- Hayden is best known for illegally spying on Americans yet
when pressed on "reasonable doubt" he said that it wasn't part
of the Constitution.
http://www.therandirhodesshow.com/live/newsletter/05.09.2006.html
Former NSA Director Hayden Lied To Congress And Broke The Law
[Our guest blogger, Morton Halperin, was Director of Policy
Planning Staff at the State Department and served on the
National Security Council under President Clinton. He also
served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President
Johnson.]
The Bush administration has pulled out all the stops in
attempting to defend the NSA’s warrantless domestic spying
program. After speeches by President Bush and Attorney General
Gonzales, Deputy Director of National Intelligence and former
NSA Director General Michael Hayden took another crack at the
defense in a speech on Monday. He’s not exactly the ideal choice
to restore the administration’s credibility.
As Think Progress documented back in December, Hayden misled
Congress. In his 10/17/02 testimony, he told a committee
investigating the 9/11 attacks that any surveillance of persons
in the United States was done consistent with FISA.
At the time of his statements, Hayden was fully aware of the
presidential order to conduct warrantless domestic spying issued
the previous year. But Hayden didn’t feel as though he needed to
share that with Congress. Apparently, Hayden believed that he
had been legally authorized to conduct the surveillance, but
told Congress that he had no authority to do exactly what he was
doing. The Fraud and False Statements statute (18 U.S.C. 1001)
make Hayden’s misleading statements to Congress illegal.
Hayden’s fate lies with the tale of another spymaster, Nixon-era
CIA Director Richard Helms.
Testifying under oath before a hearing of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee in 1973, Richard Helms claimed that CIA was
not involved in attempts to overthrow Salvador Allende of Chile:
SEN. SYMINGTON: Did you try in the Central Intelligence agency
to overthrow the government of Chile?
MR. HELMS: No, sir.
SEN. SYMINGTON: Did you have any money passed to the opponents
of Allende?
MR. HELMS: No, sir.
By the time Helms was called to testify again, CIA activities in
Chile had become public knowledge. In 1977, Richard Helms
pleaded no contest to charges of lying to Congress and served a
suspended sentence.
Four years passed between Richard Helms’ false testimony before
Congress and his guilty plea. Hayden’s congressional lying
occurred in 2002. It’s now four years later. Time to fess up,
General.
– Morton H. Halperin and Michael Fuchs
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/hayden-broke-law/
The URI to TrackBack this entry is:
http://thinkprogress.org/ 2006/ 01/ 26/ hayden-broke-law/
trackback/
1.
IMpeach them all and then put them in jail without the help of
the House Judiciary Committee.
http://constantpated.blogspot.com/
==============================
Former CIA Deputy Director: Civil Liberties Are ‘Powerful
Antidote to Violent Extremism’
Confirmation hearings for Gen. Michael Hayden to be CIA Director
are sure to renew the debate over President Bush’s warrantless
domestic surveillance and the balance between civil liberties
and national security.
Prominent conservatives working to stifle oversight of the
program, including Sens. Pat Roberts (R-KS) and John Cornyn
(R-TX), have taken to repeating the line that civil liberties
don’t matter much “after you’re dead.” Even Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice warned this past February that “terrorists and
criminals…would exploit our open society to do us harm.”
John Gannon, former CIA Deputy Director for Intelligence, has a
different view. In testimony last week to the Senate Judiciary
Committee, Gannon said that Americans’ Constitutional freedoms
“work against the development of domestic terrorist networks
that could be exploited by foreigners.” In an email published
today to the Federation of American Scientists’ Secrecy News, he
offered some more thoughts:
Americans have unparalleled Constitutional and legal protections
to express grievances and to openly criticize government at all
levels. … It means that the terrorists or other extremists would
find less fertile ground to build networks in the US because
local support would be harder to come by and because local
opposition would be more certain.
In this sense, our liberties are a powerful antidote to violent
extremism.
This is not an academic point for me. It is an observation from
a career of watching the domestic consequences of repressive
regimes elsewhere in the world–including US-friendly Islamic
governments such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
http://thinkprogress.org/?tag=Intelligence
====================
Executive Order 12333--United States intelligence activities
http://www.cia.gov/cia/information/eo12333.html
Main Page -
Tuesday, 05/09/06
Message Board by American
Patriot Friends Network [APFN]
APFN MESSAGEBOARD
ARCHIVES
