Blogs and Stories
Cheney Wins
Brendan Hoffman / Getty Images
The CIA probe may “offend the hell out of” Dick Cheney, but James Carroll writes that the former VP has won on the issues since the 1970s—and has with torture, once again.
Trumpeting his own fanfare on Fox News Sunday, Dick Cheney is back. But it was the Obama administration itself that opened wide the gates for this self-vindicating return. With the release of the 2004 CIA Inspector General’s report on torture, and Attorney General Eric Holder’s appointment of prosecutor John H. Durham to investigate CIA abuses of detainees, a crossroads was reached, and who was standing right in its middle but the former vice president. No sooner had the secret (and heavily redacted) CIA report been made available than Cheney was claiming it as vindication, proof that the possibly criminal interrogations had “saved lives and prevented terrorist attacks.”
For more than a generation, the nation’s great moral turning points have pivoted on Dick Cheney, always for the worse.
Nevermind that the documents prove no such thing, and leave aside for the moment that Durham’s investigation, taking off from low-level “interrogators,” could rise up the chain of command to Cheney’s own office. Cheney’s real vindication may lay not in what he said, or in what Durham finds, but in what else the Obama administration did this week—which was to announce the continuation of “rendition,” or the dispatching of detainees to third countries for interrogation. Rendition is a policy that, until now, most thought only Cheney could truly love. Think of Maher Arar, the Canadian whose story Jane Mayer told in The New Yorker. While changing planes between Tunisia and Canada at JFK in New York, Arar was seized and secretly shipped off by an American “special removal unit” to his native Syria, where he was held for months and tortured—and ultimately set free, uncharged, to sue the U.S. government. America is finally reckoning with itself as a torture nation, but to find Cheney at the center of this historic juncture is, well, déjà vu all over again. For more than a generation, the nation’s great moral turning points have pivoted on Dick Cheney, always for the worse.
In 1975, Cheney had his first taste of real power as Gerald Ford’s chief of staff, but, alas for Cheney, that was the low point of the nation’s power. From his vantage inside the emasculated White House, Cheney looked on in horror as the U.S. defeat in Vietnam played itself out. If Cheney’s life story were a screenplay, the day he stood with President Ford and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld watching footage of Americans clambering onto helicopters in Saigon would be the “inciting incident.” The whole drama of Cheney’s public life follows from that ignominy, and, with the others, he acted on it at once.
Instead of moving quickly to normalize relations with Hanoi, as the Paris Peace Accords had assumed and as the chief U.S. negotiator Henry Kissinger had intended, the Ford administration exacted its revenge by slapping the whole of victorious Vietnam with the trade embargo that had previously applied only to the North, and, presumably, only for the duration of the conflict. Instead, those sanctions lasted for 20 years, inflicting untold suffering. By helping America stake its claim as the Vietnam War’s ultimate victim, symbolized by endless fantasies of POWs held in jungle cages, Cheney was a founder of what his ilk then derided as the “Vietnam syndrome.” Resolving that America would never again know such humiliation, he, with Rumsfeld and others, began laying the groundwork for its repetition.
How Rich People Smoke Pot
Paul Schrodt is a writer living in New York City. He has contributed to New York magazine, Radar, and Esquire.com.
Justice Clinton?
As vice chairman of Public Strategies and president of Maverick Media, Mark McKinnon has helped meet strategic challenges for candidates, corporations and causes, including George W. Bush, John McCain, Governor Ann Richards, Charlie Wilson, Lance Armstrong, and Bono. McKinnon is co-chair of Arts & Labs, a collaboration between technology and creative communities that have embraced today's rich Internet environment to deliver innovative and creative digital products to consumers.
How to Spot an Islamophobe
James Carroll's recent book is Practicing Catholic, a story of American belief. He is a columnist for the Boston Globe and Distinguished-Scholar-in-Residence at Suffolk University. His other books include An American Requiem, which won the National Book Award, House of War, winner of the PEN-Galbraith Award, and Constantine's Sword, now an acclaimed documentary.
