ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel


Updated on September 19, 2009


All seven former CIA directors have come out against the idea of the Obama government probing the agency's interrogators during the years, 2002 through 2008.

Some of them (interrogators) have been accused of going beyond the methods described or prescribed as "enhanced techniques" on suspected terrorists detainees; and an official preliminary investigation has been opened by the Justice Department to bring them out to face eventual criminal charges.

The directors had jointly written a letter to President Obama, asking that the action should be stopped, because it would cause an avalanche of cases that have been closed for many years to be re-opened. Those cases, the directors maintained, have been internally dealt with by career prosecutors, both inside and outside the agency, in the past, who declined to prosecute them.

The decision to start a new investigation was made by Attorney General Eric Holder, when he appointed a special prosecutor, Mr. John Durham, for that purpose a short while ago, based on an Inspector General's report, which has been in existence for five years; and was solely declassified to "choose certain cases", and to go after those CIA operatives who had interrogated terrorists prisoners placed under them at a particular period, during the Bush administration.

At the time, former Vice President Dick Cheney, had objected to any action being taken to bring back cases that were declared closed by previous Justice Department attorneys; and that they were being brought back for political reasons.

The White House answered by saying, in effect, that the attorney general had the right to make an independent decision to follow through the law and investigate any matters he saw fit. The White House, failed to point out, however, that the attorney general was picking the cases that, according to him, would "correct America's image abroad"; a job that was not his to do. There was a Secretary of State, a post presently held by Mrs. Hillary Clinton, whose duties involved the repairment of any damage that the United States has incurred, politically or otherwise, in recent past.

In their letter, the seven former CIA directors said among other things, that, "Attorney General Holder's decision to re-open the criminal investigation creates an atmosphere of continuous jeopardy for those whose cases the Department of Justice had previously declined to prosecute," they had written.

They continued by saying , "Those men and women who undertake difficult intelligence assignments in the aftermath of an attack such as September 11 must believe there is permanence in the legal rules that govern their actions," they added.

The letter had all the seven signatures of all the former CIA directors; and indicated the seriousness of what they farther denounced; the action taken by the attorney general; as not just being incomprehensible, but also, "this approach will seriously damage the willingness of many other intelligence officers to take risks to protect the country."

The current CIA director has been rendered innocuous by the action of the Justice Department, and all he could say, through a spokesman, was that, "he appreCIAtes Obama's "strong support for the men and women of the CIA". He further suggested that while he was in league with the sentiment of the directors, "he is bound to the administration".

This blog had written a page on this issue, stipulating that the President, Mr. Obama, CONSTITUTIONally, was the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the U.S.A., as stated by former Vice-President Dick Cheney; and that he could stop any embarrassing action started by his attorney general; as it was bound to bring ramifications that would not be beneficial to the administration in particular, and the nation as a whole.

He should, therefore, follow the advise of the former CIA directors, and do what was right.

P.S. The said page titled "Who is in Charge" was published Tuesday, August 25, 2009. Website:


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No comments yet.