« previous | MUCK HOME | next »

CIA Vet: Agency Doesn't Need Secret Program To Target al Qaeda
Earlier today, we raised a few questions about the notion that the secret CIA program that Dick Cheney reportedly withheld from Congress concerned an effort to kill or capture al Qaeda leaders. And now a top counter-terror expert is doing the same.
Vince Cannistraro, a former CIA counterterrorism chief, told TPMmuckraker that because we've been in a state of war against al Qaeda since just after September 11, there would have been no need for a secret CIA program that received special legal authorization.
Since the war on terror began, said Cannistraro, the CIA has routinely conducted operations targeting top Qaeda leaders. "The CIA runs drones and targets al Qaeda safe houses all the time," said Cannistraro, explaining that there's no important difference between those kinds of attacks and "assassinations" with a gun or a knife.
Cannistraro said the Defense Department has also conducted such targeted efforts, under an initiative that New Yorker reporter Seymour Hersh has written about.
In January 2005, Hersh reported:
Under Rumsfeld's new approach, I was told, U.S. military operatives would be permitted to pose abroad as corrupt foreign businessmen seeking to buy contraband items that could be used in nuclear-weapons systems. In some cases, according to the Pentagon advisers, local citizens could be recruited and asked to join up with guerrillas or terrorists. This could potentially involve organizing and carrying out combat operations, or even terrorist activities. Some operations will likely take place in nations in which there is an American diplomatic mission, with an Ambassador and a C.I.A. station chief, the Pentagon consultant said. The Ambassador and the station chief would not necessarily have a need to know, under the Pentagon's current interpretation of its reporting requirement.The new rules will enable the Special Forces community to set up what it calls "action teams" in the target countries overseas which can be used to find and eliminate terrorist organizations. "Do you remember the right-wing execution squads in El Salvador?" the former high-level intelligence official asked me, referring to the military-led gangs that committed atrocities in the early nineteen-eighties. "We founded them and we financed them," he said. "The objective now is to recruit locals in any area we want. And we aren't going to tell Congress about it." A former military officer, who has knowledge of the Pentagon's commando capabilities, said, "We're going to be riding with the bad boys."
The Rumsfeld initiative seems to be the subject of this report from a few hours ago in The Guardian.
But Cannistraro cautioned that that DOD program has nothing to do with the secret, unidentified CIA program which Cheney is said to have hid from Congress, and which CIA director Leon Panetta ended last month.
As for what the program did involve, Cannistraro suggested that it involved Americans as targets, and that it went beyond surveillance, but declined to elaborate. He added that, though Cheney may have directly ordered the CIA to keep Congress in the dark, the veep wasn't acting alone. "The approval was from the president," said Cannistraro.

















This is silly. Cheney ordered it and the Village Idiot rubber stamped it.
July 13, 2009 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
The rich boy who inherited his father's friends along with their funding and the Presidency ("W") would love for us to believe that. It might even conceivably be true, but that's not particularly likely.
July 13, 2009 11:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did anybody catch Big Dick Cheney's daughter saying those who support investigations are "angry" and "un-American."
Seems just like yesterday we were all being called un-American for not supporting the Greatest President Ever! And look we still are.
July 14, 2009 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
UnAmerican = Not supporting Republicans.
July 16, 2009 8:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wierd story. I think this one is meant to throw us off the trail of what Cheney REALLY did. In all honesty, don't we all think the CIA would have targeted Al Quaida operatives, if they were doing their job? The silly part is that they didn't get them. Doesn't sound like they were working at it too hard.
July 13, 2009 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
They were working to hard going after Cheney's "enemies" to worry about a few "terrorists".
July 16, 2009 8:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
From Hersh's description, that sounds like a DOD program to set up fake "terrorist" groups in various countries, and then actually commit terrorist crimes! What were they planning to do, blow up buildings in the hopes that their fake terrorist groups could then get the attention of Bin Laden?
If so, that would be a truly horrible idea. Could you imagine the sh-tstorm if the CIA was blowing up civilians as some sort of covert op? I'm sure Cheney's CIA program wasn't any better.
