John Bolton Says Obama Has "Undercut Creativity at CIA"; Has "Near Religious Faith in Negotiations" - Video 7/25/09
Here is video of former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton criticizing President Obama's Administration for leaking information on a highly classified CIA program to identify and kill top Al-Qaeda operatives. Bolton says the revealing of the program by CIA Director Leon Panetta will depress morale at the Agency because it undercuts creativity in the future. He also said it tells Al-Qaeda leaders the CIA is not going to seek to use lethal force against them.
Bolton also slammed Obama's handling of Iran's drive to obtain nuclear weapons. Bolton thinks Obama believes he can find a way to negotiate Iran out of pursuing nuclear weapons, saying Obama has a "near religious faith in negotiations." Bolton says there is "zero chance" negotiations will succeed, and that every day that goes by just helps Iran get closer to achieving their goals.
3 comments:
They didn't "leak" information. They shut the program down because Dick Cheney told the CIA that they needn't worry about informing Congress that the program even existed, just because a tiny thing like "federal law" required it.
Let's check that balance for a second: "keep CIA morale high" on one side, "comply with federal law" on the other. Awwww, you're right: screw federal law. Keep CIA morale high. What the hell's the fun in being Vice President if you can't do what you want to do, when you want to do it?
I hope that CHeney gets exactly what's coming to him: a nice little "condo" with bars on the windows and a roommate named Bubba.
Diogenes: You lying fool..
Explain this in light of your statement...
Look what I found at the NEW YORK TIMES.
Or is there is some OTHER super-secret assassination plot they had that was somehow soooooooo unlike this one that they never did?
15 December 2002
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/15/international/15INTE.html
Bush Has Widened Authority of C.I.A. to Kill Terrorists
By JAMES RISEN and DAVID JOHNSTON
Published: Sunday, December 15, 2002
[...]
President Bush has provided written legal authority to the C.I.A. to hunt down and kill the terrorists without seeking further approval each time the agency is about to stage an operation
[...]
The creation of the secret list is part of the expanded C.I.A. effort to hunt and kill or capture Qaeda operatives far from traditional battlefields, in countries like Yemen.
The president is not legally required to approve each name added to the list, nor is the C.I.A. required to obtain presidential approval for specific attacks, although officials said Mr. Bush had been kept well informed about the agency's operations.
[...]
Under current intelligence law, the president must sign a finding to provide the legal basis for covert actions to be carried out by the C.I.A. In response to past abuses, the decision-making process has grown into a highly formalized review in which the White House, Justice Department, State Department, Pentagon and C.I.A. take part.
The administration must notify Congressional leaders of any covert action finding signed by the president. In the case of the presidential finding authorizing the use of lethal force against members of Al Qaeda, Congressional leaders have been notified as required, the officials said.
[...]
But the decision by the Bush administration to authorize, under certain circumstances, the killing of terrorist leaders threatens to thrust it into a murky area of national security and international law that is almost never debated in public because the covert operations are known only to a small circle of executive branch and Congressional officials.
Well, there's a couple of issues with what you found there, Vinny.
1. The Times article said "Congressional leaders have been notified as required, the officials said." What officials? CIA officials? Then why would Leon Panetta shut it down because Congress had NOT been notified as required? I mean, we all know the CIA has not, would not, and could not lie to Congress, right?
2. You seem to think that the Times article from 2002 is referring to the same thing that Panetta recently disclosed. That might seem plausible on the surface, but there's a major flaw in that thinking.
If the subject matters are exactly the same, then why would the rightwingnut Bolton be complaining that Panetta just leaked information "on a highly classified CIA program to identify and kill top Al-Qaeda operatives" when that same program was already written about in the New York Freakin' Times six and a half years ago?
Nice try, though, Vinny. It shows some initiative on your part, to force yourself to read something from a liberal rag like the NYT.
Post a Comment