Presently, there seems to be an attempt at obfuscation on the matter of waterboarding and it appears to becoming mainly from former Bush Administration officials.
As part of this obfuscatory process, these former Bush acolytes and the plain old crotchety Republican leaders are attempting to re-write the Bush Administration’s legacy – a legacy that is destined to live in infamy.
But to keep matters clear about who the real culprits are in this despicable tale of waterboarding, we need to review some of the sordid details of this lawless period in American history. Across the jump we shall do just that.
First and foremost, former Bush Administration officials have admitted to waterboarding over 266 times; and other, former Bush Administration officials continue to promote the notion that waterboarding was legal.
An excerpt from The Guardian article, "Bush officials defend physical abuse described in memos released by Obama":
Senior members of the Bush administration today defended the physical abuse of prisoners by CIA operatives at Guantánamo and elsewhere round the world set out in graphic detail in secret memos released by president Barack Obama.
General Michael Hayden, head of the CIA under president George Bush, and Michael Mukasey, who was attorney-general, criticised Obama for releasing the memos. The two accused him of pandering to the media in creating "faux outrage", undermining the morale of the intelligence services and inviting the scorn of America's enemies.
And then there was former Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, endorsing waterboarding in 2006:
Dick Cheney, US vice-president, has endorsed the use of "water boarding" for terror suspects and confirmed that the controversial interrogation technique was used on Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, the senior al-Qaeda operative now being held at Guantánamo Bay. [MSNBC, 10/26/2006]
So in the midst of this new brouhaha over waterboarding and who briefed who, let us not forget who the real culprits are in this matter of waterboarding – it is the Bush Administration.
Yes, the same people who brought you hyped threats of mushroom clouds, false reports of aluminum tubes for nuclear centrifuges in Iraq, spurious tales of Iraq purchasing yellow-cake uranium, and fictional declarations about not committing torture.
Also culpable in this waterboarding matter are the Bush Administration’s Attorney General office, the Bush Administration’s CIA and other national and international agencies, public or private, operating under the auspices of the Bush Administration’s "legal" guidance.
On the credibility of the briefings that the CIA gave to members of Congress, the comments by former Senator Bob Graham (D-FL and Chairman of Senate Intelligence Committee 2001-2002) are most revealing. This is what Senator Bob Graham has said about CIA briefings:
"When I was briefed which was about three weeks after the Speaker, the subject of waterboarding did not come up. Nor did the treatment of Abu Zubaydah or any other specific detainee... what's happening is there's an attempt underway to try to shift it, the discussion away from what's really important, and that is did the United States use torture, was that within the law, who authorized it, and what were the consequences of that -- those are the important issues." [MSNBC, 5/15/09]
and Senator Bob Graham continues:
"When I asked the CIA on what dates was I briefed, they gave me four dates: two in April, two in September of `02. On three of the four occasion, when I consulted my schedule and my notes, it was clear that no briefing had taken place on that date and the CIA eventually concurred in that. So, their record-keeping is a little bit suspect." [Brian Lehrer Show, 5/14/09]
Other comments from the Chairman of House Permanent Select Intelligence Committee Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-TX) and Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) are especially meaningful in ascertaining the truthfulness of CIA briefings. Their comments slam the door shut on any credibility that the CIA had regarding whether its public comments have any veracity to them.
Rep.Reyes’ comment:
"When the CIA comes in to notify you about a very sensitive intelligence program, you don't have the opportunity to get all your questions answered or to review legal documents. You're not allowed to consult with any lawyers or experts. You're not even allowed to discuss the matter with your colleagues or your staff." [Washington Post, 5/14/09]
Minority Leader Boehner’s comments:
" it's hard for me to imagine that our intelligence area would ever mislead a member of Congress" but two years ago when asked by Wolf Blitzer if he had confidence in the National Intelligence Estimate, Boehner explained, "either I don't have confidence in what they told me several months ago or I don't have confidence in what they're telling me today." [CNN, Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, 12/9/2007]
Additonally, the comment of present CIA Director Leon Panetta, when he proclaims that the CIA was truthful when it briefed the four leaders of the Senate and House Committees on Intelligence, seems to be short on preciseness. Courtesy of the New York Times, here is Director Panetta’s statement:
Mr. Panetta, a former Democratic congressman from California and a longtime associate of Ms. Pelosi, issued a statement that said the agency’s "contemporaneous records from September 2002 indicate that C.I.A. officers briefed truthfully," a rebuttal of Ms. Pelosi’s claim on Thursday that intelligence officials had lied to her. [NY Times, 5/9/2009]
Director Panetta’s comment seems to be an attempt at obfuscation.
Lastly, it is very important to remember who was the "Decider" and the advice that the Decider's staff, including the CIA and Attorney General, provided to him.