July 13, 2009 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
" In some cases, according to the Pentagon advisers, local citizens could be recruited and asked to join up with guerrillas or terrorists. This could potentially involve organizing and carrying out combat operations, or even terrorist activities."
"Involve even terrorist activities"
Consider the possibility that these covert "terrorist squads" were formed and created solely to foment terrorist acts in Muslim countries in order to justify the US presence there and to maintain a justification for continuing the "war on terror" reaping vast profits for Dick Cheney and his friends through their ownership of stock in the defense industries.
No wonder Panetta closed down the program as soon as he heard about it, and Congress was so appalled. Dick Cheney running both sides of the war on terror for his own profit.
.
July 14, 2009 8:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is the most plausible explanation I have seen so far for what might have "appalled" Panetta.
If it is true that Cheney was running both sides against each other in a "war on terror," then Obama's priority in shutting down terrorist operations should not be in Afghanistan, but here in the U.S.
July 14, 2009 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
It does make one wonder whether the BlackWater guards who massacred 17 Iraqi civilians in Nisour Square in Baghdad on 9/16/07 were one of the "terrorist" squads working for Dick Cheney and the CIA who failed to clear the area before being identified as BlackWater guards. Had they cleared the area without being identified it would have been just another "terrorist" attack by Al Queda.
They were sure gotten out of Iraq in a hurry and there has been no movement at all toward prosecuting them.
July 15, 2009 7:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Benazir Bhutto was NOT Al Qaeda.
Benazir Bhutto was NOT Al Qaeda.
Benazir Bhutto was NOT Al Qaeda.
Benazir Bhutto was NOT Al Qaeda.
Benazir Bhutto was NOT Al Qaeda.
Benazir Bhutto was NOT Al Qaeda.
July 13, 2009 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you saying that Cheney put into motion the assassination of Bhuto? Do you have evidence? Do you have a reason? Do you have a goal that they supposedly achieved?
Going by the photos, it seemed very low-tech, and not professional. Do you have something to say except that she was not Al Qaida? That is not enough in and of itself.
July 13, 2009 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnychOXj9Tg
July 13, 2009 11:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your link has nothing to do with my question. It has nothing to do with anything.
July 14, 2009 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
C'ville's right, you need to give us more. This is already conspiracy theorist stuff, but there IS some evidence and we know that there's more to come. There may be reason for your 6x repetitious comment, but what is it?
July 14, 2009 12:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Cannistraro suggested that it involved Americans as targets, and that it went beyond surveillance"
I think this is why it was so secret -a hit squad against American and Allied individuals who posed a real threat to Cheney's plans -invading Iraq -why not? We know about other things he did to this end -why would he not go all the way?
July 13, 2009 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well I have a simpler explanation that is both more sinister but doesn't require Cheney ordering Americans whacked. We know two things for a fact because they have been or become public.
One. The Cheney/Bush Administration openly pushed for the capability to obtain 'Total Information Awareness' on suspected terrorists and actually set up the Office of Information Awareness under DARPA and headed up by John Poindexter of Iran-Contra fame. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Awareness_Office
The IAO drew strong opposition in Congress amid fears it would snare innoncent Americans while ostensibly targetting 'terrorists' and was officially disbanded.
Two. The Cheney/Bush Administration covertly implemented a system of secret warrantless domestic wire-tapping that they contended was beyond Congressional or Judicial review.
Add One and Two and what do you get? How about an IAO that was never actually shut down but instead transferred to CIA control, extended to cover American citizens, and directed to report exclusively to the Office of the VP.
Sure it is speculative but it all fits.
If such a covert IAO been set up under CIA would the VP have instructed CIA to not inform Congress? Absolutely, that establishment would be in direct conflict with an act of Congress , Cheney and the CIA would have no choice.
If such a covert IAO had been set up it is plausible that it would have proceeded in starts and stops over a period of years? Well yes, it would make sense that something with this many technical components would be put in place in phases and that one piece might be more advanced than another.
If such a covert IAO had been set up would there be enough of an ongoing operation that Panetta was in a position to 'shut it down'? Absolutely, and this true whether it was just somewhere in planning and engineering or partially operational.
Could such a covert IAO program not come to Panetta's attention prior to last month? Well the CIA is a big place where information is routinely compartmentalized and probably rooms full of computer and comm equipment are routine. Put some bland name plate on the front door of the office suite and who would know?
