Former Vice President Dick Cheney defended the CIA's aggressive interrogation of terrorists — including techniques that may have skirted the law — by saying it kept the nation safe from "mass casualty attacks" for eight years. Read more ...
Showing posts with label CHENEY. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CHENEY. Show all posts
Monday, August 31, 2009
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Cheney’s Speech – The Top 10 Lines
Former Vice President Dick Cheney spoke Thursday on national security at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington, D.C. think tank. Here are the top ten lines in the speech, as compiled by the editors of FOX Nation:
No. 10: The administration has found that it’s easy to receive applause in Europe for closing Guantanamo. But it’s tricky to come up with an alternative that will serve the interests of justice and America’s national security.
No. 9: In the category of euphemism, the prizewinning entry would be a recent editorial in a familiar newspaper that referred to terrorists we’ve captured as, quote, “abducted.” Here we have ruthless enemies of this country, stopped in their tracks by brave operatives in the service of America, and a major editorial page makes them sound like they were kidnap victims, picked up at random on their way to the movies.
No. 8: If fine speech-making, appeals to reason, or pleas for compassion had the power to move them, the terrorists would long ago have abandoned the field. And when they see the American government caught up in arguments about interrogations, or whether foreign terrorists have constitutional rights, they don’t stand back in awe of our legal system and wonder whether they had misjudged us all along. Instead the terrorists see just what they were hoping for – our unity gone, our resolve shaken, our leaders distracted. In short, they see weakness and opportunity.
No. 7: Yet having reserved for himself the authority to order enhanced interrogation after an emergency, you would think that President Obama would be less disdainful of what his predecessor authorized after 9/11. It’s almost gone unnoticed that the president has retained the power to order the same methods in the same circumstances. When they talk about interrogations, he and his administration speak as if they have resolved some great moral dilemma in how to extract critical information from terrorists. Instead they have put the decision off, while assigning a presumption of moral superiority to any decision they make in the future.
No. 6: To completely rule out enhanced interrogation methods in the future is unwise in the extreme. It is recklessness cloaked in righteousness, and would make the American people less safe.
No. 5: This recruitment-tool theory has become something of a mantra lately, including from the President himself. And after a familiar fashion, it excuses the violent and blames America for the evil that others do. It’s another version of that same old refrain from the Left, “We brought it on ourselves.” It is much closer to the truth that terrorists hate this country precisely because of the values we profess and seek to live by, not by some alleged failure to do so. Nor are terrorists or those who see them as victims exactly the best judges of America’s moral standards, one way or the other.
No. 4: Intelligence officers of the United States were not trying to rough up some terrorists simply to avenge the dead of 9/11. We know the difference in this country between justice and vengeance.
No. 3: To the very end of our administration, we kept al-Qaeda terrorists busy with other problems. We focused on getting their secrets, instead of sharing ours with them. And on our watch, they never hit this country again. After the most lethal and devastating terrorist attack ever, seven and a half years without a repeat is not a record to be rebuked and scorned, much less criminalized. It is a record to be continued until the danger has passed.
No. 2: In the fight against terrorism, there is no middle ground, and half-measures keep you half exposed. You cannot keep just some nuclear-armed terrorists out of the United States, you must keep every nuclear-armed terrorist out of the United States. Triangulation is a political strategy, not a national security strategy.
No. 1: Critics of our policies are given to lecturing on the theme of being consistent with American values. But no moral value held dear by the American people obliges public servants to sacrifice innocent lives to spare a captured terrorist from unpleasant things. And when an entire population is targeted by a terror network, nothing is more consistent with American values than to stop them.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
White House: Closing Gitmo a 'Hasty Decision' - Updated
Updated: White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said closing the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, was a “hasty decision,” in his daily press briefing with reporters. But he later backtracked in the briefing and clarified that he was referring to decisions made under George W. Bush.
The White house spokesman was asked whether it was a "mistake" to request the resources to close Guantanamo Bay without a plan.
"It was a mistake to set up something that became a rallying cry for enemies around the world and to hope for so long that we could simply continue to perpetuate the theory of keeping detainees there while the courts ruled otherwise," Gibbs responded.
"I don't doubt that the President--and I think he'll say this tomorrow--that we've made some hasty decisions that are now going to take some time to unwind. And closing Guantanamo Bay obviously is one of those decisions," he added.
But later in the briefing Gibbs was asked a follow up question on what looked like a startling admission. Gibbs said that he meant that the "hasty decisions" were made by the previous administration.
