Condi Rice Rates Obama's US Troop Withrawal Strategy As Disastrous...Stanford Student Video

(Stanford Unv. Students question Condi Rice about the Bush Admin's use of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques on Terrorist Detainees imprisoned at Gitmo.)



(A fourth grader asked former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice about interrogation methods during the Bush administration. Rachel Maddow is joined by NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Condoleezza Rice: "If You Want Another Terrorist Attack In The U.S., Abandon Afghanistan"

Those in Congress who would like to see the U.S. begin to pull out of Afghanistan don't have a supporter in former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

In a new interview with Fortune Magazine, Rice offered extremely sharp criticism of the idea of withdrawal and painted the consequences of this course of action with an almost Cheneyesque bluntness.

"The last time we left Afghanistan, and we abandoned Pakistan," she said, "that territory became the very territory on which Al Qaeda trained and attacked us on September 11th. So our national security interests are very much tied up in not letting Afghanistan fail again and become a safe haven for terrorists.

"It's that simple," she declared, "if you want another terrorist attack in the U.S., abandon Afghanistan."

As the Washington Post reported Monday, Pres. Obama is rethinking all aspects of the U.S. strategy in the Afghanistan in light of the disputed presidential election, an increase in U.S. casualties and waning public support here in America.

In the interview, Rice did acknowledge the recent election as a setback. But she argued that our own experience with democracy proved that it takes time to get things right: "Our democracy wasn't so perfect at the beginning either," she said, citing her own family's experience in the pre-Civil Rights era.

Rice's comments come at a time when the talk of the threat of a possible terrorist attack in the U.S. has re-emerged following a series of arrests in Denver and New York related to an alleged bomb plot. "Counter Terrorism officials have issued security bulletins to police around the nation about terrorists' desire to attack stadiums, entertainment complexes and hotels," the AP reported today.




View Larger Map

Sources: Huffington Post, Fortune, Washington Post, AP, CNN, MSNBC, Rachel Maddow Show, Stanford Unv., Youtube, Google Maps

EX-CIA Chiefs Warn AG Eric Holder Of International Implications From Interrogation Probe...Should He Listen?

Ex-CIA chiefs seek halt to interrogations probe


(CIA report details litany of abuses)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(Former AG Chief Gonzales backs Holder on CIA decision)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(Cheney, McCain fuel National Security debate)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Seven former CIA directors asked President Barack Obama on Friday to quash a criminal probe of harsh interrogations of terror suspects during the Bush administration.

The CIA directors, who served both Democratic and Republican Presidents and include three who worked under President George W. Bush, made their request in a letter Friday to the White House.

Attorney General Eric Holder announced last month that he was appointing an independent counsel to investigate possible incidents of abuse by CIA personnel during interrogations that went beyond guidelines imposed by the Bush administration.

The incidents were referred by the CIA inspector general to the US Justice Department during the Bush administration, but Justice officials at the time prosecuted only one case.

"If criminal investigations closed by career prosecutors during one administration can so easily be reopened at the direction of political appointees in the next, declinations of prosecution will be rendered meaningless," wrote the former directors.

Possible indictments?
The Washington Post reported on its Web site Friday night that the Justice Department will focus on only two or three cases for possible indictment.

One of them, said the newspaper, involved an Afghan prisoner who died after being beaten and chained on a cold night to a concrete floor without blankets. The report cited unidentified officials.

The seven former CIA directors included Michael Hayden, Porter Goss and George Tenet, who served under Bush; John Deutch and James Woolsey, who worked for President Bill Clinton; William Webster, who served under President George H.W. Bush; and James Schlesinger, who ran the agency under President Richard Nixon. Tenet also served under Clinton.

They urged Obama to reverse Holder's Aug. 24 decision to reopen the investigation of interrogations following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano said the agency is cooperating with the Justice Department review "in part to see that they move as expeditiously as possible."

"The director has stood up for those who followed legal guidance on interrogation, and he will continue to do so," said Gimigliano.

In their letter, the former directors warned that the investigations could discourage CIA officers from doing the kind of aggressive intelligence work needed to counter terrorism and may inhibit foreign governments from working with the United States.

