Death Rattle Of The Cult Of Intelligence?

Dick Cheney represents the pinnacle of the sputtering rise of the power of our clandestine services.  He’s a true believer, an apostle and archbishop of what Victor Marchetti dubbed The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence, the title of his heavily redacted 1974 book, the first book ever subject to pre-publication censorship by the US government.  A book that was a required text book in one of my political science classes in the early 80′s (and available to read online at questia.com registration required). There are still deleted passages, and in some cases entire pages, although some of previous redactions I saw 25 years ago have been restored as new material is declassified.

The CIA can start wars, it can start revolu­tions, it can give millions of dollars away with­out the American people and their elected officials knowing a thing about it. The CIA is doing all these things — and much, much more.

This book was written before Iran/Contra, before we missed 19 nutjobs using airliners as missiles, and before WMD’s in Iraq were a “slam dunk.” However, it’s lessons are as fresh as today’s headlines.

In the eyes of posterity it will inevitably seem that, in safeguarding our freedom, we destroyed it; that the vast clandestine apparatus we built up to probe our enemies’ resources and intentions only served in the end to confuse our own purposes; that the practice of deceiving others for the good of the state led infallibly to our deceiving ourselves; and that the vast army of intelligence personnel built up to execute these purposes were soon caught up in the web of their own sick fantasies, with disastrous conse­quences to them and us.

Having a clandestine service is absolutely, without question an essential component of our national security requirements. By it’s nature, it impossible for such an organization to retain transparent accountability usually associated with bureaucratic agencies in the traditional sense.  And therein lies the rub.  They get away with murder because that’s what they are trained to do.  It’s their reason for existing.

“It is a multi-purpose, clandestine arm of power…more than an intelligence or counterintelligence organization. It is an instrument for subversion, manipulation, and violence, for the secret intervention in the affairs of other countries.”

Allen Dulles wrote those words about the KGB in 1963 so that Americans would better understand the nature of the Soviet security service. His description was a correct one, but he could — just as accurately — have used the same terms to describe his own CIA. He did not, of course, be­cause the U.S. leaders of Dulles’ generation generally tried to impute the worst possible methods and motives to the forces of international communism, while casting the “defensive actions of the free world” as honest and democratic.

Both sides, however, resorted to ruthless tactics. Neither was reluctant to employ trickery, deceit, or, in Dulles’ phrase, “subversion, manipulation, and violence.” They both operated clandestinely, concealing their activities not so much from the “opposition” (they couldn’t) as from their own peoples. Secrecy itself became a way of life, and it could not be challenged without fear of a charge that one was unpatriotic or unmindful of the “national security.”

Sound familiar?

They got their director, George H.W. Bush, elected Vice President and then President.  They got his son elected President.  They’ve switched enemies from Soviet Communism to Islamic Terrorism without pause, declaring war against a metaphor, a tactic, against which their paranoia knows no bounds.

There are few cold-warriors who survived the disgrace of the Nixon administration, the purges of the Church Commission or the exposure of Iran/Contra.  Two such survivors stand out.  Their names are Donald Rumsfeld and Richard Cheney.

Crafty and ruthless, Rummy and Cheney have a different view of what it meas to be a patriotic American.  Their loyalty has always been to the preservation and advancement of the United States position as the absolute leader in all the world, even at the expense of those quaint parchment documents preserved at the National Archives.

I understand and appreciate their position, but I and so many of my liberal ilk have loftier ambitions than raw power and military might as evidence of our position in the world.  Not only are we a nation of laws, where the “rule of law” takes precedence, but a society based on ideas and ideals.

We’re not just dreamers, naive ideologues ungrounded in the practicality of the real world.  We believe that to truly be an American patriot, you have to have faith in the ideas and honor the ideals that puts justice and honor above simple expedience.

We’re better than that because of what we do, not who we are, because what we do and what we allow to be done in our names defines who we are.  We’re better than that paranoid old man shouting at clouds we witnessed speaking at his wife’s think tank Thursday; a man whose paranoid obsession with secrecy, faith in the manipulation and power of intelligence, and reliance on the nobility of his ends justifying any and all means required, legal or not, embodies the Cult of Intelligence that has dominated our national security apparatus your entire life.

Don’t count them out, ever.  In one form or another they will be back, even as one of their Grand Poobahs, Dick Cheney, retires to ignominious obscurity and disgrace.

If…If…If…

Liz Cheney, like her father, is morally reprehensible.  It’s just that simple.  She was on Morning Joe this morning, as documented by Bob Cesca, making the “ticking time-bomb” argument for torture.  It’s all BS, and you know it.

If you somehow knew doing something otherwise illegal and immoral would save lives, would you do it?  Are you required to do it?

Would you torture a terrorist to get information?  Under what circumstances?  Does that make it “right?”

Would you draw the line at hurting his kids?  Would you rape a child to get a terrorist to talk?  Is killing children okay?

Keep in mind, you don’t know if it will work.  You don’t know if you could have gotten the information another way.  You don’t know if the terrorist will lie.

You DO know that torture is a clear violation of the laws of men and any god you ascribe to.  You DO know what you are proposing is despicable.  Nothing that prisoner says or does will make it legal, will make it anything less than wrong.