"And you said hasty," a reporter asked, “you talked about hasty decisions tomorrow, that it's going to take some time to unwind. Are you talking about the President's hasty decisions or the previous administration's hasty decision as it regards Guantanamo?”
"No, no, no, I'm sorry," Gibbs said. "My boss might want to know the answer to that. No, no, I'm discussing decisions that were made in the previous administration."
The reporter asked again, “You were not referring to the executive order?”
“No, no, no,” Gibbs said.
So either the White House spokesman misspoke or said too much. That’s for the public to decide. To some critics, Gibbs comment might evoke Michael Kinsley's famous political adage. Kinsley defined a gaffe in Washington as a moment when someone tells the truth.
Guantanamo Bay has become a political minefield for the president. President Obama’s decision to close the controversial detention center in the early days of his presidency was met with adulation on the political left and earned headlines in newspapers across the world. It was seen as a clear break from Bush-era national security policy.
But recently Obama has broken with liberals over his decision to continue Bush-era military commissions to try Guantanamo Bay prisoners and his decision not to release photographs allegedly depicting U.S. soldiers abusing detainees in Afghanistan and Iraq. To an extent, this split with the political left is indicative of the difference between campaigning and governing.
Gibbs’ gaffe Wednesday (Click here to see video) may have only further aggravated large portions of Obama's political base. Liberals rallied to Obama during the campaign in part because of his strong criticism of George W. Bush's "war on terror."
White House critics have long argued that closing Guantanamo Bay was one policy shift easier said than done.
Gibbs reversal, on what looked like a mega reversal, comes on the eve of a major national security speech by Obama. Obama is expected to address, in part, Senate Democrats' opposition to funding the closure of Gitmo. Democrats have withheld funding closure until the White House offers a clear plan on how the detention center will be shut down and importantly, where detainees will be sent.
The closure of Guantanamo Bay has quickly turned into a "not in my backyard" issue. No U.S. representative wants to explain why a Gitmo detainee was allowed to live in his or her district. In the same vein, Obama has found U.S. allies no more willing to accept detainees. France and Britain each accepted one former detainee. There are about 240 detainees at Guantánamo Bay and 30 are clear for release.
David Paul Kuhn is the Chief Political Correspondent for RealClearPolitics and the author of The Neglected Voter
By: David Paul Kuhn
President Obama decided to wedge himself in before a planned speech by former Vice President Cheney on Guantanamo Bay, Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, CIA Memos and American Safety. Obama had not definitive plan, came across as narcissistic kid or like he was still campaigning and attacked the Bush-Cheney White House no less than 28-times. This after he keeps saying that we (he) aren’t going to point fingers… HMMM… wonder when that is going to happen? Obama’s Speech came across as a pre-emptive unprepared rebuttal to Vice President Cheney’s Speech. He was talking from an 9/10 perspective… as if there were no danger.
Vice President Cheney, who would rather be fishing and hunting and has no political ambition or anything to gain from his president campaign, except to protect the American People came across as prepared and sincere. His speech was very informative, reminding us of the stakes and threats that the Bush White House was operating under after 9/11. He took responsibility, let us know that there were only 3-people water-boarded… one the engineer of 9/11, and reminded us that the results of the water-boarding saved us from an attack on Los Angeles.
After President Obama’s and Dick Cheney’s speeches today the work on Capital Hill continued unaffected. There was no additional discussion of funds to close Guantanamo Bay~
- Comments have poured in from 9/11 families and survivors thanking Vice President Cheney.
- CNN, a liberal network, just did a poll showing that President Cheney’s approval rating has increased by 8% since he has been speaking out over the past month.
- Vice President Cheney is still asking to have CIA Memos declassified to support his position. Obama refuses… The memos that were released were redacted and left out the results of the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques.
Also released today…
- 1 out of 7 released Guantanamo Bay releasees goes back to anti-American terrorist activities
- Under the Clinton Administration and others, torture was outsourced to Egypt and other countries… and it wasn’t water-boarding.
Related Resources:
- Obama vs Cheney...
- Click here to read the transcript of Dick Cheney's national security speech at the American Enterprise Institute.
- CIA denies Cheney request to declassify memos
- Cheney Says: Obama Endangers the Nation
Posted: Daily Thought Pad
Obama vs Cheney...