Matthew Miller, Holder's spokesman, said Holder does not believe his probe will affect CIA employees' commitment to their work.

"The attorney general's decision to order a preliminary review into this matter was made in line with his duty to examine the facts and to follow the law. As he has made clear, the Department of Justice will not prosecute anyone who acted in good faith and within the scope of the legal guidance given by the Office of Legal Counsel regarding the interrogation of detainees," Miller said in a written statement.

The former CIA directors also warned that foreign governments may be hesitant to cooperate with the United States if the probe continues.

"As a result of the zeal on the part of some to uncover every action taken in the post-9/11 period, many countries may decide that they can no longer safely share intelligence or cooperate with us on future counter-terrorist operations. They simply cannot rely on our promises of secrecy," the letter says.

The letter said the CIA referred fewer than 20 incidents to Bush administration prosecutors, including the case of CIA contractor David Passaro. Passaro was prosecuted, convicted and sentenced to eight years for beating an Afghan detainee in 2007. The detainee later died.

One former CIA official familiar with the cases now under review said that Bush-era Justice lawyers declined to prosecute either because they were not certain they could win conviction or because some of the CIA personnel involved had already been disciplined by the agency. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the cases.

Though not a signatory to the letter, current CIA Director Leon Panetta also opposed Holder's investigation.

"I think the reason I felt the way I did is because I don't believe there's a basis there for any kind of additional action," Panetta said.

"My concern is ... that we don't get trapped by the past. My feeling is ultimately, we're going to be able to move on," he told reporters this week after a speech in Michigan.



View Larger Map

Sources: MSNBC, Politico, Hardball, Whitehouse.gov, US Dept Of Justice, Wikipedia, Google Sight Seeing, Google Maps

The G.O.P. Fights Back By Revealing CIA Interrogation Briefing Info.

The Hill Briefing Room----

Republicans ignited a firestorm of controversy on Thursday by revealing some of what they had been told at a closed-door Intelligence Committee hearing on the interrogation of terrorism suspects.

Democrats immediately blasted the GOP lawmakers for publicly discussing classified information, while Republicans said Democrats are trying to hide the truth that enhanced interrogation of detainees is effective.

GOP members on the Intelligence Committee on Thursday told The Hill in on-the-record interviews that they were informed that the controversial methods have led to information that prevented terrorist attacks.

Hoekstra did not attend the hearing, but said he later spoke with Republicans on the subcommittee who did. He said he came away with even more proof that the enhanced interrogation techniques employed by the CIA proved effective.

“I think the people who were at the hearing, in my opinion, clearly indicated that the enhanced interrogation techniques worked,” Hoekstra said.

Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.), a member of the subcommittee who attended the hearing, concurred with Hoekstra.

“The hearing did address the enhanced interrogation techniques that have been much in the news lately,” Kline said, noting that he was intentionally choosing his words carefully in observance of the committee rules and the nature of the information presented.

“Based on what I heard and the documents I have seen, I came away with a very clear impression that we did gather information that did disrupt terrorist plots,” Kline said.

Neither Hoekstra nor Kline revealed details about the specifics of what they were told Thursday or the identity of the briefers.

Democrats lambasted their Republican counterparts for discussing the information that was provided behind locked doors.

“I am absolutely shocked that members of the Intelligence committee who attended a closed-door hearing… then walked out that hearing – early, by the way – and characterized anything that happened in that hearing,” said Intelligence Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chairwoman Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.).
“My understanding is that’s a violation of the rules. It may be more than that.”

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas) said, “Members on both sides need to watch what they say.”

Both Schakowsky and Reyes accused GOP members of playing politics with national security.

“I think they are playing a very dangerous game when it comes to the discussion of matters that were sensitive enough to be part of a closed hearing,” Schakowsky said.

Asked about the validity of Republican contentions that information shared in Thursday’s hearing showed the effectiveness of enhanced interrogation techniques, Schakowsky said she could not comment on what was discussed at a closed hearing.

Reyes responded by saying he did not attend the entire hearing.

“I wasn’t at the whole hearing,” Reyes said. “As the chairman my view is we need to get the facts about how the enhanced interrogation techniques came about, not just the results.”