Having come to Panetta's attention would such a program shock Norm? Well he is an ex-Congressman and fully aware that while Congress occasionally has to take an F-U from the executive branch, they never have to like it.
Is this kind of operation something that would shock even Republican Congressmen? Well yes, see the comment on F-U above.
Fourth Branch Dick believed the OVP, its operations, its very files were not subject to Congressional oversight or even any obligation to comply with the Presidential Records Act. He also was well known for demands for total secrecy and pushed to assert executive authority over information gathering beyond a legal bound that he never found binding to start with. Plus he was the kind of a guy who could say 'Fuck you' to a senior senator on the floor of the Senate. It is perfectly in character for RBC to order the CIA to set up a secret OIA organization with instructions to report only to OVP while keeping Congress in the dark.
Means. Motive. Opportunity. Doesn't prove a crime but is certainly suggestive.
July 14, 2009 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bruce:
"I have a simpler explanation that is both more sinister but doesn't require Cheney ordering Americans whacked."
Care to take a stab at explaining the anthrax letters and the convenient death of the main suspect before he could be brought to trial?
July 15, 2009 7:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know, I called into a right wing radio station this morning and they made the same argument regarding drone killings. This was after I brought up the movie Munich where Israeli's made assassinations lists. Here's the thing. These righties are all for this assassination list created by the CIA after they were dead wrong about Iraq during the same time period.
July 13, 2009 5:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where did the story that the CIA was covering up for Cheney Death Squads come from? Who pushed that? Clearly it's a red herring, and it was probably pushed by someone who knows the truth to be far worse. It's pretty obvious that "CIA had secret plan to kill Al Quaeda members" is not going to get too many people upset. In fact, it's going to bring up the obvious "Democrats want to stop going after Terrorists/Dems are weak on National Security" bullshit, which was probably what it was intended to do.
On the other hand, if the CIA was running a domestic surveillance program...
And Cheney kept it from Congress...
July 13, 2009 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. The CIA does not need a secret program to go after Al-Qaeda.
Meaning this "secret" program is really about something else.
What are they trying to hide?
July 13, 2009 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe it had something to do with yellow cake ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_uranium_forgeries
Reminds me of a line from William Stephenson, "nothing deceives like a document".
Whatever it is, it must be ugly as all hell given the tap dancing going on.
July 14, 2009 3:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Please!
Cheney death squads operating in the Middle East as opposed to operating in America as opposed to Total Information Awareness as opposed to surveilling American citizens in America as opposed to playing both sides of the war on terror as opposed to...
Why not all of the above?
It has yet to be shown that the "tin foil hats" have been radical enough in their thinking. When the facts have come out, those facts always seem worse than the most dire predictions of the most radical ideas of the "tin foil hatters".
.
July 16, 2009 8:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is the program codename "Blackbriar" or "Treadstone"?
July 13, 2009 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, it's "Blackfriar," but you're not the only one wondering that.
July 13, 2009 11:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
"When Jason Bourne contacts the British reporter of The Guardian Simon Ross that is researching the Operation Blackbriar that superseded the Project Treadstone to find out a clue to lead to his true identity, he is chased by CIA Deputy Director Noah Vosen, who wants to eliminate him."
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0440963/plotsummary
"-briar" or "-friar", you get my point: CIA hit squads.
July 14, 2009 9:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I remember reading about the secret commando teams Hersh cites back then and thinking these guys are going to be undermining governments around the world. Bad juju on a par with Iran and Guatemala in the early 50s and Nicarauga, Honduras and El Salvador in the 80s.
But I don't think that's what this is about. How long til we find Kerry campaign emails and transcripts of phone conversations that were stored in Cheney's safe?
July 13, 2009 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's the thing. As Dick's political hero, the other Dick, demonstrated, if you control the government and you start seriously equating people who merely oppose your policies as traitors, enemy sympathizers and threats to national security, you've given yourself permission to do pretty much anything you want to them, haven't you?
July 13, 2009 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or if you're just an amoral f*ck who thinks winning at all costs as evidenced by the hiring of the likes of Don Segretti and Karl Rove is not only the right thing to do but the only thing to do then it naturally follows that you'd bug the opposing party's campaign HQ or use the NSA to intercept their strategy calls.
