World

Rain (AM and PM) 3° London Hi 9°C / Lo 6°C

Cheney 'set up illegal secret spy project'

Hidden Republican policies on terrorism threaten major distraction for Obama

By Rupert Cornwell in Washington

Dick Cheney has stayed quiet over claims he broke the law by directly ordering the CIA to keep secrets from Congress

AP

Dick Cheney has stayed quiet over claims he broke the law by directly ordering the CIA to keep secrets from Congress

Former US Vice-President Dick Cheney was at the centre of a bitter new row last night, after charges he had directly ordered the CIA to keep Congress in the dark about a secret intelligence programme set up after the 9/11 attacks – an action that may have been in violation of the law.

A top Democratic senator, Leon Panetta, who took over as CIA director a month into the Obama administration, told Congress on June 24 about the eight year old project, of which Mr Panetta himself had only just been informed. He told the House And Senate intelligence committees that he had immediately scrapped the programme and that information about it had been withheld at Mr Cheney's behest.

In doing so, the Bush administration may have acted illegally, Dianne Feinstein, the chairwoman of the Senate intelligence committee said. "This is a big problem," she said, although she acknowledged the urgency of the circumstances after the attacks on New York and Washington: "I understand the need of the day... but you weaken your case when you go outside the law."

Another top Democrat, Deputy Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin, went further, demanding a full-scale Congressional probe into the affair. He said the executive branch should not create these types of programmes and conceal them from legislators. This was "not only inappropriate, it could be illegal," he said.

The sharp words of the two Democratic Senators came yesterday after the New York Times first reported on the programme, whose exact details still remain a mystery. According to the paper, it did not involve domestic surveillance and wiretapping, subject of a separate ongoing row between the Democratic-controlled Congress and the previous Republican White House, nor the harsh interrogation techniques, including water-boarding, used at secret CIA detention centres abroad.

The secretive and taciturn Mr Cheney was not available for comment. But according to unnamed officials quoted by the paper, the project never become operational, although planning and "some training" had intermittently taken place since 2001. It appears to have emerged amid a search for "radical countermeasures" in the traumatic immediate aftermath of 9/11. But there seems to have been no opposition within the CIA when Mr Panetta recently ordered its end.

The row threatens to be a major distraction and a new rift between the parties at the worst possible moment – just as President Obama's efforts to push through contentious legislation on energy policy, financial market reform, and above all, health care, reach a critical juncture. Yesterday Republicans leapt to the defence of their embattled former vice-president, insisting Mr Cheney and Mr Bush had the constitutional right to protect the country as they saw fit. They accused the Democrats of cooking up the affair to divert attention from their own problems on Capitol Hill, especially on health care.

Nor is the renewed spotlight on Mr Cheney the only instance of how controversies of the Bush era are dogging his successor, despite Mr Obama's insistence that the government must look forward rather than refight battles of the past.

In a potentially explosive move, Eric Holder, the Attorney General, is understood to be considering naming a prosecutor soon to investigate torture allegations against CIA operatives who carried out waterboarding and other "enhanced" methods of interrogation against detainees suspected of terrorism, techniques that may have violated international conventions against torture.

The White House has publicly come out against any legal sanctions, arguing that this would further damage morale at the CIA, and has successfully fended off action against the Bush administration officials who devised the tough interrogation policies – among whose strongest backers was Mr Cheney.

Mr Holder could thus drive an embarrassing wedge between his Justice Department and Mr Obama, a problem the former acknowledged this weekend. "I hope that whatever decision I make would not have a negative impact on the President's agenda," Mr Holder told Newsweek magazine. "But that can't be a part of my decision."

John McCain, Mr Obama's defeated opponent in 2008, also backed the president. A congressional probe into the Cheney revelations, and possible criminal action against some CIA employees were "not a good idea," the Arizona senator said on the NBC's Meet the Press yesterday.

Further washing of such dirty linen in public would merely inflict new damage on the image of the US around the world. "I agree with the President, it's time to move forwards," Mr McCain said.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

This is not some "project"...
[info]ancientoneuk wrote:
Sunday, 12 July 2009 at 11:17 pm (UTC)
This is all about the assassination team that Cheney put in place, as was uncovered by Salon's Seymour Hersch.

What it entails is that anyone, of any position of influence, that dared deny the US a thing, would find themselves bumped off by this group of assassins, they answered to Cheney and ONLY Cheney, CIA station chief's were bypassed and they were very active according to Hersch.

What this means is the US have been murdering people in other nations simply because they were perceived as an "obstacle" to US power, many of them of allied nations, as well as operating at home, Hersch claims they are not murderers but yes they are, the US law does not cover countries where they have operated, they have killed and therefore are murderers.

This won't get anywhere or an "alternative" reason will be aired because the US is not about to announce its been well-stoning its allies people and Congress will have a field day with whats left of the neo-cons in power and it would certainly tilt the balance to see Cheney indicted for crimes even if Bush still evades the law.
Re: This is not some "project"...
[info]jaded63 wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 02:30 am (UTC)
You're basing this assertion on one vague speech Hersh made in March this year, about a book which he admits is at least two years away from publication because, as he also admits, it will take at least that long for him to make the thing look credible.

