Torture Appropriations
Greg Sargent suggests the error revealed today in the CIA briefing list–that the CIA claims an appropriations staffer attended but he didn’t–is no big deal.
This, obviously, is not the biggest foul-up in the world.
Perhaps. Perhaps not. We don’t know.
Remember what Nancy Pelosi said about the way the Bush Administration used the appropriations committees to bypass the intelligence committees in Congress.
And that is why when people are talking about – whether they are talking about torture, or whether they are talking about wiretapping, or whatever you are talking about, we really have to have a change now in how Congress can do its oversight, because we expect and demand the truth.
[snip]
It used to be the Intelligence Committee – you couldn’t appropriate unless the Intelligence Committee authorized. It was almost effectively an appropriation. Over time the Intelligence in the Bush years became part of supplementals so there was absolutely no sharing of information. They would just stick the request in the supplementals. We said, "Okay, if they are going right to appropriations, we will have members of the Intelligence Committee serve in this hybrid committee, part Intelligence, part Appropriations." [my emphasis]
According to Pelosi, with both the illegal wiretap program and the torture program, the Bush Administration would work through appropriations subcommittees, thereby gaining the only kind of Congressional approval they gave a damn about–purse string approval–while avoiding any intelligence oversight.
And the briefing in question was, after all, an appropriations briefing. As I’ve discussed, there are three, total, appropriations briefings listed in the CIA briefing list.
October 18, 2005: Interrogation techniques briefed. Ted Stevens, Thad Cochran
September 19, 2006: Briefing on full detainee program, including the 13 EITs. Bill Young, John Murtha (John Murtha did not stay for EIT portion of briefing)
October 11, 2007: The Director discussed the number of detainees subjected to EITs and discussed EITs. John Murtha
The October 2005 briefing appears to have been, among other things, an attempt to coordinate with two Republicans who voted against the McCain amendment and who had already been named to the conference committee on the overall funding bill. Sure, they may have snuck something else through Toobz and Cochran, but there is a reasonably transparent explanation for what the Administration was doing, in October 2005, talking to the appropriators about torture rather than the intelligence committees. They were watering down the McCain Amendment.
But then there’s the pair of House appropriations briefings–the September 19, 2006 briefing and the October 11, 2007 briefing–for leaders of the House defense appropriations subcommittee. The September 19, 2006 briefing took place before Pelosi was Speaker and therefore before there was the hybrid committee of intelligence people on the appropriations committee and therefore at a time when, Pelosi says, Bush was bypassing intelligence by going through appropriations. This was at a time when–the Bush Administration claimed–they were no longer using the worst of the torture techniques. In fact, it happened just weeks after the Administration had supposedly come clean with the intelligence committees, with a slew of briefings on September 6, 2006.
So what in god’s name where they doing briefing the appropriators–on all 13 torture techniques–almost two weeks later? Why would they be briefing them to appropriators if 1) they had come clean about them and 2) were largely out of the torture business? After all, they only need to brief appropriators if they need money going forward, right?
But of course, they didn’t brief the appropriators. Sure, they say they briefed both Bill Young and John Murtha on the "full detainee program, including all 13 EITs." Only, with another one of their famous asterisks, they reveal that "Murtha did not stay for the EIT portion of the briefing."
So here they were asking for money for something that involved torture techniques after they claimed they were sort of out of the business. And they only briefed the Republican (as Lindsey Graham has explained helpfully, if they’re not briefing Democrats, it may be a sign of criminal intent).
So that’s the background of this dispute: they were presumably asking for money for something that involved all the torture techniques, and the Democrat was not at the part of the briefing where they discussed the torture techniques. Against that background, the dispute over Juola’s attendance is quite suspicious.
They have already tried to claim, twice (with both Pelosi and Jello Jay in February 2003), that the briefing of a staffer equates with not only briefing of a member of Congress but assent from that member of Congress. And now they’re giving as much push-back on this dispute as they have on anything else (while still admitting they might be dead wrong).
While CIA’s information has Mr. Juola attending briefings on September 19, 2006 and October 11, 2007, there are different recollections of these events, which Mr. Obey’s letter describes. As the agency has pointed out more than once, its list — compiled in response to congressional requests — reflects the records it has. These are notes, memos, and recollections, not transcripts and recordings.
So have they been claiming they had briefed Murtha just by listing Juola as attending the meeting?
And there’s one more reason to find this story suspicious. As Bob Graham has pointed out, they have briefed staffers along with members of Congress from the start. Even the flurry of briefings on September 6, 2006 included staffers in the briefings that–purportedly–covered the same material: Dave Buckley in Jane Harman’s own private briefing, Jim Hensler and Andy Johnson in the SSCI briefing, Mike Meermans in the HPSCI briefing.
But, at least according to David Obey, when Juola accompanied Murtha and Young to the briefing, Hayden told him he could not attend. That makes this appropriations briefing one of maybe 10 at which staffers were not present.
Sure, he’s not an intell staffer, though as a top staffer for defense appropriations, he has got to have gigantic clearances.
So what is it that the Bush Administration was trying to get funding for in September 2006 that they couldn’t brief a staffer on, may not have told Murtha about, and now are insistent that Juola, at least, was present for?
Update: William Ockham, who has been matching the briefing schedules to an earlier Vaughn index, has a suggestion:
I wonder if it was related to a letter written by the ADDCIA (Associate Deputy Director of the CIA) to a member of Congress on 30 Nov 2006:
This document is a four-page Ietter from the Associate Deputy Director of the CIA to a member of Congress, concerning appropriation plans specific to certain criminal prosecutions. The letter is dated November 30, 2006 and bears the classification TOP SECRET//SCI.
… appropriation plans specific to certain criminal prosecutions… to return the favor and quote KO, WTF!?
What kind of appropriations would you need for show trials?
Update: radiofreewill has a suggestion. It appears that Bush was aiming to set up not show trials, but true Kafkaesque secret trials.
Ooo, sneaky stuff, no doubt. Thanks for highlighting this– sounds suspicious. Thanks for putting it out there– someone will follow up!
And congrats again on the Olbermann shout-out!
Bob in HI
“Bush was bypassing intelligence” you can say that again
“so what is it that the Bush administration was tryig to get funding for in Sept 2006 that they couldn’t brief a staffer on, may not have told Murtha about and now are insistent that Juola ,at least ,was present for?
——————————————-
You are Marcy Wheeler “the journalist” do tell.
A new improved torture prison?
Hiring a better record keeper
Iran Plans
http://www.newyorker.com/archi…..417fa_fact
ever read about the fima camps?
if not, do utube search, then sit back and be amazed ain’t nobody reports on those
In Germany it was called ‘working towards the Fuhrer.’
Selective briefing: it’s not a bug — it’s a feature.
Which is why the bad record-keeping is a feature, not a bug, too.
In reading John LeCarre’s “Smiley” novels, I learned a great deal about intelligence services taking “backbearings” on faulty documents. If you’re trying to cover something up, and are fudging documents along the way, once people start to sniff out that there’s a problem, the documents themselves become the trail back to what you were trying to hide. A mole inside the enemy’s intelligence services, for example, reveals his side’s weaknesses in the things he tries to learn about and pass back to his masters, and also reveals the things he tries to sidetrack in order to protect himself or other spies.
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
The Honourable Schoolboy
Smiley’s People
Timelines also played a big role in those novels, too.
Nobody else is doing quality work to this high level on this issue. Wow! Thank you Ms. Journalist.
Yes, and add in bogus companies, tax havens, money laundering, BAE kickbacks, planeloads of cash… and who can guess where much of that money ended up? How many millions did Chalabi blow? Who paid for Larry Franklin to travel to Rome…? Was that on his DoD budget? Or not? Ditto Harold Rhode (just for starters).
The term ‘Congressional oversight’ is a bad joke.