As I lectured College Republicans once posing as a certain C. Colson, "You'll never get to the White House unless you have a few guys willing to go to the big house. Dan Rather still crosses the street when he sees me comin."
July 13, 2009 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Got it in one.
When during the campaign Kerry claimed he had been talking to foreign leaders Cheney was openly dismissive and came close to claiming "Never happened". At which point I asked myself "how could he know that for sure?"
I am thinking that question is on the verge of answering itself.
July 14, 2009 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
All these attempts to limit this (these) secret programs to one modality will IMO, just allow those involved to let this stuff out slowly enough to reduce the impact, and thus, the proper reaction. If Americans were targeted, even with acts that were not physical, but attacks on reputation and loyalty, together with the other surmised activities, this amounts to a modified coup in that the CIA and Cheney were operating with the power of the US government without the authority drawn from legal sources. This is a most dangerous situation, and in times less tumultuous than these to the fall of governments. Congress must insist that the president, and not the CIA shall set and carry out American foreign policy.
July 13, 2009 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't wait to see the binder labeled TPM and then see my file. There won't be a lot in it, just choice things like "Aug. 6, 2007, matyra called Cheney a dick (probably not referring to Cheney's name per se, but a insult equatable to 'ass' and also related to a specific body part."
Of course they'll have all our real names with relation to our usernames, causing a bit of a row.
July 14, 2009 12:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well I have assumed that from the time I put up my first 'Buck Fush' on dKos all these many moons ago that my name was at least on a watch list somewhere.
I did a fairly careful reading of the Patriot Act and about half of the blogosphere was technically guilty of 'terrorism' right up to Jan. 20, 2009. The language is written so broadly that if Cheney decided that something you wrote was 'intended' to 'intimidate' him into or against some official act even if in fact he was not intimidated into or against such act that you are by that fact a terrorist. And as such subject to everything that American citizen Jose Padilla endured.
It never comes out and says that "In respect to actions of government remotely related to National Security the First Amendment is not applicable" but that is what it means, or could mean.
I remain shocked that the American people and Congress simply abrogated in thought, action and even legislation every piece of the Bill of Rights. (Including the 2nd Amendment. The NRA will fight to the death for your right to carry a loaded firearm into a bar, but will meekly give up a 'loaded' shampoo bottle or nail-clipper at an airport security check.)
July 14, 2009 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cheney's secret team communicated through walky- talky rings obtained via box tops of Honey Comb cereal which advertised Saturday mornings on Fox-TV's show, "O'Reilly for Kids." Code for assassination was "Honey Comb's big, yeah yeah yeah."
July 13, 2009 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whatever is going on, I have a hunch that at least SOME of it is causing more harm to our nation than good. Why? Because those we select to investigate, fund, and oversee these guys have apparently been kept in the dark.
Not so bad a deal if and when anyone ever figures out how to make ALL those in power respect the commoners whom they are supposed to be working for. This scenario will not occur until hell freezes over, so until then, this secrecy is a wide open door for our democracy to fail...
Give a bad guy a gun (or nuclear bomb) and take away all restrictions and... this is the EXACT scenario we are now talking about...
Of course now that our other leaders have decided to protect these clowns (remember, those folks who we were counting on to bring the bad guys to justice... who instead immediately took impeachment and prosecution off the table) this will undoubtedly happen in the future... with some horrific repercussions... IMHO
July 13, 2009 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
anyone who is wondering how far people in power will go to pursue their agenda need to read this:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/northwoods.html?q=northwoods.html
it all happened a long time ago but consider that they were thinking of doing this in the 60s, how far (back) have we progressed since then?
July 13, 2009 7:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I especially "liked" this part: "planes would be hijacked."
July 15, 2009 7:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Cheney. Assassinations. Leahy. Daschle. Wellstone.
The primary targets were always domestic.
July 13, 2009 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you saying the the public blowback from the right-wing assassinations of JFK, RFK, Martin Luther King and the failure of the public questions to be "disappeared" has led them to more subtle killings like that of Wellstone? Does the plane crash of retired Senator John Tower as he was looking at becoming Secretary of Defense or perhaps for something he knew and couldn't be trusted to keep somehow fit into the new pattern of less obvious killings?
