E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSUpdated at 6:26 p.m. ET: At his confirmation hearing Thursday before the Senate Intelligence Committee John Brennan, President Barack Obama’s nominee to head the Central Intelligence Agency, defended Obama’s policy of targeted killings of terrorists, saying that some Americans had a misimpression that “we take strikes to punish terrorists for past transgressions. Nothing could be further from the truth. We only take such action as a last resort to save lives when there’s no other alternative” to avert a threat to the nation.
Despite the questions about Obama’s use of targeted strikes to kill people whom the administration calls “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or affiliated groups, it seemed by the end of the three-and-a-half hour hearing that Brennan was certain to be confirmed. Intelligence Committee Chairman Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., called him “a fine and strong leader” and pledged her support for him.
Alluding to some raucous protesters who had interrupted and delayed the hearing, Brennan said, “They really have a misunderstanding of what we do as a government, and the care that we take, and the agony that we go through” to ensure that innocent bystanders or civilians aren’t hit in targeted killings. “People are reacting to a lot of falsehoods that are out there.”
During his confirmation hearing to be director of the CIA, John Brennan reaffirmed his opposition to the CIA's harsh interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding, and rejected suggestions that he'd rather kill a terrorist with a drone than detain him. NBC's Andrea Mitchell reports.
Related: GOP senators assail Gen. Dempsey and Obama for response to Benghazi attack
He said, “I think the American people would be quite pleased to know that we’ve been very disciplined and very judicious” and that the Obama administration only uses targeted killings “as a last resort.”
On American citizens who become involved in al-Qaida or allied group abroad, Brennan said, “any American who joins al-Qaida will know full well that they have joined an organization that is at war with the United States” and that the U.S. government “will do everything possible to destroy that enemy to save America lives.” When Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., asked if such a person could surrender before the U.S. government killed them, Brennan said “they have the ability to surrender anytime, anywhere.”
Brennan told Wyden if a person is killed by mistake in a targeted killing, the government should acknowledge it publicly.
In answering another question from Wyden about the public’s understanding of the standards Obama uses to determine if he has enough evidence to order the killing of an American who is involved in al-Qaida terrorist plans, Brennan said, “What we need to do is optimize transparency on these issues and at the same optimize secrecy and the protection of our national security. I don’t think it’s one or the other.” He said, “We need to explain to the American people what are the thresholds for action” and what procedures the CIA and the president use to ensure that the killing are legal.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein clears the chamber during Thursday's Senate Intelligence Committee hearing do to protesters opposing the nomination of John Brennan as head of the CIA.
Thursday’s hearing was a chance for senators on the panel to ask Brennan whether Obama is using drone strikes as a less politically troublesome option than capturing detainees and putting them in Guantanamo.
“I never believe it is better to kill a terrorist than to detain him,” Brennan told Intelligence Committee ranking Republican member Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga. “We want to detain as many terrorists as possible so we can elicit the intelligence from them in the appropriate manner so that we can disrupt follow-on terrorist attacks.”
But Brennan did not reveal how many high-value al-Qaida suspects had been arrested and interrogated since Obama became president, promising Chambliss only that he’d get that information for him.
In reply, Chambliss said during Obama’s presidency that only one high-value al-Qaida suspect has been arrested and interrogated.
On the targeted killings policy, Obama directed the Department of Justice Wednesday to give the congressional intelligence committees "access to classified Office of Legal Counsel advice” related to the policy. This move came after NBC News on Monday published a Justice Department white paper giving the legal basis for the targeted killings.
Win Mcnamee / Getty Images
John Brennan, nominated by U.S. President Barack Obama to be the next Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee February 7, 2013 in Washington, DC.
The memo said it was lawful for the president to order people who are leaders of al-Qaida or “an associated force” killed when such people pose an imminent threat of attack against the United States and when it isn’t feasible to capture them. This is true even if they happen to be American citizens.
Brennan and other Obama administration officials say that the congressional authorization to use military force enacted after the Sept 11. 2001 attacks provide all the legal authority Obama needs to order the killing of al Qaida terrorists or those plotting attacks on the United States.
Feinstein complained to Brennan that the Justice Department has still not turned over eight Office of Legal Counsel opinions giving legal rationale for the killings. And she complained that only senators on the panel and not their staff members are allowed to read them. “The Justice Department is not yet followed through on the president’s commitment,” added Wyden.