Part of it clearly involves budgets; Cheney is a twisted, screwed up man but it’s fairly apparent that part of his diabolical ingenuity was his ability to figure out how to get money through a vast system.
Wonder whether Safavian fits in to this anywhere…? After all, he worked out of the WH.
Brilliant, important post EW. Thx.
Chris Matthews keeps bringing up Stephen Cambone’s trip from Gitmo to Abu Gharib when he allegedly gave permission to “soften” up the prisoners.
The Secret World of Stephen Cambone
Rumsfeld’s Enforcer
February 7, 2006
“Cambone has dug in and gone to war against the insurgents in the Pentagon. Cambone’s fingerprints are all over the occupation and the interrogation scandal. For him, there’s no turning back”.
Cambone has stealthily positioned himself as the most powerful intelligence operator in the Bush administration.”
http://www.counterpunch.org/stclair02072006.html
Surprise, surprise. Who could possibly have imagined…? /s
A little follow-up:
“In early 2008, two months after Cambone took the position at QinetiQ North America, it was awarded a lucrative contract by the Pentagon’s Counter-Intelligence Field Activity office (CIFA)—an office that Cambone had created while in the Bush administration. . . . as part of the five-year, $30 million contract, QinetiQ’s Mission Solutions Group is to provide unspecified “security services.” Wrote [Tim] Shorrock: “The new CIFA contract comes on the heels of a series of QinetiQ deals inked with the Pentagon in the booming new business of ‘network centric warfare’—the space-age, technology-driven intelligence and warfighting policies established by Rumsfeld and Cambone during their six-year tenures at the Pentagon. Other Cambone-pioneered programs that QinetiQ has won (before he went to work at their Crystal City offices that lie just two miles from the Pentagon) include military drones and robots, low-flying satellites and jamming technologies” (CorpWatch, January 15, 2008).
“Contracts for QinetiQ QinetiQ was created in 2001, having evolved out of a research arm of the British Ministry of Defense (MOD) called the Defense Evaluation Research Agency. After the MOD partially privatized the agency in 2001, the U.S.-based Carlyle Group purchased a large stake in the new company (see BBC, November 23, 2007). “
http://www.rightweb.irc-online…..ne_Stephen
Oh, yeah:
http://www.qinetiq.com/
And he continues to function (an “old hand”, I guess):
“QinetiQ North America has named J.D. Crouch II executive vice president for strategic development, focusing on mission-critical technology, security services, intelligence and counter intelligence, and systems engineering solutions for the federal government.
“Crouch replaces Stephen Cambone, who was recently appointed president of QinetiQ North America’s Mission Solutions Group in Fairfax, Va.
. . .
“QinetiQ North America, of McLean, Va., ranks No. 34 on Washington Technology’s 2009 Top 100 list of the largest federal government prime contractors.”
http://washingtontechnology.co…..erica.aspx
And so it goes–on and on and on.
Cambone and Geoffrey Miller are two perps I’d add to Marcy’s list. I’m not for going after many military culprits, but Miller just played too active an organizing role; he was a downright evangelist for torture.
Miller is definitely one. The evidence on Cambone is thinner. I’d also add Fredman.
I was originally aiming for 12, but didn’t want to leave Condi out (and 13 gets you to a quarter deck). But there are others, yeah.
In the end, we will find that he was much more efficient at moving monies outside the system. This administration had too many leaders who had intimate knowledge of Iran-Contra and drug involvement in Afghanistan to allow the Karzai government only to profit from the drugs. Cheney used or established off shore banks to launder drug money and divert it to other uses. Much of it has been used in Latin America again.
Is this modeled after Iran-Contra?
readerOfTeaLeaves May 19th, 2009 at 8:23 pm 6
According to Pelosi, with both the illegal wiretap program and the torture program, the Bush Administration would work through appropriations subcommittees, thereby gaining the only kind of Congressional approval they gave a damn about–purse string approval–while avoiding any intelligence oversight.
Yes, and add in bogus companies, tax havens, money laundering, BAE kickbacks, planeloads of cash… and who can guess where much of that money ended up? How many millions did Chalabi blow? Who paid for Larry Franklin to travel to Rome…? Was that on his DoD budget? Or not? Ditto Harold Rhode (just for starters).
The term ‘Congressional oversight’ is a bad joke.
Part of it clearly involves budgets; Cheney is a twisted, screwed up man but it’s fairly apparent that part of his diabolical ingenuity was his ability to figure out how to get money through a vast system.
Wonder whether Safavian fits in to this anywhere…? After all, he worked out of the WH.
Brilliant, important post EW. Thx.
Not only is it all modeled after Iran/Contra, it is run by the same people.
They didn’t require money from Congress to fund their coup. GHW Bush’s CIA runs drugs to fund these operations. Remember the recent Stanford Financial debacle? He’s not even under arrest, and one of the recent articles on this topic by the BBC identified a $3 million check from Stanford to the DEA. They accused him of being a drug informer, but his was clearly a money laundering operation for the DEA and CIA
Rumsfeld held a national press conference on 9/10 to announce that his comptroller had “misplaced” some $2.3 trillion of DOD funds. Where do you suppose it went?
The power of the purse has been usurped. Congress is irrelevant, and they know it.
A couple of thoughts spring to mind:
1. Appropriations were required to pay for ongoing 3rd-party countries’ interrogations (i.e. Jordan, Egypt, etc.) as well as bribe payments to 3rd-party countries’ governments and “facilitators” within those countries for black site detention facilities (Poland, Thailand, etc.).
2. Don’t you find the falloff of detainees detained rather surprising? Based on recent public statements by the CIA (and other government folks), if you believe them, the US seems to have gotten out of the terrorist detention business altogether by about 2005-2006. We ain’t got nobody detained in the last couple years (wink, wink!).
So, has the world run out of terrorists to capture and detain? Not bloody fookin’ likely!
So, is the CIA/DoD no longer desirous of hunting folks down and detaining them for “actionable intelligence” interrogation purposes? Not bloody fookin’ likely!
So, if there are still terrorists to capture and detain, and the CIA/DoD still wants to obtain “actionable intelligence” via interrogation, AND, the US is no longer in the detainee detention business, pray tell who is during our dirty work for us?
Oh, and one minor typo of intell should be intel.
I think the drop-off in the number of detainees is related to the end of the bounty program the US military was using to try to encourage people to turn in Saddam loyalists, al Qaeda fighters, and other terrorist types. What happened, they discovered after a couple of years, is that people were turning in the head of the family they’d been feuding with for years, not terrorists. “Hey, I get rid of that idiot, I get revenge for my family’s honor, I get a couple hundred bucks, and I get a promise of anonymity so that his family doesn’t come after me for more revenge. What’s not to like?”
After a while, the US military and intelligence folks caught on. Of course, that was after hundreds of these so-called terrorists were hauled off to a prison somewhere, interrogated somehow, and eventually — quite a while later — perhaps released.
It’s not that the number of terrorists dropped off — it’s that the military figured out that picking up a bunch of non-terrorists was not helping matters. (Except, of course, in the Bush PR department.)
While that may in fact be true (and I don’t doubt it), it still leaves the undeniable fact that the CIA/DoD would logically still be after the real folks who can tell them about existing and future plots/plans for terrorism.
And my primary point is “actionable intelligence” is still the goal of both the CIA and DoD, so just where are the folks who have this “actionable intelligence” being drained of that info?
It would seem a logical fallacy that the CIA/DoD would simply relinquish this goal and instead just take them out via Predator drones. Killing them cuts off the source of desired “actionable intelligence”.
I’m kinda with you on your #1. I think this may have been pretty self evident, but the Sept 6, 06 briefings took place as the “high value detainees” were getting their splashy transfer to GITMO.
So the question that might come up, after such a splashy transfer, might be why $$$ are still needed for US operated offshore kidnap/torture facilities. We know that we still had them in 2009, bc Panetta says he closed them and is saving us 4 mill in the budget by doing that.