That task has become complicated for Democrats, as has the task of proving any effectiveness, or not, of waterboarding and other similar methods of interrogation.

While Democrats, led by President Obama, have firmly labeled those methods torture, cast doubt on their utility, and called for their abolition, Republicans, led by former Vice President Dick Cheney, have consistently said they have worked.

Cheney has called on Obama to declassify CIA information that he says will show that enhanced interrogation techniques have made the U.S. safer.

Since Obama’s release of the Bush administration legal memos justifying the use of many of those enhanced interrogation techniques, Democrats have been on the defensive on an issue they hoped would place them on the political and moral high ground.

And at the center of the storm has been House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Pelosi has been dogged for weeks about how much she was told by CIA officials about the development and use of waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques.

Pelosi last month accused the CIA of lying to Congress about its treatment of suspected terrorists and detainees.

Republican leaders have since demanded that Pelosi either back up those claims or apologize.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Thursday pressed the issue.

“It’s been three weeks since I asked Speaker Pelosi to back up her allegations that the CIA lied to her or purposely misled her,” Boehner said at his weekly press conference. “Allowing this to hang out there is unconscionable. And I just think the silence from Speaker Pelosi is deafening.”

On Thursday Pelosi was asked if she was still receiving intelligence briefings.

“I’ve said what I’m going to say on that subject,” she immediately replied.

Before the reporter could repeat the question, Pelosi answered, “Yes I am. Yes I am.”

As part of their line of attack, Republicans have called not just for open hearings on interrogations, but for an inquiry in which Pelosi would testify about what she was told by the CIA, as well as for the release of still-classified documents they say will back up their claims that waterboarding and other methods have yielded valuable intelligence.

“We’ve asked for hearings,” Hoekstra said. “Clearly the chairman and I are of different thinking on this. But I think a whole lot of questions would be answered if those materials would be released.”

Reyes contended that the committee is acting appropriately.

“We want to know everything there is to know about interrogation, wherever that leads us,” Reyes said. “This was just the first hearing.”

“They can talk all they want and they can continue to make a political issue out of it,” he said of Republicans. “We will continue to do our work.”


View Larger Map


Sources: The Hill, Huffington Post, Day Life, Wikipedia, Google Maps

WTF?? Cheney Was In Charge of Interrogation Briefing Hearings For Congressional Members?

Washington Post----

Former vice president Richard B. Cheney personally oversaw at least four briefings with senior members of Congress about the controversial interrogation program, part of a secretive and forceful defense he mounted throughout 2005 in an effort to maintain support for the harsh techniques used on detainees.

The Cheney-led briefings came at some of the most critical moments for the program, as congressional oversight committees were threatening to investigate or even terminate the techniques, according to lawmakers, congressional officials, and current and former intelligence officials.

Cheney's role in helping handle intelligence issues in the Bush administration -- particularly his advocacy for the use of aggressive methods and warrantless wiretapping against alleged terrorists -- has been well documented. But his hands-on role in defending the interrogation program to lawmakers has not been previously publicized.

The CIA made no mention of his role in documents delivered to Capitol Hill last month that listed every lawmaker who had been briefed on "enhanced interrogation techniques" since 2002. For meetings that were overseen by Cheney, the agency told the intelligence committees that information about who oversaw those briefings was "not available."

The revelations do not shed light on whether top Democrats, as Republicans contend, were aware that waterboarding, a technique that simulates drowning, was being used on terrorism suspects as early as the fall of 2002. That discussion has dominated Capitol Hill since last month, when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who was not present at any of the briefings that included Cheney, accused the agency of intentionally misleading her in a 2002 briefing about the use of waterboarding.

An official who witnessed one of Cheney's briefing sessions with lawmakers said the vice president's presence appeared calculated to give additional heft to the CIA's case for maintaining the program. Cheney left it to the professional briefers to outline the interrogation practices, while he mounted an impassioned defense of the program.

"This is a really important issue for the security of the United States," the official recalled Cheney saying.

