I did not want to read this account

by Khaled El-Masri, who was kidnapped by Americans in Europe. I would call what he endured prolonged torture. The way his was treated

degrades us all. I refuse to endorse or tolerate a system that shrugs off this abuse. He was terrorized on our behalf. mjh

America kidnapped me – Los Angeles Times By Khaled El-Masri, KHALED EL-MASRI, a German citizen born in

Lebanon, was a car salesman before he was detained in December 2003.

THE U.S. POLICY of “extraordinary rendition” has a human

face, and it is mine.

I am still recovering from an experience that was completely beyond the pale, outside the bounds of any

legal framework and unacceptable in any civilized society. Because I believe in the American system of justice, I sued George Tenet, the

former CIA director, last week. What happened to me should never be allowed to happen again. …

Eventually my blindfold was

removed, and I saw men dressed in black, wearing black ski masks. I did not know their nationality. I was put in a diaper, a belt with

chains to my wrists and ankles, earmuffs, eye pads, a blindfold and a hood. I was thrown into a plane, and my legs and arms were spread-

eagled and secured to the floor. I felt two injections and became nearly unconscious. I felt the plane take off, land and take off. I

learned later that I had been taken to Afghanistan.

There, I was beaten again and left in a small, dirty, cold concrete cell. I

was extremely thirsty, but there was only a bottle of putrid water in the cell. I was refused fresh water. …

[read it all – America kidnapped

me By Khaled El-Masri]

America, United States, Times

Online, The Times, Sunday Times

In the end, the eagerness of a junior officer in the CIA’s Skopje office and a gut feeling on

the part of the head of the CIA’s al-Qaeda unit contrived to have Masri sent to a prison for terrorist suspects known as “The

Salt Pit” in Afghanistan.

“Masri was held for five months largely because the head of the CIA’s Counterterrorist Center’s al

Qaeda unit ‘believed he was someone else’, one former CIA official said. ‘She didn’t really know. She just had a hunch,'” The

Washington Post reported.

Wrongful

Imprisonment: Anatomy of a CIA Mistake By Dana Priest, Washington Post Staff Writer

The Masri case, with new details gleaned

from interviews with current and former intelligence and diplomatic officials, offers a rare study of how pressure on the CIA to

apprehend al Qaeda members after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks has led in some instances to detention based on thin or speculative

evidence. The case also shows how complicated it can be to correct errors in a system built and operated in secret.

The CIA,

working with other intelligence agencies, has captured an estimated 3,000 people, including several key leaders of al

Qaeda, in its campaign to dismantle terrorist networks. It is impossible to know, however, how many mistakes the CIA and its

foreign partners have made. [mjh: Because just reading this is giving aid to the enemy. Or so BushCo

claims.] …

Members of the Rendition Group follow a simple but standard procedure: Dressed head to toe in

black, including masks, they blindfold and cut the clothes off their new captives, then administer an enema and sleeping drugs. They

outfit detainees in a diaper and jumpsuit for what can be a day-long trip. Their destinations: either a detention facility operated by

cooperative countries in the Middle East and Central Asia, including Afghanistan, or one of the CIA’s own covert prisons — referred to

in classified documents as “black sites,” which at various times have been operated in eight countries, including several in Eastern

Europe.

In the months after the Sept. 11 attacks, the CTC was the place to be for CIA officers wanting in on the fight. The staff

ballooned from 300 to 1,200 nearly overnight.

“It was the Camelot of counterterrorism,” a former counterterrorism official said.

“We didn’t have to mess with others — and it was fun.” [mjh: Join the CIA. See the World. Torture for fun.]

…

The process of vetting and evaluating information suffered greatly, former and current intelligence officials said.

“Whatever quality control mechanisms were in play on September 10th were eliminated on September 11th,” a former senior

intelligence official said. …

[I]n line with the responsibility Bush bestowed on the CIA when he signed a top secret

presidential finding six days after the 9/11 attacks. It authorized an unprecedented range of covert action, including lethal measures

and renditions, disinformation campaigns and cyber attacks…. [It] played well at the White House, where the president was keeping a

scorecard of captured or killed terrorists.

Clash Is Latest Chapter in Bush Effort to Widen Executive Power

By Peter Baker and Jim VandeHei, Washington Post Staff Writers

The clash over the secret domestic spying program is one slice of a

broader struggle over the power of the presidency that has animated the Bush administration. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney came

to office convinced that the authority of the presidency had eroded and have spent the past five years trying to reclaim it.

…

The vice president entered the fray yesterday, rejecting the criticism and expounding on the philosophy that has driven so

many of the administration’s actions. “I believe in a strong, robust executive authority, and I think that the world we

live in demands it — and to some extent that we have an obligation as the administration to pass on the offices we hold to our

successors in as good of shape as we found them,” Cheney said. In wartime, he said, the president “needs to have his constitutional

powers unimpaired.”

