Bush Administration wants an exception for CIA to commit torture

[Ramo]

Vallely (the guy who's making that claim about Wilson) seems like a crackpot to me. I mean, Gen. Ripper in Dr. Strangelove type crackpot. For instance, he wrote a paper in his heyday about military techniques using mind control through EM waves. Or something:

From PSYOP to MindWar: The Psychology of Victory....Psychotronic research is in its infancy but the US Army already has operational weapons systems.....MindWar...The term is harsh and fear-inspiring, and so it should be. It is a term of attack and victory, not one of the rationalization and coaxing and conciliation by it; The enemy may be offended by it; that is quite all right as long as he is defeated by it. A definition is offered:

The deliberate, aggressive convinceing of all participants in a war that we will win that war...It is deliberate in that it is planned, systematic, and comprehensive effort involving all levels of activity from the strategic to the tactical. It is aggressive because opinions and from those antagonistic to us to those supportive of us

There are some purely natural conditions under which become more or less receptive to ideas, and MindWar should take full advantage of such phenomena as atmospheric electromagnetic activity, air ionization, and extremely low frequency waves...

http://www.xeper.org/maquino/nm/MindWar.pdf

[Dinner]

Psyop has nothing to do with portable mind control devices or other such things. I wonder how much experience he has with Psyop.

[/10 year Psyop veteran]

[Fake Boris]

Good job at being mind controlled into outright negation of the truth, Oerdin.

[mindseye]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs

Did anyone watch the footage Kieth Olbermann aired of Scott McClellan "answering" reporters' questions on VP Cheney's asking for this exemption? (...)

Coincidentally, I just read a transcript of that at first-draft.com. Since it is so illustrative of this adminstration's approach to the matter, I'm going to quote some of it below. Simultaneously entertaining and dismaying.

Q I'd like you to clear up, once and for all, the ambiguity about torture. Can we get a straight answer? The President says we don't do torture, but Cheney --

MR. McCLELLAN: That's about as straight as it can be.

Q Yes, but Cheney has gone to the Senate and asked for an exemption on --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, he has not. Are you claiming he's asked for an exemption on torture? No, that's --

Q He did not ask for that?

MR. McCLELLAN: -- that is inaccurate.

Q Are you denying everything that came from the Hill, in terms of torture?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, you're mischaracterizing things. And I'm not going to get into discussions we have --

Q Can you give me a straight answer for once?

MR. McCLELLAN: Let me give it to you, just like the President has. We do not torture. He does not condone torture and he would never --

Q I'm asking about exemptions.

MR. McCLELLAN: Let me respond. And he would never authorize the use of torture. We have an obligation to do all that we can to protect the American people. We are engaged --

Q That's not the answer I'm asking for --

MR. McCLELLAN: It is an answer -- because the American people want to know that we are doing all within our power to prevent terrorist attacks from happening. There are people in this world who want to spread a hateful ideology that is based on killing innocent men, women and children. We saw what they can do on September 11th --

Q He didn't ask for an exemption --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and we are going to --

Q -- answer that one question. I'm asking, is the administration asking for an exemption?

MR. McCLELLAN: I am answering your question. The President has made it very clear that we are going to do --

Q You're not answering -- yes or no?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, you don't want the American people to hear what the facts are, Helen, and I'm going to tell them the facts.

Q -- the American people every day. I'm asking you, yes or no, did we ask for an exemption?

MR. McCLELLAN: And let me respond. You've had your opportunity to ask the question. Now I'm going to respond to it.

Q If you could answer in a straight way.

MR. McCLELLAN: And I'm going to answer it, just like the President -- I just did, and the President has answered it numerous times.

Q -- yes or no --

MR. McCLELLAN: Our most important responsibility is to protect the American people. We are engaged in a global war against Islamic radicals who are intent on spreading a hateful ideology, and intent on killing innocent men, women and children.

Q Did we ask for an exemption?

MR. McCLELLAN: We are going to do what is necessary to protect the American people.

Q Is that the answer?

MR. McCLELLAN: We are also going to do so in a way that adheres to our laws and to our values. We have made that very clear. The President directed everybody within this government that we do not engage in torture. We will not torture. He made that very clear.

