This was originally published @ Care2.com:

Former Vice President, Dick Cheney, was at it again last Sunday.  He adamantly vocalized his disapproval of President Obama’s national security policy, and was incredulous about the idea that Bush Administration officials should be investigated for their treatment of enemy combatants.  Of course, Cheney has every right to voice his opinion in these matters, though such criticism from a former VP is highly unusual.  However, considering the Bush Administration’s past behavior in politicizing traditionally non-political government entities, how are the claims of Dick Cheney, in any way, credible?

On last Sunday’s Face the Nation, one of Cheney’s statements deserved more scrutiny than the 30 min. program allowed:

One of the things that I did six weeks ago was I made a request that two memos that I personally know of, written by the CIA, that lay out the successes of those policies and point out in considerable detail all of — all that we were able to achieve by virtue of those policies, that those memos be released, be made public.

First of all, the “two memos… that lay out the successes of those policies,” couldn’t possibly discount that torturing detainees enhanced the ability of terrorists to recruit new supporters.  So, even if the memos in question reveal productive results, those results were, at best, a push when considering the policy’s impact on US national security.

Second, and more importantly, how can two memos vindicate policies that were in clear violation of prescriptions within the Geneva Conventions and the UN Convention Against Torture?  Jeremy Scahill summed up why the policies can’t be excused, particularly as they apply to the latter, “This is a matter of law and US obligations to its international treaties, which the Constitution explicitly states the US will respect and enforce.”  The memos, even if they support what Cheney suggests, are illustrative of a policy that was blatantly illegal.

Finally, consider the behavior of Dick Cheney and others in the run up to the Iraq invasion.  There is a pattern of deceptive practices by Bush officials in shaping policies and intelligence to fit their goals.  The Office of Special Plans (OSP) is an instructive example.  Jason Leopold, presently of ThePublicRecord.org, reported for Truthout.org in 2007:

The Office of Special Plans routinely provided President Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Condoleezza Rice, who headed the National Security Council at the time, with questionable intelligence information on the Iraqi threat. Much of that information was included in various speeches by Bush and Cheney, and some was never vetted for accuracy by career CIA analysts…

…Patrick Lang, a former director of Middle East analysis at the Defense Intelligence Agency, said in an interview with the New Yorker in May 2003 that the Office of Special Plans “started picking out things that supported their thesis and stringing them into arguments that they could use with the president. It’s not intelligence. It’s political propaganda.”

The OSP was developed by Donald Rumsfeld out of frustration regarding the lack of actionable intelligence on Iraq’s capabilities and intentions.  Headed by Douglas Feith — whom Gen. Tommy Franks once referred to as the “Dumbest MF’er on the planet” — the OSP did not gather new intelligence.  Rather, the Department of Defense office reinterpreted existing data, cherry-picking and restating evidence to support the invasion of Iraq.  When Dick Cheney insists upon a link between Al Qaida and Saddam Hussein, the OSP is the source of his evidence.  Of course, we now know there was no such link.

This is merely one example, but when considered along with Cheney’s insistence that waterboarding “worked” and “kept us safe,” how can he be taken seriously?  Let me know what you think.

Personally, I wouldn’t put it past Cheney to contort evidence to fit his narrative.  It is entirely plausible that, in calling for the release of the two CIA memos, the former Vice President is cherry-picking evidence just as he did before the invasion of Iraq.  Further, it is more than plausible, as was indicated today by FBI agent, Ali Soufan, in his testimony before Congress that the interrogation methods DO NOT WORK.  Soufan said the harsh techniques were “ineffective, slow and unreliable and as a result, harmful to our efforts to defeat al-Qaida.”:

[vodpod id=Groupvideo.2651108&w=425&h=350&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]

When the past actions of Dick Cheney are considered along with his present public statements, it is entirely possible that torture was employed, not to discover a link between Al Qaida and Iraq, but to create one.

Professor Turley: “This is the most well defined and publicly known crime I’ve seen in my lifetime.”

[vodpod id=Groupvideo.2286980&w=425&h=350&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]

From the rawstory.com September 8, 2008 post by Nick Juliano:

…A lawsuit filed Monday would force Cheney to comply with the 1978 Presidential Records Act, one of an array of post-Watergate reforms meant to redress Nixon’s abuse of the office.

The act requires outgoing administrations to hand over executive branch documents to the National Archives, where the records are preserved for future historians. Problem is, Cheney’s crafty lawyers have argued he is not a member of the executive branch, and President Bush early in his tenure amended what could amount to a giant loophole to the act that would allow Cheney to simply toss his papers into the fireplace on his way out the door…

read more | digg story

See also:

From the LA Times online, Suit seeks to save Cheney files.  8 Sept. 2008.