Also, by Oct of 06, Torture Tenet was getting his own gig with QinetiQ, where Rumsfeld’s Mengele – Cambone – ended up later (see fatster’s 19) Grey’s Ghost Plane mentions lots of detainees being held in other countries for us and I have to think that after the Hariri assassination in 2005, the chunk we had in Syria were kinda, um, awkward.
Then there was al-Libi, who wasn’t included in the transfer to GITMO. Think maybe Libya got anything out of the deal to take him?
Egypt had also been getting a lot of public pressure by then that resulted in the release, by early 2007, of the CIA’s “Abu Omar” from their badly botched Italian affair. But he wasn’t Egypt’s only US shipment. Think maybe arrangements were being made there?
Also, by the fall of 06 Pakistan courts were flooded with missing persons cases involving the Musharaf/Bush joint venture to buy and sell people for torture experiments. Some reports were of over 1000 people disappeared in Pakistan. That number may be high, but let’s face it, 14 doesn’t begin to account for the CIA direct torture, and rendition to US supervised or funded torture, programs.
Shipping 14 people and having some splashy press releases and some iffy briefings didn’t make all the other people and their related problems go away on Sept 6. There was still a big mess, and money is the paper towel that DC uses to clean up messes.
Agree with your comment re: al-Libi; there must have been something exchanged with Libya to get them to take al-Libi, considering there was more than their silence being requested.
There’s no specific date given for the so-called repatriation of al-Libi to Libya, only a range of time between Nov. 2005 and Sep. 2006, when al-Libi is transferred to Mauritania and then to Libya. During the same time, a number of detainees are transferred to Gitmo instead and al-Libi drops out, resurfacing in Libya.
And there’s Mauritania — exactly how much money did it take to set up a black site there? Does the cost include the replacement of the government with a pro-U.S. faction?
And Poland — don’t want to forget Poland. How much does it cost to keep the removal of the detainees on the down low, above and beyond the cost of a missile defense program likely negotiated to put a black site there in the first place?
And then finally the detainees who’ve been ghosted since Sep. 2006 — where are they and what’s that cost?
Yeah, I suspect there was a lot on the plate during discussions with Republicans in Appropriations in early autumn 2006, let alone since 2002.
Oh, and I might point out that the earliest indications that U.S. attorneys might be terminated happened in Oct. 2006, if memory serves.
EW~
Wonderful connection of dots!! You had mentioned the abuse of the appropriations process before, but its resurfacing now is vital because it should trigger an investigation of the 7-8 years of Bushit supplementals, and maybe even the email correspondence that is associated (guess someone would have to sue…nudge…).
rOTL~
There’s a name that conveniently disappeared!! Safavian was very Abramoff-connected, no?
I swear, this is like a crazy 100,000 piece jigsaw puzzle!
Go team, Go!!
Well, I’m thinking closer to 10,000,000 pieces, but there do seem to be recurring themes and patterns, and symptoms of criminal conduct.
Safavian links to Abramoff in more than one way, but certainly through Grover Norquist.
Safavian evidently grew up in Detroit, is of Iranian descent, and IIRC his wife worked for one of the Intel committees, but it’s interesting that info now appears to be missing from his Wikipedia page. (Surprise, surprise… although I’d have to track that info to verify it, and Wikipedia should be taken with a grain of salt.)
He was a lobbyist with Abramoff at Preston, Gates (Abramoff quit just before PG fired his sleazy rogue ass), and Safavian then went into the lobbying business with Grover Norquist (late 1990s). Among their clients were said to be some oil companies. He also worked to kill a bill by Sen Kyl that might have outlawed online gambling [code: money laundering?]
When GWBush was appointed Preznit, Safavian he became Chief of Staff for Rep Chris Cannon. After that, he went to GSA, then to OMB.
If Wikipedia is to be believed, he began as the OMB Admin for Fed. Procurement Policy setting purchasing policy — for the federal government, in Nov 2003 (six months into the Iraq war). He was indicted almost two years later (Oct 2005); his trial was May 2006. But his conviction was overturned almost a year ago.
Interesting to note that the Scottish golfing trip he went on with Jack Abramoff included Cong. Bob Ney. Ney is said to speak Farsi (language spoken in Iran). No idea whether Safavian speaks Farsi. But Ralph Reed was also on that trip (and he’s probably a Left Behinder). And Abramoff was on that trip — and he’d been using a non-profit to funnel money to West Bank settlers, including reports of night vision goggles and weapons.
Unclear whether that purchasing policy gig in OMB included overseeing rendition flights or black ops. But one can see that the term ‘appropriations’ must have had quite a broad and murky latitude in the Bu$h administration by about 2003.
Alas.
So a couple more puzzle pieces for you.
I wonder if it was related to a letter written by the ADDCIA (Associate Deputy Director of the CIA) to a member of Congress on 30 Nov 2006:
… appropriation plans specific to certain criminal prosecutions… to return the favor and quote KO, WTF!?
Now, the person who might be able to help with that question would be a certain Mr. JohnLopresti… here’s hoping he shows up to assist.
Man, you’re doing a great job with that Vaughn index.
So what does it mean that they had to tell Young (and a year later, Murtha) all 13 techniques to appropriate for the show trials?
What was so important to “prosecute” right after they lost the election? That was around the time of the DoJ US Attorney firings. Wasn’t Rumsfeld let go right about then too?
Might even have been something not quit what you’d think – like perhaps appropriations related to the Italian prosecutions of CIA member and some outside the box payments to try to help squelch those.
A retired judge I spoke with this morning said that on Amy Goodman Democracy Now yesterday she had Jeremy Stahill on Gitmo toture still happening. Military witnesses and others using war type Games.
Hopefully more and more sources and reporters will add to the torture story. Marcy call Amy and get on.
The global meltdown story needs SPeacial Prosecutors as does torture, war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The MIC needs to be brought back on the porch…can never quote Ike enough. Watch them…they are watching you.
bigbrother
Maybe they needed more funds for “Grey Fox”
“In April of 2003, Rumsfeld placed Cambone in charge of counter-terrorism teams operating under the code-name “Grey Fox”. This covert operation is a kind of sabotage and assassination squad run out of the civil wing of the Pentagon. Rumsfeld had grown frustrated with the military’s reluctance to assassinate suspected al-Qaeda and Iraqi resistance leaders, an understandable reluctance in light of US executive orders restricting the use of assassinations.”
“In August 2003, as the occupation of Iraq began to turn bloody, Cambone ordered Brigadier General Geoffrey Miller, former commander of the detention facility at Guantanamo, to go to Iraq along with a team of experienced military interrogators, who had honed their inquisitorial skills with the torture of al-Qaeda and Taliban detainees captured in Afghanistan. His instructions were to “Gitmoize” the interrogations at Abu Ghraib and other prisons, including the notorious Camp Cropper on the outskirts of the Baghdad Airport, where the Delta Force conducted abusive interrogations of top level members of Saddam’s regime.”
“In August 2003, as the occupation of Iraq began to turn bloody, Cambone ordered Brigadier General Geoffrey Miller, former commander of the detention facility at Guantanamo, to go to Iraq along with a team of experienced military interrogators, who had honed their inquisitorial skills with the torture of al-Qaeda and Taliban detainees captured in Afghanistan. His instructions were to “Gitmoize” the interrogations at Abu Ghraib and other prisons, including the notorious Camp Cropper on the outskirts of the Baghdad Airport, where the Delta Force conducted abusive interrogations of top level members of Saddam’s regime.”
http://www.counterpunch.org/stclair02072006.html
What about the briefings (if any) pre-2005? Who knew about the payments to Mitchell-Jessen in 2002 or later? What role did Daniel Inoyue play (speaking of Democrats), who was in 2001-02 Ranking Minority Member of the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee? (Ted Stevens was chairman, iirc.) Inoyue’s top Washington aide was/is Administrative Assistant Patrick DeLeon, who, btw, is a psychologist and in 2002 was on the board of trustees of the American Psychological Association. Given the role of the APA in the torture issue, e.g., PENS, I think this is worth pursuing.
