government after 9/11 in order to make America safe and help keep America safe, it’s clear to me that it was done in a bipartisan way.

“And whether you’re talking about the terrorist surveillance programs, whether you’re talking about interrogation techniques, whether you’re talking about the Treasury program to track this money, all of this information was downloaded to congressional leaders of both parties, with no objections being raised.”

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


29 posted on 04/24/2009 4:39:17 AM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: All

Note: The following post is a quote:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2236734/posts

Hill Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002
Washington Post ^ | December 9, 2007 | Joby Warrick and Dan Eggen
Posted on April 24, 2009 4:39:54 AM PDT by kellynla

In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA’s overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.

Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.

“The briefer was specifically asked if the methods were tough enough,” said a U.S. official who witnessed the exchange.

Congressional leaders from both parties would later seize on waterboarding as a symbol of the worst excesses of the Bush administration’s counterterrorism effort. The CIA last week admitted that videotape of an interrogation of one of the waterboarded detainees was destroyed in 2005 against the advice of Justice Department and White House officials, provoking allegations that its actions were illegal and the destruction was a coverup.

Yet long before “waterboarding” entered the public discourse, the CIA gave key legislative overseers about 30 private briefings, some of which included descriptions of that technique and other harsh interrogation methods, according to interviews with multiple U.S. officials with firsthand knowledge.

With one known exception, no formal objections were raised by the lawmakers briefed about the harsh methods during the two years in which waterboarding was employed, from 2002 to 2003, said Democrats and Republicans with direct knowledge of the matter.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


30 posted on 04/24/2009 4:43:41 AM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: All

BLOG:

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/04/24/public-to-white-house-move-on/

“Public to White House: Move on; Pentagon prepares to release more torture photos”
By Michelle Malkin • April 24, 2009 09:54 AM


31 posted on 04/24/2009 10:58:10 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1635icvGnjo

“We Were Not! I Repeat NOT EVER TOLD Waterboarding Was Used! Nancy Pelosi”
(Added April 23, 2009)


32 posted on 04/25/2009 6:55:05 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/419lgkxx.asp

“Preening & Posturing
Throwing those who guard us while we sleep to the wolves.”
by William Kristol
05/04/2009, Volume 014, Issue 31

SNIPPET: “”We have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history,” President Obama said when he ordered the release of the Justice Department interrogation memos. Actually, no. Not at all. We were attacked on 9/11. We responded to that attack with remarkable restraint in the use of force, respect for civil liberties, and even solicitude for those who might inadvertently be offended, let alone harmed, by our policies. We’ve fought a war on jihadist terror in a civilized, even legalized, way. Those who have been on the front and rear lines of that war—in the military and the intelligence agencies, at the Justice Department and, yes, in the White House—have much to be proud of. The rest of us, who’ve been asked to do little, should be grateful.

The dark and painful chapter we have to fear is rather the one President Obama may be ushering in. This would be a chapter in which politicians preen moralistically as they throw patriotic officials, who helped keep this country safe, to the wolves, and in which national leaders posture politically while endangering the nation’s security.

The preening is ridiculous, even by the standards of contemporary American politics and American liberalism. Obama fatuously asserts there are no real choices in the real world, just “false choices” that he can magically resolve. He foolishly suggests that even in war we would never have to do anything disagreeable for the sake of our security. He talks baby talk to intelligence officers: “Don’t be discouraged that we have to acknowledge potentially we’ve made some mistakes. That’s how we learn.””


33 posted on 04/25/2009 7:31:43 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

BLOG:

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/25/former-cia-chief-goss-i-cant-believe-what-a-shameless-liar-pelosi-is/

“Former CIA chief Goss: I can’t believe what a shameless liar Pelosi is”
POSTED AT 1:53 PM ON APRIL 25, 2009 BY ALLAHPUNDIT

“Believe it, champ. And welcome to the club.
He doesn’t name any names but there’s no question who he’s aiming at.”


34 posted on 04/26/2009 8:21:24 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: All

BLOG - Quote:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/04/it_wasnt_an_nsa_tap_on_harmans.html

April 27, 2009
It wasn’t an NSA tap on Harman’s telephone line
Clarice Feldman
I knew it! The NSA was not the agency tapping Rep. Jane Harman’s calls:

COLLEGE PARK, Md. - The National Security Agency did not place a wiretap that reportedly intercepted phone conversations made by Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., the top U.S. intelligence official said Monday.

