Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
EJ
Published Letters: 486 Editor's Choice: 1
Hayden knows that for now, torture is off the table. He doesn't want that to be a permanent state of affairs. Here's what Hayden/Mukasey said in the WSJ:
Moreover, disclosure of the details of the program pre-empts the study of the president's task force and assures that the suspension imposed by the president's executive order is effectively permanent. There would be little point in the president authorizing measures whose nature and precise limits have already been disclosed in detail to those whose resolve we hope to overcome. This conflicts with the sworn promise of the current director of the CIA, Leon Panetta, who testified in aid of securing Senate confirmation that if he thought he needed additional authority to conduct interrogation to get necessary information, he would seek it from the president. By allowing this disclosure, President Obama has tied not only his own hands but also the hands of any future administration faced with the prospect of attack.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123993446103128041.html
That's a good thing, if it can be believed.
From the WSJ article written by Hayden/Mukasey: "Soon after he was sworn in, President Barack Obama signed an executive order that suspended use of these techniques and confined not only the military but all U.S. agencies...."
But you have to look really hard to find it beyond the usual suspects. Here's an example from an unlikely source about this news:
From an EFF blog post: Last week, the Justice Department told a federal judge (PDF) in Washington that the FBI – despite the new Holder FOIA guidelines – will not be altering its previous decision to withhold a substantial amount of information concerning its massive Investigative Data Warehouse (IDW), which the Bureau describes as "the FBI’s single largest repository of operational and intelligence information." The database contains hundreds of millions of records and has been characterized as an "uber-Google."
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/obamas-transparency-
From the unlikely source (AP) with no anonymous officials:
The administration's handling of the decision fit a pattern that emerged this month: Highly visible announcements when Obama breaks with Bush policy in order to open hidden government files, but an almost stealthy rollout of decisions when Obama endorses secrecy....
There's no lack of openness when Obama changes Bush policies....
With a flourish, the Justice Department has opened two batches of secret legal opinions crafted to support Bush's anti-terrorism polices. Just Thursday, four Bush-era legal opinions that relaxed restrictions against torture of prisoners were made public, accompanied by a department news release and a statement from Obama.
In contrast, the decision to endorse Bush's withholding of records about the FBI's data warehouse was filed in federal court last Monday with no other public word from the current administration.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g7opNfurujBilLAKPJydC41JOsmAD97LISR00
http://innovation.cq.com/liveonline/54/landing
According to Stein, this isn't coming out now for any reason other than that he's just been able to get to it.
Claire from Washington DC: Why are your sources coming forward now? There must be some reason why they have waited almost three years.
Jeff Stein: Thanks. I've seen a lot of speculation about that online.
The fact is, there is no "timing" to any "leak."
No sources "came forward," so to speak.
I learned about this quite a while ago and was just recently able to turn my full attention to it. Total coincidence.
Sandy from Brooklyn: Why is all this stuff coming out now?
Jeff Stein:No special reason.
The story was not "planted" on me to influence any other events -- in particular the looming AIPAC trial or things related to the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program. I've known about it for some time but just not been able to pull it together until now for various reasons.
Thank YOU, bystander, for the FDL stuff (and probably more that I haven't had a chance to see yet).
I remember your letters - they were inspiring. Your time was not wasted.
which Retired Military Patriot posted about above:
April 20 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama defended his decision to release memos detailing harsh interrogation techniques used by the CIA and told agency employees that they will have his full support.
“I know that the last few days have been difficult,” Obama told about 1,000 employees of the Central Intelligence Agency in Langley, Virginia. “Don’t be discouraged’ that we have to acknowledge potentially we’ve made some mistakes.”
He promised he would fight to protect the integrity of classified information. In an indirect jab at the Bush administration, Obama vowed his administration “will protect your identities and your security as you vigorously pursue your missions.”
The article goes on to reference Valerie Plame.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aC.my32K8GG4&refer=us
I think Cheney can request that the documents be made public the same way the ACLU did. What I don't understand is how could evidence that torture "worked" be declassified and made public without revealing intelligence? It seems to me that what can be done is being done:
In response to those efforts [investigations by the WH and the Senate Intelligence Committee], the CIA has begun assembling thousands of classified cables that contain daily reports from the agency's secret prisons, tracking the interrogation methods used on high-value detainees and how much information was obtained as a result.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-interrogation18-2009apr18,0,6342280.story
The WH and the Senate Intelligence Committee will have clearance to see these documents. But, oh how the right will scream if Obama isn't able to make these documents public.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
