Dick Cheney ordered the CIA to hide secret programme from Congress

[Demosthenes11]

Nothing will change. It would probably take the equivolent of 100 Nixon scandals and a few more unjustified war before the american people would probably bat an eye and this type of shit. Nothing has changed and I have so much scorn directed at the american political system that I really believe the best we can only hope for is Anything but more of the same.

whoa wtf rhino, stop saying something I agree with. fuckkkkkk

[Elites]

Please sign me up for that program if I can become a Jason Bourne.

[Klaatu]

What in the world would stop politicians from breaking the law if they think they can get away with it because an administration prefers its political capital over upholding the damn law?

http://img4.ifilmpro.com/resize/imag...td/2795756.jpg

Corrupt government is nothing new. Change must happen on genetic level.

http://www.timboucher.com/journal/wp...gress_logo.png

[Kuya]

You Americans have a really pronounced end-of-the-world mentality. Where nothing matters, corruption is just an every day happening, so you should just forget about it and accept it. It's like it doesn't occur to you that it is that kind of mentality that allows this to spiral into oblivion.

That's a generilization.


But i wonder, is it your talking heads that instill this in you, or are they just manifesting what you really feel?

The Village roundtable all gasped in horror anyway because who knows where such an investigation might lead and as Cokie complained, it would mean that the whole town would be mad at each other again and nobody wants that! "Everybody hates each other and the poison gets very thick." She did finally come down on the side of following the rule of law, even though it would make her uncomfortable at cocktail parties, but it was a close thing.

Bob Woodward was very upset at the idea that the government can't keep secrets because "we need them!" Besides, Holder shouldn't be like Janet Reno and just initiate investigations willy nilly. (He seems to think that Reno authorizing independent counsels to investigate her own president for trivial matters for political reasons is the same thing as investigating whether the previous administration tortured prisoners.) They all chuckled at the notion that Holder was really independent and if he is, that means he's a rogue interrogator himself.

They all snorted and giggled and laughed throughout the whole segment about how silly it was to be upset that the CIA lied because well, that's what it does. And they all thought it was a ripping good joke that Cheney had keep everything a secret because well, everyone knows that's what he does. Hahahahaha.

And then they talked about Michael Jackson.

Looks like the talking heads are already at work.

[Alleya]

You Americans have a really pronounced end-of-the-world mentality. Where nothing matters, corruption is just an every day happening, so you should just forget about it and accept it. It's like it doesn't occur to you that it is that kind of mentality that allows this to spiral into oblivion.

That's a generilization.


But i wonder, is it your talking heads that instill this in you, or are they just manifesting what you really feel?






Looks like the talking heads are already at work.

I agree with you about the insanity of this mentality, but thinking it will ever change really just is idealism. Do you have any suggestions on how to enact real change? Everyone always says write your representative, but that's a pretty toothless act. "Hey, you, stop doing bad things or we'll...you know...reelect you since congress has a 90% incumbency rate...but watch out! Because the guy we put in your place will be, you know, exactly the same as you but with a different letter by his name on the ballot!"

It's also pretty hard to organize into grassroots movements since dissenters are shouted down and demonized by the media almost regardless of the perceived political bias (see: This Is What Democracy Looks Like). Dissenting organizations that aren't destroyed by the media are put on FBI watch lists and severely culled all the time.

So yeah...if you have suggestions I'm sure we'd love to hear them.

[Kuya]

I would suggest two things: Support Accountability Now and send letters/emails/phonecalls to the DOJ (Eric Holder) and tell everyone you meet who feels sympathetic to the cause to do the same.

Accountability Now

[url=http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/6282]The Seminal

[Kuya]

My post got borked, anyway. The least people can do is send emails/phonecalls/mail to Eric Holder imploring him to investigate or establish an independent inquiry. I also wouldn't denounce protesting as it at least serves the purpose of letting others know that they aren't alone in their outrage, regardless of what the MSM says.

AG Holder: Help POTUS Out BY Appointing Torture Special Prosecutor

Dear Attorney General Eric Holder, Jr.:

President Obama needs help, and you are the man who can provide it.
Appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate torture.