Dennis Blair, the national intelligence director, declined to say which agency requested the reported wiretap and oversaw the information gleaned from Harman’s conversations. Blair was speaking at the dedication of a new intelligence research facility.

The only other agency that has authority to place wiretaps on calls inside the United States is the Justice Department. It requires court approval.

The NSA story never made any sense.

Posted at 09:59 PM


35 posted on 04/28/2009 12:41:52 AM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: All

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/20090421_release.pdf

DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE
WASHINGTON, DC 20511

April 21, 2009

Statement by the Director of National Intelligence
Mr. Dennis C. Blair

I recommended to the president that the administration release these memos, and I made clear that the CIA should not be punished for carrying out legal orders.

I also strongly supported the president when he declared that we would no longer use enhanced interrogation techniques. We do not need these techniques to keep America safe.

The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security.

# # #


36 posted on 04/28/2009 12:44:10 AM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/pelosi

#

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2239944/posts

“Intelligence panel Dems huddle with Pelosi”
The Hill ^ | April 28, 2009 | Susan Crabtree and Mike Soraghan
Posted on April 28, 2009 4:40:45 PM PDT by jazusamo


37 posted on 04/28/2009 4:44:46 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/28/despite-reports-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-waterboarded-times/

“Despite Reports, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Was Not Waterboarded 183 Times
The number of times Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded was the focus of major media attention — and highly misleading. “

By Joseph Abrams
FOXNews.com
Tuesday, April 28, 2009

SNIPPET: “A U.S. official with knowledge of the interrogation program told FOX News that the much-cited figure represents the number of times water was poured onto Mohammed’s face — not the number of times the CIA applied the simulated-drowning technique on the terror suspect. According to a 2007 Red Cross report, he was subjected a total of “five sessions of ill-treatment.”

“The water was poured 183 times — there were 183 pours,” the official explained, adding that “each pour was a matter of seconds.”

The Times and dozens of other outlets wrote that the CIA also waterboarded senior Al Qaeda member Abu Zubaydah 83 times, but Zubayda himself, a close associate of Usama bin Laden, told the Red Cross he was waterboarded no more than 10 times.

The confusion stems from language in the Justice Department legal memos that President Obama released on April 16. They contain the numbers, but they fail to explain exactly what they represent.

The memos, spanning from 2002-2005, were a legal review by the Bush administration that approved the use of waterboarding and other “enhanced interrogation techniques.” Obama banned the procedure on his second day in office, saying that waterboarding is torture.”


38 posted on 04/29/2009 7:10:32 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20090429_chilling_effect_u_s_counterterrorism

“A Chilling Effect on U.S. Counterterrorism”
April 29, 2009 | 1815 GMT

By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart

SNIPPET: “Politics and moral arguments aside, the end effect of the memos’ release is that people who have put their lives on the line in U.S. counterterrorism efforts are now uncertain of whether they should be making that sacrifice. Many of these people are now questioning whether the administration that happens to be in power at any given time will recognize the fact that they were carrying out lawful orders under a previous administration. It is hard to retain officers and attract quality recruits in this kind of environment. It has become safer to work in programs other than counterterrorism.”

SNIPPET: “As we’ve previously noted, it was a lack of intelligence that helped fuel the fear that led the Bush administration to authorize enhanced interrogation techniques. Ironically, the current investigation into those techniques and other practices (such as renditions) may very well lead to significant gaps in terrorism-related intelligence from both internal and liaison sources — again, not primarily because of the prohibition of torture, but because of larger implications.

When these implications are combined with the long-standing institutional aversion of U.S. government agencies toward counterterrorism, and with the difficulty of finding and retaining good people willing to serve in counterterrorism roles, the U.S. counterterrorism community may soon be facing challenges even more daunting than those posed by its already difficult mission.”


