Cheney told CIA to withhold information

shawn555

Registered
Forum Member
Apr 11, 2000
7,190
130
63
berlin md
Cheney told CIA to withhold information: report
Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:44pm EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The CIA withheld information about a secret counter-terrorism program from Congress for eight years on orders from former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney, the New York Times said on Saturday.

Citing two unidentified sources, the newspaper said Central Intelligence Agency Director Leon Panetta disclosed Cheney's involvement in closed briefings to congressional intelligence committees late last month.

Panetta, who was named to head the agency earlier this year by President Barack Obama, ended the program, which remains secret, when he first learned of its existence from subordinates on June 23, the Times said.

Intelligence and congressional officials told the newspaper the agency began the program after the September 11 attacks and said it never became operational and did not involve CIA interrogation programs or domestic intelligence activities.

The newspaper said its efforts to reach Cheney through relatives and associates were unsuccessful.

Asked about the Times report, CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano said it was not the agency's practice to discuss classified briefings.

"When a CIA unit brought this matter to Director Panetta's attention, it was with the recommendation that it be shared appropriately with Congress. That was also his view, and he took swift, decisive action to put it into effect," Gimigliano said, declining to comment further.

Cheney was a key advocate in the Bush administration of using controversial interrogation methods such as waterboarding on terrorism suspects and has emerged as a leading Republican critic of Obama's national security policies.

Panetta has vowed not to allow coercive interrogation practices, secret prisons or the transfer of terrorist suspects to countries that may use torture, a pledge seen as a break with the agency's policies under President George W. Bush.

Critics of the agency, however, want it to be more forthcoming about its secret programs.

Fears the CIA withheld key information from Congress were rekindled in May when House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, accused the agency of failing to reveal in 2002 that it was waterboarding a terrorism suspect.

Panetta has rejected the Democratic speaker's accusation.

U.S. law requires the president to make sure intelligence committees are kept fully informed of intelligence activities, including any significant anticipated intelligence activity.

But the government has some leeway in disclosing such information.

(Additional reporting by James Vicini; Writing by Paul Simao; Editing by Philip Barbara)

? Thomson Reuters 2009
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,575
226
63
"the bunker"
the dems are conjuring up more smoke and mirrors to cover for pelosi's humiliating spell of amnesia earlier this year.....lol
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,575
226
63
"the bunker"
last time i checked,it was still called "the central intelligence agency"....not "the central information agency".....

:look:
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,489
168
63
Bowling Green Ky
--Won't be anything become of it--trying to cover Pelosi ass.

You got to love this admin

If I were Rebs would continue investigation of Holder last minute pardons of 10 most wanted criminal and others--Whats gumby do--make him AG -then proceeds to put tax cheats in head of IRS

It's the Amos and Andy show

ohd.jpg
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,575
226
63
"the bunker"
i wonder why "this" seekrit wasn`t leaked to the new york times like all the rest?....how did that happen?....

:mj03:

oh!!!...it wasn`t reported to congress... ;) :grins:
 

jer-z jock

Blow $$ Fast
Forum Member
Jun 11, 2007
4,564
3
0
the dems are conjuring up more smoke and mirrors to cover for pelosi's humiliating spell of amnesia earlier this year.....lol

I guess waiting for a few months, days, or weeks even, WOULD be better then spinning the story RIGHT AWAY ya know when it was fresh in everyones mind:jerkit:
 

maverick2112

Registered User
Forum Member
Jan 16, 2001
2,967
5
38
Wyoming
Like the CIA would ever let congress know everything its doing.............:mj07:

Is this suppose to be a joke........:shrug:
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,489
168
63
Bowling Green Ky
The audacity of wanting to kill AQ leaders after 911--
What the fck were we thinking :SIB

By SIOBHAN GORMAN

WASHINGTON -- A secret Central Intelligence Agency initiative terminated by Director Leon Panetta was an attempt to carry out a 2001 presidential authorization to capture or kill al Qaeda operatives, according to former intelligence officials familiar with the matter.
View Full Image



<CITE>Agence France-Presse/Getty Images</CITE> Sen. Dianne Feinstein said CIA Director Panetta, above, told lawmakers Vice President Cheney ordered information be withheld from Congress.