Misogynist Massachusetts
James Carroll's recent book is Practicing Catholic, a story of American belief. He is a columnist for the Boston Globe and Distinguished-Scholar-in-Residence at Suffolk University. His other books include An American Requiem, which won the National Book Award, House of War, winner of the PEN-Galbraith Award, and Constantine's Sword, now an acclaimed documentary.
The Christian Anti-Gay Campaign
James Carroll's recent book is Practicing Catholic, a story of American belief. He is a columnist for the Boston Globe and Distinguished-Scholar-in-Residence at Suffolk University. His other books include An American Requiem, which won the National Book Award, House of War, winner of the PEN-Galbraith Award, and Constantine's Sword, now an acclaimed documentary.
maspring
Cheney's biggest victory is in casting this debate as one of national security.
There's evidence that suggest that what Cheney was really after in the waterboarding had nothing to do with impending attacks against the US.
Instead he was attempting to coerce confessions of a link between Al Queda and Sadam to help justify the invasion after the fact.
The fact that this debate is centered around the rightness of torture as a means of interrogation rather than plot to cover the Bush administration's backside after no weapons of mass destruction were found is itself a victory for Cheney.
And, finally, Cheney will have scored again if he stays out of jail. He's practically begging Holder to put him on trial.
mcmchugh99
He's playing the Wimp Card on the Democrats, because he always know that most of them run scared from that, and go wee-wee all over the floors.
Cheney knows he has made some major strategic blunders as well, not least in Iraq, and that all kinds of war crimes have also been committed these past eight years--worse than waterboarding. What if people start talking about ALL of it, the whole enchilada?
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
jpelhamtn
Cheney will not run. This is an article of delusional fiction. What happened? Now that the media knows they cannot 'kill' Palin's political future...and she remains the biggest threat to Obama in 2012...we'll see more such silly articles. Palin...Huckabee...Romeny...likely be one of those three.
Embers
He IS practically begging to be prosecuted... but Cheney's such a psycho that I doubt he sees it that way. Will Holder put him on trial? I won't Holder my breath!
If Obama is continuing extraordinary rendition, then I'm not all that hopeful that my fantasy of Cheney in prison will ever come true. SIGH.
trueconserv
Okay, then first, please have the DOJ investigate Valerie Plame for lying under oath to the Senate intelligence committee.
Second, please have the DOJ file charges to Sandy Bergler for stuffing confidential papers down his pants and under a construction trailer before his 9/11 commission testimony. He was hiding papers (although we will never know) on how derelict the Clinton WH was in treating al Queda.
Third, please have the DOJ investigate the Clintons in Chinagate and other shady people who have given money to the Clintons over the years.
Fourth, the DOJ needs to investigate why the Obama administration has hired people with criminal records and now are working in the WH.
Holder has absolutely no credibilty. He allow the pardon of some of the biggest cirminals in the Clinton Administration. His law firm worked as defending attorneys to the prisoners at GITMO for pro bono. That is conflict of interest and he should resign.
Embers
Okay, trueconserv, I'm on it!
Tonight when Eric Holder calls me (he calls me every night to say "sweet dreams" before we go to sleep), I will tell him to begin prosecution of Valerie Plame, Bill and Hillary Clinton, and Sandy Bergler IMMEDIATELY.
Thanks for the tip!!!
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
BullMoose
Wish Cheney can be Secretary of Defense again when Obama is thrown out in 2012.
Better than anything the Chicago "community organizer" can come up with.
wbishop12
Haha!
Keep dreaming bullsh!t, I mean bullmoose!
After eight years of Obama, we'll have eight years from another Democrat.