Obama's Achilles' heel is his apparent perception that somehow the past,
and his stance in relation to it, is irrelevant. Economic recovery, healthcare
reform... are the forward-looking issues of the day, and we must place our
past divisions and divisiveness behind us. I do not agree.

Look at the Sunday (07/12/09) NYTimes. The lead story reads: "Cheney Is
Linked to Concealment of C.I.A. Project." And, juxtaposed (coincidently?),
the NYT's "Quotation of the Day:" "No business wants to invest in a place
where the government skims 20 percent off the top, or the head of the port
authority is corrupt. No person wants to live in a society where the rule of
law gives way to the rule of brutality and bribery. That is not democracy,
that is tyranny, and now is the time for it to end."
PRESIDENT OBAMA, on the need for reform in Africa.

I was moved as well when President Obama told the world that we must "bear witness"
to the events in Iran and said: "If the Iranian government seeks the respect of the
international community, it must respect the dignity of its own people and govern
through consent, not coercion." Yet, we Americans are not allowed to "bear witness"
to pictures that allegedly illustrate coercion by our own government while being
lied to and misled about the nature and frequency of such acts apparently over
many years.

The President's words are indeed elegant and moving, but how do they
bear credibility when this Administration turns a 'blind eye' to those very
injustices at home?

So, Mr. Holder, you can actually help out President Obama by appointing a Special
Prosecutor. Consider it an act of tough love if this makes it more palatable. Yes,
I imagine the blogs, MSM, radio talk shows, etc. will have a 'field day'. It will
certainly distract, if not delay or derail, some of President Obama's initiatives.
There may well be political fallout. BUT, you will contribute to: 1) backing up
some of Mr. Obama's campaign promises; 2) enhancing our world standing
and supporting President Obama's rhetoric; and 3) bolstering the "rule of law" as the
primary governing force in our own country. Most important, you will contribute to
a true break with the Bush Administration. You will be enacting democracy by putting
in action the checks and balances designed by our founders; enabling them to uphold the
integrity of our Constitution.

Thank you in advance for your courage and dedication to your office and country.

If i find anything else, i'll be sure to post it here, but the most important thing is to not remain apathetic in all of this, because you'll only make things worse that way.

The Seminal � AG Holder: Help POTUS Out BY Appointing Torture Special Prosecutor

edit:

http://www.democrats.com/special-pro...ush-war-crimes

http://www.petitiononline.com/NC05FOXX/petition.html

You can easily google organizations either mounting protests or preparing petitions/mass letters for the DOJ.

[Demosthenes11]

I canvass for a political organization atm and it has made me even more pessimistic about the electorate. So many people are "supportive" of an issue but simply refuse to take any action - even the simplest one - to get involved because that means spending 2 minutes talking to me instead of watching MJ news on tv

[*Shinzon*]

No body can touch the CIA. They do what they want when they want and they always have. The upper echelon of the CIA and NSA are some of the most untouchable people in the country. People get so angry about shit that the CIA does when really, people don't want to fucking know. If everyone knew the kind of shit that the CIA did to gather intelligence, people would probably be completely disgusted and rightfully so. The world doesn't always play by the rules and neither does the CIA.

On that note I'm not supportive of all the shit the CIA does to gather funds, including confiscating millions upon millions from arms, and drug sale along with the bending of truth but; theres a point where people just need to slow the fuck down and think about some of the shit they want agencies like the CIA to do. Most people emotionally respond to a story about a person getting stabbed or shot in the daily news, do you REALLY want to know about the kinda stuff the CIA field agents do?

[Kuya]

Make your point concise. What are you getting at?

[Stumblingdrunk]

Make your point concise. What are you getting at?

He's saying the people need to be protected from reality, and evildoers.

[Leif]

Straight forward title. He apparently ordered the CIA (since when does a vice president have that authority?) to hide a counterrorism programme that never went fully operational even though by law the intelligence agencies must inform Congress of these activities. It is belived that the Bush administration made it a high priority to conceal this programme. What the programm is and what it does is yet unknown. Does anyone still oppose an investigation, and even prosecution when this is a clear breach of US law?