From ThinkProgress, Historians:  Stop Bush/Cheney from destroying Presidential Records.  8 Sept. 2008.

From the post: “Thirty-two of the nation’s leading historians have sent letters to congressional leaders calling on them to strengthen the Presidential Records Act …”  The post also links to the correspondence sent to both houses of Congress.

Ron Suskind’s book forces Conyer’s to stop dragging his feet.

In a recent post, I noted Suskind’s expressions of sympathy for the pressure put upon his sources; indeed, his sources implicated Dick Cheney’s office and the CIA for forging a letter which implied a connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Husein’s regime. It is alleged that the forgery was intended to bolster support, domestic and abroad, for the 2003 Iraq invasion.

Dick

If Suskind’s sources weren’t expecting such pressure, they should have been.  Regardless, they may breathe a little easier today, as the vice president’s aides soon may be absorbing some of the pressure over the potential scandal.  The Raw Story reported yesterday on the House Judiciary Committee Chairman, John Conyers, and his written correspondence, requesting answers regarding the allegations contained within Suskind’s book, The Way of the World.

These developments could inspire Conyers to begin impeachment hearings regarding Cheney’s behavior as VP.  Conyers and others have been widely criticized for dragging their feet on the matter.

I’ll include some excerpts from Raw Story below, but be sure to check out the whole article.  If for no other reason than it contains the text of Conyers’ letters to Former CIA Director George Tenet, former VP Chief of Staff I. Lewis Scooter Libby, VP advisor John Hannah, and former CIA Deputy Director (and Suskind source) Bob Richer.  The post also links to pdf files where the letters may be downloaded from.

I sincerely hope that I never receive a letter like that.

From The Raw Story’s John Byrne, posted August 20, 2008:

Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) issued letters of inquiry Wednesday to Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, regarding a forged letter linking Saddam Hussein to the 9/11 attacks…

Conyers asked that Richer “set up a time” to discuss allegations surrounding the false letter.

“According to recent allegations in your capacity as the former CIA Deputy Director of Clandestine Operations and Chief of the Near East Division, you were tasked by former CIA Director George Tenet to create the false letter and may even have seen the White House stationery on which the false letter assignment was reportedly written,” Conyers wrote Richer Wednesday. “Given your reported direct knowledge of these events, I am requesting that you contact Judiciary Committee staff as soon as possible to set up a time to discuss your involvement and knowledge of the allegedly false letter…”

read more | digg story

Suskind’s new book, The Way of the World:  A Story of Truth & Hope in an Age of Extremism, has stirred up something of a hornet’s nest.  Of course, this is not unexpected.  Anything published that sheds light upon Bush administration misdeeds tends to meet the same reaction:  suppress, deny, and discredit (not necessarily in that order).

In this case The Pulitzer Prize winning journalist has illuminated an effort by the Bush administration to falsify a connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Husein’s Iraq.  As bad as that sounds, the details of the way they went about it make it so much worse. From the August 6, 2008, Washington Post:

The book’s most contentious claims involve Tahir Jalil Habbush, the former head of intelligence in Saddam Hussein’s government in the years before the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003. As the deadline for war neared, U.S. and British intelligence officials arranged a series of secret meetings with Habbush in early 2003 and confronted him regarding their concerns about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction …

…Habbush said Saddam Hussein had ended Iraq’s nuclear weapons work after the first Persian Gulf war in 1991, and halted biological weapons research in 1996.

Habbush’s accounts were shared with top officials at the CIA and the White House, where they were dismissed as Iraqi deception. In subsequent meetings, Suskind writes, intelligence officials prodded Habbush for proof that the weapons programs had been abandoned.

“Ultimately, Habbush could not offer proof that weapons that didn’t exist, didn’t exist,” Suskind wrote.

After the invasion, Habbush was paid $5 million by the CIA for serving as an informant and resettled in Jordan. It was then, according to Suskind’s account, that White House officials decided to enlist his help with the alleged forgery — one suggesting a link between Saddam Hussein’s government and Mohamed Atta, the leader of the 19 hijackers in the Sept. 11 attack…

Suskind states that, in September 2003, the White House directed then-CIA Director George J. Tenet to concoct a fake letter, backdated to July 2001 but bearing Habbush’s signature, claiming that Atta had been trained in Iraq for his mission. Habbush agreed to sign the letter, which was then leaked to a British journalist in December 2003, Suskind writes in the book.

According to Suskind his sources on the matter are now feeling the heat to alter or retract their accounts as laid out in The Way of the World.  Below is a video of Ron Suskind discussing the implications of his book with Countdown’s Keith Olbermann from Tuesday, August 5, 2008. For an objective review of Suskind’s book, read Louis Bayard’s review at Salon.com.
[vodpod id=Groupvideo.1466178&w=425&h=350&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]