P1-AQ644_Panett_G_20090712190641.jpg




The precise nature of the highly classified effort isn't clear, and the CIA won't comment on its substance.
According to current and former government officials, the agency spent money on planning and possibly some training. It was acting on a 2001 presidential legal pronouncement, known as a finding, which authorized the CIA to pursue such efforts. The initiative hadn't become fully operational at the time Mr. Panetta ended it.
In 2001, the CIA also examined the subject of targeted assassinations of al Qaeda leaders, according to three former intelligence officials. It appears that those discussions tapered off within six months. It isn't clear whether they were an early part of the CIA initiative that Mr. Panetta stopped.
The revelations about the CIA and its post-9/11 activities have emerged amid a renewed fight between the agency and congressional Democrats. Last week, seven Democratic lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee released a letter that talked about the CIA effort, which they said Mr. Panetta acknowledged hadn't been properly vetted with Congress. CIA officials had brought the matter to Mr. Panetta's attention and had recommended he inform Congress.
Neither Mr. Panetta nor the lawmakers provided details. Mr. Panetta quashed the CIA effort after learning about it June 23.
The battle is part of a long-running tug of war between the executive branch and the legislature about how to oversee the activities of the country's intelligence services and how extensively the CIA should brief Congress. In recent years, in the light of revelations over CIA secret prisons and harsh interrogation techniques, Congress has pushed for greater oversight. The Obama administration, much like its predecessor, is resisting any moves in that direction.
Most recently, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in a dispute over what she knew about the use of waterboarding in interrogating terror suspects, has accused the agency of lying to lawmakers about its operations.
View Full Image



<CITE>European Pressphoto Agency</CITE> Dick Cheney


P1-AQ645_Cheney_G_20090712184300.jpg




Republicans on the panel say that the CIA effort didn't advance to a point where Congress clearly should have been notified.
CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano said the agency "has not commented on the substance of the effort." He added that "a candid dialogue with Congress is very important to this director and this agency."
One former senior intelligence official said the program was an attempt "to achieve a capacity to carry out something that was directed in the finding," meaning it was looking for ways to capture or kill al Qaeda chieftains.
The official noted that Congress had long been briefed on the finding, and that the CIA effort wasn't so much a program as "many ideas suggested over the course of years." It hadn't come close to fruition, he added.
Michigan Rep. Pete Hoekstra, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said little had been spent on the efforts -- closer to $1 million than $50 million. "The idea for this kind of program was tossed around in fits and starts," he said.
Senior CIA leaders were briefed two or three times on the most recent iteration of the initiative, the last time in the spring of 2008. At that time, CIA brass said that the effort should be narrowed and that Congress should be briefed if the preparations reached a critical stage, a former senior intelligence official said.
Amid the high alert following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, a small CIA unit examined the potential for targeted assassinations of al Qaeda operatives, according to the three former officials. The Ford administration had banned assassinations in the response to investigations into intelligence abuses in the 1970s. Some officials who advocated the approach were seeking to build teams of CIA and military Special Forces commandos to emulate what the Israelis did after the Munich Olympics terrorist attacks, said another former intelligence official.
"It was straight out of the movies," one of the former intelligence officials said. "It was like: Let's kill them all."
The former official said he had been told that President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney didn't support such an operation. The effort appeared to die out after about six months, he said.
Former CIA Director George Tenet, who led the agency in the aftermath of the 2001 attacks, declined through a spokesman to comment.
Also in September 2001, as CIA operatives were preparing for an offensive in Afghanistan, officials drafted cables that would have authorized assassinations of specified targets on the spot.
One draft cable, later scrapped, authorized officers on the ground to "kill on sight" certain al Qaeda targets, according to one person who saw it. The context of the memo suggested it was designed for the most senior leaders in al Qaeda, this person said.
Eventually Mr. Bush issued the finding that authorized the capturing of several top al Qaeda leaders, and allowed officers to kill the targets if capturing proved too dangerous or risky.
Lawmakers first learned specifics of the CIA initiative the day after Mr. Panetta did, when he briefed them on it for 45 minutes.
House lawmakers are now making preparations for an investigation into "an important program" and why Congress wasn't told about it, said Rep. Jan Schakowsky, an Illinois Democrat, in an interview.
On Sunday, lawmakers criticized the Bush administration's decision not to tell Congress. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat from California, hinted that the Bush administration may have broken the law by not telling Congress.
"We were kept in the dark. That's something that should never, ever happen again," she said. Withholding such information from Congress, she said, "is a big problem, because the law is very clear."
Ms. Feinstein said Mr. Panetta told the lawmakers that Mr. Cheney had ordered that the information be withheld from Congress. Mr. Cheney on Sunday couldn't be reached for comment through former White House aides.
The Senate's second-ranking official, Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, and Vermont Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, echoed those concerns and called for an investigation, an indication of how the politics of intelligence continue to bedevil the CIA.
Separately, Attorney General Eric Holder is considering whether to order a criminal probe into whether treatment of terrorism detainees exceeded guidelines set by the Justice Department, administration officials said.
President Barack Obama and Mr. Holder have said they don't favor prosecuting lawyers who wrote legal justifications for interrogation methods that the president and his attorney general have declared to be torture. They have sought to protect CIA officers who followed the legal guidelines.
"The Department of Justice will follow the facts and the law with respect to any matter," said Matthew Miller, a department spokesman. "We have made no decisions on investigations or prosecutions, including whether to appoint a prosecutor to conduct further inquiry."
<CITE class=tagline>?Evan Perez and Elizabeth Williamson contributed to this article.</CITE> Write to Siobhan Gorman at siobhan.gorman@wsj.com
<!-- article end -->
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
A couple of interesting sections from your post, Wayne - I guess even those responsible for letting this secret program go on weren't really in favor of it, either:

