President Remains Commander in Chief [upd]
By Socrates Posted in National Security — Comments (18) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
President Bush wielded the power of the veto pen over the bill that would have limited the CIA to using the same interrogation techniques used by Army interrogators.
This was a courageous and correct veto on the part of President Bush, but not for the reasons he gave.
Read on ...
[Update: in a comment, rbdwiggins gives the text, linked above for the President's veto of H.R. 2082, the "Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008."
Now those interested can follow here for the text of the bill itself, thomas.gov being notorious for URL-shifting.]
The future adults at the Talking Points Memo (w/t) are apopleptic, crying "Impeach! Impeach!" -- or perhaps it was just once, as it's hard to tell in that echo chamber.
The President was clear in his reasons for the veto:
The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror -- the CIA program to detain and question key terrorist leaders and operatives. This program has produced critical intelligence that has helped us prevent a number of attacks. The program helped us stop a plot to strike a U.S. Marine camp in Djibouti, a planned attack on the U.S. consulate in Karachi, a plot to hijack a passenger plane and fly it into Library Tower in Los Angeles, and a plot to crash passenger planes into Heathrow Airport or buildings in downtown London. And it has helped us understand al Qaida's structure and financing and communications and logistics. Were it not for this program, our intelligence community believes that al Qaida and its allies would have succeeded in launching another attack against the American homeland.
The main reason this program has been effective is that it allows the CIA to use specialized interrogation procedures to question a small number of the most dangerous terrorists under careful supervision. The bill Congress sent me would deprive the CIA of the authority to use these safe and lawful techniques. Instead, it would restrict the CIA's range of acceptable interrogation methods to those provided in the Army Field Manual. The procedures in this manual were designed for use by soldiers questioning lawful combatants captured on the battlefield. They were not intended for intelligence professionals trained to question hardened terrorists.
On has to wonder: if the CIA is limited to the same techniques as the Army, would there be any need for the CIA to interrogate? And once the front-line soldiers and officers interrogate an enemy combatant, having published our interrogation techniques in the Army Field Manual the enemy combatant would know what to expect and be ready for it, even if the CIA's questioners were more hightly skilled.
From a pure political calculation, some on the right who oppose non-standard interrogation (NSI) will be disheartened by this news. But they are missing a key point: this veto gives John McCain distance from President Bush, which he can exploit with independent voters, on an issue which is probably not as important to the war on terror as it's made out to be.
Because whether or not we use NSI or even full-on torture on detainees is not as important in the overall fight against them as is keeping our playbook hidden from the enemy. This bill would have exposed our methods to our foes, and if only for that reason deserved a veto.
But in the event that some madman was ready to explode a nuclear bomb in a major U.S. city, would we want to keep that information a secret? Or would we rather use every technique known to man to stop it?
Obviously we don't use non-standard interrogation on every detainee; that's why it's non-standard. But like our own nuclear arsenal, these techniques should be available to us, in all their horror.
Congressional Democrats know these things, but are shamefully demagoguing them just to score partisan political points.
techniques in the past, he's been hardening lately. And he has always been tough on everything else regarding the War on Terror. A war waged at 90% efficiency, to please the independents, is still vastly superior to timetables for surrender.
...............................
"Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do and how you do it."
--Rudy Giuliani
"A war waged at 90% efficiency, to please the independents, is still vastly superior to timetables for surrender."
I have difficulty with Senator McCain's treatment of the 'torture' issue. However, his experience with the subject exceeds mine.
--
Gone 2500 years, still not PC.
military expert:
"In this business, you find the enemy, then go after and destroy him. Everything else is rubbish!" Eddie Rickenbacker, American WWI Flying Ace
How about one more?
“Victory is reserved for those who are willing to pay its price.” Sun Tzu
Other gems are linked below.
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.“--Jeff Cooper. From Bill Coffey's collection of military quotations
By in large, I feel the left has completely misread the American People when it comes to the war in Iraq & global war on islamist jihadism. Most Americans see the terrorists as, well, terrorists. Low, scum of the earth, who attack innocents in cowardly fashion. Most Americans don't really care what is done with these guys - we don't want innocent people interrogated & really don't want to know the details - however, we do want them stopped so we can be safe. The American People don't want to just leave Iraq - we want to win it.
Vision
One Agency. One Community. An Agency unmatched in its core capabilities, functioning as one team, fully integrated into the Intelligence Community.
Mission
We are the nation’s first line of defense. We accomplish what others cannot accomplish and go where others cannot go. We carry out our mission by:
* Collecting information that reveals the plans, intentions and capabilities of our adversaries and provides the basis for decision and action.
* Producing timely analysis that provides insight, warning and opportunity to the President and decisionmakers charged with protecting and advancing America’s interests.
* Conducting covert action at the direction of the President to preempt threats or achieve US policy objectives.
Core Values
* Service. We put Country first and Agency before self. Quiet patriotism is our hallmark. We are dedicated to the mission, and we pride ourselves on our extraordinary responsiveness to the needs of our customers.
* Integrity. We uphold the highest standards of conduct. We seek and speak the truth—to our colleagues and to our customers. We honor those Agency officers who have come before us and we honor the colleagues with whom we work today.
* Excellence. We hold ourselves—and each other—to the highest standards. We embrace personal accountability. We reflect on our performance and learn from that reflection.
"Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich." ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
destroyed this organization.
And the lefty hacks in Congress wish to destroy completely what remains.
Message to the House of Representatives
I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 2082, the "Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008." The bill would impede the United States Government's efforts to protect the American people effectively from terrorist attacks and other threats because it imposes several unnecessary and unacceptable burdens on our Intelligence Community.
***
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan
The problem with the idea of McCain using this to distance himself from the president is that he voted against the bill in the Senate.
However, McCain's reasoning was far better than the president's -- his point was that the CIA, as a non-military agency, should not be legally bound to rules written and controlled by the military. They need their own rules and standards.
I am totally against the "non-standard interrogation" techniques you mention, but I think McCain's explanation is a good one.
on the issue to distance himself without appearing to waffle. That he voted against the bill makes me feel better, so thanks for pointing that out.
I don't like the idea of allowing out government to use NSI either, even on enemy combatants. However, I like the alternative a lot less.
--
Gone 2500 years, still not PC.
You point out that
"whether or not we use NSI or even full-on torture on detainees is not as important in the overall fight against them as is keeping our playbook hidden from the enemy."
Very true.
Also, it would be a usurpation of Executive Authority. The Congress authorizes and finances wars, but the President is the decider guy. This is not a decision to be left up to Congress. Furthermore, it would be terrible policy to put our CIA defenders in the position of having to decide whether or not to comply with a Presidential order and risk prosecution or to follow the "law."
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.“--Jeff Cooper. From Bill Coffey's collection of military quotations
Yes, I meant to say that. I think the title of the blog implies it, but thanks for making it explicit.
--
Gone 2500 years, still not PC.
WE need to be careful about its use.
Our CinC is limited by law. He is not going to be permitted to govern by decree or by unilaeral action - I hope.
That can be a very dangerous extension of Exec. Authority and I could easily see abuse of the argument.
I am all for the veto of this bill. It sounds like something that would undermine our interests and especially that it is a new and reactionary restriction on our CIA and intel in general.
But the lefties are desperate - they have been unable to secure defeat in this war and have already proven they will stoop as low as required to work against the national interest in pursuit of their political goals.
This is a fine point, and I'm not disagreeing with the fact that we need to be careful.
What I want to make clear is that by passing such a law, Congress would take what is essentially a political decision and make it a legal one. There is no reason to have the details of our treatment of CIA interrogatees a matter of either public record or Congressional debate. It's a matter of policy and personal decision.
We have a National Policy, set by the Chief Executive: "We Don't Torture Prisoners." Anybody who violates that policy is subject to punishment by the Executive Branch, and in most cases by legal sanctions as well. Apparently, those cases of legal sanctions don't apply to prisoners being interrogated by the CIA in extreme circumstances, and that's as it should be, because those circumstances dictate that the decision to use NSI methods is a political one.
When the safety of millions of people is at stake, there should be no fear of criminal prosecution on the part of the President or anyone whom he might designate to use NSI techniques. It's just plain silly to say, "It's illegal, but as President I'll take the responsibility to 'do the right thing.'" If the President has no authority to do something (because it's illegal) he CAN'T take that responsibility, nor can he give a legal order to anyone else to do so.
This is a quintessentially political decision. "Save the country?" or "Don't save the country?"
To turn it into a question of "Am I breaking the law?" is to trivialize both the danger we face and the President's oath of office.
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.“--Jeff Cooper. From Bill Coffey's collection of military quotations
SEC. 406. is infinitely more dangerous than losing a successful interrogation technique:
SEC. 406. COMPREHENSIVE LISTING OF SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAMS.
Not later than February 1, 2008, the Director of National Intelligence shall submit to the congressional intelligence committees a classified comprehensive listing of all special access programs under the National Intelligence Program (as defined in section 3(6) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(6))). Such listing may be submitted in a form or forms consistent with the protection of national security.
President Bush's veto of HR 2082 is justified on those grounds alone. The Democrats simply are not interested in safeguarding intelligence information that is crucial to our national security.
Special Access Programs concern the most sensitive information maintained by the Government, and SAP materials are maintained separately precisely to avoid the existence of one document that can serve as a roadmap to our Nation's most vital information.
SEC. 327. is a blatant attempt by the Legislature to usurp the inherent constitutional authority of the Executive.
SEC. 327. LIMITATION ON INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES.
(a) Limitation- No individual in the custody or under the effective control of an element of the intelligence community or instrumentality thereof, regardless of nationality or physical location, shall be subject to any treatment or technique of interrogation not authorized by the United States Army Field Manual on Human Intelligence Collector Operations.
(b) Instrumentality Defined- In this section, the term `instrumentality', with respect to an element of the intelligence community, means a contractor or subcontractor at any tier of the element of the intelligence community.
It's a clear indication to me that the Democrats have no plan and no desire, to combat a truly evil ideology which threatens our national security interests, and therefore, they are unqualified to protect the safety of the American people.
***
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan
read all about it in the New York Times on Thursday.
Yeah, Congress can be trusted with government secrets.
do the Democrats fail to understand? The question was purely rhetorical, because the answer is self-evident.
You're being much too kind to the NYTimes. They'd stop the presses to get that information out on Tuesday.
***
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan
And a thank you to the President for doing whats needed to keep the nation safe.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777