How about the anthrax letters targeting only Democrats? Right-wingers (with exception of the strange death of Tower) certainly seem to be safe from being targets over the last 50 years. I wonder what an actuary would say about the death prospects of Democrats and left wingers in the U.S.
July 13, 2009 11:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, Cheney got the job as SecDef after Tower was rejected by the senate - due in large part to Paul Wyrich (Heritage Foundation founder) dishing dirt on him. It was something like 24 months after that his plane crashed ... no idea if it's related, but if so, it was likely to cut Tower out of the picture from the military contracting racket he and Scowcroft had dominated up to that point(long story).
There is an awful lot more to the Cheney saga (and apparent motivations) than avenging Nixon IMO!
July 14, 2009 1:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
9/11 was an inside job. (seriously)
July 13, 2009 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
No it wasn't. Seriously.
July 13, 2009 11:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, here we go. Let's stick to what we know. In this case we know a few things and there's rumors of more, but at least some sort of coherent narrative is starting to take shape, a little.
In the 9/11 case, there's nothing but rumors--and those are too often perpetrated by the same credulous people who believe in aliens, faking the Moon landing, Sasquatch, and that Hostess Cup Cakes are real food.
July 14, 2009 12:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
"In the 9/11 case, there's nothing but rumors."
Tell it to these people:
http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/07/09/make-it-happen-on-purpose/
July 14, 2009 9:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
9/11 was too complex to have been an inside job. There was no way to coordinate the plane strikes.
Four planes, four targets. Why was the only target that was NOT struck not rigged for explosives? What if one of the planes bound for the WTC been taken down by its passengers? Are you just going to blow up the the non-struck building anyway?
If Bush/Cheney wanted to start a war in Iraq that could have just stashed another bomb in the WTC garage like the one in 1993, claimed they had evidence it was planted by some guy named Mohammed Atta and that he had been seen with an Iraqi agent in the Czech Republic. Isn't destorying multiple buildings in downtown Manhatten and temporarily wrecking a whole wing of the Pentagon kind of overkill for the desired effect?
One plane, one building or two planes, one building, now there you have a plausible basis for a conspiracy theory. Four planes, four targets, one not actually struck and the whole thing falls to pieces. There isn't enough baling wire and string in the world to tie this together.
In drama the word used is "overdetermined".
July 14, 2009 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
yes, I get your point.
The anthrax attacks that soon followed were far more economical in producing the desired effect.
A few people die, and Saddam's "mobile labs" eclipse bin Laden's cave.
But the anthrax would have been far less effective if it hadn't been keyed to 9/11 itself.
July 14, 2009 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bruce: " Isn't destorying multiple buildings in downtown Manhatten and temporarily wrecking a whole wing of the Pentagon kind of overkill for the desired effect?"
That depends on your desired effect. There is some evidence that there was a lot of stock manipulation going on right before 9/11/01 and that some people really made a lot of money based on foreknowledge. Especially in American Airlines stock. Taking out the NYSE erased most of these records and the US government has not seemed willing to publicize who profited from these transactions.
Also: "Why was the only target that was NOT struck not rigged for explosives?" What makes you think it wasn't rigged that way? It would be just as easy to remove any explosives as it would be to place them in the first place.
.
July 15, 2009 8:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
not sure what to make of Cannistraro's statement since he is trained in deception.
i think his views and statements would have to be carefully analyzed to see if there is any sign of deception in them.
his statement that they were targeting Americans is very provocative, to say the least.
but there is an ambiguity in the expression "targeting Americans": targeting Americans for ASSASSINATION or targeting Americans for SURVEILLANCE. it's not at all clear which he means though it is implied that it is the former.
i would wait and see what the utterly unreliable (probably CIA-friendly) MSM does with it: if they run with the Cannistraro narrative, it may point to fabrication.
on such an important matter, i would rather start with a credible source who has been following such atrocities (that we know of) in a seemingly case-by-case basis for years, such as that of Professor Juan Cole:
http://www.juancole.com/2009/07/truth-commission-needed-to-examine.html
July 13, 2009 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
one more thing.
i recall from a movie that i saw, "The Walker" (2007), starring Woody Harrelson, the Cheney-like character was represented as big into assassinating Americans--any that got in his way.
the ambiance of the movie felt very Cheneyesque
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0783608/
July 13, 2009 9:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I bet the Cheney CIA program was about - Spying on Congress and the Media, and anyone else who may have tried to stop the War in Iraq and all of the other Crimes.