39 posted on 04/29/2009 11:53:31 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: All

http://video1.washingtontimes.com/video/CIAletter.pdf

#

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/01/house-intelligence-chief-enters-controversy/

“Congress to oversee CIA more closely
Reyes enters CIA fracas”
By Eli Lake and Bill Gertz, THE WASHINGTON TIMES | Friday, May 1, 2009

EXCLUSIVE:


40 posted on 05/01/2009 5:10:41 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2241985/posts

#

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDE2MTMxODE5Y2YzMGNlOWExZmJjYmJhYzViMDk0NjA=

Friday, May 01, 2009

“Andy McCarthy Said “No” to the Justice Department Today [Kathryn Jean Lopez]”

#

QUOTE:

http://nrinstitute.org/mustread.php

Andrew C. McCarthy

May 1, 2009

By email (to the Counterterrorism Division) and by regular mail:

The Honorable Eric H. Holder, Jr.
Attorney General of the United States
United States Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001

Dear Attorney General Holder:

This letter is respectfully submitted to inform you that I must decline the invitation to participate in the May 4 roundtable meeting the President’s Task Force on Detention Policy is convening with current and former prosecutors involved in international terrorism cases. An invitation was extended to me by trial lawyers from the Counterterrorism Section, who are members of the Task Force, which you are leading.

The invitation email (of April 14) indicates that the meeting is part of an ongoing effort to identify lawful policies on the detention and disposition of alien enemy combatants—or what the Department now calls “individuals captured or apprehended in connection with armed conflicts and counterterrorism operations.” I admire the lawyers of the Counterterrorism Division, and I do not question their good faith. Nevertheless, it is quite clear—most recently, from your provocative remarks on Wednesday in Germany—that the Obama administration has already settled on a policy of releasing trained jihadists (including releasing some of them into the United States). Whatever the good intentions of the organizers, the meeting will obviously be used by the administration to claim that its policy was arrived at in consultation with current and former government officials experienced in terrorism cases and national security issues. I deeply disagree with this policy, which I believe is a violation of federal law and a betrayal of the president’s first obligation to protect the American people. Under the circumstances, I think the better course is to register my dissent, rather than be used as a prop.

Moreover, in light of public statements by both you and the President, it is dismayingly clear that, under your leadership, the Justice Department takes the position that a lawyer who in good faith offers legal advice to government policy makers—like the government lawyers who offered good faith advice on interrogation policy—may be subject to investigation and prosecution for the content of that advice, in addition to empty but professionally damaging accusations of ethical misconduct. Given that stance, any prudent lawyer would have to hesitate before offering advice to the government.

Beyond that, as elucidated in my writing (including my proposal for a new national security court, which I understand the Task Force has perused), I believe alien enemy combatants should be detained at Guantanamo Bay (or a facility like it) until the conclusion of hostilities. This national defense measure is deeply rooted in the venerable laws of war and was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in the 2004 Hamdi case. Yet, as recently as Wednesday, you asserted that, in your considered judgment, such notions violate America’s “commitment to the rule of law.” Indeed, you elaborated, “Nothing symbolizes our [adminstration’s] new course more than our decision to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay…. President Obama believes, and I strongly agree, that Guantanamo has come to represent a time and an approach that we want to put behind us: a disregard for our centuries-long respect for the rule of law[.]” (Emphasis added.)

Given your policy of conducting ruinous criminal and ethics investigations of lawyers over the advice they offer the government, and your specific position that the wartime detention I would endorse is tantamount to a violation of law, it makes little sense for me to attend the Task Force meeting. After all, my choice would be to remain silent or risk jeopardizing myself.
For what it may be worth, I will say this much. For eight years, we have had a robust debate in the United States about how to handle alien terrorists captured during a defensive war authorized by Congress after nearly 3000 of our fellow Americans were annihilated. Essentially, there have been two camps. One calls for prosecution in the civilian criminal justice system, the strategy used throughout the 1990s. The other calls for a military justice approach of combatant detention and war-crimes prosecutions by military commission. Because each theory has its downsides, many commentators, myself included, have proposed a third way: a hybrid system, designed for the realities of modern international terrorism—a new system that would address the needs to protect our classified defense secrets and to assure Americans, as well as our allies, that we are detaining the right people.

