Former Vice President Dick Cheney is clearly more concerned with his own legacy and political partisanship than with the well being of America, even though his actions bring attention to his own devastating failures in office and undermine this nation's president.
Take the most recent attack on President Barack Obama's initial handling of the nearly catastrophic attempt to blow up an airplane over Detroit. "He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core Al Qaeda-trained terrorists still there, we won't be at war," Cheney said in a written statement. "But we are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren't, it makes us less safe." This is an amazing statement coming from the man who, while serving as vice president, personally authorized the release of more than 500 Guantanamo prisoners, dozens of which are reported to have reengaged in terrorism against the United States.
As vice president, Cheney played a key role in undermining the civil rights of Americans through the Patriot Act, and authorizing the use of illegal torture, such as waterboarding, in interrogations. Cheney's statement about President Obama continued, "He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won't be at war." Perhaps waterboarding passengers before they board a plane will mollify Cheney?
The former vice president's chutzpah and outspokenness is especially remarkable considering all that went wrong during his term. There was the Iraq War, poorly justified and badly executed by the Bush/Cheney administration. There was also the failure to find even one weapon of mass destruction in Iraq, the single most urgent reason cited for going to war. And there were no Al-Qaeda training camps in Iraq either. Yet thousands of brave American soldiers have died or been injured, and billions of dollars have been spent in this war which America is committed to for years to come.
The former vice president also took his eye off the ball in America's war on terror. The Bush/Cheney White House failed to close the deal in Afghanistan eight years ago, and rid the world of Osama bin Laden. Instead they allowed the problem to fester and grow until their last day in office.
Following the ghastly terrorist attacks on America September 11, 2001, President George Bush set up a commission "to provide recommendations designed to guard against future attacks." On July 22, 2004, that commission made its findings public. Yet to this day America has not successfully implemented all of the commission's recommendations. Perhaps doing so would have "connected the dots" between a father's warnings to the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, his son's failure to get a visa for Great Britain, and his attempt to buy an airline ticket to Detroit for $500 cash while carrying no luggage.
Cheney and some ambitious Republicans are critical of President Obama for taking so long to respond to the attack. But where were these same critics when it took President Bush six whole days to comment about Richard Reid's failed attempt to blow up an airliner with a shoe bomb? And did these same GOP critics rush out fundraising letters to their constituents warning of America's safety immediately following the Reid incident as some have done this time around?
In his written statement Cheney identified President Obama's "goal of his presidency--social transformation, the restructuring of American society." Well, after the Bush/Cheney administration, what choice did he have? Sure, the issue of national security is critical. But the new president inherited a near economic depression, record job losses, huge government deficits that will be damaging to our children's future, failed oversight of the nation's financial institutions, more than 40 million Americans without health insurance and rapidly increasing medial costs.
The failure to stop the Detroit "underwear bomber" is unacceptable. There is plenty of blame to go around. But it is time to stop scapegoating; it is time to fix the systemic problems. It is time to knock down walls and jealousies between the appropriate government agencies, to leverage existing technologies to centralize and track important information. As an example, if Google can create a technology to prioritize a search, or send out Google alerts or can place a targeted advertisement on a Blog, why can't the U.S. government create a software program to track terrorism suspects? So that if England puts someone on its "no-fly" list an alert is sent to the TSA and its counterparts worldwide.
It is time to stop politicizing America's safety; to stop all the national bickering and backbiting. The war with Al Qaeda needs everyone's total focus. There is too much at stake!
Showing posts with label Cheney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cheney. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Obama and Cheney
It was the polished and thoughtful constitutional lawyer against the irreproachable and contemptuous lifetime bureaucrat. President Barack Obama and former Vice President Dick Cheney engaged in a remarkable battle of words over national security, torture and the future of Guantanamo prison.
While not face to face, it may be the most important debate of our time because it was about the soul of America. Obama's central theme was that some Bush/Cheney policies were illegal, ineffective and weakened our country. Cheney's theme was that his administration's policies were legal and they kept America safe from another terrorist attack.
Vice President Cheney has been a lone but forceful voice in defending the battered Bush/Cheney legacy. Why did his newly elected administration not take seriously 2001 intelligence reports that Al Qaeda was about to strike America? He even raised it in his speech at the American Enterprise Institute; "Nine-eleven caused everyone to take a serious second look at threats that had been gathering for a while, and enemies whose plans were getting bolder and more sophisticated."
The World Trade Center terrorist attack was devastating. The Bush/Cheney administration went into overdrive to make up for their initial mistakes. "Everyone expected a follow-on attack, and our job was to stop it," Cheney recounted yesterday, "Al Qaeda was seeking nuclear technology...we had an anthrax attack from an unknown source...and dictators like Saddam Hussein with ties to Mideast terrorists."