Senior CIA leaders were briefed two or three times on the most recent iteration of the initiative, the last time in the spring of 2008. At that time, CIA brass said that the effort should be narrowed and that Congress should be briefed if the preparations reached a critical stage, a former senior intelligence official said.
Amid the high alert following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, a small CIA unit examined the potential for targeted assassinations of al Qaeda operatives, according to the three former officials. The Ford administration had banned assassinations in the response to investigations into intelligence abuses in the 1970s.


-and-

The former official said he had been told that President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney didn't support such an operation. The effort appeared to die out after about six months, he said.
Former CIA Director George Tenet, who led the agency in the aftermath of the 2001 attacks, declined through a spokesman to comment.


-and-

Eventually Mr. Bush issued the finding that authorized the capturing of several top al Qaeda leaders, and allowed officers to kill the targets if capturing proved too dangerous or risky.

So, I guess Bush, Cheney, and CIA brass don't seem to agree with what appears to be the theme of your post. But, blaming someone outside the cabal for having the same thoughts that your heroes had? Can't go there, that's for should. And to ridicule them on top of it? Priceless.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,575
226
63
"the bunker"
the "obama administration" is playing all these libs for suckers....everytime unemployment goes up...or he wants to slide something past the sheeple regarding rationed healthcare,or the ridiculous crap and trade(that`s gonna cost everybody a fortune,not to mention putting us behind the 8-ball in regard to india,china and russia),all they do is conjure up "bush and cheney" and the mindless drones go into a trance and start frothing at the mouth....

pretty nifty...but you need the unthinking masses to cooperate(like good little sheep).....

it`s like invoking the boogeyman to get a little kid to behave...

i mean, this is what all banana republics do...first order of business for the new top bananas is to try and publicly hang the outgoing regime(fixing the economy and despots with nukes be damned)...

watch as cia employees start abandoning ship...panetta(with no real intelligence experience) is going to be doling out these so- called "secrets" at a carefully planned pace over the next 4 years.....

the left has has always had a deep, deep loathing of the military and the cia....and now with control of the w.h. and congress,this is their chance to destroy it....panetta,a nice enough guy,but a lifelong dem. operative,is point man on that....that`s why he`s there...

trying to close gitmo(the perfect prison for terrorists)...habeas corpus for "enemy combatants",gutting the military,refusing to utilize our own national resources to lessen our dependence on foreign oil,blaming his own country and kissing up to every despot and tinpot dictator in the world....:nono: ,....

how much more evidence do we need to show that bock and his suckerfish have zero desire to fight terror and keep us as the preeminent economic and military power in the world?...

g.l. to america...we`re gonna need it..
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
how much more evidence do we need to show that bock and his suckerfish have zero desire to fight terror and keep us as the preeminent economic and military power in the world?...

g.l. to america...we`re gonna need it..

While most of the above is more of the same, this last part is arguable, of course. I'm happy Obama is going after the real terrorists where they live, and being aggressive in those places where our efforts were hurt - if not crippled - by Bush policy and Iraq... Afghanistan and Pakistan. Now there are some right wingers that are ripping him for extending the wars and being more aggressive, spending the money, etc., and cutting and running from Iraq. I think he's doing the right thing on all fronts, and confronting the nebulous terra-rists, and finally where they are, and not the fake ones in Iraq.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,489
168
63
Bowling Green Ky
While most of the above is more of the same, this last part is arguable, of course. I'm happy Obama is going after the real terrorists where they live, and being aggressive in those places where our efforts were hurt - if not crippled - by Bush policy and Iraq... Afghanistan and Pakistan. Now there are some right wingers that are ripping him for extending the wars and being more aggressive, spending the money, etc., and cutting and running from Iraq. I think he's doing the right thing on all fronts, and confronting the nebulous terra-rists, and finally where they are, and not the fake ones in Iraq.

Hmm you must have missed Osama (thats with an S) claim that AQ would make its stand in Iraq ala "the mother of all battles" and that the U.S. didn't have stomach for it--

He was right the liberals including Hussein(that's with an O )was calling it quits-retreat-surrender-we lost.

Bottom line is our trops kicked AQ ass despite efforts of the liberals to the contrary.

