CIA Urges Judge To Keep Bush-Era Documents Sealed

[Beacool]

Al-Qaeda Could Use Contents, Agency Says

By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 9, 2009

The Obama administration objected yesterday to the release of certain Bush-era documents that detail the videotaped interrogations of CIA detainees at secret prisons, arguing to a federal judge that doing so would endanger national security and benefit al-Qaeda's recruitment efforts.

In an affidavit, CIA Director Leon E. Panetta defended the classification of records describing the contents of the 92 videotapes, their destruction by the CIA in 2005 and what he called "sensitive operational information" about the interrogations.

The forced disclosure of such material to the American Civil Liberties Union "could be expected to result in exceptionally grave damage to the national security by informing our enemies of what we knew about them, and when, and in some instances, how we obtained the intelligence we possessed," Panetta argued.

Although Panetta's statement is in keeping with his previous opposition to the disclosure of other information about the CIA's interrogation policies and practices during George W. Bush's presidency, it represents a new assertion by the Obama administration that the CIA should be allowed to keep such information secret. Bush's critics have long hoped that disclosure would pinpoint responsibility for actions they contend were abusive or illegal.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/08/AR2009060804117_pf.html

[CanonRay]

1. You bet your ass they want the shit sealed.

[dipsydoodle]

2. The mere statement

"endanger national security and benefit al-Qaeda's recruitment efforts." being publicised is second best to releasing the tapes - dumwads. Probably just easier to release them and get any reprocussions over with.

[Beacool]

3. I'm conflicted about the whole issue.

Over this and the torture pics. On one hand transparency demands that we lay it all out on the table, but on the other hand, we should try not to put our people abroad and our allies at risk.

:-(

[zipplewrath]

9. If they were so worried about these issues

The time to protect our troops and people abroad is when the abuse is trying to happen. You stop it then, not after you've done it and hope no one finds out. They are suppose to be abroad risking their lives defending our freedoms. One of those freedoms is to hold accoutable the jerks responsible for this crap.

[Beacool]

4. TPM is already having a fit over this news:

Panetta: Too Dangerous To Release Torture Tape Docs
By Zachary Roth - June 9, 2009, 9:58AM
Do we have yet another case of the Obama administration mimicking its predecessor's notorious penchant for government secrecy?

The CIA argued yesterday that Bush-era documents detailing the videotaped interrogations of detainees should not be released, citing national security concerns, reports the Washington Post.

The videotapes, which depicted harsh interrogation tactics, were famously destroyed in 2005. As part of a wide-ranging lawsuit, the ACLU is seeking the release of CIA emails discussing the tapes, handwritten notes taken after reviewing the tapes, and a photograph of one high-value detainee, Abu Zubaydah, among other items relating to the tapes.

--------------

An ACLU lawyer told the Post that Panetta is in effect arguing: "The greater the abuse, the more important it is that it should remain secret."

This is hardly the first time that the Obama administration has disappointed open-government advocates, especially on issues relating to the war on terror. Last month, the president said he opposed the release of photographs that show harsh interrogation techniques at Abu Ghraib and other military prisons. And the administration has several times invoked the state secrecy privilege to argue for the dismissal of lawsuits on warrantless wiretapping and renditions -- despite the fact that, as a candidate for president, Barack Obama criticized President Bush for invoking the privilege too frequently.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/06/panetta_too_dangerous_to_release_torture_tape_docs.php

[katandmoon]

5. When Bush does it = baaaaaad. When Obama does it = sensible!

[Beacool]

6. Well, nothing new there.

Both parties are the reverse side of the same coin. We extol and excuse our side, they do the same with theirs; even though everyone knows better.

:shrug:

[katandmoon]

11. I don't excuse and extol my side though...I hope them accountable

[asphalt.jungle]

8. Bush = covering his own ass. Obama = covering the troops overseas ass

So yes Bush trying to hide things done on his watch is different than Obama choosing not to reveal what was done by the previous administration if he deems it dangerous to the troops. If Obama was trying to hide shit done during his administration and people wanted to rationalize it then I would agree with sarcasm like "When Bush does it = baaaaaad. When Obama does it = sensible!"

[katandmoon]

10. ROFL - spin spin spin!

[LiberalFighter]

7. All of these guys need to be lined up and have both of their brains sterilized.