Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (480636)	5/14/2009 10:44:24 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574755

"Wrong... he was a broken down dictator with zero power. Fully contained. Not even close to the truth of the matter, but if you feel it serves your purposes to forward that viewpoint feel free.

To: Road Walker who wrote (480636)	5/14/2009 11:08:58 AM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574755

Wrong... he was a broken down dictator with zero power. Fully contained. Except that on repeated occasions we had had to move significant military assets into the region to force him to complyy with inspections after he thumbed his nose at us and the UN (which had the additional consequence of emboldening terrorists against us as they perceived it as weakness on our part). Except that we were having to maintain no-fly zones - apparently, into perpetuity, to "contain" him. I find it laughable that those on the Left believe that "torture" of three guys was a recruiting tool for AQ but maintaining the no-fly zone out of the ME wasn't. Anyone who has studied the subject, even a little, knows that the flow of recruits to AQ was due in large part to the American military presence in the region. Except that he was continuing to kill his own people indiscriminately, that he was encouraging terrorism against Israel with cash payments, and that his behavior was totally suggestive of continued WMD development, and that all the intelligence available strongly suggested he was continuing his weapons development. Right. He was "contained". What a stupid remark.

To: Road Walker who wrote (480636)	5/14/2009 3:08:19 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1574755

CIA rejects Cheney declassification request The CIA has rejected Dick Cheney's request to release classified information on interrogations -- info he believed would prove waterboarding and other techniques were effective in extracting information from terror detainees. The reason: The docs are the subject of pending litigation -- a reference to lawsuits filed by detainees. The agency's statement: The process for Mandatory Declassification Review is governed by Executive Order 12958, as amended. That Order excludes from review information that is the subject of pending litigation. The two documents that former Vice President Cheney sought contain information that falls into that category.” “For that reason—and that reason only—CIA did not accept Mr. Cheney’s request for a Mandatory Declassification Review. The Agency simply followed the Executive Order. This request was handled in accordance with normal practice by CIA professionals with long experience in information management and release. It was for them a straightforward issue.” [The letter to Cheney is after the jump.] » Continue reading CIA rejects Cheney declassification request Mr. Stephannie Oriabure, Archivist National Archives and Records Administration 700 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20408-0001 Reference: EOM-2009-00573 / NLMS 2009-001 (Cheney, Richard B.) Dear Ms. Oriabure: Your facsimile of 21 April 2009 referred one document to this agency responding to the referenced Executive Order 12958 Mandatory Declassification Review request. I have enclosed a copy of your correspondence at Tab A. As you are aware, a request for Mandatory Declassification Review is governed by Executive Order 12958, as amended, which was signed and executed by the President on March 25, 2003. Under section 3.5.(a)(3) of that Executive Order, a document is excluded from Mandatory Declassification Review if that document contains information that is the subject of pending litigation. This provision ensures that the Mandatory Declassification Review process is not used to disrupt simultaneous litigation proceedings that are already pending. In researching the information in question, we have discovered that it is currently the subject of pending FOIA litigation (Bloche v. Department of Defense, Amnesty International v. Central Intelligence Agency). Therefore, the requested document, which contains this information, is excluded from Mandatory Declassification Review. The requester may appeal my decision to the Agency Release Panel, in my care, within 45 days from the date of this letter. He may send his appeal to: Agency Release Panel c/o Information and Privacy Coordinator Central Intelligence Agency Washington, D.C. 20505. Sincerely, // s // Delores M. Nelson Information and Privacy Coordinator politico.com