You'll be dead before another Republican wins the White House.
jpelhamtn
If 'rendition' ever accurately gets investigated the Clinton's and their Administration's personnel will be headed for the political gallows. So yes, I'm sure Cheney would appreciate being prosecuted...because then he can bring down the 'liberal house' and their compliant media defenders...who only find torture a problem when performed under Republican Presidents.
motamanx
Maspring, you have hit the nail on the head. This comment is a compendium of Cheney's treasonous acts (the one's we now about so far, anyway). Thanks.
Obama keeps saying he wants to "move forward" on all this and not look back, but he does so at his peril. Time wounds all heels, it is said, and Cheney's time has come.
trueconserv
What treasonous acts? There is absolutely no proof of any of the sort. Get off your high horse about this because there is no proof.
There is more proof of the shady dealings with the current adminstration, that you may want to spend more time whinning about them.
jpelhamtn
TREASON is what Jimmy Carter does...courage is what Cheney performed for this nation. TREASON is working against your government...Cheney has not done that. But if you think he did...please tell us how?
johnwr3
Vice President Cheney is a grown up. James' article must be a nice morning brioche for the latte drinking belt way boys and girls but is nothing more than a window into the mind of a Ted Kennedy "no conflict is my cup of tea" democrat. His reference to the first Gulf War proves why democrats are limp wristed on national defense. However, I do realize how popular the Kennedy position on the Gulf War is today but it was wrong then and is wrong now. I guess I just don't understand the democrat position not to endorse booting Hessian and his sidekicks out of Kuwait back in '91? They had invaded a neighboring nation, murdered and raped their way through the country and all in the name of oil. Ted Kennedy voted not to fight for an ally, as I'm sure Obama would have, and James' article today should remind all of us that "freedom isn't just for some people, it's for all human beings". How can you be in favor of national health insurance James and at the same time vote, as Kennedy did, to let innocent men, women and children be murdered by a tyrant? Are liberals afraid of the fight? They must be, look who they elected. A guy who hides behind the skirt of his Attorney General as he goes on a political witch hunt within an agency that has STARS on the wall on its HQ representing lives lost in the defense of our nation. Shame on you President Obama. I guess the term honor isn't in the vocabulary of a community organizer from Chicago or Hawaii or Kansas. James is right "Cheney Wins" but thanks to the Alice in Wonderland White House we all lose.
MajorRevisions
Secretary of Defence Chaney outlined the reasons we did not invade Iraq and if he had remembered them, we would not have invaded because he was correct in '91. What he said would happen, happened when we invaded. You would think with this knowledge they would have at least had a plan to resolve these issues when we decided to invade another country.
As an ex-conservative (still have my Goldwater for President button) I am not affraid of a fight. However, we do not start wars, we should end them. We are suppose to be the good guys. If this is a just war, why aren't we, as Americans, lined up outside the military recruting stations asking to be part of this instead of lowing standards for enlistment.
pacifistgunslinger
Dick Cheney was, and remains, a coward. When many of my generation were actually in Vietnam, he couldn't bother himself to get a uniform and a gun and do the nation's work. Now, as an old man, he proves how tough he is. What bull!
johnwr3
Dear MajorRevisions,
Like I said Cheney was correct in '91. Kennedy voted against the Gulf War which, to me, says his ideology came before anything else. You and I could argue the pros and cons of the current conflicts but no one argues the removal of Saddam. You say we are the good guys and don't start wars. I agree we're the good guys but if you recall Saddam was firing at our planes on a weekly basis for years, paid terrorists families 35k for their sucicide bombers, threatened his neighbors and murdered his own people. You could make the argument that we were at war with him ever since he started the Gulf War in '91. He didn't comply with international law and shunned the UN's orders. If the UN has become weak and impotent there has to be someone who'll stand for justice. I can't speak to why Americans aren't lining up to enlist but it probably has something to do with being selfish. You say you are an ex-conservative...I wasn't aware that was a party? I guess that means you're a liberal? How can you go from Goldwater to Obama?
