« Beliefnet on PBS Board Enforcement of Bylaws: Should Religious Content Be Allowed? | Mike7Woodson's Blog | Godspeed Natalya Estemirova »

"..every necessary weapon of war - " Was Congress informed?


Sometimes the best way to conceal something is by putting it right out in the open and up front.
From his September 20, 2001 speech before a joint session of Congress:

Americans are asking: How will we fight and win this war? We will direct every resource at our command -- every means of diplomacy, every tool of intelligence, every instrument of law enforcement, every financial influence, and every necessary weapon of war -- to the disruption and to the defeat of the global terror network.
Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success.
And did the New York Times report this in 2002? Be sure to read the whole thing.
Bush Has Widened Authority of C.I.A. to Kill Terrorists

10 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic



From the link provided . . .

This appears to be the key at that link:

The precise criteria for adding someone to the list are unclear, although the evidence against each person must be clear and convincing, the officials said. The list contains the names of some of the same people who are on the Federal Bureau of Investigation's list of most wanted terror suspects, although the lists are prepared independently.

Officials said the C.I.A., working with the F.B.I., the military and foreign governments, will seek to capture terrorists when possible and bring them into custody.

Counterterrorism officials prefer to capture senior Qaeda leaders for interrogation, if possible. They regard killing as a last resort in cases in which the location of a Qaeda operative is known but capture would be too dangerous or logistically impossible, the officials said.

Under current intelligence law, the president must sign a finding to provide the legal basis for covert actions to be carried out by the C.I.A. In response to past abuses, the decision-making process has grown into a highly formalized review in which the White House, Justice Department, State Department, Pentagon and C.I.A. take part.

The administration must notify Congressional leaders of any covert action finding signed by the president. In the case of the presidential finding authorizing the use of lethal force against members of Al Qaeda, Congressional leaders have been notified as required, the officials said.

So ... All that has to happen now is for the "covert action finding signed by the president" be declassified and thereby show which congressional leaders/lawmakers were notified. Thereby this whole brouhaha can be neatly laid to rest.

Oh wait ... Hold on. Maybe Big Dick forgot to get the "president" to sign a "covert action finding" and get it over to the congressional leaders/lawmakers...

We'll never know unless they declassify the pertinent documents and information.

Eh... Mike?

~OGD~

user-pic

I'll instruct them to get it done right away. (o;

user-pic

As the citizens we are the boss and that is exactly what we ought to do .... unless you want to turn the Constitution into a dead letter and be ruled by elected kings ... altho I'm not quite sure that we intended to elect Cheney President.

user-pic

Another way would be for congressional leaders owed the finding to confirm or deny whether they received the finding or notice of it.

user-pic

What difference did it make who Bush/Cheney 'informed' anyway....they were, and still are, living in an alternate reality of spin and lies where the 'mission' was 'accomplished' in May, 2003 They now claim they saved thousands of lives while not providing even one name to prove it.

Graveyards in Arlington Cemetery and all over America are filled with Americans Bush/Cheney and their always partisan Republican hacks did not inform or save.

user-pic

Here's an interesting piece on this topic:

http://www.truthout.org/071609D

And here, Clinton says he ordered bin-Laden's assassination (get people together..):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L2513JFJsY&feature=related

user-pic



Hmmm ... The goalpost of this post has changed . . .

At the time Clinton "ordered" bin-Laden's assassination he wasn't the vice-president. . .

And neither is Obama the vp ...

On the other hand ... Big Dick was NOT the president.

~OGD~

user-pic

OGD, have you read "Warrior Politics: Why Leadership Demands a Pagan Ethos" by Robert D. Kaplan? He advocates that the US behave as a sort of stealth empire regarding the new breed of conflicts he'd witnessed as a basis for his book "Balkan Ghosts."

The book is telling and I recall reading Newt Gingrich, when he was on the Defense Policy Council saying that it is a blueprint for what America should do post-9-11. My thought is that Clinton was attempting something like Kaplan's prescriptions, whereas Bush's imperial actions were hardly stealthy. Here:

http://www.amazon.com/Warrior-Politics-Leadership-Demands-Pagan/dp/0375726276

The point I'm making is that both parties, once their candidates make it into office, begin embracing an imperial element of internationalism of some kind or another.

I appreciate the distinction between Chief and the Vice in Cheney's situation, and how that can erode the Constitutional definition of powers. That ought to be fully resolved on the side of punishing Constitutional or statutory violations.

One thing I wonder is whether when the Clinton Administration bombed Iraq during Operation Desert Fox, intelligence suggested that it might get Saddam or another cabinet official with a smart bomb. Would that be classified as an assassination attempt without a finding?

user-pic



I'm glad to see this . . .

I appreciate the distinction between Chief and the Vice in Cheney's situation, and how that can erode the Constitutional definition of powers. That ought to be fully resolved on the side of punishing Constitutional or statutory violations.

And that's the only issue I'm concerned with at this point in time in relationship to the Cheney matter.

And there can be little doubt that the following will initially muddy the waters further on the way to what really transpired.

Schakowsky: Committee will investigate CIA‎

“My subcommittee will take the lead on significant portions of the investigation; we will explore instances where the Congress was not informed in a timely way and situations in which laws may have been broken.”

politico.com/news/stories/0709/25094

~OGD~

Leave a comment

Mike7Woodson

user-pic

Following: 12
Followers: 5

Posts
Comments & Recommends


Favorites

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address