Cheney: "Our Administration Will Stand Up Well In History"
Dick Cheney registered a full-throated defense this morning of the Bush administration's interrogation policies and issued a renewed call for the full release of the intelligence reaped via harsh questioning tactics. In a 34-minute speech given at AEI, Cheney also harshly criticized the Obama WH and the New York Times and asserted, as he has since leaving office, that the Bush/Cheney team kept the country safe in the wake of 9/11.
On torture
Torture was never permitted, and the methods were given careful legal review before they were approved. Interrogators had authoritative guidance on the line between toughness and torture, and they knew to stay on the right side of it. Even before the interrogation program began, and throughout its operation, it was closely reviewed to ensure that every method used was in full compliance with the Constitution, statutes, and treaty obligations. On numerous occasions, leading members of Congress, including the current speaker of the House, were briefed on the program and on the methods.In my long experience in Washington, few matters have inspired so much contrived indignation and phony moralizing as the interrogation methods applied to a few captured terrorists.
On closing Gitmo
On his second day in office, President Obama announced that he was closing the detention facility at Guantanamo. This step came with little deliberation and no plan. Their idea now, as stated by Attorney General Holder and others, is apparently to bring some of these hardened terrorists into the United States. On this one, I find myself in complete agreement with many in the President's own party. Unsure how to explain to their constituents why terrorists might soon be relocating into their states, these Democrats chose instead to strip funding for such a move out of the most recent war supplemental.The administration has found that it's easy to receive applause in Europe for closing Guantanamo. But it's tricky to come up with an alternative that will serve the interests of justice and America's national security. ... I think the President will find, upon reflection, that to bring the worst of the worst terrorists inside the United States would be cause for great danger and regret in the years to come.
Tactics made country safer
The broad-based strategy set in motion by President Bush obviously had nothing to do with causing the events of 9/11. But the serious way we dealt with terrorists from then on, and all the intelligence we gathered in that time, had everything to do with preventing another 9/11 on our watch. The enhanced interrogations of high-value detainees and the terrorist surveillance program have without question made our country safer. Every senior official who has been briefed on these classified matters knows of specific attacks that were in the planning stages and were stopped by the programs we put in place.This might explain why President Obama has reserved unto himself the right to order the use of enhanced interrogation should he deem it appropriate. What value remains to that authority is debatable, given that the enemy now knows exactly what interrogation methods to train against, and which ones not to worry about. Yet having reserved for himself the authority to order enhanced interrogation after an emergency, you would think that President Obama would be less disdainful of what his predecessor authorized after 9/11. It's almost gone unnoticed that the president has retained the power to order the same methods in the same circumstances. When they talk about interrogations, he and his administration speak as if they have resolved some great moral dilemma in how to extract critical information from terrorists. Instead they have put the decision off, while assigning a presumption of moral superiority to any decision they make in the future.
On the release of interrogation memos
Releasing the interrogation memos was flatly contrary to the national security interest of the United States. The harm done only begins with top secret information now in the hands of the terrorists, who have just received a lengthy insert for their training manual....
As far as the interrogations are concerned, all that remains an official secret is the information we gained as a result. Some of his defenders say the unseen memos are inconclusive, which only raises the question why they won't let the American people decide that for themselves. I saw that information as vice president, and I reviewed some of it again at the National Archives last month. I've formally asked that it be declassified so the American people can see the intelligence we obtained, the things we learned, and the consequences for national security. And as you may have heard, last week that request was formally rejected. It's worth recalling that ultimate power of declassification belongs to the President himself. President Obama has used his declassification power to reveal what happened in the interrogation of terrorists. Now let him use that same power to show Americans what did not happen, thanks to the good work of our intelligence officials.
The Bush/Cheney legacy
For all the partisan anger that still lingers, our administration will stand up well in history - not despite our actions after 9/11, but because of them. ... To the very end of our administration, we kept al-Qaeda terrorists busy with other problems. We focused on getting their secrets, instead of sharing ours with them. And on our watch, they never hit this country again. After the most lethal and devastating terrorist attack ever, seven and a half years without a repeat is not a record to be rebuked and scorned, much less criminalized. It is a record to be continued until the danger has passed.








I believe Mr. Cheney. I don't believe Mr. Obama.
Mr. Cheney is dangerous and made our country less safe.
9/11 was a result of America's policy on Afghanistan under Carter, Regan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush administration. It is not partisan...they were all wrong. Cheneys response to 9/11 resulted in an unnecessary war in Iraq, a mishandled approach to Al Queda in Afghanistan, policies of torture and prisoner abuse, recruiting tools for more terrorists.
We are not any safer today than we were on 9/11/2001.
I believe Mr. Cheney. I don't believe Mr. Obama.
Lee Barnett | May 21, 2009 3:30 PM
=============================
Why do you believe in Cheney, Mr. Barnett? Mr. Cheney should be supporting our President. Instead he's being reckless. I really think he hopes that something catastrophic happens to this country. I also heard Mr. Cheney is a bit on the paranoid side and does believe there will be acts of terrorism. Stupid old man.
Any,
If you needed brain surgery, would you go to an old brain surgeon or a plumber? Just because he's a little older than O'bama, that doesn't diminish his wealth of experience in dealing with the terrorists the world has been plagued with. I'm sure he knows a lot more than the public is privy to, and that's ok with me. Go back to texting your little friends and leave the important stuff to the grown-ups.
Liberal postings are just white noise from a daycare center for "adults" with an emotionally retarded view of the world. The most unsophisticated, il informed and hateful drivel comes from the left. People have to stoop to argue with you. Completely void of individual thought, its hysterical. Obamba waves his mighty hand and you are all hypnotized. lol if that punk wanted you to start killing your neighbors and he made a good argument for it and made it legal I am quite sure many of you would do it.
Cheney is squirming because due process will eventually find him and Bush to be criminals and will apply due process. NOTHING and I mean NOTHING can stop this process. All three branches of the government are working it from different angles and the people are behind it.
Torture is NOT the will of the people.
Law and order IS the will of the people.
If you want to live in a land where law does not apply GO TO Somalia!
If you want to live in this country you HAVE to obey the rule of law and the will of the people. Even a President is not EXEMPT!
'nuff said case closed!
Cheney lied about the "intelligence" that got us embattled in a 5 year war in Iraq that our current president must extricate this country from. Why would you believe him in this matter where guilt might result in criminal prosecution? Sounds like another crooked politician trying to save his own skin.
"I'm not a crook...", ring a bell?
Cheney cannot have it both ways. He needs to answer the following questions directly: how far are you willing to go to extract information from a prisoner? If torture works, and can be justified morally as a means of protecting us against attack, how can you justify limiting torture to waterboarding? What if sticking a hot poker into a prisoner's eye would yield the location of a nuclear bomb, would you do that? If not, why not?
Once we condone torture, we have no justification for limiting the techniques used. Pretending to drown someone is OK to save Americans, but shocking genitals is a no-no. On what grounds?
If Cheney agrees that he would use that hot poker to reveal the location of a nuclear bomb, he is a war criminal, a torturer no different than the thugs that Saddam used to torture his opponents. If he would not use that hot poker, he is admitting that torture is wrong, and therefore that waterboarding is wrong. And he is therefore a war criminal for approving waterboarding.
But the problem is not only that Cheney's position on torture is untenable. He has no credibility. Cheney never served in the military and has no field experience. His views on the efficacy of torture are counter to expressed views of experts from the FBI, CIA, and multiple branches of the military. The man has zero standing on this issue.