In the opening stage of the hearing senators wanted to ask Brennan, who worked at the CIA for 25 years, about his knowledge of the enhanced interrogation techniques including waterboarding that were used by CIA operatives prior to 2008 to get information from al Qaida detainees.
“I did not take steps to stop the CIA’s use of those techniques. I was not in chain of command of that program,” Brennan told Chambliss.
“I was aware of the program – I was CC’d on some of those documents -- but I had no oversight,” he added. He also said, “I had expressed my personal objections and views to some agency colleagues” about some of the EIT methods such as waterboarding.
Brennan told Chambliss that he had the impression in 2007 that "there was valuable information coming out" from Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, but that after having read parts of a 6,000-page internal CIA review of the EIT program, he now doesn’t know if those techniques did elicit valuable information.
Leave a Comment:
Obama and his Attorney General say "waterbordering AlQaida terrorists is illegal".
Obama and his Attorney General say "assassination of US citizens linked to AlQaida is LEGAL...."
Obama, Bush's Attorney General, Obama's attorney General, International Law, Our Laws say "waterbordering AlQaida terrorists is illegal".
Obama, the Attorney General, our laws say "assassination of US citizens linked to AlQaida, participating as enemy combatants in combat zones is LEGAL...."
Yup.
Hank-1921206
Please do share with us exactly which laws those are so we know that you're not just talking out of your ass.
So, water-boarding is torture and not OK, but high-altitude assassinations are fine? Priceless.
Thank you for your ability to see what is going on.
not priceless just hypocritical
its the results of water boarding confessions that direct the location of the drone's ass 'frying
different altogether
Of course, it's an environmental concern. Killing them doesn't waste so much water!
It's going to be interesting to see what the political fallout will be in the next few future elections including the next presidential election. Between the ACA (Obamacare tax and penalties as they become more apparent), gun control, and the instructions on the use of drones I wonder if there may be a groundswell of desire for change or if voter apathy will keep the status quo.
I am afraid that apathy is now in the mainstream.The American voter,consumer and citizen is mostly asleep.
Brennan and other Obama administration officials say that the congressional authorization to use military force enacted after the Sept 11. 2001 attacks provide all the legal authority Obama needs to order the killing of al Qaida terrorists or those plotting attacks on the United States. Brennan said there is no geographical limitation on that authority.
That's a statement that can be taken a couple of ways.
What is going down here. I am not sure I believe the government and there definition of terrorist.
No, it can't be taken a couple of ways since military action can only be on foreign lands.
It can be taken a couple of ways if you're paranoid and delusional though.
Hank, It can't be taken a couple different ways it sounds CRYSTAL CLEAR to me. Do you believe anything this government says? Military action happens on our soil all the time there called the FBI remember WACO, randy weaver? I should add Newtown these are just three that you will never know what happened there. Your thinking Newtown? yes the AR-15 that was used that NEVER left the trunk.
Brennan just made the opening for Americans to be murdered here on American soil.Look up when you are outside or even in your own home.
Hank
Just what part of Brennans statement; "There is no geographical limitations on that authority" do you not understand? WOW !
"This white paper sets forth a legal framework for considering the circumstances in which the US government could use lethal force in a foreign country outside the area of active hostilities against a US citizen who is a senior operational leader of al-Qaida or an associated force of al-qaida, that is, an al-qaida leader actively engaged in planning operations to kill Americans."
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf
Hank with some of the things this government has done if your not paranoid your not looking in the right direction. Never Never leave a loophole that big in a law.
A poster on another site made an interesting observation. This administration has the same disregard for the law as the Nixon administration. They demonize Tricky Dick, why not Bad Boy Barry? Rhetorical question, of course.
As I have said before, the logic on the left dictates that Nixon should have had Bill Ayers killed.
Of course, since lefties are killing and going after American citizens who protest the government here in the USA today.
Your leaps in logic are fallacious and indefensible.
the answer Blamo
when Nixon was president there was a free press an actual group of reporters that were not bought and paid for. They investigated and reported on the NEWS
Now we have "commentators" not reporters whether at FOX or MSNBC
they are paid shills
Their Company owns the President MSNBC the Dems when it is their turn and FOX the Rep when it is their turn.