Wouldn’t Inoyue have been aware of some of these appropriations going through? Why are we not hearing about appropriation briefings earlier than 2005 — or have I missed something about that?
Good questions. I’ll try to think of a way to follow up here in Honolulu.
Bob in HI
Thanks, Bob. I’d be curious to know what you come up with.
I’m sure Perry Bacon Jr. will get right on this.
Do ya mean this Perry Bacon Jr.? I’ve been out of this loop (I’m out of many, as you surely have noticed), and thank you for giving me the opportunity to have a good chuckle. Good grief!
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsme…..with_that/
Well I have to think that’s the same Perry Bacon Jr., because how many could there be?
Columbia Journalism Review also suggested he may have written the worst single article about Campaign ‘08:
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/post_75.php
This is the same PBJ who is now interpreting Panetta’s memos to his employees as Panetta swearing the CIA briefings memo is 100% truthful and contradicts everything Pelosi has said.
([Sigh] Skippy and strawberry preserves’ll never again be the same …)
Apologies for this O/T, but with 29% reporting, CA voters seem to be pretty P.O.’d:
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/props/59.htm
Way to go, Ahhhhhhhhnuld.
The prior administration’s intertial apogee of institutional corruption may have been most evident in its initiatives toward appropriations committee access as a furtherance of its congressional circumvention strategem. Then-senBiden had spoken out on the new policies of shortshrifting congress, from his then upperChamber perspective around 2005, similarly. The year 2005 also saw the thenVp’s having led a briefing of the Az senator on tocha, though during the penumbra of that deviation from priorUsual US policy, as congress transited from 2005DTA to MCA2006.
Wow!!!!!!
I was hoping you’d come through ;-))
Sinister about McCain; the timing fits eerily.
ReadOtL’s, credit ew for the appropriations insight, and SpeakerNP. The interview February 7 2006 with thenSenBiden discussed only the NeoShortShrift exercise in conferenceCommittee, a process after appropriations. Yet, ew’s HouseAppropriations committee thread recently seemed to arrive at the heart of the matter, branchwise.
This may be old news but Greenwald has a good post about “The myth of the parasitical bloggers:”
http://www.salon.com/opinion/g…..index.html
Here’s the USA Today time-line for Sep 2006.
I’ll suggest that the Sep. 19th, 2006 Briefing catches Bush doing an Appropriations End-Around on the Senate Armed Services Committee, similar to what Pelosi says Bush did with the Intelligence Committees.
From a Sep 15th Article entitled: Senators Defy Bush on Tribunals
The White House wants the new Guantanamo tribunals to maintain the right to use evidence obtained through coercion and to keep elements of prosecution cases secret from those accused.
But the senators argued that Mr Bush’s proposals would effectively redefine the Geneva Conventions to allow harsh treatment of detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay camp in Cuba.
They said their own version would provide fair trials and meet the demands of the US Supreme Court, that struck down Mr Bush’s original plan.
Four Republican senators joined opposition Democrats on the Armed Services Committee to approve their measure.
The rebels include three prominent senators, John McCain, John Warner and Lindsey Graham, who say Mr Bush’s bill would do further damage to America’s moral authority.
—
So, I’m going to guess that Bush – despite giving assurances that he wasn’t in the Torture Business – sent his Goons to meet with his Republican Appropriators and briefed them on the Full Chinese Menu of Torture, including the Water Torture – and had the funding for his Secret Full Torture Program hidden from the Dems, and the Four Republican Senators.
The Four Republican Senators appear to have offered Bush an alternative plan – similar to Zelikow’s – that would have operated within the Geneva Conventions.
So, this might be another chapter of Bush Willfully Going Around Congress – this time it’s the Senate Armed Services Committee – both Dem and Rep – McCain, Warner, and Huckleberry – to Get His Way – in Bad Faith – in order to Secretly Fund his Torture.
Wouldn’t it be nice if We could convince the ‘Law and Order’ Republicans to Join US in fighting the blight of Bush’s Secret Inhuman Depravity.
This might say that Bush was bound and determined to Torture, no matter what, and no matter who tried to stop him.
At least determined to have no bushwa about the torturing he’d already done.
Warner’s out of the Senate now, isn’t he? I wonder who’s the fourth?
If a Goddamn piece of paper can’t stop you from whooping ass
ergo GOD wants you , his earthly agent , to Whoop Ass ….Bring ‘em on.
Was this stuff happening while Jerry Lewis was Appropriations chairman?
I just got done talking to about 5 dozen of my neighbors
teabags never came up
torture came up
three people in my precinct mentioned the death penalty
more than two dozen mentioned prision
and just about everybody agrees that the crimes of the bush administration has to be investigator
I did not talk to a single person who supported george bush, dick cheney, OR torture
so I’m thinking that the repuglitards are SERIOUSLY MISOVERESTIMATING their popularity
they seem to think they know what they’re doing. but …
people seem really anxious to vote about fate of the repuglitards
but they want to cast those votes in the JURY BOX, not the voting booth
I wish I could report similar good news from my neighborhood. I haven’t spoken to nearly as many people, but the large majority here doesn’t really care.
You tortured…you got any job openings for torturers?
You wiretapped…you got any job openings for wiretappers?
You maintained a secret airline to keep subjects hidden…you got any job openings for pilots?
They’re just not paying attention to the headlines, they’re reading the classifieds.
Boxturtle (references upon request)
I think these are the SASC GOP members from the 109th Congress:
Warner (Ch.) McCain Inhofe Sessions Ensign Talent Chambliss Graham Dole Cornyn Roberts Thune Collins
…5 days later, on Sept. 21st, Bush and the so-called ‘Rebel’ Republican Senators make a Compromise.
US President George W Bush has reached a deal with Republican senators on a controversial bill setting rules for the questioning of terror suspects.
Under the deal, Mr Bush dropped his demand that CIA interrogators be protected from prosecution by redefining the Geneva conventions.
The compromise will also allow the Bush administration to resume military tribunals, suspended since June.
Rebel John McCain said Mr Bush now had tools needed for the “war on terror”.
(snip)
An adjustment to the domestic War Crimes Act outlining “grave breaches” of the Geneva Convention will now set out what the CIA can and cannot do.
These breaches include torture and other forms of assault and mental stress, but the agreement does not mention specific interrogation techniques which would be banned.
Rules on evidence
The deal will also allow for military tribunals to try some of the terror suspects held at Guantanamo Bay.
But in a second key concession by the administration, they will now see all the evidence the jury sees, including some classified material once it has been stripped of the most sensitive details.
—
So, the Compromise gives the ‘Rebel’ Republicans the appearance of a victory – Banning the use of Torture as part of Military Tribunals – all the while Bush is Briefing the same Roster of Torture Techniques that he’s been using all along – and that the ‘Rebel’ Republican Senators had presumably objected to in the first place.
Did any of Bush’s Torture Program actually stop because of this Compromise, or was it all Kabuki?
Were all of Bush’s UE Programs – Data-mining, Wire-Tapping, Torture, Media Management, etc – just Secretly moved around and surreptitiously funded, year after year – while giving Congress, and US, lip-service about complying with the Rule of Law?
BTW, Marcy’s 13 torturers article on Salon has gotten 7 reviews so far over on News Trust, and a “Very Good” rating. News Trust is a news aggregator; on their front page, and email daily digest, they list abstracts of the articles getting the most attention and highest ratings. Marcy’s article was one of the two “Independent Media” articles listed in today’s daily digest from News Trust, but it has been dropped from their Main Page on the Net. Maybe a few more reviews today would push it back to the main page. Its combined rating, btw, is higher than any of the other articles currently listed on their main page, so it has fallen off only because it is no longer attracting sufficient attention.