The Cheney clan are despicable creatures.  They need to be culled from the herd, isolated, shunned.

Cesca notes this outrage:

Adding 2… Liz Cheney: “We didn’t know anything about al-Qaeda” on 9/12. Seriously.

Beyond simple ass-covering, is it possible there’s a bit of over compensation at work?

I mean, if you were assigned the leadership of an anti-terrorist task force by the President of the United States and never, ever convened a meeting (gathering up your oil executive cronies to drool over a map of Iraq took priority), wouldn’t the guilt come out in weird ways — especially if you were an arrogant ass who refuses to take responsibility for anything?

In fact you didn’t take the warnings of your predecessors seriously, ignored the advice of experts and clear warnings that a large scale attack on the United States was imminent and did nothing even though it was your damn job to prevent something like 9/11 — and then 3,000 people were killed in spectacular fashion — well, maybe you’d go nutz too.  Personally, I would have simply tried to disappear.

What I don’t get is how the infotainment industry continues to obsess over a guy whose popularity, even when combined with the equally despicable Rush Limbaugh, is still less than Colin Powell, the man who lied to the United Nation (ie, the entire world) about the threat from Iraq.  In fact Powell is more than four times more popular than Cheney.

It’s about honor, integrity.  Many of you may make the argument that Colin Powell left his honor on the floor of the Security Council.  But he is still more deserving of respect than Dick Cheney or any of his kin are capable of understanding.

Jesus, I keep having flashbacks to Dick’s wife Lynne yelling to the crowd that John Kerry was a “bad man.” WFT.  These Cheney people have zero capacity to judge anyone, ever.  I don’t care if it’s about what is or is not torture or what jokes “cross the line.”  They have no perspective whatsoever, and no standing to tell anyone what is right or wrong.

So? Cheney Strikes Again

Sully keyed on to dick Cheney’s Nixonian lack of irony in his Sunday interview with FOX: the shredding of the Constitution in order to save it.

How can the suspension of all laws into the power of the executive branch in wartime be seen as a defense or protection of the Constitution? Perhaps for a brief amount of time in a dire emergency, after which there would be a thorough accounting to the Congress and the Courts. But indefinitely? As inherent in the office? And with jurisdiction over the entire United States as well as the world? With “enemy combatants” defined as anyone the president calls an “enemy combatant” and no distinction between citizen ad non-citizen? Including the right to torture? Indefinitely?

Sullivan misses the point. Although I’m sure he’d agree once he thought about it, he’s bought into the Cheney Frame. The whole “War on Terror” farce is the real culprit. Knowing that we’ve ceded the President of the United States the power to unleash hell upon the world with a simple recitation of the nuclear codes through the chain of command, the question comes down to whether or now we are in a “state of war.”

Ahhah, only Congress has the power to declare war, you say. Well boys and girls, in this The Honorable Vice President of the United States is exactly right — the War Powers Act is unconstitutional. Since that nefarious law was passed (over Nixon’s veto) the process of beginning hostile action as perceived by the founders has been stood on it’s head. Avoiding the realities of a modern superpower’s prerogatives and responsibilities in a dangerous high-tech world is one of the reasons the United States has not officially declared war since WWII, despite being the most militaristic country in the world.

The thing that makes POTUS so potable, so ridiculously powerful is his ability to blow shit up anywhere and anytime he wants, on a whim, and make it happen half-way around the world within minutes or hours, depending on how big a bang he wants to make.

We’ve invaded, conducted police actions, initiated national liberations, enforced quarantines, protected convoys and shipping lanes, airlifted, escorted, bombed, put our fighting men and women in harms way across the planet, and even used the 82nd Airborne to capture Panama’s leader and put him on trial for drug crimes after their legislature declared war on us — all without a single declaration of war.118 times since it’s passage in 1973, the White House has reported to Congress under the Act. I won’t even get into the time when Ronald Reagan’s henchmen found a way to fight another war in South America despite Congress’s specific prohibition and refusal to provide any funds for the illegal operation no one was supposed to find out about. Since all the perps were pardoned by Bush the Elder anyway, Greenwald’s admonitions about not letting them get away with it again are all the more apropos.

What’s so super-special-awesome about dick Cheney’s problem with the War Power’s Act (merely a Resolution actually, if you are to believe dick), is that he takes such a predictably bass-ackwards view of why the thing is wrong, why it’s unconstitutional. Cheney, like all good executive operatives with a Napoleonic complex believes that the War Powers Act improperly impinges on the POTUS’s powers as Commander in Chief under Art.II, Sec.2 of the COTUS, which has never been ruled on by SCOTUS. That sounds unreasonable on its face, the very idea that 48 hours after committing our military to hostilities the President is required to notify Congress we’ve got our war on.

Of course, it isn’t reasonable at all. The President can start a war without the Constitutionally mandated declaration of war under the WPA. Notification or not, Congress has illegally abdicated it’s prerogatives, turned over an essentially legislative act of grave enough import that the founders insisted that it be subject to reasoned debate and cool heads. Really, can you think of anything of more consequence than committing to military action?