So it is in FOx interest to say Bush was good and Obama bad
the same for MSNBC Bush bad Obama good
they get breaks from the Puppet and the Puppet gets rich
the President does not run the media corp the media corp runs the President
That will not happen.The public and our lazy stupid media think that Barry is God and Jesus.
I'm not so much against the policy (so long as those targeted are on foriegn soil) as much as I am amazed that the same liberals who are now defending Obama (or are silent on the issue) would be crying on every network for impeachment if this policy was that of the Bush administration.
Just goes to show that your assumption that liberals don't want to fight terrorism was incorrect in the first place.
Of course, feel free to speculate what you think might have happened if Bush did the same thing instead of sending hundreds of thousands of troops in harm's way and engaging in a decade's worth of ineffective nation building.
I'm not saying liberals don't want to figh terrorism... I'm just saying they aren't very good at it. Had the Bush administration not been aggressive during their interrogation of terrorists, Obama would never have had his Bin Laden talking point. Oh wait, I forget - in the eyes of liberals, waterboarding by Republicans is illegal but murdering American citizens is legal. Got it.
So moreso, I'm calling out liberals as the hypocrites that they are when it comes to policies that deal with terrorism (or would you prefer that I call them man-made catastrophes?).
Go one step further.Foreign soil is going to be anywhere on our earth where Americans disagree with the criminals who are running things.
whats more sad that this guy john brennan has ZERO CLUE
About the long term very negative effect by using drones
to kill 'suspect' there 100s &100s of innocents children
and families getting killed by those drones.. thats creating MANY MORE
Enemies thn we can kill.. the use of the drones is a major liabily.. sad days ahead
What is hilarious are the so called hearings late on a Thursday afternoon.A dog and pony show,bread and circuses being run by our esteemed Diane Feinstein who is a joke.
the use of the drones puished really hard by john brennan and Obama
is now SOLD ON IT. Even though its a DANGEROUS Policy...
watch and see..many countries deeply recent the invations of their airspace..
read the int'l reports and u. will see for yourself..
Stop clicking your own posts, it's almost embarassing to witness.
What int'l reports are those , btw? Share a few with us.....
Hank why are you not afraid?Forget about whether Obama is doing the murders or whether it is a Republican.This policy is the beginning of the terror for ALL Americans who disagree with the government.
So dig a deeper bunker and shut off your internet connection so they can't track you.
Please.
The imperial presidency of George W Bush that liberals used to lament is now their fantasy of how a reelected Obama ought to govern.
The definition of hypocrisy:
When those that railed against something done by George W Bush back the same actions done by Barrack Obama.
If you're an american citizen playing in a middle eastern sandbox with a towel around your head intent on brutalizing anyone standing in the way of Sharia Law and killing other Americans you might just catch the "big heater" up your ass
No tom wrong answer
want to bomb and kill a foreigner no problem that is the root of WAR but when you kill YOUR OWN CITIZENS without due process you become like Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, Castro, Mao etc etc
that citizen has declared war on his home country and is a traitor in a hostile army in a hostile foreign country intent on Jihad and death to America
tom NONE of that is required for these strikes
NONE zero nada NO PROOF
still feel willing to trust Obama or Bush number 3 with your life?
And I stand by my statement want to kill a foreign citizen during a war heck i don't care bomb their hospital we might win that way BUT YOU DON'T bomb your own
catch them bring them back hold a trial then hang them IF guilty
I will not be in Yemen or the Northwest territories of Pakistan working with Islamis Jihadists
That is what the government wants you to believe to justify the murder of Americans.
OPEN your eyes the second we are willing to kill OUR OWN PEOPLE without due process we become as the Nazis were, MURDERERS and fascists
Victor, please volunteeer to be amongst the elite troops going on the ground in NW Pakistan to capture thses guys, would ya.
They're not worth risking Amareican lives to capture to be absolutely sure to me, nor do I want to send my sons there to get them either.
But heck, you and your ilk are more than welcome to go round them up.
Enjoy.
Hank
My "ilk" what Ilk am I?
When did I serve or do I serve?
If this nation kills its own CITIZENS without due process of law it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
It is against the US law and places us into the ilk of Nazis or Commies.
Hank it makes us MURDERERS even during times of war.
