Congressional oversight responsibilities are now being outsourced. Nat Hentoff has the details.
(Read Hentoff first. Then further down in this diary we find more about how congressional intelligence oversight has been eviscerated. This is not just a problem of weak rubber-stamp republicans. It’s now codified in the Patriot Act. So Democrats, even in power, could still potentially be ignored. As usual, the real scandal here is what is legal. )
Europe Shames U.S. Congress,
CIA war crimes in Europe are now under official investigation there, but not here
by Nat Hentoff http://villagevoice.com/news/0620,hentoff,73206,6.html
May 14th, 2006 9:19 PM
After 9-11, within the frame-work of the fight against terrorism, the violation of human and fundamental rights was not isolated, or an excessive measure confined to a short period of time, but rather a widespread regular practice by the CIA in which the majority of European countries are involved.
Giovanni Claudio Fava, chief investigator for a European Parliament report on the CIA’s “extraordinary renditions” in Europe following three months of hearings, April 26
[…]This European inquiry was started after the Washington Post’s Dana Priest revealed last November that the CIA had secret prisons in Eastern Europe�a sequel to her many stories about the CIA’s far from secret “renditions.” She won a Pulitzer Prize for that November story�as well as an investigation of her and her sources by the Justice Department.
There are CIA agents who have feared for a long time that these scabrous chickens would come home to roost. In December 2005, Michael Scheuer�who had recently left the CIA after having begun the “rendition” program under the Clinton administration�spoke openly about it on 60 Minutes. […] What Michael Scheuer said on 60 Minutes and elsewhere is not likely to happen again�nor are the criticisms of the CIA by a growing number of its retired agents. The CIA has now warned former employees to have no contact with reporters unless approved by the agency; and as the April 26 Financial Times noted, those ex-agents who have consulting contracts with the CIA could lose their pensions if they speak freely.
Says former CIA official Larry Johnson, a critical blogger on these matters at tpmcafe.com
: “They are trying to intimidate the press and trying to intimidate employees. Anybody who has been critical of the Bush administration is getting letters.”
But the CIA can’t shut up the European Parliament; the Council of Europe, a human rights organization; or reporters enthusiastically on the case in Britain, Italy, Sweden, Germany, and elsewhere, including Eastern Europe.
Moreover, European Parliament investigator Giovanni Fava and his committee come to Washington this month. He has some additional questions for Bush administration officials, members of Congress, and human rights groups here about the renditions around Europe. Also among those inquiries are other possible CIA crimes, including torture, in the CIA’s secret prisons.
Read the rest at the Voice.
Many Republicans argue that whistleblowers should approach congressional committees that have oversight over Intelligence, or turn to internal grievance handling channels, instead of passing potentially sensitive information to the press. But intelligence employees are excluded by law from whistleblower protection under the Patriot Act (and previous law).
Whistleblowers have had a very hard time being ‘seen’ by congressional committees. Whistleblowers like Sibel Edmonds are treated like hot potatoes until they leak to the press. Then a groundswell of concern forces congress to invite them into a closed session. And then… not much happens. That’s just where we find ourselves in 2006 in America.
Government Accountability Project. Original: http://www.whistleblower.org/content/press_detail.cfm?press_id=446
CIA Leaks Investigation Highlights Need for Whistleblower Law Reform
Washington, D.C. – Today, the Government Accountability Project proclaims that the CIA’s public efforts to crackdown on leaks of classified information demonstrate the need for Congress to approve meaningful whistleblower protections for employees who decide to disclose classified evidence of government wrongdoing, misconduct and illegality.
Russell Tice via DemocracyNow. Original: http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/04/04/1420212&mode=thread&tid=25
And the intelligence community, all of the whistleblower protection laws are — pretty much exempt the intelligence community. So the intelligence community can put forth their lip service about, ‘Oh, yeah, we want you to put report waste fraud abuse,’ or ‘You shall report suspicions of espionage,’ but when they retaliate you for doing so, you pretty much have no recourse. I think a lot of people don’t realize that.
Blogger Glenn Greenwald seems to understand the real scandal is what’s legal. He’s just one person, but he tries to do the legwork to actually read the laws, such as the Patriot Act, that our ‘lawmakers’ pass without reading. He’s just one person, but that’s the work that needs to be done.
Greenwald doesn’t assume that because we all assume something ‘must’ be illegal that now– after the Patriot Act– it actually is still illegal.
Glenn Greenwald, of Unclaimed Territory
Original: http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/05/no-need-for-congress-no-need-for.html
(2) The legal and constitutional issues, especially at first glance and without doing research, reading cases, etc., are complicated and, in the first instance, difficult to assess, at least for me. That was also obviously true for Qwest’s lawyers, which is why they requested a court ruling and, when the administration refused, requested an advisory opinion from DoJ.
But not everyone is burdened by these difficulties. Magically, hordes of brilliant pro-Bush legal scholars have been able to determine instantaneously — as in, within hours of the program’s disclosure — that the program is completely legal and constitutional (just like so many of them were able confidently to opine within hours of the disclosure of the warrantless eavesdropping program that it, too, was perfectly legal and constitutional).
Mike Whitney of Znet had warned about the fine print in the Patriot Act:
Mike Whitney at Znet. Original: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=6848
Intelligence reform has been a stealth-project from the get-go. […]
Instead of addressing the underlying issues, the new bill eviscerates what’s left of the Bill of Rights and hands over more power to Bush. Now, Bush is free to hand-pick the men he wants for top-level Intelligence positions without Senate confirmation – an invitation to create his personal security apparatus without congressional interference. The bill also decreases Congress’ powers of oversight. The new Intelligence Director can exempt his office from “audits and investigations, and Congress will not receive reports from an objective internal auditor.” In other words, Congress has limited its own access to critical information of how taxpayer dollars are being spent. They’ve simply given up their role of checking for presidential abuse.
The bill “eliminates provisions to ensure that it (Congress) receives timely access to intelligence, and it also allows the White House’s Office of Management and Budget to screen testimony before the Intelligence Director presents it to the Congress.” So, now Bush can either stonewall Congress entirely or just cherry-pick the tidbits he doesn’t mind handing over. The Congress is just paving the way for even greater secrecy.
Needless to say, all the whistle-blower protections have been removed from the new bill. In this new paradigm of Mafia-style governance the only unpardonable offense is reporting the crimes of one’s bosses. Now, the Bush Fedayeen can purge the entire intelligence apparatus and no one will be the wiser.
Are Democrats up to the work necessary to restore laws that allow congressional oversight?
Can we get Whistleblower protection for the intelligence community?
Originally developed in discussion on the IP mailing list and cross-posted to Ita Vero at TimeTogether.org.