Speaking with reporters traveling with him aboard Air Force Two to Oman, Cheney said the period after the

Watergate scandal and Vietnam War proved to be “the nadir of the modern presidency in terms of authority and legitimacy” and harmed the

chief executive’s ability to lead in a complicated, dangerous era. “But I do think that to some extent now we’ve been able to restore

the legitimate authority of the presidency.” …

“He’s living in a time warp,” said Bruce Fein, a constitutional

lawyer and Reagan administration official. “The great irony is Bush inherited the strongest presidency of anyone since Franklin

Roosevelt, and Cheney acts as if he’s still under the constraints of 1973 or 1974.”

Sen. John E. Sununu (R-N.H.) said:

“The vice president may be the only person I know of that believes the executive has somehow lost power over the last 30

years.” …

“The problem is, where do you stop rebalancing the power and go too far in the other direction?” asked David

A. Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union. “I think in some instances [Bush] has gone too far.”

Donors underwrite life of luxury for DeLay

As Tom DeLay became a

king of campaign fundraising, he lived like one too. He visited cliff-top Caribbean resorts, golf courses designed by PGA champions and

four-star restaurants — all courtesy of donors who bankrolled his political money empire.

Over the past six years, the former

House majority leader and his associates have visited places of luxury most Americans have never seen, often getting there aboard

corporate jets arranged by lobbyists and other special interests.

Public documents reviewed by The Associated Press tell the

story: at least 48 visits to golf clubs and resorts; 100 flights aboard company planes; 200 stays at hotels, many world-class; and 500

meals at restaurants, some averaging nearly $200 for a dinner for two.

Since he joined the House leadership as majority whip in 1995, DeLay has raised at least $35 million for his campaign, PACs,

foundation and legal defense fund. He hasn’t faced a serious re-election threat in recent years, giving him more leeway than candidates

in close races to spend campaign money.

AP’s review found DeLay’s various organizations spent at least $1 million over the last

six years on hotels, restaurants, golf resorts and corporate jet flights for their boss and his associates.

While it’s illegal for

a lawmaker to tap political donations for a family vacation, it is perfectly legal to spend it in luxury if the stated purpose is raising

more money or talking politics. …

Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., a Republican author of legislation that reformed campaign

finance, was just as critical of DeLay’s spending habits.

“It’s excessive, it’s obscene, it distorts someone’s

ability to have good judgment,” said Shays, a longtime critic of DeLay. “It’s an abuse of campaign finance law and of our ethics law.

It’s harmful to Congress in general and the Republican Party in particular. We need a new leader.”

“Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretaps, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order.

Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court

order before we do so.” — uExpress.com: Richard Reeves by Richard

Reeves — (12/23/2005) PRESIDENT BUSH speaking over a year ago.

How is the previous statement not a

lie? mjh

Bush Addresses Uproar Over

Spying
‘This Is a Different Era, a Different War,’ He Says as Some Lawmakers Seek Probe
By Peter Baker and Charles Babington,

Washington Post Staff Writers

“It was a shameful act for someone to disclose this very important program in a time of war,” he

said. “The fact that we’re discussing this program is helping the enemy.”

Text: Bush News Conference

Bush: I want to

make sure the American people understand, however, that we have an obligation to protect you, and we’re doing that and

at the time protecting your civil liberties. Secondly, an open debate about law would say to the enemy, ‘Here’s what

we’re going to do.’ And this is an enemy which adjusts.

QUESTION: You say you have an obligation to protect us. Then why not

monitor those calls between Houston and L.A.? If the threat is so great and you use the same logic, why not monitor those calls?

Americans thought they weren’t being spied on in calls overseas; why not within the country if the threat is so great?

BUSH: We

will, under current law, if we have to. We will monitor those calls.

Vital Presidential Power

This is not an argument for an

unfettered executive prerogative. Under our system of separated powers, Congress has the right and the ability to judge whether President

Bush has in fact used his executive discretion soundly, and to hold him responsible if he hasn’t. But to engage in demagogic rhetoric

about “imperial” presidents and “monarchic” pretensions, with no evidence that the president has abused his discretion, is foolish and

irresponsible.

[William Kristol is editor of the Weekly Standard.]

WEBCommentary(tm) – Bush Goes on

Offense…Finally

During Monday’s presser, Bush could be seen attempting to suppress his anger over the leaking of the NSA

operation. Hopefully he will call for a special prosecutor to investigate this truly damaging leak. He must stay on the

offensive. We spent two years investigating the leak of a bozo’s CIA wife’s name. These were two people using the CIA for

their own politically leftist agenda, yet the Democrats and their lapdogs in the news media displayed feigned concern regarding

national security over the woman’s identity being revealed.