Bob in HI
OT but indicative of the class of folk who have perpetrated the torture shop:
Has anyone at the blogs here pointed out the article in this past Sunday’s Times(UK) on Joseph Cassano and AIG? If the article seems to ramble a bit, then about halfway through one suddenly can guess why.
Seems back in 2001 someone at The Economist took a notion to investigate the then rather high share price of AIG. An under-the-radar type named Freestone, firm Seabury Analytic, was hired to do the research. Five months later,
I think that must be certified insane, as hardly anything in the universe can sustain such a high growth rate for anywhere near so long.
My damn emphasis. I’m pleased to note that Mr. Freestone did not sign the thing, and he and his business are presumably none the worse for the whole episode. An attempt by AIG similarly to highjack The Economist also got nowhere (though if you read the article you’ll get a new feeling for the use of private jets). But this story, especially the part about Tom Freestone, shows up just how thuggish and bullying these folks are.
How many times do you suppose AIG has pulled that stunt on one certain Timothy Geithner? And what do you suppose the result was?
Bob in HI
I put it up a couple times Almost $60 Trillion in toxic CDS and $580 Trillion in CDOs is an unimaginable stack of debt to repair with tax dollars…Giethner, Sommers and Obama are insane to keep throwing away the future of generations. And that is exactly what Enron and the like did took future years profits and declared them on real time books to make the profit estimates that kept the stocks high…
That is how much the economy has to absorb before a real recovery occurs. 13 times the total Global GDP. Where are the Special Prosecutors?
and does anybody remember hearing any fucking apology ???
That is exactly what I thought watching the clip of Micheal Steele telling us that the time for apologies and naval gazing was over. WTF
So 4500 Americans dead, DEAD, 40,ooo (and counting) over a million Iraqi people dead, DEAD thousands injured, millions displaced, torture, the CIA and the DOJ, and the economy in the tank etc etc. And those who were in charge when those decisions were being made are done apologizing.
Fuck they never even started apologizing.
I guess being a Republican means never having to say your sorry. Well and there are plenty of Dems who need to start naval gazing
If I were the Judge and Jury those who voted for and supported the war and torture would sit for an hour staring at a few of these pictures
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/3689167.stm
http://dir.salon.com/story/new….._gallery/i
ndex.html
You can barely find pictures of people in Iraq who have died as a direct consequence of the bloody illegal war on the Web.
Or the Reps who voted for the war and supported torture can spend some time with the soldiers suffering post traumatic syndrome. Spend a week taking care of the children or parents of a soldier who has committed suicide due to the stress and horrific things that have gone in Iraq.
Sign up Reps to do some time in the VA dealing with the long lines of soldiers who are living on medication to deal with their PTSD.
Do some time in the clinics where these soldiers are looking for help
Do some time with some of the orphans and widows in Iraq.
The folks who supported this bloody war have suffered few consequences and they should.
http://lauraflanders.firedoglake.com/
More than one million soldiers have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan over the last eight years. Close to 4,500 have died in Iraq and nearly 20 percent of those who return have Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Well over 100,000 Iraqis have been killed. As Memorial Day approaches how will soldiers, families of soldiers, and the rest of our society reflect on the dead and those still living with the trauma of war?
Today on GRITtv Darren Subarton a veteran who served in the Army’s 101st Air Borne Division, Joshua Kors who has written extensively on the experience of veterans returning from war, Dan Lohaus director of When I Came Home, and Nada Michael a student in Social Work at Smith College discuss the challenges veterans face, dealing with the VA, and what likely won’t be discussed Memorial Day.
—-we sure are not seeing many Vets on Chris Matthews, Ed’s Olbermanns, or Maddows
freep (if you’re still about) –
Were most/all of those of your political persuasion or a mix of leanings?
Reeeeeeeeeeeelentless! Excellent work!
We indeed owe Lindsey Graham a Thank You Card.
It was mighty nice of him to frame the debate to the benefit of the truthseekers:
“If You’re Trying to Commit a Crime,” You Wouldn’t Brief Democrats
It’s time to develop a glossary of terms with reality-based definitions in order to crack their code. Americans need to be taught how to listen with new ears.
Actionable Intelligence = Fabricated/Coerced/Forged/False
Better yet, the TRAITORS need to be revealed, and sent to prison.
SENATOR GRAHAM CALLS FOR ACTION AGAINST AMERICANS WHO DISAGREE WITH BUSH
This is what Lindsey Graham has in mind for those who dare publish the truth.
What lengths are these criminals willing to go to in order to protect their own skins? Will they invent a new terror threat? Will they declare martial law? What’s next from these psychopaths?
When the truth becomes the enemy, the shark has truly been jumped.
“…against all enemies, foreign and domestic”
The enemies of Free Speech and Freedom Of The Press are the Domestic Enemies of the Constitution, and the Republic.
Thanks for outing yourself, Lindsey.
Dept, of I Want To Play, Too! from yesterday:
Shimon ben Shatach says: Interrogate the witnesses extensively; and be cautious with your words, lest they learn to lie.
What, that isn’t a Bible verse?
“In a place where there are no human beings, be one” is also good: Artscroll decided to translate that as “leader”.
I like both of those.
Sorry for the dead link in my #44.
It’s here.
“I was very vocal in the internal debate,” she said. “I worried about how that would make us look in the eyes of the world. But I had left the White House when a lot of that was taking place.”
Ray McGovern reveals the entire truth about “Acting President” Dick Cheney and his direct control of all branches of government.
Ah, yes, appropriations. The final link! You, EW, are brilliant!
So they have all the levers of power at their finger tips:
So they briefed for appropriations. Not for oversight.
Ok, I get it now.
EW, I realize many, many people who write here want to see you on TV. I beg to differ. We need you quietly, feverishly, working away in solitude. Where you can solve all these mysteries. I fear TV would lead you to another world, which would swallow you up. And the nation would be in peril! I like you right where you are. Not beholden to any special interests. Except your conscience. Which, to my mind, is acutely tuned to the Constitution, the Rule of Law. (I do not wish TV upon you.)
I wish upon you the kind of quiet fame that comes with work well done. A comfortable living. Freedom. Especially to research and write, based upon your conscience. (And not upon a TV audience.)
Blessings upon your work. I am deeply grateful.
http://attackerman.firedoglake…..ecordings/
CIA Responds To Obey: ‘These Are Notes, Memos, And Recollections, Not Transcripts And Recordings’
——–so where are those transcripts and recordings
Extraordinary sleuthing. I will read this 3 or 4 more times so most of it will “click” for me, but what jumped out on first reading is that Congressional Republicans are all in. They can’t turn on the torturers because they were a vital part of it all. There can be no bi-partisan investigations in Congress because they perverted the legislative and appropriation process to fund the monsters. Every word that Lindsay Graham said during Sen Whitehouse’s hearing was furious spinning and butt covering for himself. Nothing but special prosecutors will do and anyone suggesting otherwise is asking the conspirators to investigate themselves. Holder has no choice at this point.
(my bold)
Well stated. I agree fully. This should become the basis for a FDL action alert petition.
Really all that is left is showing how they used the courts to enable, obscure and rationalize torture with preselected judges. Republicans are the masters of the use of conflict of interest. Getting all of them out of the process will not be easy. We must clearly state when the most vocal defenders of torture have a conflict and why anything they spout should be discounted and viewed as conveniently self serving.
Precisely correct. Graham is absolutely “all-in.” Torture Enabler, just like Lieberman and hundreds of other foreign agents.
Like every massive conspiracy, it works because they ensnare as many co-conspirators as possible, whether by overt or covert means (partial briefing after the fact).
This entire false flag attack and response was all planned out well in advance, and apparently had the buy-in of many in Congress (Shadow Government Operatives).