Hersh has long been criticised for being fast and loose with his facts, and there is no doubt that his book on Kennedy, 'Dark Camelot', was chock full of lies and falsifications.
Re: This is not some "project"...
[info]ancientoneuk wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 03:51 am (UTC)
Having not read that book I cannot say whether it is or not, however your own response is almost word for word that of Brian Whitman yet Hersh has nailed the truth down many times on major issues.

After all it was Hersh that blew the cover on a covert operation to strike Iran pre-emptively with nuclear weapons, and exposed too the complicity of David Miliband and Tony Blair.

But whatever this is, its big, Obama has just extended the Secret Service protection on Cheney which expires after six months of leaving office, seen not as much as a courtesy but pundits across the water think more of making sure they know where he is and what he is up to.

Time will tell, I note that with Hersh's claims over Cheney's "assassination ring" that there is little protest or denial which itself is rather odd...
Re: This is not some "project"...
[info]jaded63 wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 09:45 am (UTC)

Bush did not strike Iran pre-emptively with nuclear weapons. Bit of an inconvenient fact, that. Hershey's prediction on October 8th, 2004, in front of a Berkeley audience, that the Iraq war was not winnable, was another failed prediction (among many). In fact his assertion casts doubt on his sources, because he said in that speech that his sources told him the Iraq war 'was not winnable. It's over.' 5 years later, after a lot of blood and suffering, the Americans have ground out a result which is an emphatic victory, and which in my view has changed the geo-political situation in the region in a quite astonishing way. One of the ripple effects of that change has been the anti-regime protests in Iran, and another has been the softening of the Syrian position towards the West.

I don't know why you refer to 'my response', with specific regard to the supposed assassination squad. I referred to what Hershey himself had said. I repeat, he said that it would take at least another two years for him to be able to get enough evidence to make his assertions credible.

As for Cheney, he never says anything publicly to anybody if he can avoid it.

Ultimately, if there was such an assassination squad (undoubtedly going after Al Qaeda elements and those linked closely to them),the U.S. would have been doing no more than it did in WWII, and what Mossad has been doing for decades against Muslim terrorists. After the huge shock of 9/11, as Blair said, the rules of the game changed.
Re: This is not some "project"...
[info]infangthief wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 08:16 pm (UTC)

Time to reopen the case of Dr David Kelly.
Errr ... nothing happened, nobody got bumped off ..
[info]joeny wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 03:26 am (UTC)

"The programme was shut down on the very day the Obama administration learned of its existence last month. Details remain cloaked in secrecy, however, and assurances have been given that it was never activated."

At this stage, it sounds like there a contingency plan that was never implemened
Re: Errr ... nothing happened, nobody got bumped off ..
[info]ancientoneuk wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 03:56 am (UTC)
It always astounds me that they get caught lying again and again and yet they demand we trust their word, if a politician stood on a stack of bibles swore the sky was blue, I would have to take a second look...
Re: Errr ... nothing happened, nobody got bumped off ..
[info]susanlevi wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 11:55 am (UTC)


... not so. Rafiq Hariri tops the list of targeted hits by Darth Vader. In the short term, it worked too ! Lebanon went through a Gucci revolution and the Syrians were forced out... except that Chirac was mighty pissed off about loosing his pension fund paymaster ...
Minor correction - Panetta never a senator
[info]boblite wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 03:47 am (UTC)
You state Leon Panetta was a senator. Not so. Leon Panetta was a congressman (i.e. house of representatives, 435 members) but never a senator (senate, 100 members). Otherwise your article was fine.
Rafiq Hariri
[info]susanlevi wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 05:49 am (UTC)


The assisination of Rafiq Hariri, Lebanese PM .. comes to mind as one 'hit' - with tangible gains for the US and their friends.
Rafiq Hariri's Assassination
[info]susanlevi wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 05:59 am (UTC)


The assassination of Rafiq Hariri, Lebanese PM on Darth Vader's orders .. comes to mind as one 'hit' - with tangible gains for the US and their friends at a critical moment in the Middle East... no surprises from these revelations for those in the loop.
Ill informed author
[info]johnnywi wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 06:23 am (UTC)
The author of this piece doesn't even know that Panetta was never a senator. He has no real grasp of what is going on. Cheney may be bad, but he has been defending his actions vigorously, in the American press.
Obama and 'continuity' with Bush
[info]old_green wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 08:13 am (UTC)
Don't we remember Obama surprised (some of) us with his plans for 'continuity' with the Bush regime, e.g. keeping the same Secretary of Defence, Gates.