As expected, liberals from the Democrat and Republican parties

called for congressional investigations into President Bush’s decision after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to allow domestic

eavesdropping without court approval. They appeared disinterested in finding out the truth about the leaker in this obvious case

of treachery. …

Now that Bush and his administration are finally taking the offense, they should deal with the liberals

and backstabbers in their own party. And keep up the pressure to investigate the New York Times hack who broke the story and find out the

identities of the treasonous leakers. The media want a special prosecutor leak investigation? Give ’em one they can choke on, Mr.

President. — Jim Kouri, CPP

[mjh: The famously “leftist” New York Times capitulated to a presidential request

to keep silent on this domestic spying for more than a year.]

Bush Addresses Uproar Over

Spying
‘This Is a Different Era, a Different War,’ He Says as Some Lawmakers Seek Probe
By Peter Baker and Charles Babington

Washington Post Staff Writers

Nor did he explain why the current system is not quick enough to meet the needs of the fight

against terrorism. Under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the NSA in urgent situations can already eavesdrop on international

telephone calls for 72 hours without a warrant, as long as it goes to a secret intelligence court by the end of that period for

retroactive permission. Since the law was passed in 1978 after intelligence scandals, the court has rejected just five of

18,748 requests for wiretaps and search warrants, according to the government.

Imperial Assumptions By

Eugene Robinson

It seems that the Imperial Presidency has been restored. The nation’s highest office was cut down to

constitutional size three decades ago, when Richard Nixon helicoptered out of town, but listening to George W. Bush in his latest come-

out-swinging media blitz has been like an audience with an impatient monarch whose ungrateful subjects won’t just shut up and do as he

says.

On Saturday, he was wrathful. How dare someone reveal that for years his administration has been eavesdropping on the phone

calls and e-mails of American citizens? How dare the New York Times publish its story about the illegal surveillance?

Investigations would be convened, he warned, and the leakers could be outed.

Unauthorized Snooping

[Washington Post Editorial]

[I]f Mr. Bush claims the authority to defy acts of Congress, he invites a constitutional clash of the

highest order. In a constitutional democracy, laws are meant to be followed until they can be changed — even laws that, a president

feels, encumber his ability to wage war. …

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales … acknowledged that the administration discussed

introducing legislation explicitly permitting such domestic spying but decided against it because it “would be difficult, if not

impossible” to pass.

Civil liberties

don’t matter much ‘after you’re dead,’ Cornyn says on spy case By Jonathan Allen

“None of your civil liberties matter

much after you’re dead,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a former judge and close ally of the president who sits on the

Judiciary Committee.

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), who has led a bipartisan filibuster against a reauthorization of the Patriot

Act, quoted Patrick Henry, an icon of the American Revolution, in response: “Give me liberty or give me death.”

He called Cornyn’s

comments “a retreat from who we are and who we should be.” …

Cornyn, who agreed with the White House analysis

of the president’s powers, called for an investigation into how the Times obtained its information.

Are domestic terrorists in legitimate organizations like

PETA. Probably. Probably also in the NRA. Where do we draw the line on spying? I thought the “war on terror” (an indefinite extension of

presidential fiat) was against Islamists, not vegans. mjh

FBI Papers Show Terror

Inquiries Into PETA; Other Groups Tracked By Spencer S. Hsu, Washington Post Staff Writer

FBI counterterrorism

investigators are monitoring domestic U.S. advocacy groups engaged in antiwar, environmental, civil rights and other causes, the

American Civil Liberties Union charged yesterday as it released new FBI records that it said detail the extent of the activity.

The documents, disclosed as part of a lawsuit that challenges FBI treatment of groups that planned demonstrations at last year’s

political conventions, show the bureau has opened a preliminary terrorism investigation into People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals,

the well-known animal rights group based in Norfolk.

The papers offer no proof of PETA’s involvement in illegal activity. But

more than 100 pages of heavily censored FBI files show the agency used secret informants and tracked the group’s events for years,

including an animal rights conference in Washington in July 2000, a community meeting at an Indiana college in spring 2003 and a planned

August 2004 protest of a celebrity fur endorser. …

The FBI also kept information on Greenpeace and the American-Arab Anti-

Discrimination Committee, the papers show. …

PETA general counsel Jeff Kerr called the FBI’s conduct an abuse of power that

punishes activists for speaking out.

“These documents show a disturbing erosion of freedom of association and freedom of speech

that we’ve taken for granted and that set us apart from oppressive countries like the former Iraq,” Kerr said, adding that the documents

show no illegal activity by PETA. “You shouldn’t have to wonder when you go to a speech at a college campus, or when you go to a

meeting, whether you’re being surveilled by the FBI. It goes back to the dark days of Nixon and the enemies list.”

mjh’s blog — Let Me See Your ID