Cheney on Obama: 'Recklessness Cloaked in Righteousness'
Today's speech... about Gitmo, squeezed in before Cheney's speech... planned for weeks came across as the Serious Adult (Cheney) verses the Narcissistic PC Man-Chiled (Obama) - Never a Fair Fight
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Muslims: 'We Do That On First Dates'
Only the second of those alleged facts is true: The president's release of the Department of Justice interrogation memos undoubtedly hurt America's image abroad, as we are snickered at in capitals around the world, where they know what real torture is. The Arabs surely view these memos as a pack of lies. What about the pills Americans have to turn us gay?
The techniques used against the most stalwart al-Qaida members, such as Abu Zubaydah, included one terrifying procedure referred to as "the attention grasp." As described in horrifying detail in the Justice Department memo, the "attention grasp" consisted of:
"(G)rasping the individual with both hands, one hand on each side of the collar opening, in a controlled and quick motion. In the same motion as the grasp, the individual is drawn toward the interrogator."
The end.
There are rumors that Dick "Darth Vader" Cheney wanted to take away the interrogators' Altoids before they administered "the grasp," but Department of Justice lawyers deemed this too cruel.
And that's not all! As the torments were gradually increased, next up the interrogation ladder came "walling." This involves pushing the terrorist against a flexible wall, during which his "head and neck are supported with a rolled hood or towel that provides a C-collar effect to prevent whiplash."
People pay to have a lot rougher stuff done to them at Six Flags Great Adventure. Indeed, with plastic walls and soft neck collars, "walling" may be the world's first method of "torture" in which all the implements were made by Fisher-Price.
As the memo darkly notes, walling doesn't cause any pain, but is supposed to induce terror by making a "loud noise": "(T)he false wall is in part constructed to create a loud sound when the individual hits it, which will further shock and surprise." (!!!)
If you need a few minutes to compose yourself after being subjected to that horror, feel free to take a break from reading now. Sometimes a cold compress on the forehead is helpful, but don't let it drip or you might end up waterboarding yourself.
The CIA's interrogation techniques couldn't be more ridiculous if they were out of Monty Python's Spanish Inquisition sketch:
Cardinal! Poke her with the soft cushions! ...
Hmm! She is made of harder stuff! Cardinal Fang! Fetch ... THE COMFY CHAIR!
So you think you are strong because you can survive the soft cushions. Well, we shall see. Biggles! Put her in the Comfy Chair! ...
Now -- you will stay in the Comfy Chair until lunchtime, with only a cup of coffee at 11.
Further up the torture ladder -- from Guantanamo, not Monty Python -- comes the "insult slap," which is designed to be virtually painless, but involves the interrogator invading "the individual's personal space."
If that doesn't work, the interrogator shows up the next day wearing the same outfit as the terrorist. (Awkward.)
I will spare you the gruesome details of the CIA's other comical interrogation techniques and leap directly to the penultimate "torture" in their arsenal: the caterpillar.
In this unspeakable brutality, a harmless caterpillar is placed in the terrorist's cell. Justice Department lawyers expressly denied the interrogators' request to trick the terrorist into believing the caterpillar was a "stinging insect."
Human rights groups have variously described being trapped in a cell with a live caterpillar as "brutal," "soul-wrenching" and, of course, "adorable."
If the terrorist manages to survive the non-stinging caterpillar maneuver -- the most fiendish method of torture ever devised by the human mind that didn't involve being forced to watch "The View" -- CIA interrogators had another sadistic trick up their sleeves.
I am not at liberty to divulge the details, except to mention the procedure's terror-inducing name: "the ladybug."
Finally, the most savage interrogation technique at Guantanamo was "waterboarding," which is only slightly rougher than the Comfy Chair.
Tens of thousands of our troops were waterboarded over the past three decades as part of their training, but not until it was done to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed -- mastermind of the 9/11 attack on America -- were liberal consciences shocked.
I think they were mostly shocked because they couldn't figure out how Joey Buttafuoco ended up in Guantanamo.
As non-uniformed combatants, all of the detainees at Guantanamo could have been summarily shot on the battlefield under the Laws of War.
Instead, we gave them comfy chairs, free lawyers, better food than is served in Afghani caves, prayer rugs, recreational activities and top-flight medical care -- including one terrorist who was released, whereupon he rejoined the jihad against America, after being fitted for an expensive artificial leg at Guantanamo, courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer.
Only three terrorists -- who could have been shot -- were waterboarded. This is not nearly as bad as "snowboarding," which is known to cause massive buttocks pain and results in approximately 10 deaths per year.
