No Comment — July 13, 2009, 11:58 am

Is the Lid About to Blow on the Cheney Snuff Program?

Back in March, stories started to emerge to the effect that the CIA ran a super-secret assassinations program. It was apparently former Vice President Cheney’s pet project, and he seems to have had some role directing it. Details about the program were scarce, but the pushback that came from Cheney’s corner was a vintage nondenial denial. Rather than directly deny that the program existed, a senior Cheney advisor, John Hannah, quibbled with some elements of the description that the New Yorker’s Sy Hersh put forward. I summarized the claims and counterclaims here.

Last week, we learned that CIA Director Leon Panetta had briefed the Congressional intelligence committees that his predecessors had failed to notify Congress about a super-secret program, and that he himself wasn’t told about it for months. Over the weekend, the New York Times reported that the program had been kept secret by direct order of Dick Cheney. In a classic ploy, Cheney also appears to have directed that the program be described as something under consideration rather than final, so it would not have to be briefed. Whatever the label affixed to it, it is increasingly likely that this really was a program, it was implemented in some measure, and it has Dick Cheney’s fingerprints all over it.

This morning the Wall Street Journal links these two matters. The super-sensitive CIA program that Cheney ordered not be disclosed was in fact Dick Cheney’s targeted killings program. Siobhan Gorman:

A secret Central Intelligence Agency initiative terminated by Director Leon Panetta was an attempt to carry out a 2001 presidential authorization to capture or kill al Qaeda operatives, according to former intelligence officials familiar with the matter. The precise nature of the highly classified effort isn’t clear, and the CIA won’t comment on its substance. According to current and former government officials, the agency spent money on planning and possibly some training. It was acting on a 2001 presidential legal pronouncement, known as a finding, which authorized the CIA to pursue such efforts. The initiative hadn’t become fully operational at the time Mr. Panetta ended it.

In 2001, the CIA also examined the subject of targeted assassinations of al Qaeda leaders, according to three former intelligence officials. It appears that those discussions tapered off within six months. It isn’t clear whether they were an early part of the CIA initiative that Mr. Panetta stopped.

The detail here is critical. In wartime, a nation is certainly free to target and remove the command and control mechanisms of an enemy force, including individual commanders, and a program designed to identify and take out Al Qaeda kingpins in a war setting therefore raises more policy than legal concerns. Removed from the war setting, however, the issue becomes one of summary execution and raises serious legal issues. And were the targets entirely Al Qaeda leaders? The Bush Administration had a disturbing habit of labeling anyone it disliked a “terrorist” and then immediately reaching to the strongest weapons in its arsenal against them. The kill list would therefore be worth careful study, though that’s something that will assuredly occur behind closed doors.

The more immediate question here is the failure to brief Congress. Once more we see Dick Cheney engaged in the management of a secret government at the highest levels. Was Dick Cheney running a private snuff squad? Did he order the CIA to violate the clear requirement of the National Security Act of 1947 that Congress be apprised of the program? Those are serious questions that the intelligence oversight bodies need to pursue.

One more thing: those following this question should pick up retired senior CIA operative Barry Eisler’s book Fault Line. As this thing unravels, Eisler’s novel, which turns entirely on a super-secret assassinations program, is looking less like fiction and more like the work of someone who had a firm grip on what Cheney was doing.

Share
Single Page

More from Scott Horton:

Context, No Comment August 28, 2015, 12:16 pm

Beltway Secrecy

In five easy lessons

From the April 2015 issue

Company Men

Torture, treachery, and the CIA

Six Questions October 18, 2014, 8:00 pm

The APA Grapples with Its Torture Demons: Six Questions for Nathaniel Raymond

Nathaniel Raymond on CIA interrogation techniques.

Get access to 165 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

September 2015

Weed Whackers

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Tremendous Machine

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

A Goose in a Dress

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Genealogy of Orals

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
Romancing Kano·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

I recently spent a semester teaching writing at an elite liberal-arts college. At strategic points around the campus, in shades of yellow and green, banners displayed the following pair of texts. The first was attributed to the college’s founder, which dates it to the 1920s. The second was extracted from the latest version of the institution’s mission statement:

The paramount obligation of a college is to develop in its students the ability to think clearly and independently, and the ability to live confidently, courageously, and hopefully.

leadership
service
integrity
creativity

Let us take a moment to compare these texts. The first thing to observe about the older one is that it is a sentence. It expresses an idea by placing concepts in relation to one another within the kind of structure that we call a syntax. It is, moreover, highly wrought: a parallel structure underscored by repetition, five adverbs balanced two against three.

Article
The Prisoner of Sex·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“It is disappointing that parts of Purity read as though Franzen urgently wanted to telegraph a message to anyone who would defend his fiction from charges of chauvinism: ‘No, you’ve got me wrong. I really am sexist.’”
Illustration by Shonagh Rae
Article
Gangs of Karachi·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“In Karachi, sometimes only the thinnest of polite fictions separates the politicians from the men who kill and extort on their behalf.”
Photograph © Asim Rafiqui/NOOR Images
Article
Weed Whackers·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“Defining 'native' and 'invasive' in an ever-shifting natural world poses some problems. The camel, after all, is native to North America, though it went extinct here 8,000 years ago, while the sacrosanct redwood tree is invasive, having snuck in at some point in the past 65 million years.”
Photograph by Chad Ress
Article
The Neoliberal Arts·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“College is seldom about thinking or learning anymore. Everyone is running around trying to figure out what it is about. So far, they have come up with buzzwords, mainly those three.”
Artwork by Julie Cockburn

Percentage of Britons who cannot name the city that provides the setting for the musical Chicago:

65

An Australian entrepreneur was selling oysters raised in tanks laced with Viagra.

A naked man believed to be under the influence of LSD rammed his pickup truck into two police cars.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Subways Are for Sleeping

By

“Shelby is waiting for something. He himself does not know what it is. When it comes he will either go back into the world from which he came, or sink out of sight in the morass of alcoholism or despair that has engulfed other vagrants.”

Subscribe Today