The CIA declined to comment on why Cheney's presence in some meetings was left out of the records. One senior intelligence official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the identities of individual briefers are intentionally concealed in all cases -- their names do not appear in any of the CIA documents that describe congressional briefings. In at least some cases, he added, the identity of the briefer was never recorded in the agency's internal records.

For all but seven of the 40 meetings listed, however, the documents outlined which agency led the briefing and which provided support. And on at least five occasions, they spelled out that then-CIA Director Michael V. Hayden led the classified meetings.

Since leaving office in January, Cheney has mounted a vigorous public defense of the interrogation practices. Speaking at the National Press Club on Monday, he said CIA officials approached the White House in 2002 with the request to use harsher techniques such as waterboarding.

"We all approved it. I'm a strong believer in it. I think it was the right thing to do," said Cheney, who is now pushing for the declassification of the information gained from the detainees who were subjected to the most brutal techniques.

Several members of Congress who took part in the Cheney meetings declined to comment on them, citing secrecy concerns. But there was little doubt that he was leading the charge on the issue.

"His office was ground zero. It was his office you dealt with at the end of the day," recalled Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who jousted with Cheney over the system of interrogations.

One of the most critical Cheney-led briefings came in late October 2005, when the vice president and Porter J. Goss, then director of the CIA, read Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) into the program on the interrogation methods, according to congressional and intelligence sources.

One knowledgeable official described the meeting as contentious. Cheney and Goss, with other CIA officials present, tried to persuade the former Vietnam POW to back off an anti-torture amendment that had already won the support of 90 senators.

The McCain amendment would have ended practices such as waterboarding by forbidding "cruel, degrading and inhumane" treatment of detainees. The CIA had not used waterboarding since 2003, but the White House sought to maintain the ability to employ it.

In the meetings with lawmakers, Cheney was adamant that the enhanced interrogations were needed to preserve national security, according to two participants. He advocated briefing more lawmakers about the program, against the wishes of National Security Council officials who sought to inform only the top members of the intelligence committees.

Lawmakers at times challenged Cheney and CIA officials about the legality of the program and pressed for specific results that would show whether the techniques worked. In response, the CIA briefers said that half of the agency's knowledge about al-Qaeda's plans and structure had been obtained through the interrogations.

Before the McCain briefing, Cheney met with a friendlier audience, his longtime friends Sens. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) and Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), who oversaw the Pentagon's annual spending bill, to which the McCain amendment was attached. Cochran said yesterday that it was the first time he had been given a full description of what waterboarding entailed.

"I found the conversation with the vice president to be very candid, straightforward, helpful," Cochran said.

CIA records indicate that another briefing -- for which the briefer's name is "not available" -- was given to Senate GOP leaders on Nov. 1, 2005. That was the same day Cheney made a regular appearance at the weekly Tuesday luncheon for Senate Republicans. Cheney usually engaged only in brief, quiet asides with senators at the lunches. But at this meeting -- the day before The Washington Post published a detailed account of the CIA's secret overseas prison system -- Cheney rose to speak, and the room was cleared of all staff.

He discussed the value of the interrogation program and the information gleaned by using the harsh techniques, according to numerous contemporaneous media accounts.

Cheney's briefings on interrogations began in the winter of 2005 as the top Democrats on the Senate and House intelligence committees, Sen. John D. Rockefeller III (W.Va.) and Rep. Jane Harman (Calif.), publicly advocated a full-scale investigation of the tactics used against top al-Qaeda suspects.

On March 8, 2005 -- two days after a detailed report in the New York Times about interrogations -- Cheney gathered Rockefeller, Harman and the chairmen of the intelligence panels, Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) and Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), according to current and former intelligence officials. Weeks earlier, Roberts had given public statements suggesting possible support for the investigation sought by Rockefeller. But by early March 2005, Roberts announced that he opposed a separate probe, and the matter soon died.

Cheney's efforts to sway Congress toward supporting waterboarding went beyond secret meetings in Washington. In July 2005, he sent David S. Addington, his chief counsel at the time, to travel with five senators -- four of them opponents of the CIA interrogation methods -- to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. On the trip, Sen. Graham urged Addington to put the interrogations at secret prisons and the use of military tribunals into a stronger constitutional position by pushing legislation through Congress, rather than relying on executive orders and secret rulings from Justice Department lawyers.