MajorRevisions
johnwr3
Are you saying Cheney was correct in '91 when he said it would be a mistake to invade Iraq and over throw Saddam? Cheney, when he was Secretary of Defence, made the arguement for not invading Iraq and removing Saddam, I don't have to. I do not know what the pros are for going go to war so you would have to take that point of view.
I should have said I was a conservative republican and if I had to classify myself today and it seems one must, I'd call myself an conservative independent. I'll be honest and say I miss the days when consevatives and liberals could actually sit down and talk about issues instead of screaming, "we're so right and you're wrong" and letting their ideology dictate everything.
Daveparts
johnwr3
Perhaps you've heard of April Glaspie but probably not. She was the US ambassador to Iraq before the first gulf war. She was sent by the limp wristed George Bush who failed to understand that sending a female ambassador to an Arab country was seen as an insult.
Saddam carefully laid out the issues to Glaspie, how Kuwait had been slant drilling into Iraq and how Kuwait had been exceeding its OPEC quotas and that because of that it was driving down the price of oil and making it difficult for Iraq to pay its debts.
And what did Glaspie tell Saddam?
GLASPIE: I think I understand this. I have lived here for years. I admire your extraordinary efforts to rebuild your country. I know you need funds. We understand that and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country. But we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
idicula1979
Good point and if you torture somebody they will make up anything just to make the torture stop by this rational it is easy to see how all citizens can be tortured just for disagreeing with the Government. Which brings me to my second point to say that those who go along with the notion that torturing people are ok are going against the constituion, and since they are the same people that blindly go about saying we are Americans and we just want to protect America, they are so blind they don't even see the double speak. Which bring me to my third point that the former administration failed in first preventing 9/11 from happening and allthough they justify their bending of the constition to say we were never hit again. They failed their only real duty to the american citizen which is to uphold the constition which means that the mere fact that the american people will listen to Cheney in trying to justify the last 8 years means that this once great nation has been given with fear and parania .
useburners
He lost me when declaring that Panama and Desert Storm were unnecessary. Everything else Carroll writes is suspect.
maspring
Maybe. But with Dick Cheney we're talking about a guy who claimed to not be from either the Legislative or Executive branches of government.
Carroll may be right or he may be wrong.
But Cheney was definitely wrong.
trueconserv
No. Cheney was right that the VP is part of the legislative branch. (The only powers and responsibilities lie within the Senate.) Even Sarah Palin got it right during the VP debate. Joe Biden looked like an idiot. The lefties need to re-read the Consitution. Though, they may not want to if they want to pass healthcare legislation. Because they would find out that they can't do what they want.
jpelhamtn
Cheney & Palin were correct in a strictly Constitutional sense...the best sense from which to derive an answer.
trueconserv
These lefties are delirious. Why be surprised.
nortonclybourn
The Constitution you are reading was actually written in Kenya.
retired-army-1SG
It's always funny to me when 'conservative" tout that those who don't agree with them should read or re-read the Constitution as if they are the only ones who ever read it or interprets it correctly. The Constitution, like most documents written to be used to guide the activities of those in an unforeseen future, is open to wide interpretation. This is why we have the Supreme Court. Like the scriptures of countless religions, ideologues will always claim that there understanding is the only correct one. Truth is, both views can be explained using the same document.
Bamos99
Dear Truconserv:
Have you no shame, Sir? The name calling should be beneath you. Have a nice day.
BullMoose
Lefties are delirious. True,short, at hits the point.
retired-army-1SG
I agree Desert Storm was necessary, but I do believe we could have dealt with Panama differently. I was there, and what I saw was Panamian civilians put in harms way - several killed - basically because Noriega wasn't doing as he was told. I think we could have achieved the same results without military action.
tehixe
That title is a low blow! I pounce on it at once, expecting to be enraged like I never have been before. And then it turns out that's it's really saying that Dick Cheney "wins," not that he's actually won anything, which anyone with half a brain could see. I guess it's a good strategy to rack up hits, but it's kind of a douche move IMO :p
nortonclybourn
He won a place on Fox News, that must have been tough to get.
mcmchugh99
He's afraid that if some flunkies are prosecuted, they are going to start talking about EVERYTHING that went on these past eight years, and it's all going to start rolling uphill for a change.