Good. I don't trust members of congress to keep their mouths shut about those programs.

If the program was never enacted, I don't see a big deal. You don't have to inform Congress of what you were planning to do, contemplating, or taking preliminary steps. If they never enacted the program, nothing happened. Move on.

And I think everybody knows "investigation" means calling big figures in front of a bunch of politicians for a show trial and determining which guy down the chain is going to be the fall guy. Can't we skip the crap?

[*Shinzon*]

Sorry that was kind of rambling. Simply put yes, people need not know everything done by the CIA or any intelligence gathering agency. Ever since 9/11 it has sickened me to no end that news agencies and people, who have no business involving themselves in the defense of our country, find it necessary to publicize every fault that the government or a government installation has. For instance, on New York News channels, each has an investigative team of reporters who go around and publicly announce that they found some hole that can potentially become a terrorist attack site. Really? You think it's a great idea to announce for everyone to see, that the Indian Point Nuclear power plant has security faults or that our reservoirs are not properly protected? Do they think that terrorists don't watch the news?

Sorry rambling again:

My point is simple. I believe that, not particularly relating to this incident, the people who believe it's ok to publicize everything the CIA and other agencies do is most of the time out of line and more or less done to create political stir than actually help protect the country from our own agencies. I believe that, in some instances, people NEED to be left out of the loop on potentially "scary" or unethical actions taken by our intelligence agencies. Often times these reports do more damage than ever do to correct a situation. There is a reason that the government classifies or restricts access to files and information that it gathers. It is to avoid involving people who have no business getting involved in the defense of this country and to prevent inciting panic, scares, and things of that sort that can have a devastating impact on the country if it gets into the public. If there's a problem with some government facility or some potentially dangerous information that needs to be addressed, the intelligence agencies can sort it out. We don't need politicians or your average joe to get involved.

Sorry I don't think that's much clearer but im kinda typing this with company D:

[archibaldcrane]

If the program was never enacted, I don't see a big deal.

Serious question here - would you think it was a big deal if the program had been enacted?

Somehow I doubt it.

[Kuya]

Sorry that was kind of rambling. Simply put yes, people need not know everything done by the CIA or any intelligence gathering agency. Ever since 9/11 it has sickened me to no end that news agencies and people, who have no business involving themselves in the defense of our country, find it necessary to publicize every fault that the government or a government installation has. For instance, on New York News channels, each has an investigative team of reporters who go around and publicly announce that they found some hole that can potentially become a terrorist attack site. Really? You think it's a great idea to announce for everyone to see, that the Indian Point Nuclear power plant has security faults or that our reservoirs are not properly protected? Do they think that terrorists don't watch the news?

Sorry rambling again:

My point is simple. I believe that, not particularly relating to this incident, the people who believe it's ok to publicize everything the CIA and other agencies do is most of the time out of line and more or less done to create political stir than actually help protect the country from our own agencies. I believe that, in some instances, people NEED to be left out of the loop on potentially "scary" or unethical actions taken by our intelligence agencies. Often times these reports do more damage than ever do to correct a situation. There is a reason that the government classifies or restricts access to files and information that it gathers. It is to avoid involving people who have no business getting involved in the defense of this country and to prevent inciting panic, scares, and things of that sort that can have a devastating impact on the country if it gets into the public. If there's a problem with some government facility or some potentially dangerous information that needs to be addressed, the intelligence agencies can sort it out. We don't need politicians or your average joe to get involved.

Sorry I don't think that's much clearer but im kinda typing this with company D:

First bolded thing. In which universe do you live? The media has done nothing but NOT be critical of what the government does. If they had been, they wouldn't have lapped up the propaganda the government whipped for Iraq. Furthermore, your example was nothing but the media scoring some points by making issue of nothing; it was not an example of the media doing its job and being critical of what the government does.