Unfortunately, Obama is not only continuing, but worse, extending, the abuses of Bush.
Goody! a new guessing game
[info]standupifyou wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 08:42 am (UTC)
Dr David Kelly anyone?
Re: 007
[info]susanlevi wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 11:19 am (UTC)


He was done-in under the orders of our own stiff-upper lip lot - by our own franchised version of Darth Vaders hit squads .... more subtle ofcourse, but ruthless all the same...
HOT
[info]happybabe1987 wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 08:52 am (UTC)
***********************************************
OH, WONDERFUL!
There are many beautiful mature women and men chatting on that community^^^^^^^^^Cougar Circle^^^^^^^^which designed to help ethnically diverse singles meet new friends and make dates. u will have a more lovely baby not long after....
*************************************************
One law for the elite
[info]respectedgraham wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 11:10 am (UTC)
Ironical that we are supposedly fighting in Afghanistan to restore democracy- the rule of the majority. When are the majorities of both the USA and this country going to be allowed to run their respective nations, rather than the vested interests who lie, cheat and even break the law to keep hold of their privileged positions.
Rafiq Hariri's Assassination
[info]joeny wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 01:13 pm (UTC)
"The assassination of Rafiq Hariri, Lebanese PM on Darth Vader's orders ..."
Yeh, sure, the US killed the anti-Syrian, anti-Hezbollah democratically elected leader of Lebanon.
What next from these crazies? .... the US carried out 9/11, contrary to all the evidence and Bid Laden's own claim?
Sorry, I forgot, some nutty Independent readers DO claim that too ....... sigh !
Re: Rafiq Hariri's Assassination
[info]panic2009 wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 04:13 pm (UTC)
the rules of the game did change after 9/11. the lunatics in the white house got the excuse they wanted to do whatever they wanted wherever they wanted when they wanted. it was like a belated xmas present for them.

as for bin laden, he did mastermind it with the help of the easter bunny, the bogeyman, count dracula and a possee from the clangers. dr no equipped his cave for him too.

get real. do the maths. work it out for gawds sake. 9/11 was immense. too immense for someone in a cave to put together on his own!!!!

and for all the "well, torture and murder is ok if it saves lives" crowd, i pray that one of your families isnt in the same position one day. will it still be ok then?

cheney and his ilk must be brought to book along with blair and his cronies. this is too scary and too blatantly illegal to let it go. rest in peace dr david kelly. i bet your name passed cheney's lips at some time.
Re: Rafiq Hariri's Assassination
[info]slingyerhook wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 06:11 pm (UTC)

It's those who beleive 9/11 wasn't an inside job who are the loonies...

"The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden's Most Wanted web page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9//11." Rex Tomb, FBI Chief of Investigative Publicity, June 5, 2006
Re: Rafiq Hariri's Assassination
[info]joeny wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 06:12 pm (UTC)
"9/11 was immense. too immense for someone in a cave to put together on his own!!!!"

Good grief, 9/11 deniers really CAN get published on the Independent !

Yep, those 19 Muslims that took over the planes after leaving long, detailed videos boasting about the plan, were really CIA agents who killed themselves as part of the plot ! DOH !
Yep, destroying the commerical hub of New York, trying the destroy the Pentagon, killing nearly 3000 Americans, etc. was all part of an ingenious plan by Dick Cheney to benefit America. DOH !!

Are you serious, or just 'aving a laugh?
Re: Rafiq Hariri's Assassination
[info]slingyerhook wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 07:38 pm (UTC)
And I suppose you think that Israel's attack on the USS Liberty was a "tragic mistake". When people are allowed to see the evidence themselves they can make up thrir own minds. This is just what Zionists fear.
Re: Rafiq Hariri's Assassination
[info]panic2009 wrote:
Tuesday, 14 July 2009 at 06:52 am (UTC)
the 19 muslims of whom approx half are still alive??

and yes, powerful people within america certainly did benefit from 9/11. an open investigation would dispel all the rumours etc but for some reason nobody wanted that from the start aside from the victims' families. wonder why?
Trust Obama
[info]lasvegasrich wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 03:40 pm (UTC)
George W. Bush left so many problems for President Obama, that it will take years for him to straighten them out. I do believe that he wants to put things back on track, and resume posiitive relations with our allies, and reach out to achieve some kind of understanding with our opponents. As far as this CIA operation plan, it was was kept secret from Congress, and I bet from GWB. So broad accusations of USA complicity in this nasty stuff are not warranted. Dick Cheney was a government all to himself, refusing to cooperate with congressional committees and leaders, and claiming executive privilege when pressed. A nasty man.
U.S. assassination squads are not new
[info]slingyerhook wrote:
Monday, 13 July 2009 at 05:55 pm (UTC)
In the 1960s the FBI mounted the Counter Intelligence Program or COINTELPRO which was targeted at black militants and black civil rights groups. The program included the creation of government death squads who got much of their information from the ADL who masqueraded as the friends of the black civil rights people and the Ku Klux Klan who received firearms training in return for their information. COINTELPRO culminated in the assassination of Martin Luther King.
Alas, crazy conspiracy theories in the Independent are not new
[info]joeny wrote:
Tuesday, 14 July 2009 at 01:02 pm (UTC)
slingyerhook claims that the USA arranged 9/11, so that America could benefit from it (sigh)
He/she also manages to bring Israel into the fray - as per usual here (sigh)
slingyerhook also now claims that the FBI murdered Martin Luther King (sigh)

What next? Maybe Roosevelt had US airmen pretend to be Japanese pilots attacking Pearl Harbour?

The Independent's willingness to publish such comments are making it look ridiculous. Can such wacko claims really not be moderated?

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date