--If ya wanna knopw what really pisses me off is Gumby's audacity while in Iraq using the word "we"--is there just one person here that has any doubt what result would have been with the 3 amigo's.

--and here is real killer--you got troops out there putting their lives on the line for a wanna be in chief--who wants to give "his brothers" as he calls them--everything from miranda rights to a personal blow job from him--and wants to prosecute those in charge of victory Iraq when he was waving the white flag.
--What a pathetic little man.
How do you think troops feel about Gumby's capture and release program--not sure I'd be taking any prisoners.

Only thing good about war in pakistan is we got both parties pulling for victory this time.

Seems all our anti war protesters have abated for some reason. O must have held out his hand and said this is "the good war" my children :)
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,575
226
63
"the bunker"
very seriously,just for a second...(even though you know how i love baitng my lib buddies...i`m making a serious point here).....i want you to take your tinfoil hats off for a second and consider what i`m saying objectively...

this program that everyone is hot and bothered about was a program that although NEVER implemented,was nothing more than a plan to hunt down and capture or kill al qaeda operatives...

that was the program in a nutshell...

not spying on the american people or stealing or some sort of traitorous activity...

is this what the dems really want to pursue with everything that this country has on the table?...seriously?...

if they start engaging in the political show trials of their opposition, they risk making civil transitions from one party to another near to impossible.....

at the very least, the outgoing party will have to destroy huge amounts of data just to make spurious political prosecutions that much more difficult...

i`m serious...we are bordering on banana republic territory here...and for what?....to make cheap political points against the last administration or to cover for that lame-brain pelosi`s stupid,pathetic ill-executed comments about the cia being "liars"?...

is it really smart to head down this path over a never implemented plan that was designed to kill our enemy and keep our country safe?....

these vendettas are so stupid...

theres plenty of real work to do....so do it...cover yourself in glory based on your own merits...
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Hmm you must have missed Osama (thats with an S) claim that AQ would make its stand in Iraq ala "the mother of all battles" and that the U.S. didn't have stomach for it--

Really busy this evening, and will try to respond to more of this and the wease, but had to comment on this particular first volley. I didn't miss his quote, I saw his quote. I have a brain, so I knew his quote was bullshit, and so did you, unless you know something nobody else on the planet didn't. I know, and will always know, that Al Qaida will never be involved in anything approaching "the mother of all battles," and that they never were a part of Iraq until Bush decided to go there. America has always had the stomach for fighting Al Qaida where it is, and for what it did to us. Iraq, as anyone objective knows, had and has nothing to do with Al Qaida. And us pulling out there will have nothing to do with Al Qaida, and they will not do anything there, if we are not there, for the most part. Show me proof - if and when it happens, because there is no proof to show they were really there to any extent even after we were there - and definitely not before.

There's plenty more wrong with your post, but this particular part was so wrong, I could not let it go. Now, on to dinner.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Cheney has no respect for our laws. Peroid. Has nothing to do with anyone else. And some one at CIA should go.
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
the "obama administration" is playing all these libs for suckers....everytime unemployment goes up...or he wants to slide something past the sheeple regarding rationed healthcare,or the ridiculous crap and trade(that`s gonna cost everybody a fortune,not to mention putting us behind the 8-ball in regard to india,china and russia),all they do is conjure up "bush and cheney" and the mindless drones go into a trance and start frothing at the mouth....

pretty nifty...but you need the unthinking masses to cooperate(like good little sheep).....

it`s like invoking the boogeyman to get a little kid to behave...

i mean, this is what all banana republics do...first order of business for the new top bananas is to try and publicly hang the outgoing regime(fixing the economy and despots with nukes be damned)...

watch as cia employees start abandoning ship...panetta(with no real intelligence experience) is going to be doling out these so- called "secrets" at a carefully planned pace over the next 4 years.....

the left has has always had a deep, deep loathing of the military and the cia....and now with control of the w.h. and congress,this is their chance to destroy it....panetta,a nice enough guy,but a lifelong dem. operative,is point man on that....that`s why he`s there...

trying to close gitmo(the perfect prison for terrorists)...habeas corpus for "enemy combatants",gutting the military,refusing to utilize our own national resources to lessen our dependence on foreign oil,blaming his own country and kissing up to every despot and tinpot dictator in the world....:nono: ,....

how much more evidence do we need to show that bock and his suckerfish have zero desire to fight terror and keep us as the preeminent economic and military power in the world?...

g.l. to america...we`re gonna need it..

obama-mr-spock.jpg

________"Curious... but highly illogical."_______
 

BobbyBlueChip

Trustee
Forum Member
Dec 27, 2000
20,716
290
83
53
Belly of the Beast
I'm probably more po'd that the this program wasn't implemented and also - who in the hell is leaking this shit. It is treason, not a hyprebole, it's treason.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top