There are differences in these various proposals. But their proponents, and adherents to both the military and civilian justice approaches, have all agreed on at least one thing: Foreign terrorists trained to execute mass-murder attacks cannot simply be released while the war ensues and Americans are still being targeted. We have already released too many jihadists who, as night follows day, have resumed plotting to kill Americans. Indeed, according to recent reports, a released Guantanamo detainee is now leading Taliban combat operations in Afghanistan, where President Obama has just sent additional American forces.
The Obama campaign smeared Guantanamo Bay as a human rights blight. Consistent with that hyperbolic rhetoric, the President began his administration by promising to close the detention camp within a year. The President did this even though he and you (a) agree Gitmo is a top-flight prison facility, (b) acknowledge that our nation is still at war, and (c) concede that many Gitmo detainees are extremely dangerous terrorists who cannot be tried under civilian court rules. Patently, the commitment to close Guantanamo Bay within a year was made without a plan for what to do with these detainees who cannot be tried. Consequently, the Detention Policy Task Force is not an effort to arrive at the best policy. It is an effort to justify a bad policy that has already been adopted: to wit, the Obama administration policy to release trained terrorists outright if that’s what it takes to close Gitmo by January.

Obviously, I am powerless to stop the administration from releasing top al Qaeda operatives who planned mass-murder attacks against American cities—like Binyam Mohammed (the accomplice of “Dirty Bomber” Jose Padilla) whom the administration recently transferred to Britain, where he is now at liberty and living on public assistance. I am similarly powerless to stop the administration from admitting into the United States such alien jihadists as the 17 remaining Uighur detainees. According to National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair, the Uighurs will apparently live freely, on American taxpayer assistance, despite the facts that they are affiliated with a terrorist organization and have received terrorist paramilitary training. Under federal immigration law (the 2005 REAL ID Act), those facts render them excludable from the United States. The Uighurs’ impending release is thus a remarkable development given the Obama administration’s propensity to deride its predecessor’s purported insensitivity to the rule of law.

I am, in addition, powerless to stop the President, as he takes these reckless steps, from touting his Detention Policy Task Force as a demonstration of his national security seriousness. But I can decline to participate in the charade.

Finally, let me repeat that I respect and admire the dedication of Justice Department lawyers, whom I have tirelessly defended since I retired in 2003 as a chief assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York. It was a unique honor to serve for nearly twenty years as a federal prosecutor, under administrations of both parties. It was as proud a day as I have ever had when the trial team I led was awarded the Attorney General’s Exceptional Service Award in 1996, after we secured the convictions of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and his underlings for waging a terrorist war against the United States. I particularly appreciated receiving the award from Attorney General Reno—as I recounted in Willful Blindness, my book about the case, without her steadfastness against opposition from short-sighted government officials who wanted to release him, the “blind sheikh” would never have been indicted, much less convicted and so deservedly sentenced to life-imprisonment. In any event, I’ve always believed defending our nation is a duty of citizenship, not ideology. Thus, my conservative political views aside, I’ve made myself available to liberal and conservative groups, to Democrats and Republicans, who’ve thought tapping my experience would be beneficial. It pains me to decline your invitation, but the attendant circumstances leave no other option.

Very truly yours,

/S/

Andrew C. McCarthy

cc: Sylvia T. Kaser and John DePue
National Security Division, Counterterrorism Section


41 posted on 05/01/2009 5:15:51 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: All; backhoe

Ping to post no. 42.

#

http://www.jihadica.com/jihadi-reactions-to-the-torture-memos

http://experts.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/05/04/irreparable_damage

“Irreparable damage”
Mon, 05/04/2009 - 5:10pm

By Thomas Hegghammer

SNIPPET: “Switch to the jihadi Internet forums, where thousands of radical Islamists log on every day to debate religion, politics, and the latest news from the war on terror. Last week there were debates on all kinds of topics, from swine flu to the financial crisis to the alleged capture of the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq. But there was virtually nothing about the torture memos.”

SNIPPET: “The reason for the silence on the forums is that al Qaeda couldn’t care less about the current U.S. debate about torture. The questions of who signed which memos when, whether Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 80 or 180 times, and whether a millipede was inserted into Abu Zubaydah’s confinement box are only interesting for those who did not expect the United States to behave this way. And the jihadists are not among them.

For a start, al Qaeda never cared about the black sites in the first place. It never expected its leaders to be treated gently, and it knew the dungeons of Cairo were infinitely worse anyway.”

Snippet: “Thomas Hegghammer is a fellow at Harvard Kennedy School and a senior research fellow at the Norwegian Defence Research Establishment. He is the coauthor of Al Qaeda in Its Own Words and author of the forthcoming Jihad in Saudi Arabia. He blogs about jihadi Web sites at www.jihadica.com.”