But even that’s too much Congressional meddling for Cheney. Shocking, the very idea that they’d have to report anything to Congress. Preposterous! And to add insult to injury, after destroying anything that moves for 60 days, the President is further required by the WPA to remove his forces without a specific authorization for the continued use of military force or an actual declaration of war.

Of course, it’s the git-er-done or bring-em-home clause that agitates the VP, at least that’s what I would assume, even though he only talks about the notifications requirement.

The War Powers Act is still in force out there today. That requires him to grant certain notifications to the Congress and give them the authority to supersede those by vote, if they want to, when it comes to committing troops.

No president has ever signed off on the proposition that the War Powers Act is constitutional. I would argue that it is, in fact, a violation of the Constitution, that it’s an infringement on the president’s authority as the commander in chief.

It’s never been resolved, but I think it’s a very good example of a way in which Congress has tried to limit presidents’ authority and, frankly, can’t.

Naw, dick doesn’t have any problem telling Congress anything, whether it’s that we’re at war and/or to go fuck themselves. His problem is that once he’s started an otherwise illegal war (but for the WPA’s authorization that he can) he doesn’t think anyone has the right to tell him to stop after two months of carnage. It’s truly a remarkable mind-set, so diabolical. dick has no problem with the WPA’s patently unconstitutional grant of power to POTUS, but objects to the idea that such illegal authority could be taken away if Congress wants to declare peace.

No wonder these guys thought it perfectly proper to by-pass Congress and conduct a war in Nicaragua as long as they didn’t fund the thing through official channels. This is the very same ideology that led to the United States authorizing war crimes like torture and extraordinary rendition, to wiretapping everything and everybody, and invading Iraq after ignoring the UN, the weapons inspectors, any contrary intelligence, and Congress’s requirement that all diplomatic avenues be exhaused under the AUMF. It further rationalizes why they made up stories about non-existent yellowcake purchases and meetings between 9/11 terrorists and Iraqi intelligence agents that never took place and justifies the outing of under-cover operatives.

For the life of me, I’m not sure what it more important to Cheney: the idea of protecting the powers of the President or the power of the United States. Certainly to him, they are inseparable. What he most certainly does not appreciate is that by promoting the President to a nearly imperial despot, he destroys this nation, and the Constitution he swore protect — which of course is exactly what Sullivan was talking about. But there’s something more personal, more human we see as the consequences of Cheneyism.

It’s again the framing, the idea that we are at war not just with Iraq or Afghanistan, but with an abstract concept, a tactic, a feeling of fear and those that scare us, that we are, or can even be at war with terror.

what we did after 9/11 was make a judgment that the terrorist attacks we were faced with were not a law enforcement problem.

They were, in fact, a war. It was a war against the United States, and therefore, that we were justified in using all the means available to us to fight that war.

And in a war, you capture the enemy and you hold them till the war is over with. You don’t capture German prisoners of war and then put them on trial in World War II. That’s not what we had to deal with here.

But in terms of what kind of rights these folks had, they were not covered by the Geneva Convention. They were unlawful combatants. They were not…

WALLACE: Well, that’s not what the Supreme Court — we’ll get to that…

CHENEY: Well…

WALLACE: … but that’s not what the Supreme Court ended up saying.

CHENEY: They were not — this was the decision we made at the time based on the precedent that was available. They were not citizens of a state that had — was a party to the Geneva Convention.

They did not adhere to the laws of war. They spent all their time trying to kill civilians for their — achieve their political ends. They didn’t wear uniforms. I mean, by any definition that was available to us at the time, the Geneva Convention does not traditionally apply to terrorists.

WALLACE: Mr. Vice President, here’s — here’s my — here’s my…

CHENEY: Second — no, let me — let me finish.

WALLACE: Can I just ask — can I just ask this…

CHENEY: No.

WALLACE: … one question? Because I think it will — it will bring the point in. In the first big test case, which was against Usama bin Laden’s driver…

CHENEY: Right.

WALLACE: … Salim Hamdan, the military jury — in the end, the military jury ended up acquitting him of all the major charges against him.

The government asked for 30 years to life. The judge ended up deciding that he should be released based on time served. The question basically is this. Even the government can get things wrong sometimes.

CHENEY: So?

So . . .

So at least when it comes to military matters (or so George Will would seem agree) the President has no peer, no co-equal branch to provide any check or balance. POTUS can start a war with no declaration under the War Powers Act. Cheney would argue that Congress’s authority to stop the war us the problematic (read unenforceable and unconstitutional) part of the WPA. He can then declare anyone an enemy, anyone at all if the war is global in nature as it is when the enemy is anyone who terrifies us enough to call them a terrorist, and yet the law of war do not apply.

How perfectly convenient to be able to make war, and make up your own rules of war, and then say the Geneva Conventions don’t apply because, after all, it’s not a real war with real enemies after all. Unbelievable. That passage made my jaw drop.

The convoluted web of inconsistencies and illegal hypocrisy infesting the VPOTUS’s mind would paralyze most mortals, which only proves that either dick Cheney is undead or quite clinically insane. He’s the reason they usually lock psychopaths away — to protect the rest of society.