And I bet he wanted spying for the Oil companies (his secret Energy meetings), and Wall Street shenanigans are probably involved here too (Big "spike" in Oil prices.
Didn't we hear people talking about the Kerry campaign being spied on - and his campaign donors. And didn't Joe Wilson imply about personal spying being done.
Don't forget cheney learned from Nixon - and you can bet he did all kinds of scary things for power and eliminating any news source or anyone who might get in his way.
July 13, 2009 10:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cheney's whole career was about avenging Nixon and punishing Democrats.
July 13, 2009 10:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
THis is right. I hadn't realized this fully until Monday, though I've seen things about it. I blogged about it Monday.
July 14, 2009 12:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is what I said yesterday at Hullabaloo. If something is "leaked" to the Washington Times and Wall Street Journal, and the "secret" is that "Cheney was targeting Al Qaeda", then the leak is a lie.
July 13, 2009 10:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
"And there's this guy from the CIA who's creeping around Laurel Canyon…"
Frank Zappa, 1967
July 13, 2009 10:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
All of this is about keeping anyone who knows/knew the truth from coming forward.
Also keep the big distraction going.
When you have 8 years of lies.....many people have to be kept in check.
July 13, 2009 11:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
This whole thread is almost pure paranoia.
I once had a friend who was a professional counselor point out to me that sometimes individuals suffering from paranoia do have real enemies. The mental symptoms and reactions are exactly the same as for those who do not have enemies, and the mental processes are equally damaging to those who possess them. Muslims in America on 9/12 might fit that description, as would members of some minority groups.
She went on to add that since the normal treatment for paranoids is to prove to them they don't have enemies and don't need the self-damaging defenses, it's really Hell to treat those paranoids who in fact do have real enemies.
I never was sure whether she was joking.
July 14, 2009 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
After 8 years of lies, what do you expect? Maybe this will turn out to be nothing, maybe it'll be a big something. But after 8 years of seeing things that our country has done that you never believed America was capable of doing*, then maybe you get to jumping at shadows. But, remember, that many of the shadows that we've seen have belonged to something scary and real.
*the Abu Ghraib photos, torture, holding foreigners in prison with no charges, invading a country for no reason whatsoever, mobile WMD labs, FISA bs, etc
July 14, 2009 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Operatives posing as corrupt foreign business people? One wonders if some of them pretended to want to buy supplies from a nation in Africa.
One also wonders how broad was the definition of terrorism.
Sorry about the paranoia.
July 14, 2009 2:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not at all sorry about paranoia.
Everytime I thought I was paranoid enough, I was proven wrong. I should have been even more paranoid.
.
July 15, 2009 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
On NPR this morning Mara Liaisson reports that "we don't know much about this program, but we *do* know that it was about targeting Al Qaeda leaders for assassination, beyond bombing them from the air" (this is not a direct quote, but I think the paraphrase captures accurately what she said).
On what basis do we "know" this? Who is it exactly who was in a position to know who said this? Someone speaking in an official capacity from CIA, or from Congress, or from the White House -- who? And what exactly did they say?
July 14, 2009 8:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
NPR in the last eight years has become a far from reliable news scource -I was proud to be an avid listener and supporter since the early Seventies -I remember the first "all things considered" -I remember when they changed the theme music for the first time, and what the old tune was -I remember the first "morning edition". After the invasion of Iraq is when I really noticed hearing more and more statements of the type you mention. What's really troubling is that the reporters have not changed -it's just that they are now subtly passing on blatant right wing talking points, and interviewing discredited Bush era officials without any challenges.
It saddens me to say that it has gotten so bad that I don't listen to NPR any more at all.
July 14, 2009 9:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Has anyone noticed that everytime one of daddy's illegal activities come out, Liz Cheney shows up on TV? If NOT informing Congress is illegal, then what is about "illegal" that the Cheney's don't understand? We are a nation of laws, and the Cheney's act as if our laws don't apply to them. I think they doth protest too much.