Q Are you denying we asked for an exemption?

MR. McCLELLAN: Helen, we will continue to work with the Congress on the issue that you brought up. The way you characterize it, that we're asking for exemption from torture, is just flat-out false, because there are laws that are on the books that prohibit the use of torture. And we adhere to those laws.

Q We did ask for an exemption; is that right? I mean, be simple -- this is a very simple question.

MR. McCLELLAN: I just answered your question. The President answered it last week.

Q What are we asking for?

Q Would you characterize what we're asking for?

MR. McCLELLAN: We're asking to do what is necessary to protect the American people in a way that is consistent with our laws and our treaty obligations. And that's what we --

( - snip - )

Q Why does the CIA need an exemption from the military?

MR. McCLELLAN: David, let's talk about people that you're talking about who have been brought to justice and captured. You're talking about people like Khalid Shaykh Muhammad; people like Abu Zubaydah.

Q I'm asking you --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, this is facts about what you're talking about.

Q Why does the CIA need an exemption from rules that would govern the conduct of our military in interrogation practices?

MR. McCLELLAN: There are already laws and rules that are on the books, and we follow those laws and rules. What we need to make sure is that we are able to carry out the war on terrorism as effectively as possible, not only --

Q What does that mean --

MR. McCLELLAN: What I'm telling you right now -- not only to protect Americans from an attack, but to prevent an attack from happening in the first place. And, you bet, when we capture terrorist leaders, we are going to seek to find out information that will protect -- that prevent attacks from happening in the first place. But we have an obligation to do so. Our military knows this; all people within the United States government know this. We have an obligation to do so in a way that is consistent with our laws and values.

Now, the people that you are bringing up -- you're talking about in the context, and I think it's important for the American people to know, are people like Khalid Shaykh Muhammad, Abu Zubaydah, Ramzi Binalshibh -- these are -- these are dangerous killers.

Q So they're all killers --

Q Did you ask for an exemption on torture? That's a simple question, yes or no.

MR. McCLELLAN: No. And we have not. That's what I told you at the beginning.

( - snip - )

Q You want to reserve the ability to use tougher tactics with those individuals who you mentioned.

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, obviously, you have a different view from the American people. I think the American people understand the importance of doing everything within our power and within our laws to protect the American people.

Q Scott, are you saying that Cheney did not ask --

Q What is it that you want the -- what is it that you want the CIA to be able to do that the U.S. Armed Forces are not allowed to do?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not going to get into talking about national security matters, Bill. I don't do that, because this involves --

Q This would be the exemption, in other words.

MR. McCLELLAN: This involves information that relates to doing all we can to protect the American people. And if you have a different view -- obviously, some of you on this room -- in this room have a different view, some of you on the front row have a different view.

Q We simply are asking a question.

Q What is the Vice President -- what is the Vice President asking for?

MR. McCLELLAN: It's spelled out in our statement of administration policy in terms of what our views are. That's very public information. In terms of our discussions with members of Congress --

Q -- no, it's not --

MR. McCLELLAN: In terms of our members -- like I said, there are already laws on the books that we have to adhere to and abide by, and we do. And we believe that those laws and those obligations address these issues.

Q So then why is the Vice President continuing to lobby on this issue? If you're very happy with the laws on the books, what needs change?

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, you asked me -- you want to ask questions of the Vice President's office, feel free to do that. We've made our position very clear, and it's spelled out on our website for everybody to see.

Q We don't need a website, we need you from the podium.

MR. McCLELLAN: And what I just told you is what our view is.

[ - snip - ]

Q So what is the Vice President lobbying for? And is he doing it on behalf of the White House, or is he operating independently?

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, I just said we're going to continue to work with Congress.

Go ahead.

Q Why don't you answer the one question on exemption?

MR. McCLELLAN: I just did, Helen.

Q Does the Vice President's Office have -- I mean, you blanket -- covered the White House. The Vice President's Office is under the Office of the White House. Why can't you just -- why can't you answer?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not going to get into all the discussions we have with members of Congress. If they want to add additional information, you're welcome to contact their office, as well.