From the earliest moment Bush and Cheney linked Saddam Hussein to Al Qaeda and targeted him for attack. They built a case for an American invasion of Iraq by claiming his complicity in the American attacks and his possession of weapons of mass destruction, WMD's. But no link would be found and there were no WMD's. More than 4,000 U.S. soldiers have died in Iraq since the poorly planned invasion and occupation began. As Obama said, "Faced with an uncertain threat, our government made a series of hasty decisions...all too often our government made decisions based on fear rather than foresight."
Another one of those decisions was to use enhanced interrogation techniques. Cheney defended them as legal and effective, "(their use) prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people." He quoted President Obama's Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Dennis Blair, as saying, "High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the Al Qaeda organization that was attacking this country." But Cheney did not mention that Blair also said, "The bottom line is that these techniques hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."
Obama's position on these techniques was firm, "I categorically reject the assertion that these are the most effective means of interrogation." Cheney's was righteous, "In my long experience in Washington, few matters have inspired such contrived indignation and phony moralizing as the interrogation methods applied to a few captured terrorists." Cheney's claim that the enhanced interrogation techniques used were legal is manipulating the truth. This country has long declared that waterboarding is torture. Further, in 2002 terrorists were waterboarded well before the ginned up and misguided Justice Department approval was given for its use.
Former Vice President Cheney also criticized the "selective release" of documents relating to the interrogations by the President. "For reasons the administration has yet to explain, they believe the public has the right to know the method of the questions, but not the content of the answers." The President said he released those memos because, "We will not be interrogating terrorists using that approach. That approach is now prohibited." But the argument may not be settled until the President releases all the memos.
With regard to Guantanamo, Cheney accused Obama of acting hastily. "On his second day in office, President Obama announced that (he was) closing the detention facility," Cheney said, "The step came with little deliberation and no plan." Cheney then played the fear card, "The President says some of these terrorists should be brought to American soil for trial in our court system." He added that he agreed with many Democrats who were "Unsure how to explain to their constituents why terrorists might soon be relocating into their states." But Obama described Guantanamo as a symbol that helped Al Qaeda recruit terrorists. "The problem of what to do with Guantanamo detainees was not caused by my decision to close the facility, " Obama said, "The problem exists because of the decision to open Guantanamo in the first place." Today Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a holdover Bush appointee, defended Obama's decision to close the Guantanamo facility.
The blight of Abu Ghraib came up when Cheney blamed "a few sadistic prison guards" for abusing inmates "in violation of American law, military regulations and simple decency." He said that the guards had received Army justice but failed to point out that responsibility for Abu Ghraib runs all the way up the chain of command to former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Obama seems to be trying to find a pragmatic way to deal with all of these problems. "National security requires a delicate balance," he said, "On the one hand, our democracy depends on transparency. On the other hand, some information must be protected from public disclosure for the sake of our security." But will he remain pragmatic should there be another devastating terrorist attack on this country? He raised that possibility in his speech.
And how will history treat the Bush/Cheney administration? The difficult and costly Iraq war that America should have never waged, a failed Katrina response, a collapsed economy, incredible deficit spending and the use of torture are among the missteps that do not bode well for their legacy.
Yet Cheney remains defiant and outspoken because he has nothing to lose. "For all the partisan anger that still lingers," he said yesterday, "our administration will stand up well in history--not despite our actions after 9/11, but because of them."
While not face to face, it may be the most important debate of our time because it was about the soul of America. Obama's central theme was that some Bush/Cheney policies were illegal, ineffective and weakened our country. Cheney's theme was that his administration's policies were legal and they kept America safe from another terrorist attack.
Vice President Cheney has been a lone but forceful voice in defending the battered Bush/Cheney legacy. Why did his newly elected administration not take seriously 2001 intelligence reports that Al Qaeda was about to strike America? He even raised it in his speech at the American Enterprise Institute; "Nine-eleven caused everyone to take a serious second look at threats that had been gathering for a while, and enemies whose plans were getting bolder and more sophisticated."
The World Trade Center terrorist attack was devastating. The Bush/Cheney administration went into overdrive to make up for their initial mistakes. "Everyone expected a follow-on attack, and our job was to stop it," Cheney recounted yesterday, "Al Qaeda was seeking nuclear technology...we had an anthrax attack from an unknown source...and dictators like Saddam Hussein with ties to Mideast terrorists."
From the earliest moment Bush and Cheney linked Saddam Hussein to Al Qaeda and targeted him for attack. They built a case for an American invasion of Iraq by claiming his complicity in the American attacks and his possession of weapons of mass destruction, WMD's. But no link would be found and there were no WMD's. More than 4,000 U.S. soldiers have died in Iraq since the poorly planned invasion and occupation began. As Obama said, "Faced with an uncertain threat, our government made a series of hasty decisions...all too often our government made decisions based on fear rather than foresight."