Because let me inform you, a functional media is important in the existence of a seemingly democratic government, as people NEED to be informed of what their government is doing to hold it accountable, if not, it becomes no different than some form of autocratic state. So unlike your example, the media should be all over the government's face and forcing to prove and justify what it says and does. They need to justify their legitimacy to us, lest they become nothing more than autocrats.

Second bolded. You're not talking about this specific case which is what i wanted to know about, however, tell me, when does the CIA get to hide things from us and when can't they? Why was it wrong to hide this, but not something else? Furthermore, you are aware that this is an instance of one part of the government lying to another part of the government? And it is illegal right? The CIA is not supposed to hide what it does from the relevant committies in Congress; this is an aspect that keeps one "branch" or institution from acting on its own. And in this case, we have a vice president who has no bussiness telling the CIA what it should or should not do, telling the CIA to hide information from another branch of government whose CONSTITUTIONAL PURPOSE it is to also guard the executive branch.

That's how any psuedo democratic government functions; they must justify their actions to us, because we are the ones who vote for them. They can't decide on their own what gets hidden from us, because we have to know what they're doing. They have to argue, in a court, whether something is a danger to national security. And in this court, only the judge has to see the material and decide whether it truly merits such censor. However, a government institution or a branch cannot unilaterally declare information "too dangerous" for the public without first proving that it is dangerous.

The government, which is not a monolithic institution, cannot be allowed to hide what it does under its own volition, because it will tend to hide things that are not a danger to national security, but may endanger their stay in power or diminish their legitimacy. I have argued this before. If your argument is allowed to pass, then the government can essentially hide anything it deems to be a threat to us when it may not be so at all. This is too dangerous and the proper channels must be established to do so, and they exist. And because the proper channels exist and they were not used in this case, then the law was broken and accountability must be restored.

But to end my point, you're talking about part of the scenario, while ignoring that in this case one branch of government lied to another which is illegal, and it inhibits the ability of the government to function properly. The argument of whether the government should be able to hide something from us cannot be left to the government alone. Because they will not always be honest.

Good. I don't trust members of congress to keep their mouths shut about those programs.

If the program was never enacted, I don't see a big deal. You don't have to inform Congress of what you were planning to do, contemplating, or taking preliminary steps. If they never enacted the program, nothing happened. Move on.

And I think everybody knows "investigation" means calling big figures in front of a bunch of politicians for a show trial and determining which guy down the chain is going to be the fall guy. Can't we skip the crap?

The program was active, it was just not fully operational. Key word here is fully operational, and if it weren't a big deal in the first place, then it should have been revealed before. You know, in the 8 years that they could have done so.

[Atreides]

personally, I think the CIA should tell us what they really know about extraterrestrials

im serious :<

[Rhinox]

Good. I don't trust members of congress to keep their mouths shut about those programs.

If the program was never enacted, I don't see a big deal. You don't have to inform Congress of what you were planning to do, contemplating, or taking preliminary steps. If they never enacted the program, nothing happened. Move on.

And I think everybody knows "investigation" means calling big figures in front of a bunch of politicians for a show trial and determining which guy down the chain is going to be the fall guy. Can't we skip the crap?

Sure. We can start by Inditing key figures in the bush administration starting with rumsfeld, wolfiwitz, gonzales and cheney. I couldn't care less really if they ever serve time. I just want their legacy destroyed. I honestly think that would hurt them more then actually going to prison. Put a big fat asterisk in history on the bush administration.

[bigrougabagel]

We don't need politicians or your average joe to get involved. :

Exactly. Cheney doesn't need to be involved in setting up secret programs to do secret things to prevent Amureekans from being kersploded by evil brown people or whatever their new threat of the month is.

[Neosutra]

Kuya said everything I wanted to say in response to Shinzon, but Im seriously blown away at anyone that could think it is ok for goverment agencies to hide things from their overseeing government agencies..

Checks and Balances? Consitution? America? Bueler? Bueler?

[guartz]

It's worth mentioning (again) that 9/11 was a result, no, a consequence of secret CIA actions. A free society, is an open society and largely safer for it.