Cheney held those secret energy-related meetings (specifically designed to divvy up the spoils of war / oilfields and pipeline routes) well in advance of 9/11, Chertoff had the USA Patriot Act written before 9/11, Hundreds of Mossad agents (”Israeli art students” – Google it) were permitted to roam free across America to enable it, Dov Zakheim stole over $2.3 TRILLION (enough to finance a coup) from the DOD – as admitted by Rumsfeld – before 9/11, First-Responders were in place in Manhattan on the morning of 9/11 before the planes struck the buildings, US and British troops were in place to respond to 9/11 (invade Afghanistan) before it ever occurred, Israeli nationals were warned via Odigo messaging (thanks to Kobi Alexander) to stay away from the WTC on the morning of 9/11, and the Dancing Israelis (google it) were caught red-handed on 9/11 with video tape of themselves celebrating as the towers were struck AND a third plane that was supposed to strike a third building in Manhattan on 9/11 failed to arrive as planned, yet WTC 7 fell to earth later that afternoon regardless of this massive cockup (shoot-down of the flight over Pennsylvania).
This entire discussion is based on one very well planned event – the funding, the pretext, the act, and its aftermath.
We are discussing 9/11 and its aftermath.
The coverup has failed. Their pants are around their collective ankles.
Connect all the dots – call them out by name.
plunger, I like your writing but could you please just do oxdowns on it so as not to divert the discussion on these torture threads?
you know how these devolve and I hate seeing it, do an oxdown and we’ll all meet over there
Don’t you find it at all ironic that every discussion of torture (and justification for it) by Republicans includes the repeated use of the term “9/11″ – yet we in the reality based community are self-censored from discussing it (actually attacked for mentioning it) in precisely the same context?
How was that reality created?
in case you hadn’t seen it –
quite the hubbub on that very subject over at Big Orange this week.
plunger, you and I agree on that matter, however it’s not possible to explore every avenue on each thread, there are umbrella subjects and those subjects under the umbrella
each subject under the umbrella needs it’s own attention, concentrating on other issues under the same umbrella makes it impossible to follow any of them
do your oxdown, we’ll give you plenty of action I promise
Hey, Perris,
Might I suggest you write an oxdown diary on what you think the politically correct way people should frame their comments?
A little patience goes a long way.
my 101 was for your 99
Hey EW,
When we were talking about this possibility last week, I started to put together Appro Committee records. I do not have those dates. And, I sense I am not fining everything.
Do you have actual records for those dates?
Were they able to classify appro committee if briefings were happening in Appros? Do we know if Dick was at any?
I beg your indulgence to post a link. It relates torture to the basic straussian/neocon principles as well pointing out how these principles result in torture as well as the negative consequences of Eric Erikson’s stages of development. Together with a suggestion that the positives of his developmental model point the way for where the nation needs to go. In a humble way, it’s my best effort both to explain the past and point to the future. (both morally and psychosocially).
TheraP, you’ve put it together in that TPM piece. I’ve been looking for something like that for a few years, now. This is a quick, initial reaction, and I’m going to go through it later, but I don’t think my impression is going to change. Thanks.
TheraP!
That juxtaposition is absolutely brilliant.
We are at the point,, as a species, where either we will encourage individual genius, through supporting individual health, well-being and development … or succumb to Strassian/like ‘master plans’.
In my estimation, only the former offers us any sustainable future, the latter will lead, inexorably, to a very agonized (and most unnecessary) end of the species.
Once again, TheraP, I commend you on being a most exemplary member of your profession, as well a being precisely the kind of human being who reflects the understanding, maturity and responsibility which our times and our humanity most need.
Thank you, TheraP.
David
Your words are humbling. I’m trying to do my part. (If you think the blog is worth others reading, clicking rec’d will help it to get a wider viewing.)
I’ll tell you, once I “understood” the building blocks of the staussian/neocons, in my previous blog, I could see the total dead-end they had engineered. It could happen again. Unless we are vigilant.
Thus, I think EW’s efforts are so crucial to this process. It’s like our life as a nation depends on what’s happening on this very blog. I am not overestimating here!
(I will try not to distract from this thread.)
It not only could happen again, it is not exactly ‘over’.
And yes … “on this very blog”.
This is the struggle, and we are in the midst of it … outcome uncertain …
Your brainstorming, that of Mary, and many others, ENHANCES what is happening on this thread. Thanks to all. ;->
THANK YOU!
TheraP just read your link. Great article. In the end your description of the outcome of the bushco years is the complete invalidation of humanity.
Human life as a bug to be squished. Describes to me, the paradigm of invalidation. Once we invalidate ourselves…as a species (since “the elite” are part of the human race and not separate per all scientific knowledge), we are doomed.
We must change the invalid cognition. The closer we can get to a valid map, the more likely we are to prevail in preserving our species.
Thanks TheraP!
Peterr @ 3
EW @ 4
Here we go. Blanket purchase agreements (BPA) with no bid contracts through Dept. of Interior and State. DoD subs through the BPA’s outside of DoD. Briefings through Appros Committees. All back door. All difficult to trace, especially if you have well placed folks.
Again a reminder about Cheney (and Bush):
Features definitely.
features yes, “genius” hardly, “delegating” your own responsibility is the mark of the inept
think reagan,the great delegator
think clinton the micro manager…one is a genious one is not, cheney is a moron with a vocabulary and style that makes you think he is FAR more capable then he actually demosntrates
years ago, Sidney Blumenthal warned everyone about Cheney and how his years in both the WH and Congress provided him an almost unique body of knowledge on where the levers were and how to pull them without leaving any fingerprints. further he opined that Cheney had been kept in check by working under ‘grown up’ Presidents – Ford and 41, but would bring the crazy under the weak, boyish 43
yes perris, he is a monstrous,unimaginative dullard – but a lst string bureaucrat in the current environment
Then toss in the fact that Liz Cheney was at Dept of State, overseeing a budget that evidently was $129 million in a single year.
Anyone account for that money, supposedly spent to ‘develop democracy’ around the Near East?
… crickets…
Thank you for that. I’ve been working my way in this direction for some time. Pieces fell into place, before I even knew where they were leading. (I’ve been up since about 2:30 this morning, working on this – because I woke up knowing how to fit it all together and how to write it up.)
We’re all engaged in a big project here. Thank you for your affirmation. (now back to reading the thread)
TheraP – Great Work on the TPM Article!
I get the feeling that the Straussian Model – BushCo – is clever enough to Publicly Claim to uphold the ‘Virtuous’ left-hand side of Erikson’s Developmental Stages, while Projecting the ‘Defiled’ right-hand side onto their Perceived Enemies – all the while Doing to Their ‘Enemies’, in Secret, Exactly What They Are Projecting Onto Them as Evil.
Ianapsych, but the Straussian approach seems to be a Blueprint for Agenda-Driven Sociopathic Ideologues to Masquerade as Men and Women of Good Character, in order to Control – through the Deception that the Ideology is More True than the Facts – the whole of the People.
So, imvho, if We are going to ‘aim for the positives’ in Erikson’s Developmental Stages – which is Truly Noble, as opposed to the Straussian Noble Lie – then it seems we’ll have to emphasize and build from the ground up on Real Personal Integrity and Character (generosity, honesty, forgiveness, modesty, integrity, vision, etc) through individual example – Real Principled Leaders being empowered by Real Principled Followers to Solve Real Factual Problems.
Thanks for all that you do!
Precisely.
One need only listen to what Rove accuses his enemies of doing, to know what it is that Rove (and his co-conspirators) are in fact doing.
It works every single time, until the masses become educated as to the techniques of Strauss.
Once you recognize that you reside in Opposite World, one need only turn the “news” on its head to recognize the truth.
If you want to understand the NeoCons, you have to go to the source, Leo Strauss. He believed in lying to the people, to control them. He taught Wolfowitz and had a secret society of how to manipulate politically through lies, and religion. Welcome to the NeoCon reality, where your constitution means nothing, but the politicians create the reality. Strauss is best written about by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadia_Drury">Shadia Drury.