Another one of those decisions was to use enhanced interrogation techniques. Cheney defended them as legal and effective, "(their use) prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people." He quoted President Obama's Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Dennis Blair, as saying, "High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the Al Qaeda organization that was attacking this country." But Cheney did not mention that Blair also said, "The bottom line is that these techniques hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."
Obama's position on these techniques was firm, "I categorically reject the assertion that these are the most effective means of interrogation." Cheney's was righteous, "In my long experience in Washington, few matters have inspired such contrived indignation and phony moralizing as the interrogation methods applied to a few captured terrorists." Cheney's claim that the enhanced interrogation techniques used were legal is manipulating the truth. This country has long declared that waterboarding is torture. Further, in 2002 terrorists were waterboarded well before the ginned up and misguided Justice Department approval was given for its use.
Former Vice President Cheney also criticized the "selective release" of documents relating to the interrogations by the President. "For reasons the administration has yet to explain, they believe the public has the right to know the method of the questions, but not the content of the answers." The President said he released those memos because, "We will not be interrogating terrorists using that approach. That approach is now prohibited." But the argument may not be settled until the President releases all the memos.
With regard to Guantanamo, Cheney accused Obama of acting hastily. "On his second day in office, President Obama announced that (he was) closing the detention facility," Cheney said, "The step came with little deliberation and no plan." Cheney then played the fear card, "The President says some of these terrorists should be brought to American soil for trial in our court system." He added that he agreed with many Democrats who were "Unsure how to explain to their constituents why terrorists might soon be relocating into their states." But Obama described Guantanamo as a symbol that helped Al Qaeda recruit terrorists. "The problem of what to do with Guantanamo detainees was not caused by my decision to close the facility, " Obama said, "The problem exists because of the decision to open Guantanamo in the first place." Today Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a holdover Bush appointee, defended Obama's decision to close the Guantanamo facility.
The blight of Abu Ghraib came up when Cheney blamed "a few sadistic prison guards" for abusing inmates "in violation of American law, military regulations and simple decency." He said that the guards had received Army justice but failed to point out that responsibility for Abu Ghraib runs all the way up the chain of command to former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Obama seems to be trying to find a pragmatic way to deal with all of these problems. "National security requires a delicate balance," he said, "On the one hand, our democracy depends on transparency. On the other hand, some information must be protected from public disclosure for the sake of our security." But will he remain pragmatic should there be another devastating terrorist attack on this country? He raised that possibility in his speech.
And how will history treat the Bush/Cheney administration? The difficult and costly Iraq war that America should have never waged, a failed Katrina response, a collapsed economy, incredible deficit spending and the use of torture are among the missteps that do not bode well for their legacy.
Yet Cheney remains defiant and outspoken because he has nothing to lose. "For all the partisan anger that still lingers," he said yesterday, "our administration will stand up well in history--not despite our actions after 9/11, but because of them."
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Cheney's Torture Logic
Perhaps there was one good thing about having Vice President Dick Cheney in office, you didn't hear from him very often. But now that he is a civilian he just can't stop talking. It is especially surprising because there is nothing much good to say about the past eight years. Record government deficits, a failed financial system, a collapsed housing market, a senseless war in Iraq, no weapons of mass destruction and an increase in global terrorism.
Unlike his former boss, and most of his predecessors, Cheney can’t seem to move on with life, so he has taken the offensive. Cheney has one self-proclaimed accomplishment to hang on to; terrorists did not attack America again after 9/11. So he has been attacking President Barack Obama for making America less safe from a terrorist attack by ending surveillance and other intelligence procedures implemented under President Bush. Further, he has emphatically and unabashedly defended the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques.”
Let's face it, Vice President Dick Cheney didn't just have the President's ear, it is pretty clear he had President Bush by the ear. Take this exchange about enhanced interrogation techniques with CBS News anchor Bob Schieffer on Face the Nation this past Sunday:
Schieffer: "You approved this?"
Cheney: "Right."
Schieffer: "Did President Bush know everything you knew?
Cheney: "I certainly, yes, have every reason to believe he knew -- he knew a great deal about the program. He basically authorized it. I mean, this was a presidential-level decision. And the decision went to the president. He signed off on it."
He "basically authorized it?" It sounds like back then Cheney said, "Just sign here George and don't worry, I got your back." Only now it is clear Cheney is saying, "If you go after me, you got to go after Bush too!"