July 14, 2009 8:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Cannistraro suggested that it involved Americans as targets"
Like General Wherley?
http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/whatever-force-is-necessary/
July 14, 2009 9:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
My tin foil hat isn't handy, so I'm going to stay away from the more conspiratorial concerns here.
But in terms of addressing the fundamental question of why this program might be different than "merely" killing Al Qaeda via drones attacks and the like, there has been a clear indication that this issue could be one of geography/diplomacy.
The suggestion from many of the press reports on this subject is that instead of simply attacking Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the Cheney program is alleged to have been designed to go after targets in other countries -- including western allies of the US -- without participation, consent or knowledge of those countries.
If Cheney's assassins were going to be killing people the CIA considered connected to Al Qaeda in the UK, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Canada, Turkey, and similar locations, the dangers of the program become extremely obvious. If the US were gunning down British citizens and residents on the streets of London without the consent of the British government, the potential shit-storm in response if discovered would be hugely damaging to American relations with allied countries.
(The discussions on MSNBC last night framed this by looking at the continuing fall-out of the "extraordinary rendition" of a Muslim cleric from the streets of Milan by CIA operatives- although that event did involve the knowledge of at least some in the Italian government, and did not involve assassination.)
Perhaps such a program would not need additional legal authorization, but that doesn't address the legal obligation of the CIA to keep Congress (or at least the gang of eight) appraised of significant programs being undertaken. That would still be required, even if authorization were not needed.
But if this was the nature of the program, it wouldn't surprise me in the least that Cheney chose to keep Congress in the dark about it -- and the combination of lack of information and potential diplomatic fall-out would explain why Congressional Dems and Director Panetta view this as such a serious matter.
July 14, 2009 9:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
We were already kidnapping people from the streets of Western countries and using 'extra-ordinary rendition' to deliver them to regimes that were known to use torture. If we really just wanted to whack these guys we could have put them on a plane to a place where we just knew they would get killed 'trying to escape' or would 'suicide' or have a 'fatal heart attack' like the guy in Libya. For that matter we could just pull a Pinochet and drop them into the Med from 10,000 feet. If the bodies were found they could simply be dismissed as some illegal migrant drowned trying to reach Europe.
The whole 'shoot them down in the streets of London' is just too over-determined, there are so many simpler ways of getting the desired end. The KGB is known to have assassinated an overseas target with poison hidden in the tip of an umbrella. I think some people have been watching too many action movies here, if the U.S. decides some person in a western capital needs to be dead the CIA has ways of making that happen without explosives and machine gun fire.
July 14, 2009 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cheney's "secret" programs had nothing to do with capturing Al Qaeda or "protecting the nation"..it was all about covering up the crimes being committed by the Bush administrations...if Congress would have been informed of what these criminals were doing they would have been stopped and impeached (Bush/Cheney, etc., would have lost their power!)...don't you recall which administration Cheney and Rumsfeld came out of..?The Nixon Administration!... now...what if the Iraqi, Afghanistan, Iran...(etc.), governments captures any of our troops and tortures them...If your Son or Daughter, (etc.) is captured, will you then consider water boarding, shackles, chains, stress positions..days with out sleep and beatings (maybe to death)...torture?...you've just seen Obama help to throw what was made international law (mostly by the U.S.) at the Nuremberg Trials out the window...the United States Congress has been steadily throwing out the "rule of law", allowing our "Leaders" to be placed above the Laws..since Ford pardoned Nixon...the crimes have become more and more egrarious... from a botched B&E, (election fraud)..to lying, Treason, false imprisonment, false and wrongful convictions, unlawfully with holding information from Congress, to illegal wire-tapping, to torture, etc.,...what's the next crime?.. and when will it stop..? Never..? How far do we go before we finally realize we have become what we despise..?
July 14, 2009 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Given Cheney's well-known detestation of the CIA, the likelihood of his getting them to do anything constructive/popular is extremely low.
Getting them to do pointless, incriminating, detestable things to Americans and allies? That sounds more believable.