People are already talking off the record, but only 1% of it has come out yet.
crymeariver
Well if you out a CIA agent and FORCE some of them to engage in illegal activity, who is going to be brave enough to talk? Who is going to protect the CIA from Cheney? He might be a chickenhawk but he has them by the balls. We the people standing up for our laws are the last line of defense against corupt government officials like Cheney.
nortonclybourn
can he really afford to screw everybody and hope they don't have the guts to retaliate?
tehixe
Sure, he's betting they're more afraid of his Force Choke ability than jail ;)
Embers
>>>can he really afford to screw everybody and hope they don't have the guts to retaliate?
Yes. Yes, he can.
fenngibbon
This was the most fetid load of crap I have ever read on this website. Just to highlight one bit of idiocy: Carroll seem to be suggesting that using military force rather than sanctions to get Hussein out of Kuwait was the "miscalculation" from which current troubles flow. Excuse me? Considering that the sanctions regime imposed after the first Gulf War didn't exactly bring Hussein to heel, what sane person would think that sanctions would have forced him out of Kuwait, when his capabilities hadn't been seriously pounded? Moreover, given the disintegration of sanctions and the massive corruption in the Oil-for-Food program, it's irrational to think that a sanctions regime would have lasted for long if Hussein had been allowed to keep control of both Iraq's and Kuwait's oil supplies.
The only miscalculation was the failure to more thoroughly destroy Hussein's military assets, and that decision was strongly influenced by Colin Powell. I know it's the popular fashion to sit at his feet and gaze up worshipfully at him, but between the decision to let the Republican Guard go in the first Gulf War and his incompetence in the lead up to the current conflict (he was played for a sucker by Dominique de Villepin, for God's sake), that jackass certainly bears some measure of responsibility for our current troubles.
This user is no longer registered.
n--Y--genomegkEmbers
The 4th largest military in the world? Oh no! Not number four! Save us!
We're NUMBER ONE.
This user is no longer registered.
n--Y--genomegkThis user is no longer registered.
n--Y--genomegktrueconserv
Yes, I'm sure the fact that Hussein killed thousands of people just gets in the way of your reality. And it's okay with YOU that he sponsered terrorists.
I guess that Saddam's continuing thumbing his nose at the international community doesn't mean squat to you. Don't worry, it's OKAY to not follow the rules. The left holds Bush 43 and Cheney to a more stringent code of ethics and let Saddam Hussein go. (Of course, it's doesn't even matter with U.S. Presidents either.) I highly doubt you were outraged by Clinton or have serious concerns about Obama.
How is THAT rational? Oh, that's right, you are a lefty.
retired-army-1SG
We should have concerns about ANYONE who occupies the White House. The point here is well made, however, that Iraq was contained and the latest war was unnecessary. It would have been a good idea if W had listened more to Gen. Powell than Dick chickenhawk.
Embers
And trueconserv, Saddam Hussein is dead, so he isn't thumbing his nose at anyone anymore.
This user is no longer registered.
n--Y--genomegktrueconserv
Typical liberal. Always re-writing history. Genomegk, did you eat your Wheaties today? I guess not.
What Fenngibbon said was 100% correct. You lefties just erase fact to fit your own truth about the war.
And FYI, terrorists attacked before we went to Iraq. I know that the truth is hard for you to swallow, but common sense does prevail.
Embers
Trueconserv, you need some Midol. Even if you're actually a man, you still need some Midol.
VeloSD
trueconserv - when you say that the terrorists attacked us first, what does that have to do with Iraq? IIs it that they're all Arabs, and any "Hajji" is as good as any other? You should read and think about what you're saying, if only to not embarrass yourself.