Normal human beings -- especially those who grew up with my older brother, Jimmy -- can't read the interrogation memos without laughing.
At Al-Jazeera, they don't believe these interrogation memos are for real. Muslims look at them and say: THIS IS ALL THEY'RE DOING? We do that for practice. We do that to our friends.
But The New York Times is populated with people who can't believe they live in a country where people would put a caterpillar in a terrorist's cell.
by Ann Coulter - Legal Affairs Correspondent for HUMAN EVENTS and Author including: High Crimes and Misdemeanors
Related Articles:
Monday, April 27, 2009
Hoekstra: Congress Knew About Memos
Rep. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan says it’s high time to have the CIA declassify and release its memos on the successes of enhanced CIA interrogations of terrorist detainees.
The ranking Republican on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair had touted the “[h]igh value information” that came from interrogations enhanced with water-boarding techniques. Blair concluded that when those methods were used they provided a deeper understanding of the al-Qaida enemy, Hoekstra noted.
“Members of Congress calling for an investigation of the enhanced interrogation program should remember that such an investigation can’t be a selective review of information, or solely focus on the lawyers who wrote the memos, or the low-level employees who carried out this program,” Hoekstra wrote.
Congress Knew
“I have asked Mr. Blair to provide me with a list of the dates, locations and names of all members of Congress who attended briefings on enhanced interrogation techniques,” Hoekstra added.
He argued that in addition to exposing the names of the initiated on Capitol Hill, any fair investigation would also require that the Obama administration release the memos on the successes of the controversial program requested by former Vice President Dick Cheney.
Cheney told Fox News this week that in his opinion the American people should be made aware how successful enhanced interrogation methods had been in preventing terrorist attacks and saving lives.
He added that once this was understood by the public, they would comprehend why such techniques had been given the go-ahead.
“I haven’t talked about it, but I know specifically of reports that I read, that I saw, that lay out what we learned through the interrogation process and what the consequences were for the country,” Cheney said, according to a report by Fox News.
Cheney further noted that he has asked the CIA to declassify those memos. He has reportedly also written to the White House asking for documents showing the effectiveness of water-boarding to be made public.
For those that would argue against releasing the success memos or even the names of the members of Congress who knew all about the enhanced interrogations, Hoekstra pointed out that
President Obama went against the advice of CIA director Leon Panetta and four prior CIA directors to reveal the memos.
“It was not necessary to release details of the enhanced interrogation techniques, because members of Congress from both parties have been fully aware of them since the program began in 2002,” Hoekstra wrote.
Hoekstra also chided the president for his backtracking this week, pointing to how the chief executive had now “opened the door to possible prosecution of Justice Department attorneys who provided legal advice with respect to the enhanced interrogations program.”
“The president also signaled that he may support some kind of independent inquiry into the program. It seems that he has capitulated to left-wing groups and some in Congress who are demanding show trials over this program,” he wrote.
Any investigation, Hoekstra wrote, must include an expert assessment of “the likely damage done to U.S. national security by Mr. Obama’s decision to release the memos over the objections of Mr. Panetta and four of his predecessors.”
Source: Newsmax
Posted: Daily Thought Pad
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
The CIA's Questioning Worked
In releasing highly classified documents on the CIA interrogation program last week, President Obama declared that the techniques used to question captured terrorists "did not make us safer." This is patently false. The proof is in the memos Obama made public -- in sections that have gone virtually unreported in the media.
Consider the Justice Department memo of May 30, 2005. It notes that "the CIA believes 'the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why al Qaeda has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001.' . . . In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including [Khalid Sheik Mohammed] and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques." The memo continues: "Before the CIA used enhanced techniques . . . KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, 'Soon you will find out.' " Once the techniques were applied, "interrogations have led to specific, actionable intelligence, as well as a general increase in the amount of intelligence regarding al Qaeda and its affiliates."
Specifically, interrogation with enhanced techniques "led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the 'Second Wave,' 'to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into' a building in Los Angeles." KSM later acknowledged before a military commission at Guantanamo Bay that the target was the Library Tower, the tallest building on the West Coast. The memo explains that "information obtained from KSM also led to the capture of Riduan bin Isomuddin, better known as Hambali, and the discovery of the Guraba Cell, a 17-member Jemmah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the 'Second Wave.' " In other words, without enhanced interrogations, there could be a hole in the ground in Los Angeles to match the one in New York.