July 14, 2009 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
"since Ford pardoned Nixon...the crimes have become more and more egrarious... from a botched B&E, (election fraud)..to lying, Treason, false imprisonment, false and wrongful convictions, unlawfully with holding information from Congress, to illegal wire-tapping, to torture, etc.,...what's the next crime?.. and when will it stop..? Never..? How far do we go before we finally realize we have become what we despise..?"
Indeed. One could say that The Great Experiment has run its course. Or rather, much of the course had already been altered half a century ago, when the desire for Empire became the dominant paradigm, but the depths of that fundamental shift are only now becoming publicly apparent. It's easy to demonize Cheney, but he is merely the one brazen figurehead of a broad movement.
July 14, 2009 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mr. Cannistraro is correct about Americans being targets. Nor is this what you all think. The program wasn't set-up to outright shoot the targets. Rather, targets were tracked when in their cars, their schedule and which roads they would take known for the day because of electronic surveillance of their communications. Car accidents were staged with the hope that the target would perish in the accident, and their death appear as an accident. I was driving a 2000 ML430 Mercedes. It was a terrible car mechanically, but it also was a tank and kept me safe for 2 of the accidents. The other accident was while I still hadn't gotten my car back from repair with the first accident, and was driving my grandmother's 2000 Mercedes wagon. That is a very long car. The tow truck operator with tons of hardware on the front of the grill assigned to creme my grandmother's wagon took-out the entire backend of the car! Literally, he made a turn, had to go only feet to where I was stopped at a red light, and yet caused the entire backend of the car to have to be replaced!
I am head of federal operations for the inventing company of the tech std called "smart wallet" by NIST. Lockheed Martin's biometric smart card is so inferior to our platform that they aren't competition. Yet, Lockheed walked-off with all our contracts DARPA labeled as ours in 2002. The VP had our US RnD, then German RnD and then finally French RnD operations sabotaged. There simply was no place in the world we could retreat w/o being stalked by the CIA! Carol Lam interfered with the first conspiracy on our French RnD office so it took her removal and a 2nd conspiracy for the VP to succeed in the sabotage of our French office where he had CIA operatives embedded that French employment law prohited us from firing. The public learned something had happened when the Real ID standard was announced by Chertoff 3/4 of a year late (from when the Act specified), and it was because our French office filed for bankruptcy that morning. Meanwhile, it was me back in the US keeping the company funded. Kill me, and Lockheed's superior competition fails! The attempts on my life were made 2/04, 3/04, 5/04 and 9/05. 9/05 wasn't a car accident but literally that the Veep got so desperate he tried to have people beat me up. The location was very public, and only that scared-off my wannabe attackers. They weren't prepared to go to jail for the VP!
Lynne Cheney was on Lockheed's board of directors into 9/03. The Cheney family is full of Lockheed Martin shares the VP wanted to defend from office by abusing his post. Furthermore, Phil Perry, the VP's son-in-law was embedded by Cheney into various posts to keep my company from DOD and DHS contracting, and when not in government service was a Lockheed Martin lobbyist at Latham & Watkins.
By the way, Cheney was caught by a grand jury the public didn't know is convening by August of 2006, and was caught in newer conspiracies by the grand jury in 1/07 at the same time Perry was caught.
The other piece of information you all are seeking is about the other NSA programs controlled by the White House. Cameras were put into my house concentrated on areas where I dressed. I believe the original reason was to blackmail me. In 2/06 images of my bare body were posted to the internet in retribution to some comments I made to WaPO's website under the username Dawn The Doormat that were being widely read, and a phone call made to my county PD Police Commissioner's office to have me taken into custody on felony obscenity charges. The PC and his staff are family friends. They called my father before the FBI could intervene and silence them. This is how I found-out about what happened.
In 2/06 former US AG Gonzales said, "there are other White House spy programs the president doesn't know about." This is another way of saying that the VP did!
There also is the problem that more than 500 members of Congress are in Lockheed Martin's pocket!
I am having troubles with being silenced in some circles and really, this is the only outlet where I've been permitted to speak-out. This probably is b/c no one reads comments here. I suggest you all pay attention now b/c in weeks someone like DeLay, Buckham or Doolittle will be indicted. My company is to be apart of the indictments and this last avenue in which I've been able to speak-up will be closed to me. This is one of the last chances TPM readers have to get their questions answered.
July 14, 2009 11:09 PM | Reply | Permalink