One of Cheney's central arguments is that the enhanced interrogation techniques used were legal. "We had pursued interrogation in a normal way. We decided that we needed some enhanced techniques. So we went to the Justice Department," Cheney said to Schieffer. "What we got from the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) were legal memos that laid out what is appropriate and what’s not appropriate," he continued. "If we had been about torture, we wouldn’t have wasted our time going to the Justice Department."
The United Nations Convention Against Torture, of which America is a signatory, says, "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession" is torture. Further, torture is illegal under U.S. law, and "The Army Field Manual" specifies that waterboarding is prohibited.
Clearly the OLC was instructed by the White House to manufacture guidelines under which waterboarding would not be torture. In other words, harsh enough to have an impact but gentle enough so as not to cause pain. Journalist Christopher Hitchens underwent waterboarding for a Vanity Fair article last August and his conclusion was, "If waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture." So much for legality.
Whether waterboarding worked or not appears to be, at best, a jump ball. Most experts believe that torture does not work because prisoners lie. But Dick Cheney is emphatic that waterboarding did work, and he says four former directors of the CIA agree. As Cheney told Schieffer, "No regrets. I think it was absolutely the right thing to do. I’m convinced, absolutely convinced, that we saved thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of lives."
So Cheney has asked the Obama administration to release all the classified memos pertaining to the enhanced interrogations. "Release the memos. And we can look and see for yourself what was produced," Cheney said. This makes a lot of sense. By releasing all of the relevant memos Americans will likely know conclusively if the enhanced techniques worked. There should also be a bipartisan special commission investigation into the use of enhanced interrogations and the role of the OLC.
In the end the Bush administration abandoned American values and played with the truth. Illegal acts are rewritten as legal through some tortured logic. That will be the Bush/Cheney legacy here. And Dick Cheney doesn't care what anyone thinks.
Unlike his former boss, and most of his predecessors, Cheney can’t seem to move on with life, so he has taken the offensive. Cheney has one self-proclaimed accomplishment to hang on to; terrorists did not attack America again after 9/11. So he has been attacking President Barack Obama for making America less safe from a terrorist attack by ending surveillance and other intelligence procedures implemented under President Bush. Further, he has emphatically and unabashedly defended the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques.”
Let's face it, Vice President Dick Cheney didn't just have the President's ear, it is pretty clear he had President Bush by the ear. Take this exchange about enhanced interrogation techniques with CBS News anchor Bob Schieffer on Face the Nation this past Sunday:
Schieffer: "You approved this?"
Cheney: "Right."
Schieffer: "Did President Bush know everything you knew?
Cheney: "I certainly, yes, have every reason to believe he knew -- he knew a great deal about the program. He basically authorized it. I mean, this was a presidential-level decision. And the decision went to the president. He signed off on it."
He "basically authorized it?" It sounds like back then Cheney said, "Just sign here George and don't worry, I got your back." Only now it is clear Cheney is saying, "If you go after me, you got to go after Bush too!"
One of Cheney's central arguments is that the enhanced interrogation techniques used were legal. "We had pursued interrogation in a normal way. We decided that we needed some enhanced techniques. So we went to the Justice Department," Cheney said to Schieffer. "What we got from the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) were legal memos that laid out what is appropriate and what’s not appropriate," he continued. "If we had been about torture, we wouldn’t have wasted our time going to the Justice Department."
The United Nations Convention Against Torture, of which America is a signatory, says, "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession" is torture. Further, torture is illegal under U.S. law, and "The Army Field Manual" specifies that waterboarding is prohibited.
Clearly the OLC was instructed by the White House to manufacture guidelines under which waterboarding would not be torture. In other words, harsh enough to have an impact but gentle enough so as not to cause pain. Journalist Christopher Hitchens underwent waterboarding for a Vanity Fair article last August and his conclusion was, "If waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture." So much for legality.
Whether waterboarding worked or not appears to be, at best, a jump ball. Most experts believe that torture does not work because prisoners lie. But Dick Cheney is emphatic that waterboarding did work, and he says four former directors of the CIA agree. As Cheney told Schieffer, "No regrets. I think it was absolutely the right thing to do. I’m convinced, absolutely convinced, that we saved thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of lives."
So Cheney has asked the Obama administration to release all the classified memos pertaining to the enhanced interrogations. "Release the memos. And we can look and see for yourself what was produced," Cheney said. This makes a lot of sense. By releasing all of the relevant memos Americans will likely know conclusively if the enhanced techniques worked. There should also be a bipartisan special commission investigation into the use of enhanced interrogations and the role of the OLC.
In the end the Bush administration abandoned American values and played with the truth. Illegal acts are rewritten as legal through some tortured logic. That will be the Bush/Cheney legacy here. And Dick Cheney doesn't care what anyone thinks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)