“techniques of Strauss” (Urk — I inadvertantly used a HTML comment opener in my comment, and the rest of it disappeared. I don’t think that I have the time to rewrite it. It was kind of a long one. Just ignore this.) But thanks for the link.
@ 82: You are right. We therefore redouble our efforts!
@ 90: You are absolutely correct. The entire bush crime spree is a masquerade as “governance” – with idealized leaders. “Dear Leaders”. Scary as heck! You have put it better than I! (Plus in the former blog, linked in that post, I describe how people are conscripted into such groups – the allure of being “part of the elite” … The Best and The Brightest! Remember that one? They seduce with money and power. And with being part of an idealized group. Just as you describe.)
Yes, it is our task to build from the ground up. This very blog is a good example. A productive work group. Caring. Around leaders who are NOT elitists. Structure. But not oppression. Kudos to all!
A Hearty Good Morning Marci and Pups!
Well well well. Giant leap from DHBlogger to “Journalist” in one swell foop! Huzzah!!!
Proud doesn’t cover it all. Grateful and awed by your mental dexterity and drive? OH YESSSSS!!!!! You’re amazing and we salute you, Marci. Do I detect a few congresscritters scurrying for dark corners? A few haz-beenie-babies from boosh-coattail years sweating through their buniony-footed jammies?
You Go GRRLLLLL! Set em up and they’ll fall of their own weight. I’m-a-thinkin’. Audacious arrogance wielding unbridled power should not be the way of the nation.
I look for the guilty to meet a mighty fail, at long last.
And to WO, Bmaz, Mary and all of the other heavy hitters here at EW’s who assist, dissect research dig deeper and deeper, set examples for all of us in their pursuit of justice, truth and accountability. A salute to you too!
Can you get an editor to review your posts? This one needs a bit of work.
“So what is it that the Bush Administration was trying to get funding for in September 2006 that they couldn’t brief a staffer on, may not have told Murtha about, and now are insistent that Juola, at least, was present for?”
———————————————————
American Death Squad
Obama inherits Cheney’s army of assassins – and promotes their commander
http://original.antiwar.com/ju…..ath-squad/
“Yet Camp Nama is hardly the worst of McChrystal’s walks on the “dark side.” Remember, Hersh reported that JSOC was (and presumably still is) going around killing “high-value targets” on a global scale, murdering people from the Middle East to Central America. The criterion for selecting the victims was (and presumably still is) whether, in Hersh’s phrase, they had engaged in or were planning “anti-American activities.”
———————————————————————
How did they pay for this?
when our great grandchildren are privileged to read the more complete narrative of this travesty, Marcy Wheeler will be properly identified as Journalist Zero
ms ew: I recognize you’ve got us to the always-reliable breadcrumb trail [”Follow the money.”], but do you think there’s merit in considering how this deeply shizoid Briefing List reflects on the changes in who was running the Agency at each point along the [hesitate for effect…] timeline? I raise this in part due to the painfully cramped way in which Panetta has squeezed out his qualifiers on it.
EG the early internal paranoia/treat Congress like a mushroom crop approach, reaping pretty much the neglect sown by Tenet, as he and Cheney fumbled threw the early stages of their ‘courtship’; the predictable appearance of a directorship dedicated heavily if not primarily to making sure the clock ran out on as many limitations statutes as possible; the ‘damn the hearings-full speed ahead’edness of the military mentality, convinced of the civilian branches being fille with weak simpletons. And throughout, the evolution in Bushie behavior.
Spotlight this and every report Marcy gives us to all the news media. Don’t let them off the hook of excuse that they didn’t have the resources to find out and report on this information.
Yep, even spotlight to the anti-woodward/bernsteins at the WaPoo.
Good! YES!
shame digg steals the traffic cause that does get alot of play over all
I hope they negotiate the proper method for dealing with diggs from firedoglake.com
Way ot…I woke up thinking about not only KO mentioning Marcy “the journalist” and the team work here at EW’s WOckham(thank you). I was thinking about KO’s interview with Elizabeth Edwards and how sensitive he was with her and his line of questioning. To KO(if he or his staff pass by) thank you for that sensitive interview it was so obvious that you felt some of her pain. What a brave woman Elizabeth Edwards continues to be..she has set quite an example for all of us
Well, the rethugs did it again. They managed to use faux outrage against Pelosi’s garbled statements about what she knew about the torture program-except that it is only torture when talking about dems-and have not only gotten the MSM onboard but have totally managed to change the subject from who actually did or approved torture and for what reason into why didn’t the dems do something about (torture)when they had zero power and the rethugs would stop any effort
The fact that the MSM has gone along-well the MSM has fallen into something other than what it is supposed to be by printing rumors as fact-with the rethugs, and the fact that the dems, ONCE MORE, seem to be totally confused about what they should do brings us back to the main subject. Whatever Pelosi said or did not say after a brief in 2002 means nothing. It has allowed the rethugs to change the subject from cheney sending out word to torture people to connect Iraq to alQaeda. OOOOH! SHINY! The dems are totally damn hopeless. It takes Jesse Ventura to slap down the lies of the rethugs. Where are the dems????? Better yet, WTF is Reid doing as senate leader? That SOB is hopeless. He not only makes no sense, but continues to repeat the rethug line. Our leaders are freekin idiots! Maybe our exercise in a republic form of govt needs to be thrown out and a new system, parliamentary system installed. Or perhaps a dictator might be the answer. Whatever, we are becoming an embrassment to ourselves because of the idiots we choose to lead us.
Going on close to two weeks now. Marcy tried to put her finger in the dike
OT, but not when you are talking about funding detention I guess.
Judge Bates joins the ranks of activist judges who are far to the left of Obama’s position when it comes to forever detentions.
emph added
This is part of what made me so mad with that Georgia boy, what was his name?, and Graham during the Whitehouse hearing. They pretended that while, yeah, GITMO violated all kinds of criminal law rules, it was hunky meets dory vis a vis laws of war and that was CRAP CRAP CRAP. I am so far from being an expert on the laws of war it isn’t funny, but even I know better than that and Graham is JAG fergoshsakes. It’s telling that the Hamden decision came from Stevens, who knows more about the laws of war than anyone on the Sup Ct.
And this is an area where Obama just spins round and round with no more coherence in policy and approach than Bush, adding only an ability to go even further while soundbyting better in his pursuit of chaos.
This has been THE issue, the war v. crime convergence, that has needed input for, oh, let’s say 7 or 8 years now, and definitely all through Obama’s tenure in the Senate and campaign etc. His problem is that while he clings to the “they’re all terrorists, they’re all guilty” hysteria he can’t address the issue. While he keeps puffing the doobyous rhetoric that we haven’t committed crimes of our own that need to be addressed, he can’t really come up with anything credible.
This isn’t some kind of truly “new war” that has no solutions under the laws of war and crime. What makes it “solution impossible” is that no one will talk honestly about the problem. You can’t reconcile “no one is above the law and our national identity will be to support the rule of law” with “hey, we’re going to insulate our criminals from consequences and look forward—and oh yeah, change everything so that the victims of our criminals live forever in a world without law”
It doesn’t work, it’ll never work, and the law will spit you out everytime. But the Executive Crime branch doesn’t really care if it destroys national and international baseline instiutions – as long as they get called patriots and get nifty little corporate and lobbying payoffs and bookdeals.
I guess this is what has changed my mind so over the years, from thinking at one point that it would be a bad thing for NSA and CIA and others under pressure and order to bear significant consequences. It’s the continued and relentless lack of remorse and willingness to destroy more and more and more.
I suggest you do an oxdown on staussean principles and include who attended his class
this is incredible stuff plunger, don’t let it go as ot comments on a thread, give it it’s own life here at the lake
I’ve pretty much done that on Monday here.