Subsequent court rulings would challenge the legality of the system, and Justice Department lawyers were privately drafting new rules on interrogations. Addington dismissed the views of Graham, who had been a military lawyer.

"I've got all the authority I need right here," Addington said, pulling from his coat a pocket-size copy of the Constitution, according to the senator, suggesting there was no doubt about the system's legal footing.

Sources: Washington Post, Huffington Post, Day Life, Politico

Speaker Pelosi Stands Firmly By Her CIA Story....Way to go Nancy!!

This week during a Question and Answer session at the White House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was grilled on her previous statements about the CIA misleading members of Congress.

The Journalists in attendance probably thought she was going to fold or fumble her way through it, instead she was as steady as a rock and on point.

I was proud of the way she stood up to the reporters who were obviously attempting to embarrass and harass her.

Just like the professional Businesswoman/ Advocate for Commonplace People that she is, Speaker Pelosi shut down their little "pick on Pelosi Media party" with style, grace and quiet authority.

Let's face it, Speaker Pelosi did NOT become the first Female Speaker of the House in history by being a wimp or a cry baby!

Of course she wasn't going to allow this Republican gimmick to slow her down or knock her off her throne! There is still too much to be done....for the folk who elected her into public office.

All right G.O.P. Strategists, this Pelosi/CIA thing is getting old.

In fact the more you keep harping on it, its destroying your credibility.

This is a woman who has helped save thousands of jobs, fought to get additional Health Care for Low-Income children, is currently fighting for national Health Care Reform, fought to save homes, worked diligently to revamp the Democratic Party, etc.,

What has the Republican Party done for their constituents.....lately that is?

Yes! The CIA has lied to the American People and Congress in the past. Get over it!

Why do you think Democrats on the hill decided to forgo a probe regarding her claims? They too know the CIA IS capable of lying or embellishing "the truth".

While its true the CIA agency's mission does symbolize absolute Integrity, some of the agents (regular Human Beings just like average everyday citizens) employed within the agency might not be people who practice absolute Integrity. Especially when preparing National Security Briefs or disclosing information to Congressional members.

Now what other tricks does the G.O.P. have in its hat?

Do you seriously think voters cast their ballots to put you guys (elected officials) in public office for this kind of childish behavior? Yeah right!

Please stop wasting time and just leave Speaker Pelosi alonnnnne!

Way to go Nancy for displaying tremendous courage in the line of fire. I'm proud of you!

(Speaker's remarks during a recent press conference:)

"I have made the statements that I've made on this -- I don't have anything more to say on this."

"What we are doing is staying on our course and not be distracted from it... I don't have anything more to say."



Sources: Politico, Gawker, Washington Post, CBS, SFGate.com, Day Life

Dick Cheney's Counter National Security Address....Supports Enhanced Interrogation Techniques

After President Obama delivered his speech on National Security, former V.P. Dick Cheney expounded on the subject with his own perspective in support of the Bush administration's use of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques.

Oh boy, now I'm really confused!

Dick Cheney: "Keep in mind that these are hardened terrorists picked up overseas since 9/11. The ones that were considered low-risk were released a long time ago... I think the president will find, upon reflection, that to bring the worst of the worst terrorists inside the United States would be cause for great danger and regret in the years to come."

"In seeking to guard this nation against the threat of catastrophic violence, our administration gave intelligence officers the tools and lawful authority they needed to gain vital information."

"Our government prevented attacks and saved lives through the Terrorist Surveillance Program, which let us intercept calls and track contacts between al-Qaida operatives and persons inside the United States."

"In the years after 9/11, our government also understood that the safety of the country required collecting information known only to the worst of the terrorists. And in a few cases, that information could be gained only through tough interrogations... The interrogations were used on hardened terrorists after other efforts failed. They were legal, essential, justified, successful, and the right thing to do."

""The administration seems to pride itself on searching for some kind of middle ground in policies addressing terrorism... But in the fight against terrorism, there is no middle ground, and half-measures keep you half exposed."

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

View Larger Map

Sources: MSNBC, Day Life, Wikipedia, Google Maps