It is called a War Crime and ties in perfectly with my pointing to fascism from what I've read a bunch of Nazis hung for War Crimes. I saw a video and they said the real fat one killed himself with cyanide. anyhow,,,
"I was following orders" is not a defense.
You do not kill your OWN PEOPLE the enemy yes but Hank not American Citizens!
Good day Mien Dumkorf
We are now heading into dangerous, unlawful territory.This is madness. Kill Americans including 16 year old sons?Do you not understand that this is going to lead the way for Americans to be killed just for disagreeing with this criminal government?And criminal governments of the future.Why is this being allowed?Please fellow Americans open your eyes and your minds and THINK about was is going on.Forget about whether Bush or Obama is in office.This is the government running over the rights of us Americans and not being challenged.Are you not scared?I am afraid of what is happening to our rights.One day if I participate on a blog online or say to someone that I do not agree with the government then I will be killed by a drone.THINK, THINK, THINK Americans.Forget about Beyonce or the NFL or whether Michelle Obama has buff arms like a man or whether she has bangs.All of that is a distraction.Stop dozing,wake up and THINK about what is going on.Americans are going to be killed by drones on foreign soil and Americans will be murdered on American soil.Why is Barack Obama not being prosecuted for this tyranny on the American people?I do not care if a Republican or a Democrat takes away my rights,violates our constitution, and our bill of rights,it does not matter which party in power is doing all of these things under the so called justification of the so called war on terror.The war is not on the fanatics in the Middle East and all over the world who want to kill Americans and Israelis. The war is on us Americans by our own government.
absolutely correct
and you would think that the liberals that were so against Bush's illegals acts would remember back to just 4 short years ago and stand up to THEIR party and demand a stoppage to this policy.
Instead they mindlessly think oh well it is okay Obama cares about me and my family
wrong Obama Bush Romney Cheney Clinton Pelosi care for themselves and no one else
Victor you are correct.This is all a game to take total control of all of us.Stalin did it and now Obama is doing it.Former presidents started this process many years ago.
Anti, Victor, you gentlemen are absolutely correct in your opinions. Did you know that the Department of Homeland Security considers "extreme" right wing citizens to be terrorists and that it is taught at West Point? This being true, if you are a believer in the constitution and oppose our liberties being removed, you are a domestic terrorist, and thusly a potential target for these drone strikes. Sure, it won't happen immediately, but soon you will see this almost unbelievable scenario becoming a reality.
As for all the "people" with their views supporting the strikes, as well as pretty much anything else this administration does, consider this. A large amount of them are plants. They are run through proxys to discredit any truth that is posted in social media. They -do not- exist. This is not to say that many of the people responding to these stories are not real citizens, but I'm absolutely certain that many of the more inflamitory individuals are ghosts. Just a heads up, and something to consider before you even begin to argue with them, as that is their directed goal.
Right now Idaho is considering the use and future of drones as well as legislation that protects the rights of individuals and privacy. Stay tuned. Meanwhile both sides in this issue need to know more about enemies of this country and the use of drones before opening mouth and inserting foot.
FACT: Under Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481), President Obama could have sought first to relieve Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16 year old son of their US citizenship citing:
The later would have required the Obama adminsitration to show cause for and obtain a conviction in a court of law proving an act of treason was commited.
Enemy combatant is defined: "Any person in an armed conflict who could be properly detained under the laws and customs of war."
FACT: Anwar al-Awlaki was NEVER charged with any crime. He was merely suspected of a crime. No court or military tribunal convicted Anwar al-Awlaki of terrorism or acts against the United States of America.
Why wouldn't the Obama administration seek to remove the citizenship of Anwar al-Awlaki and his son under Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481)? Why wouldn't Jose Padilla be stripped of his citizenship? Why not John Walker Lindh?
My hypothesis is that to enforce this law it would require the US government to strip hundreds of thousands of American's who've served voluntarily in the Israeli military as officers, and even more for holding Israeli citizensip.
Regardless, the bottom line is Obama and his administration ordered the murder without trial of American citizens in a complete disregard to the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Regardless of any crime al-Alwaki was accused of, as an American citizen he has the right to a fair trial.
Article 6 of the Bill of Rights
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Do I think terrosits should be protected? No. But I do understand clearly that the rule of law and our Bill of Rights are in place for a reason. They exist to keep our government from carrying out acts such as assasinations of it's citizens without allowing a court to determine the facts and conviction.