This user is no longer registered.
n--Y--genomegkMarcusTullius
The brilliance of Cheney's brand of effective politics is to make not simply plausible arguments--the "folks at the agency" will be demoralized by Justice's investigation--but also fashion those arguments to appeal very broadly. I agree with Mr Carroll that Cheney has indeed won, and the evidence of that victory is the Obama-Administration continuation of rendition. Mr. Obama's inaugural address, which this citizen found so moving, appears to have been only hollow lip service to the American ideals he cited and promised to promote. It is quite disheartening indeed.
trueconserv
Yes, many things that Obama has said have been lies. He talks out of both sides of his mouth. His approval ratings are the result of people who don't trust him at his word.
sippewissett
Give a for-instance. You never back up your accusations, just fling them out into the ozone. You're not credible. "Get it" yet?
ProfDonJM
Then what would be the cause of Bush's and Cheney's final poll numbers?
sippewissett
Oh, please. We're talking about seven months of clean-up from a disasterous administration. Just as "Rome was not built in a day", neither is digging out from a worldwide recession, restoring some semblance of stability to the financial and real-estate markets and restoring our stature abroad.
Don't succumb to the ADD requirements of this "gotta have it now" nation. We are woefully stupid about finance, economics and insurance-industry reform or there wouldn't be such a mess fomented by fear. The ideals are still there -- and you have a role in keeping them front and center.
NCNative
To bad Chris Wallace doesn't have the "hardball" skills of his father. Maybe Chris should watch his father's 60 minutes segments.
trueconserv
Why would Chris Wallace want to watch CBS? Their credibility is pond scum. Mike Wallace got smart and retired.
sippewissett
Mike Wallace was 78 when he retired, scarcely someone who was 'getting out'. CBS' credibility is "pond scum"? With whom besides you? Give it a rest; you never use facts. Go somewhere that will appreciate your ignorance.
Embers
It appears that trueconserv is another troll... prolly came here from that stupid article about 4chan that Rushkoff wrote.
clearthinker
The essence of this article is Republicans like war and Democrats like diplomacy. What else is new? Republicans don't think waterboarding is torture, but Dems do...blah blah blah. This story is getting tiresome really.
We "sanctioned" Iraq to death during the 90's and after 9-11 the Bush administration decided to play "hardball" with Sadam and make him put his money where his mouth is. Come to find out EVERYONE was wrong. Sadam didn't have WMD's and this made Bush and Cheney look stupid. I love hindsight though. This continual real to real dribble about the CIA and Cheney and torture is going to wear down this country. It may have already.
trueconserv
You are wrong. Democrats start wars. Clinton enacted the Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998 which paved the way for Bush to get Saddam.That along with the original 1991 U.N. resolution which ended the Gulf War.
retired-army-1SG
Can't you guys make up your minds? Before Clinton was a wimp who was afraid to confront Iraq, now you're saying he started the war? LOL
retired-army-1SG
I truly believe that being able to look at ourselves and judge how we have behaved in the past is a good thing, and should be done. I also think that a better way would be to employ the Army's Lessons Learned approach where we analyze actions from the basis of how to do it better or at least not so stupidly in the future.
Bamos99
Everyone? Change your name, please. Have a nice day.
sonofloud
Yes, he succeeded in taking away our civil liberties and turning us into our enemies.....let's party !!!
Martyz42
Dick Cheney should be thanking whatever god he believes in that he is not where he really belongs, in JAIL with other murders.... Dick Cheney should be charged with treason, pre meditated murder as well as conspiracy to commit murder. Dick Cheney violated & twisted the constitution into knots with lies & fraud. PLEASE people this man belongs in jail, not speaking to the public....
trueconserv
You are really twisted, you know that.
If you want someone who has violated and the twisted the Constitution, it's Barack Obama hands down.
And if your memory is foggy, Hillary Clinton was almost disbarred for not allowing a president to use his Constitutional rights.