42 posted on 05/05/2009 4:39:14 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/05/justice-nears-end-interrogation-memo-probe/
(AP)

“Source: Charges Unlikely for Lawyers Over Interrogation Memos”
Tuesday, May 05, 2009

WASHINGTON —

SNIPPET: “The person noted that the investigative report was still in draft form and subject to revisions. Attorney General Eric Holder also may make his own determination about what steps to take once the report has been finalized.

The Justice Department notified two senators by letter that a key deadline in the inquiry expired Monday, signaling that most of the work on the matter was completed. The letter does not mention the possibility of criminal charges, nor does it name the lawyers under scrutiny.”


43 posted on 05/06/2009 12:31:17 AM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34730

#

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2245931/posts

The Torture of American Soldiers
FRONTPAGE MAGAZINE.com ^ | Wednesday, May 06, 2009 | By: Jamie Glazov
Posted on May 7, 2009 1:51:44 AM PDT by Cindy

SNIPPET: “Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Dave Gaubatz, the first U.S. civilian (1811) Federal Agent deployed to Iraq in 2003. He is currently the Director of the Mapping Sharia Project and the Owner of DG Counter-terrorism Publishing...”

SNIPPET: “Below is a sampling of the results of the interrogations agents and I obtained: I have the documents, photographs, and contact information of Iraqis and U.S. personnel who were also aware. Anything I write or speak about can be verified. Simply ask VP Biden and our President to release the complete intelligence reports my team and I wrote in 2003.

1. When the members of the 507th were ambushed in Nasiriyah, Iraq, Private Jessica Lynch was initially taken to an Iraqi military base hospital in the Nasiriyah area (not the civilian hospital). Some of the other 507th were killed during the ambush, and others were captured and then murdered.

2. I visited the military hospital Private Lynch was held and it can be best described as ‘filth’. Jessica suffered physically and psychologically at this military facility.

3. When our brave troops began bombing this Iraqi base, the Iraqis decided to move Private Lynch to the Nasiriyah civilian hospital. The leaders of the Baath Party were using the basement of the hospital and its many tunnels as sanctuary.

4. Jessica Lynch was drugged, tied up, and placed under the stretcher in a Red Crescent vehicle. The Director of the Red Crescent was a senior member of the Baath Party and was allowing the use of ambulances to transport weapons and Saddam supporters (military and Saddam’s civilian Fedeyeen forces) throughout Iraq. Our U.S. military on the ground had been informed the ‘Rules of Engagement’ did not allow searching mosques, schools, or Red Crescent ambulances. U.S. military personnel died as a result of this.

5. A few days before Private Lynch was rescued, she was placed in Saddam’s civilian hospital.

6. The doctor of Jessica Lynch and a brave Iraqi lady was ‘Hameeda’. She is the sister-in-law of my good friend Mohammed Odeh Al Rehaief. Mohammed is the Iraqi lawyer who had provided intelligence to U.S. forces which enabled Jessica to be rescued.

7. Jessica Lynch’s hospital bed was located near a window overlooking a soccer field near the grounds of the hospital. She had been forced to watch as some of her team members were tortured, beheaded and buried.

8. One agent and I had interviewed the Saddam Hospital staff and determined the location of the dead Americans who had been killed during the 507th ambush.

9. The Director took us to a position on the soccer field and said the 507th members had been buried in front of the soccer goal posts, so the children would run over their graves while playing soccer. This was to dishonor our ‘troops’.

10. The Director informed us the 507th members had been beheaded and many had been dragged through the streets of Nasiriayh.

11. The night before Jessica Lynch was rescued; the Fedeyeen had threatened to take Jessica Lynch from her hospital bed, use a ‘Red Crescent vehicle, and go into the desert area outside of Nasiriyah. The Fedeyeen were going to bury Jessica alive in the vehicle. The doctor of Jessica was able to talk the Fedeyeen out of removing her this night. The next day our troops rescued her.

12. I wrote numerous intelligence reports pertaining to these tragedies and others. Senator Biden and many others were aware of the tortures our troops underwent, and the ‘interrogation results I and others had conducted on Enemy of Prisoners of War (EPW), and the results.