Q Well, they don't answer like you do. You are at that podium. We need to hear from you. You --

MR. McCLELLAN: And I just made it clear --

Q -- are the Press Secretary for all --

MR. McCLELLAN: There's a statement of administration policy that has been put out. And -- but let's talk about what this issue is relating to. This issue is relating to the protection of the American people and making sure that the President of the United States has the tools he needs to be able to prevent attacks from happening, and to be able to stop those terrorists who still seek to do us harm from carrying out their attacks in the first place.

Q -- the Vice President wants torture? Which --

MR. McCLELLAN: Wrong. That is absolutely false.

Q Well, then tell us --

MR. McCLELLAN: The President has made it very clear that we do not torture.

Q What is the Vice President doing?

MR. McCLELLAN: I just told you.

( - snip - )

[Ted Striker]

Ex-CIA boss: Cheney is 'vice president for torture'

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Former CIA chief Stansfield Turner lashed out at Dick Cheney on Thursday, calling him a "vice president for torture" that is out of touch with the American people.

"It's the vice president who is out there advocating torture. He's the one who has made himself the vice president in favor of torture," said Turner, who from 1972 to 1974 was president of the Naval War College, a think tank for strategic and national security policy.

Torture diminishes the country's image and moral stature, forcing other nations to look at the United States "in a very different light," Turner said, adding that such tactics also open the door to retribution.

"We military people don't want future military people who are taken prisoner by other countries to be subjected to torture in the name of doing just what the United States does," he said.

A statement from the vice president's office said that the United States "does not torture." It also stated that Cheney's views are "reflected in the administration's policy.

"Our country is at war, and our government has an obligation to protect the American people from a brutal enemy that has declared war upon us."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/11/18/torture.vp/index.html

Typical BS response from Cheney, we have to protect people from a brutal enemy, blah blah

[Agathon]

Every day Dr Strangelove looks more and more like a serious documentary.

[Ted Striker]

You're not kidding.

This whole last 5 years has been the most surreal, depressing episode I have ever witnessed in our nation's history.



It really is worse than fiction.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
You're not kidding.

This whole last 5 years has been the most surreal, depressing episode I have ever witnessed in our nation's history.



It really is worse than fiction.

[Ted Striker]

YEP, Cheney's "Leadership" Responsible for Systematic Torture

Powell aide: Torture 'guidance' from VP

Former staff chief says Cheney's 'flexibility' helped lead to abuse


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A former top State Department official said Sunday that Vice President Dick Cheney provided the "philosophical guidance" and "flexibility" that led to the torture of detainees in U.S. facilities.

Retired U.S. Army Col. Larry Wilkerson, who served as former Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff, told CNN that the practice of torture may be continuing in U.S.-run facilities.

"There's no question in my mind that we did. There's no question in my mind that we may be still doing it," Wilkerson said on CNN's "Late Edition."

"There's no question in my mind where the philosophical guidance and the flexibility in order to do so originated -- in the vice president of the United States' office," he said. "His implementer in this case was [Defense Secretary] Donald Rumsfeld and the Defense Department."

At another point in the interview, Wilkerson said "the vice president had to cover this in order for it to happen and in order for Secretary Rumsfeld to feel as though he had freedom of action."

Traveling in Latin America earlier this month, President Bush defended U.S. treatment of prisoners, saying flatly, "We do not torture." (Full story)

Cheney has lobbied against a measure in Congress that would outlaw "cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment" of prisoners, calling for an exception for the CIA in cases that involve a detainee who may have knowledge of an imminent attack.

The amendment was included in a $491 billion Pentagon spending bill that declared 2006 to be "a period of significant transition" for Iraq. (Full story)

Proposed by Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican who was tortured as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam, the amendment was approved in the Senate last month by a 90-9 vote. It was not included in the House version of the bill.

The White House has said that Bush would likely veto the bill if McCain's language is included, calling the amendment "unnecessary and duplicative."

Rumsfeld told ABC's "This Week" on Sunday that the White House was in negotiations with the Senate over the amendment.