Please, spare us.
sippewissett
"Violated and twisted the Constitution"? There you go again. It would be easier to defend this slander if you were referring to George W. Unless you back up your accusations with facts, you will soon be barred from this site.
Bamos99
If consistancy is the hobgobblin of the small mind, you Sir are microscopic. Have a nice day.
amanda07070
Where's your answer to sippewisset's question?
Embers
War profiteering IS treason. Didn't Truman or Eisenhower say that?
We live in a corrupt country if Cheney can buy his way out of everything he's done... which he pretty much has already.
BullMoose
Truman began congressional inquiries into war profiteering in 1943.
ProfDonJM
Once out of office, war criminals really should just keep their mouths shut.
ProfDonJM
Surely Mike Wallace is embarrassed by his son's pandering to Cheney.
trueconserv
Though he would have to get behind several, including Dan Rather, Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson for their pathetic reporting.
ProfDonJM
Yeah, Couric's question to Palin about "what newspapers/magazines do you read" was a real tripper-upper.
RobbyS
LoL! You may not be old enough, but I recall Mike's interview of Margaret Sanger back in the '50s. "Maggie" was dressed up like a New York dowager and affecting the same attitude. It was like she was his aunt, and he didn't ask her a single tough question. Mike has always kissed the feet on lefties he admired.
retired-army-1SG
The truth - as I see it of course - is that we have not had true journalists for many, many years; maybe as long as the advent of TV. What we have now is entertainment, not news. All of the new organs are worried about two things, ratings and sales (sponsors). Talk radio is no better (either wing). Air America proved that when they gave Jerry Springer a show, and anyone who has listened to the ranting right know that any of those guys would be regulars on Jerry's TV show. Let's face it, if we are going to get a straight story, we have to dig and dig and dig some more an use our own intellect to sort out the BS.
trueconserv
How pathetic, James Carroll didn't even read the CIA memos. It's rather clear when they say that Mohammed sang like a canary only AFTER the techniques were used. He didn't offer any intelligence before. So, it's totally disingenous to say this. It says that Mohammed was almost like a professor and wrote down the workings of al Queda to the CIA agents. Think how many lives were saved because of this.
Furthermore, this has already been investigated by an impartial investigator. This is pure double jeopardy.
Eric Holder should be ashamed of himself and should recuse himself. His law firm has represented the GITMO detainees as pro bono. That is a conflict of interest.
connie47
You have a dozen comments on this article alone. What kind of egomaniac thinks they're so interesting that nearly 30% of the comments should come from them? The worst part is that your posts are for the most part full of strawmen arguments, attempts to change the subject and misinformation.
Embers
It's only double jeopardy if there's been a trial. Doesn't count for investigations. But since this is the sort of information found in the Bill of Rights, Constitution, etc., I understand why you were not aware of this fact.
jimors
I am in awe of your ability to read through all of the redaction and conclude that the torture was successful. The redaction of entire pages of the report make that impossible.
There is one thing that is true and doesn't require further evidence. Cheney and others on the OTC authorized and, in fact, demanded EIT, (read torture), be used. Cheney is an immoral, conscienceless bastard that belongs at the end of a rope.
Have a nice day.
AmericanPravda
The reason that Cheney is out there shilling for torture and national security, has less to do with the actual support of torture and security, and much more to do with lame attempts to shore up his rationale for not being prosecuted for his part in openly lying to the American public about reasons to invade Iraq.
He and his cabal have the lives of 4500 American soldiers on their hands, not to mention tens of thousands of soldiers seriously and irreparably injured and 1.5 million Iraqis displaced.
For these pleasantries, he, along with others in the Bush administration, should be investigated, prosecuted and imprisoned. Anything else falls short of justice!
amapola101
Nothing will ever happen to DC.no such thing,if anyone ever is prosecuted it will be scapegoats,or whoever. We do have a responsibility to be carefuo to CIA memebers, whose names should be protected. they have always dine things not allowed.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.