FP: Can you mention any other intelligence you were able to obtain during interrogations?

Gaubatz: I have hundreds of pages of personal notes, photographs, names, dates, locations, and yes, VP Biden was aware of intelligence we were obtaining from EPWs. He nor any politician ever asked how we were obtaining.”

SNIPPET: “Gaubatz: I have never written or said anything I can’t substantiate under oath when required to do so. Will VP Biden, Pelosi or others do the same under oath?”

(Click on the article link to read the whole article.)


44 posted on 05/07/2009 2:02:21 AM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: All

ADDING 1 link to post no. 44:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2245931/posts?page=5#5


45 posted on 05/07/2009 2:46:27 AM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: All

Blog:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/05/intelligence-re.html

“Intelligence Report: Pelosi Briefed on Use of Interrogation Tactics in Sept.
May 07, 2009 6:02 PM

SNIPPET: “ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was briefed on the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” on terrorist suspect Abu Zubaydah in September 2002, according to a report prepared by the Director of National Intelligence’s office and obtained by ABC News.

The report, submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee and other Capitol Hill officials Wednesday, appears to contradict Pelosi’s statement last month that she was never told about the use of waterboarding or other special interrogation tactics. Instead, she has said, she was told only that the Bush administration had legal opinions that would have supported the use of such techniques.

The report details a Sept. 4, 2002 meeting between intelligence officials and Pelosi, then-House intelligence committee chairman Porter Goss, and two aides. At the time, Pelosi was the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee.

The meeting is described as a “Briefing on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of particular EITs that had been employed.”

EITs stand for “enhanced interrogation techniques,” a classification of special interrogation tactics that includes waterboarding.”


46 posted on 05/07/2009 4:37:14 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.foxnews.com/video/?playerId=videolandingpage&maven_playlistId=c985e69916535a2170b2b18ab0ab7eb60401f9bb&maven_referrer=rss&referralPlaylistId=c985e69916535a2170b2b18ab0ab7eb60401f9bb&referralObject=4903117

FOX NEWS.com - Video: “WHEN DID PELOSI KNOW?
CIA: Pelosi briefed on tough techniques”
(May 8, 2009)


47 posted on 05/08/2009 3:20:31 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2247252/posts

#

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2247330/posts

“Phone call to Pelosi’s SF office inquiring whether she will confirm or deny resignation plans”
call to Pelosi’s SF disctrict office ^ | 5-8-09 | dfu
Posted on May 8, 2009 6:15:31 PM PDT by doug from upland


48 posted on 05/08/2009 7:23:19 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: All

Note: The following post is a quote:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2248902/posts

GOP wants intel docs declassified
The Hill ^ | May 11, 2009 | Reid Wilson
Posted on May 11, 2009 5:24:40 PM PDT by jazusamo

Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) has called on the intelligence community to declassify documents showing what certain members of Congress were told about the harsh interrogation techniques employed in the war on terrorism.

In a letter to CIA Director Leon Panetta and National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair on Friday, Hoekstra, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, asked that the so-called Memoranda for the Record (MFR) he reviewed last week be released.

Memoranda for the Record indicate subjects discussed at the classified briefings, as well as who attended.

The request comes after a memo prepared by the CIA listed 40 briefings for members of Congress and their staffs over the past six and a half years. The records indicated that during these briefings, several lawmakers — including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — were briefed on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques.

Hoekstra’s letter is the latest step in a campaign to associate Pelosi with the harsh interrogation techniques used on terrorism suspects. Republicans hope to delay any potential probes into Bush administration officials’ conduct during the war on terror.

Though some Democrats want what could amount to a truth commission for the last six years, Republicans say prominent Democrats like Pelosi should be asked to testify as well.

The debate came after the Obama administration publicly released Department of Justice (DoJ) memos that laid out guidelines under which CIA officials could use the controversial interrogation techniques, which the president himself has described as torture.

Hoekstra argues that since the DoJ memos were released, there would be no harmful effects from releasing the MFRs.

“Given that the underlying programs have now been publicly disclosed by the president and that a general description of each briefing has been declassified, I am requesting that the [MFRs] be reviewed for declassification and publicly released as soon as possible,” Hoekstra wrote.