The memo notes that "[i]nterrogations of [Abu] Zubaydah -- again, once enhanced techniques were employed -- furnished detailed information regarding al Qaeda's 'organizational structure, key operatives, and modus operandi' and identified KSM as the mastermind of the September 11 attacks." This information helped the intelligence community plan the operation that captured KSM. It went on: "Zubaydah and KSM also supplied important information about al-Zarqawi and his network" in Iraq, which helped our operations against al-Qaeda in that country.
All this confirms information that I and others have described publicly. But just as the memo begins to describe previously undisclosed details of what enhanced interrogations achieved, the page is almost entirely blacked out. The Obama administration released pages of unredacted classified information on the techniques used to question captured terrorist leaders but pulled out its black marker when it came to the details of what those interrogations achieved.
Yet there is more information confirming the program's effectiveness. The Office of Legal Counsel memo states "we discuss only a small fraction of the important intelligence CIA interrogators have obtained from KSM" and notes that "intelligence derived from CIA detainees has resulted in more than 6,000 intelligence reports and, in 2004, accounted for approximately half of the [Counterterrorism Center's] reporting on al Qaeda." The memos refer to other classified documents -- including an "Effectiveness Memo" and an "IG Report," which explain how "the use of enhanced techniques in the interrogations of KSM, Zubaydah and others . . . has yielded critical information." Why didn't Obama officials release this information as well? Because they know that if the public could see the details of the techniques side by side with evidence that the program saved American lives, the vast majority would support continuing it.
Critics claim that enhanced techniques do not produce good intelligence because people will say anything to get the techniques to stop. But the memos note that, "as Abu Zubaydah himself explained with respect to enhanced techniques, 'brothers who are captured and interrogated are permitted by Allah to provide information when they believe they have reached the limit of their ability to withhold it in the face of psychological and physical hardship." In other words, the terrorists are called by their faith to resist as far as they can -- and once they have done so, they are free to tell everything they know. This is because of their belief that "Islam will ultimately dominate the world and that this victory is inevitable." The job of the interrogator is to safely help the terrorist do his duty to Allah, so he then feels liberated to speak freely.
This is the secret to the program's success. And the Obama administration's decision to share this secret with the terrorists threatens our national security. Al-Qaeda will use this information and other details in the memos to train its operatives to resist questioning and withhold information on planned attacks. CIA Director Leon Panetta said during his confirmation hearings that even the Obama administration might use some of the enhanced techniques in a "ticking time bomb" scenario. What will the administration do now that it has shared the limits of our interrogation techniques with the enemy? President Obama's decision to release these documents is one of the most dangerous and irresponsible acts ever by an American president during a time of war -- and Americans may die as a result.
By Marc A. Thiessen – Posted: Tuesday, April 21, 2009
The writer, a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution, served in senior positions in the Pentagon and the White House from 2001 to 2009, most recently as chief speechwriter for President George W. Bush.
Related Articles:
Posted: Daily Thought Pad
Jack Bauer Is Officially Dead
FNC
So, like you, I enjoy watching "24," often in a shorty robe, clinging to my favorite pet Roberto, who turned 19 last March. (I bought him a collar.)
As you know, the show is about a dude trying to save the U.S. from annihilation. And he always succeeds, sometimes shirtless.
Of course, in real life this is what we call fantasy. But, now we just call it criminal.
On Tuesday, President Obama said he's open to charges brought against those evil Bush lawyers behind the just-released memos justifying the interrogation techniques used against folks who wanted to blow up our country. Or more specifically, Los Angeles.
Which is why I bring up "24." Not only is it about this sort of thing, it's made in L.A., a place that might have been devastated if it weren't for those evil lawyers.
Writing in The Washington Post, Marc Thiessen notes that "enhanced techniques" led to the discovery of a planned hijacking of an airliner, sent to crash into the Library Tower, the tallest building on that coast. Thiessen writes that the info culled from these interrogations led to the arrests of those who would have attempted this attack. aNow, Thiessen once wrote speeches for Bush, but that doesn't change the point: that although Obama released memos revealing the techniques, what those actions actually achieved is blacked out.
Which is odd.
I mean, what goes on behind the scenes is what saves us. Now we know, however, that our president finds that sort of thing yucky and, as a consequence, he'll share the info with everyone. Except the part where it says it works.
Jack Bauer is officially dead.
And if you disagree with me, then you sir are worse than "Two and a Half Men."
Greg Gutfeld hosts "Red Eye with Greg Gutfeld" weekdays at 3 a.m. ET. Send your comments to: redeye@foxnews.com
Related Articles:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)