Angry US Citizen, I think what eats me up the most with Obama is his silver tongue can make something like this seem like the thing to do. And hey I'm all for getting every terrorist on the planet BUT when i read there are no geographical limitations then the game changes. Same thing with gun control. Obama wants a ban on magazines then it spreads to assault rifles then to background checks and your doctor asking if you own firearms. Obama always wants a blanket policy that's over the top. obama thinks he's king not president he wants to write the laws so he can use them as he sees fit.
"Bleeding-heart liberals" killing suspected terrorists? Conservative heads are spinning...they don't know what to say!
I say impeachment.
Obviously, you are anti-American
It is anti American to not want to be murdered by a drone Nick? THINK Nick.Think about what I am saying.Don't let your political leanings numb your senses.
antiCMatthews, If Obama keeps going like he is I think IMPEACHMENT is going to be a true reality. I'll be in line to sign the papers.
terrorism is a declaration of war whether by a foreign entity of by a traitorist american, therfore not entitled to our legal system. Better to get rid of them there than their ability to kill inocents here. No President orders a drone attack for the fun of it. I am pretty sure that they are given plenty of proof of guilt.
Really?And you let yourself get away with that kind of mind numbing rational?
They're tracking you right now thru your internet connection, anti, better shut it off.
QUICK
Really, who's the editor in this organization??
You do not HAVE to be in Yemen.I keep saying this is now going to be sanctioned here on American soil.
I don't see what the difference is among drones, manned bombers, cruise missiles, military personnel with cannons, etc. They are all trying to achieve the same results: kill the enemy. None of those approaches tries to capture the enemy then have a trial. Do our enemies do this to captured Americans? I say more Drones until we kill every one of the enemy. Or would you rather they be allowed to kill more Americans?
Nick you are entirely missing the point.This is NOT a war on terrorists.This is the beginning of the war on us Americans.Murder by drones sanctioned by Obama is dangerous.
antiCMatthews, I think your talking to deaf ears. He is missing more t5hen just the point.
why is john brennan dual citizen he is u.s AND Israeli citizen is that fair
to the u.s? what the hel is going on this guy could be a double agent
he might still be a moussad agent an israel spy agency.. can someone
REALLY look into it.. is the AIPAC Backing this guy too???what the hell is going on
It does not matter.He will be confirmed.The hearings are for the stupid,lazy,apathetic public.
u keep your terriorist out i'll bring my on in simple
RK--I cannot find any evidence that he holds dual citizenship. Can you provide a link or reference please? Thanks.
It started with Bush and continues with Obama. The United States is in a free fall, from the top of the world power rankings, plunging quickly into the ranks of the second world. You're not too terribly far from becoming a state-run, military, third-world country. Folks around the world are watching in utter dismay.
Once a leader in education, you're now cranking out dummies. Once a military leader, you don't have the money to keep funding your military. Once an economic powerhouse, you are over your head in debt. Once a leader in manufacturing and technology, you have fallen way behind Asia.
Your politicians (and the majority of you who support the right wing of the political spectrum) need to jettison your sense of pride and patriotism and get real. All the "America is great" propaganda won't change any of the facts. A massive ideological shift needs to happen.
Like I have said.This is not about the left or the right.This is about the murders of Americans by a government that is now our enemy.The government has declared war on US.Stop listening to the news.Listen to your own inner gut.
My inner gut tells me to advise intelligent Americans to move to Canada or Sweden.
I have thought about that.It sounds great.The problem is this policy is going to spread to other countries.
Deeper bunker and shut off your Internet connection. They're tracking you and coming for you next, anti.
Isn't assassination illegal ?
Not if your Obama or Hitler.
Yes it is illegal.That will not stop Obama.The senators and the members of the house are not stopping him.They are suppose to represent us.They are not representing us.
does that mean he can take out us whites because we still don't accept him as a pres
That is ridiculous.What does it matter what color we are?Murder does not recognize color.
minoritywhity, I will take you out. Just wait till one of these so called american kill someone you know. Your tune will change then.
I wish that the American public would stop thinking about what party you belong to.We are Americans all.We are not a party.
the party my family belonged to had abe sober up an say i did what
Get off.You don't want to think, you want to be lazy and stupid.