"There's a discussion and debate taking place as to what the implications might be and what is supportable and what is not," he told the program. "But the fact of the matter is the president from the outset has said that he required that there be humane treatment."

Cheney has come under mounting criticism for his position. Last week, Stansfield Turner, a military veteran who served as director of the CIA during the Carter administration, labeled him the "vice president for torture." (Full story)

In a statement responding to Turner's remark, Cheney said his views "are reflected in the administration's policy. Our country is at war and our government has an obligation to protect the American people from a brutal enemy that has declared war upon us."

"We are aggressively finding terrorists and bringing them to justice and anything we do within this effort is within the law," the statement said, adding that the United States "does not torture."

Rumsfeld denies 'cabal' charge

Bush administration officials, including Rumsfeld and military officials, have denied that instances of torture were ever officially condoned. Some personnel accused of torture have been convicted and sentenced for prisoner abuse.

"All the instructions I issued required humane treatment," Rumsfeld told ABC. "Anything that was done that was not humane has been prosecuted."

But Wilkerson argued last month in a speech that Cheney and Rumsfeld formed a cabal that "made decisions that the bureaucracy did not know were being made."

Wilkerson told CNN Sunday he does not know "if the president was witting in this or not."

"I voted for him twice," he said. "I prefer to think that he was not."

Earlier, on the same CNN program, Rumsfeld dismissed as "ridiculous" the claim that he was involved in a cabal.

Rumsfeld and Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said they had no recollection of Wilkerson having attended meetings with Rumsfeld or Cheney.

"In terms of having first-hand information, I just can't imagine that he does," said Rumsfeld. "The allegation is ridiculous."

"I was in every meeting with the joint chiefs. I was in every meeting with the combatant commanders. I went to the White House multiple times to meet with the National Security Council and with the president of the United States. I have never seen that colonel," added Pace.

"They made my point for me," responded Wilkerson. "The decisions were not made in the principals' process, in the deputies' process, in the policy coordinating committee process. They were not made in the statutory process."

Wilkerson said his "insights" came from Powell "walking through my door in April or March of 2004 and telling me to get everything I could get my hands on with regard to the detainee abuse issue -- ICRC [International Committee of the Red Cross] reporting, memoranda, open-source information and so forth -- so that I could build some kind of story, some kind of audit trail so we could understand the chronology and we can understand how it developed."

While he acknowledged having no proof that the United States is torturing detainees, Wilkerson said, "I can only assume that, when the vice president of the United States lobbies the Congress on behalf of cruel and unusual punishment and the need to be able to do that in order to get information out of potential terrorists... that it's still going on."

He said U.S. officials should realize they are involved in "a war of ideas" that cannot be advanced with torture.

"In a war of ideas, you cannot damage your own ideas, your own position by seeming to do things that are in contradiction of your values," he said.

Rumsfeld told ABC that the military has "overwhelmingly treated people humanely."

"The history of the United States military is clear. Torture doesn't work. The military knows that. We want our people treated humanely," he said.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/20/torture/index.html

[MrFun]

Ted Striker hates freedom.

[Dinner]

I truly hope this administration gets tried for its crimes the way Penochet is getting tried for his. They deserve it.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by MrFun
Ted Striker hates freedom.

Well Ted certainly hates the dictionary systematically. I mean sometimes he hates it and other times he doesn't, which means that he hates it systematically, because a dictionary is part of a system.

[Sphinx871]

Originally posted by MrFun
Ted Striker hates freedom.

That never gets old does it?

What conservatives on this board (or anywhere for that matter) have said respectfully disagreeing with Republican policies = hating freedom? Where did you get this from?

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Sikander


Well Ted certainly hates the dictionary systematically. I mean sometimes he hates it and other times he doesn't, which means that he hates it systematically, because a dictionary is part of a system.

Unlike you I don't manipulate the dictionary intelligence to fit my world view.

And I see I need some more milkbones.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Ted Striker

Unlike you I don't manipulate the dictionary intelligence to fit my world view.

And I see I need some more milkbones.

Unlike you I'm not so ignorant as to defend a position that is wrong according to every definition in every dictionary.