Plunger is welcome to use any and all of what I’ve done in that blog, or I could certainly put it up at Oxdown myself. It’s easy to get the players. That link is here. (though ignore the wacko theorizing. just concentrate on the people and the places they went, who they connected with) That link is in the blog above. (and many links in the thread below)
Great work – nicely done.
http://phil.uregina.ca/CRC/encyc_leostrauss.html : following links leads me to this article and this quote:
Crikey. Is even the “religious right” part of the Straussian design? (my bold)
“I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny imposed upon the mind of man” : Jefferson, T.
Just watched “Born Yesterday”, in which this quote figures importantly. And now we find out that Leo Strauss wanted to have his cake (intellectual freedom) and eat it, too (design a society based upon the Rulers and the Ruled, without innate rights, without the principles of the Founding Fathers).
Thanks for nothing, Prof. Strauss. Now get lost, and take your spawn with you.
“Reason cannot provide the requisite support for moral and political life; what is needed is belief in a transcendent God who punishes the wicked and rewards the righteous.”
No Liberal Rationalist–and no real Christian, in this armchair theologian’s opinion–would ever claim that reason can support BOTH moral and political life.
Reason supports political life, which consists of the pursuit of human ends and the partial fulfillment of competing human desires. Political life is compromise, relativism. It is a matter of public debate and majority rule. It is of this world. It is something Christian’s “render unto Caesar”.
As Christian’s use it and as the civil law recognizes it, “morality” is, by definition, uncompromising and absolute. It is private. It is the personal revelation of God. It is not of this world. It is something believers “render unto God.” It is not reasonable at all.
The quotation thus misses a crucial distinction: politics is rational, but religion/morality is not and does not profess to be. Religion and religiously grounded morality is, rather, an expression of personal desire for and love of God. Politics–what St. Augustine called the City of Man–is not about the love of God. For non-believers, it is about their own aims. For believers, it is about their neighbors aims, which have to matter since we all live in one world.
The separation of Church and State is thus an idea that Christianity did much to introduce into our thinking. It is a crucial defense for sincere religious belief as much as a defense of secular life and rights. The Roman state made belief in its state religion a legal requirement, because it demanded that the State, its Leader, and its political and economic status quo be worhipped unquestioningly. It demanded that Caesar be accorded the authority of God.
The above quotation, like much from the Irreligious Right today, is thus Anti-Christian. It’s real gods are Mammon and Caesar, Wealth and Power. That is idolatry, not faith.
It appears that biology supports political life. When Aristotle observed that ‘man is a political animal,’ he meant ‘a critter capable of making laws, and one that relies on social living.’
“More” actually derives from a Latin noun for ’shared’ or some related meaning. We live today in a world of rapidly colliding cultures, economies, traditions, and assumptions about how society should be structured.
It’s looking like people are ‘moral’ because its safer to be part of a nurturing, equitable community. No man is an island because it’s simply not possible to hunt a wooly mammoth (or the 20th c equivilent) all by one’s lonesome.
Traditionally, we lived among people to whom we were closely related biologically. That’s far less true today.
I’ve seen it take a toll (and have felt it to some degree in my own life). Look back 3 or 4 generations, and people mostly lived in rural communities that were agriculturally based and in synch with seasonal rhythms.
In the tumult of our times, people do odd things to try and become part of a ‘group’ that they believe values them and will keep them safe. That includes joining extremist groups like neocons and AQ.
When the world feels safer for more people, IMHO we’ll have fewer extremists. Meanwhile, we need a shitload of FBI talent to clear enough space for the world to feel safer and saner again. Much rides on whether people like you, me, my grocer, my mechanic, and my insurance agent believe that justice is still possible. If it is, then the fevered heat of the world may calm down a few degrees — socially, anyway.
But a key part of attaining ‘justice’ is cleaning up fraudulent, perverted, predatory economic instruments, entities, and economic predators.
Onward…
Strauss was an atheist, who viewed religion as a way of manipulating people. He wanted union of the nation and religion and manipulation of “images” via propaganda, to control the inferior masses.
I’m not Strauss expert. But what I did was extract the main “principles” or assumptions that neocons drew from Stauss’s theories.
I did two posts related to this. The one I put up today and the the one prior to that, linked in today’s post (above @60).
I hope this comment and my posts can be of help in answering that question. I feel on very firm ground in terms of the “principles” I extracted as they “work” dynamically and can be used as “building blocks” to see how straussian thinking and manipulation played out under bushco. It’s like having a set of building blocks you can manipulate. And suddenly you see these blocks can be rearranged to arrive at any of their policies.
Religion was a tool for the straussians. They were not believers. Strauss definitely was not.
Strauss hated liberalism. He taught his disciples to hate it too. He was basically an advocate of authoritarianism – but hid that in the US, except in the inner circles.
don’t get the wrong idea demi, I don’t propose to tell anyone how to frame their posts here, when I suggest framing it’s for the law critters that read here not for the posters, and believe me, I myself frame my posts wrong more often then not
I love plunger and how he frames his posts but there has been trouble here with the moderators and the 9/11 discussion
I do NOT want to see plunger become persona non gratta so I am trying to make sure that doesn’t happen.
that’s the history of my suggestion to plunger, again, I love his comments and posts
Gotcha. Didn’t know the history of Plunger and the Moderators. I wouldn’t like anyone here to become persona non gratta either.
The mods down’t scare me, tho. I’ve gotten into it before when I said I thought the mods weren’t playing fairly, but not for a long time. It seems not even the mods like to be told what or how to do. *g*
Remember the overuse of the phrase “stovepiping of intelligence” as the primary excuse for how we ended up in a war without any actual proof of WMD to justify it?
Referring to Perris’s earlier mention of keeping comments under the “umbrella” (meaning on-topic), I simply have a very expansive view of that definition. My image of the “umbrella” is no different than the strategist/criminals that conceived these deeds. It’s enormous.
They don’t view their acts in a stovepipe, and to the extent that we elect to by choice (by restricting thought), we will never fully recognize the forest, for the trees.
The inclusion of Strauss in today’s thread lends context that is invaluable to understanding the mindset of those behind these War Crimes. Discussion of Iran/Contra opens minds to the players involved, the tactics used, and the usurpation of Congressional funding.
Means. Motive. Opportunity.
Not all are encompassed under a rigidly controlled “topic.”
Yes. Some may not see the relevance of every comment towards the understanding of the topic. But, there is a large umbrella that many aspects can fall into.
Plunge on.
Pity that the MSM now rarely reads the fine print or does Izzy-journalism. Only DFH bloggers have the time, as MSM’ers have those appointments with the boss, the hair stylist, their investment bankers and their secret, cooperative access-sources. And, of course, make time to read bloggers to make sure they’ve covered or ignored the important stories of the day.
Many thanks, and congratulations again on your fine work.
Up with BIG umbrellas!
The bigger the better.
(As a general ‘rule’, I regard that as a questionable ‘philosophy’, but, as regards umbrellas, barring heavy winds, it covers much important ‘territory’.)
The bigger the better.
Ah ha! Akin to open minds, open hearts? Inclusive acceptance? More space for non-judgement under a big umbrella, no?
Hi David.
PS, I’m off to the gym. It seems the busier I am in my life the less time I spend here. Or, is it that the less time I spend here, the more I get accomplished in my other life? I ask too many questions. *g*
EW (Just between you and me) You are a Great Lady of The Lake, take care.
FYI – David Schuster just tweeted:
EW is starting to get the respect she’s richly earned.
Hope this isn’t a repeat.
Military attorney: Waterboarding is ‘tip of the iceberg’
BY DAVID EDWARDS AND MURIEL KANE Published: May 20, 2009 Updated 2 hours ago
“A military attorney who represented a now-freed Guantanamo detainee told CNN on Wednesday that waterboarding is only “the tip of the iceberg”
“Air Force Lieutenant Yvonne Bradley was the lawyer for Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian national who was arrested by the Pakistani government in April 2002 on suspicion of being a member of al Qaeda.”
http://rawstory.com/08/news/20…..rboarding/