Those techniques include waterboarding, which Pelosi maintains she was not aware of. Justice Department documents show one terrorist, Abu Zubaydah, was waterboarded 83 times in August 2002, the month before the only briefing at which Pelosi has acknowledged being present.

“The American people should be given the full picture on what was known and agreed to on Capitol Hill on a bipartisan basis about the enhanced interrogation program,” Hoekstra said in a statement. “I think the administration should review the CIA notes and records from the briefings and, consistent with national security, make them available to the public.”

The CIA could not be reached for comment. The agency is not required to release the documents, although it has made them available to members of Congress and key staff for review at the agency’s Langley headquarters.

The Intelligence Committee’s top Republican denied that the call for declassification was tied to Pelosi, instead insisting it would shed light on congressional oversight efforts.

“This effort is not about one person, but what lawmakers in this institution, in both parties, were aware of and supported at the time,” he said. “Releasing these records will help clear the air. Accountability for enhanced interrogation doesn’t begin with lawyers who offered opinions or interrogators in the field, it begins right here in the halls of Congress.”

In a statement released Friday, Pelosi said she had been informed only of techniques the CIA might use in the future.

Records show Pelosi aide Michael Sheehy attended a 2003 briefing with Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) in which CIA officers disclosed the use of waterboarding on Zubaydah.

Pelosi acknowledged in December 2007 that she had learned about the meeting and had concurred with a protest Harman filed with the CIA.

Democrats are stressing that Pelosi and Harman were not explicitly told of waterboarding until the 2003 briefing, at which point it had been used for six months, and that it continued after Harman protested. They also note that the House passed legislation that would have banned waterboarding months after Democrats took control in 2007.

Hoekstra has maintained for weeks that Pelosi knew about waterboarding used on terrorists and terrorism suspects. Last week, Hoekstra told The Hill he would be open to hearings on when certain members of Congress knew about the enhanced interrogation techniques.

“I wouldn’t have a problem with the Intelligence Committee or the Judiciary Committee having hearings on this,” he said on Friday. “If [House Judiciary Committee Chairman] John Conyers [Jr. (D-Mich.)] wants to have hearings, they shouldn’t call in the Department of Justice attorneys as their first witnesses. The first people that should be called in and held accountable ought to be Congress.”

Former Sen. Bob Graham (Fla.), who was the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence panel in September 2002, told The Washington Post on Monday that he was not told about waterboarding during a briefing he received around the same time Pelosi received hers.

CIA documents say Graham and Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) received briefings on techniques used on Zubaydah, though Graham said he was never told about the enhanced tactics.

Mike Soraghan contributed to this article.


49 posted on 05/11/2009 5:34:02 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34776

“Madam Doublespeaker”
By: Jacob Laksin
FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, May 12, 2009

SNIPPET: “What did Nancy Pelosi know and when did she know it?

That’s hardly the question that the Democratic House Speaker wanted asked when she recently threw her support behind the Orwellian-sounding “Truth Commission” to investigate former Bush administration staffers who drafted the harsh interrogation techniques that Democrats now call “torture.” But with evidence mounting that Pelosi was briefed on those same interrogation methods as far back as 2002 – and did nothing to oppose their use – Pelosi may soon become the object of the political inquisition she once hoped to lead.

Last week, for instance, it emerged that one of Pelosi’s central claims – that she, along with other Congressional Democrats, was entirely in the dark about the kinds of interrogation tactics being used on high-level terrorist detainees – was almost certainly fiction. Records released to Congress by the CIA revealed that Pelosi was among the Congressional leaders who in 2002 were informed that “enhanced interrogation techniques” (EITs) had been used on al-Qaeda operative Abu Zubaydah. Specifically, the records indicated that during a September 4, 2002 meeting, Pelosi was one of those briefed “on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of the particular EITs that had been employed.” There was no specific mention of waterboarding, but given that the Zubaydah was one of only three detainees on whom the procedure was used, there is every reason to think that Pelosi knew full well what interrogators were doing.

The point is significant because it directly contradicts Pelosi’s previous claim that she had been told only that enhanced interrogation techniques “could be used” but not that they were. “We were not — I repeat — were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used,” Pelosi said last month, insisting that she was informed only that “they could be used, but not that they would” be. After last week’s revelations, that defense no longer holds water.”


50 posted on 05/12/2009 3:35:02 AM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-70 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson