New York Times, May 20, 2004, 18.
68. âIt is wrong. It is against the law. It costs the lives of Americans.â Donald
Rumsfeld, Memorandum on the Impact of Leaking Classiď¬ed Information
(Washington, DC: Ofď¬ce of the Secretary of Defense, 2002).
69. United States Department of Justice, Task Force Report on Unautho-
rized Disclosure of Classiď¬ed Information (Washington, DC: Department
of Justice, 2002).
70. David Cole, Enemy Aliens: Double Standards and Constitutional Freedoms
in the War on Terrorism (New York: The New Press, 2003), 25.
71. The Department successfully fought a legal challenge to its denial brought
by a coalition of nineteen advocacy groups. The United States District
Court for the District of Columbia overruled the Justice Department
and ordered release of the requested information, but this decision was
reversed on appeal. See Center for National Security Studies v. U.S. Depart-
ment of Justice, D.C.C.A., June 17, 2003. In January 2003, the United States
Supreme Court refused to hear a further appeal. The Justice Department
also barred state and local governments from releasing information about
detainees held under contract in their facilities.
72. Cole, Enemy Aliens, 26â“28.
73. Mark Mazetti et al., âInside the Iraq Prison Scandal,â U.S. News and World
Report, May 24, 2004, 18â“22. In early 2004, there were about twenty facil-
ities in Afghanistan alone.
74. Reed Brody, âWhat About the Other Secret U.S. Prisons?â International
Herald Tribune, May 4, 2004, 8.
75. For a critical assessment of the Defense Departmentâ™s February 2004 plan
for the operation of military tribunals at Guantanamo, see Human Rights
First, Trials under Military Order: A Guide to the Final Rules for Military
Commissions (New York: Human Rights First, 2004).
76. Rasul et al. v. Bush, President of the United States, et al, United States
Supreme Court, decided June 28, 2004.
77. John Hendren and Mark Mazzetti, âProposal to Keep Some Prisoners â˜Off
the Booksâ™ Went against Promises for Yearly Case Reviews,â Los Angeles
Times, July 9, 2004.
78. Joint Inquiry, Report of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activ-
ities before and after the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001.
Notes to Pages 67â“68
79. Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenhall, âThe Secrets of September 11,â
Newsweek, April 30, 2003.
80. David Johnston and Douglas Jehl, âBush Refuses to Declassify Saudi Sec-
tion of Report,â New York Times, July 30, 2003, 1.
81. Senators McCain and Lieberman ď¬rst introduced legislation to establish
an independent commission in December 2001. The commission was
established in November 2002. Generally, see Steven Strasser and Craig
R. Whitney, The 9/11 Investigations, 1st ed., PublicAffairs Reports (New
York: PublicAffairs, 2004).
82. Philip Shenon, âBush, in Reversal, Supports More Time for 911 Inquiry,â
New York Times, February 5, 2004, 21.
83. T. Christian Miller, âPanel Presses Rice to Testify,â Los Angeles Times,
March 29, 2004, 1.
84. President Bush relented in February 2004.
85. Eric Lichtblau, â911 Report Cites Many Warnings About Hijackers,â New
York Times, February 10, 2005, A1.
86. Bob Woodward, Plan of Attack (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2004).
The allegation is further discussed by Cass Sunstein in The Secret
$700 Million April 22, 2004 [Accessed July 8, 2004]), available from
87. Fallows, âBlind into Baghdad.â Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul
Wolfowitz publicly attacked the âoutlandishâ view of likely post-war
obligations offered by Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki in February
2003. According to Fallows, Shinsekiâ™s âuncooperative attitudeâ made him
the target of several âcalculated insultsâ by Secretary Rumsfeld. Senior
ofď¬cers later said that the treatment of Shinseki exempliď¬ed the atti-
tude toward public dissent held by the departmentâ™s civilian leadership:
Thomas Ricks, âDissension Grows in Senior Ranks on War Strategy,â
Washington Post, May 9, 2004, A1.
88. Elizabeth Drew, âBush: The Dream Campaign,â New York Review of Books,
June 10, 2004, 23â“26, 24.
89. A critical assessment of the Bush administrationâ™s behavior before the
war is provided by John Prados in Hoodwinked, 19â“110.
90. Walter Pincus, âIntelligence Report for Iraq War Was â˜Hastily Doneâ™,â
Washington Post, October 24, 2003, A18.
91. Cirincione, Mathews, and Perkovich, WMD in Iraq: Evidence and Impli-
92. All of the committeeâ™s rationale for conclusions regarding the discussion
paper has been withheld on national security grounds. See Senate Intel-
ligence Committee, Report on the U.S. Intelligence Communityâ™s Prewar
Intelligence Assessments on Iraq, 295â“297.
93. New York Times, âLott Seeks Oversight of Classiď¬ed Data,â July 11,
94. Douglas Jehl and Neil Lewis, âU.S. Disputed Protected Status of Iraq
Inmates,â New York Times, May 23, 2004. In May 2004, General Janis
Karpinski testiď¬ed that military intelligence ofď¬cers went âto great lengths
to try to exclude the ICRC from accessâ to the interrogation wing of the
Notes to Pages 68â“70
Abu Ghraib prison: Philip Shenon, âOfď¬cer Suggests Iraqi Jail Abuse
Was Encouraged,â New York Times, May 2, 2004, 1.
95. Taguba, Article 15â“6 Investigation of the 800th Military Police Brigade,
96. Dana Priest and Bradley Graham, âU.S. Struggled over How Far To Push
Tactics,â Washington Post, June 24, 2004, A1.
97. Elise Ackerman, âPolicy Let U.S. Hold Detainees in Secret, Military Ofď¬-
cers Say,â Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service, September 8, 2004.
98. Army Field Manual FM 34â“52 (Intelligence Interrogation, Revision of
May 8, 1987) states that âthe use of force, mental torture, threats, insults,
or exposure to unpleasant and inhumane treatment of any kind is pro-
hibited by law and is neither authorized nor condoned by the U.S.
99. It was later learned that Secretary Rumsfeld had approved new rules
for Guantanamo detainees on December 2, 2002. The rules were con-
tained in a memorandum classiď¬ed as SECRET/NOFORN. Revised rules
were contained in an April 16, 2003, memorandum from Rumsfeld
that was also classiď¬ed as SECRET/NOFORN on his authority. Accord-
ing to the Washington Post, interrogation rules for Iraqi detainees that
followed Rumsfeldâ™s directions were contained in a classiď¬ed memo-
randum signed by Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, the U.S. commander in
Iraq, on September 12, 2003: Washington Post, âA Partial Disclosure,â
Washington Post, June 24, 2004, A24.
100. Washington Post, âUnanswered Questions,â Washington Post, July 11,
101. Reportersâ™ Committee for Freedom of the Press, Homefront Conď¬dential,
Fourth Edition (Washington, DC: Reportersâ™ Committee for Freedom of
the Press, 2003), 1.
102. Dean, Worse than Watergate, 1.
103. Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., War and the American Presidency, 1st ed. (New
York: W. W. Norton, 2004), 61.
104. I noted these ten major statutes earlier in this chapter. The series began
with the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 and ended with the
General Accounting Ofď¬ce Act of 1980.
105. A 1978 Washington Post editorial praised the new law for creating an
âimpartial arbitratorâ to oversee the executive branch. It noted that the
bill had the support of âmany of [the intelligence agenciesâ™] most persis-
tent criticsâ: Washington Post, âNational Security Wiretaps,â September
6, 1978, A14.
106. Monica McCullough, The âSecretâ Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court:
Exaggerated Concern and Transparency Rhetoric, Unpublished paper
(Syracuse: Maxwell School, 2003), 1. A critique of weaknesses in the over-
sight mechanisms provided by FISA is also provided by Paul T. Jaeger,
J. C. Bertot, and C. R. McClure, âThe Impact of the USA Patriot Act on
Collection and Analysis of Personal Information under the Foreign Intel-
ligence Surveillance Act,â Government Information Quarterly 20 (2003):
Notes to Pages 71â“74
107. The American Civil Liberties Union and the National Emergency Civil
Liberties Committee. A group of congressmen also ď¬led an amicus brief.
108. Eric Lichtblau, âWhistle-Blowing Said To Be Factor in FBI Firing,â New
York Times, July 29, 2004, 1. Although details of the report were leaked
in July 2004, an unclassiď¬ed summary of the report did not become
available until January 2005.
109. National Security Archive, The Ashcroft Memo: âDrastic Changeâ or âMore
Thunder than Lightningâ? (Washington, DC: National Security Archive,
110. Blaine Harden and Dana Milbank, âPhotos of Soldiersâ™ Cofď¬ns Revive
Controversy,â Washington Post, 2004, A10.
111. The documents, and NDRCâ™s analysis, are located at http://www.nrdc.
112. Center for Public Integrity, U.S. Contractors Reap the Windfalls of
Post-War Reconstruction (Washington, DC: Center for Public Integrity,
113. Electronic Privacy Information Center, EPIC Celebrates International
Right To Know Day (Washington, DC: Electronic Privacy Information
114. Dan Eggen and Susan Schmidt, âData Shows Different Spy Game since
911,â Washington Post, May 1, 2004, A1.
115. Dan Eggen and Susan Schmidt, âSecret Court Rebuffs Ashcroft,â
Washington Post, August 23, 2002, A1.
116. The controversy is described in In Re: Sealed Case Noâ™s 02â“001 and 02â“
002, 310 F.3d 717 (FISA Court of Review, 2002).
117. For example: Washington Post, âChipping Away at Liberty,â November
19, 2002, A24.
118. Ellsberg began on October 1, 1969, and ď¬nished in mid-November. âThe
nightly routineâ consisted of taking a briefcase of papers from RAND
late in the evening, copying them until the next morning, sleeping until
the early afternoon, then returning to work. Ellsberg, Secrets, 328.
119. David Sanger, âDiscipline Takes a Break at the White House,â New York
Times, May 30, 2004, 1. The documents were collected as part of a Trea-
sury Department archiving process in which the Secretaryâ™s records were
routinely converted into digital form.
120. Ellsberg, Secrets, 295, 365, 373 and 387. The Nixon administrationâ™s
request for a restraining order was subsequently extended to the
Washington Post when it also published excerpts of the paper.
122. http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/cofď¬n photos/dover/.
123. Michael Weisskopf, âReporterâ™s Notebook,â Time, June 3, 2002, 6.
124. Richard A. Clarke, Against All Enemies: Inside Americaâ™s War on Terror
(New York: Free Press, 2004).
125. Dana Milbank and Mike Allen, âWhite House Counters Ex-Aide,â
Washington Post, March 23, 2004, A1.
126. Miller, âPanel Presses Rice To Testify.â
Notes to Pages 74â“77
127. Alberto Gonzales, Letter to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks
Upon the United States (Washington, DC: Executive Ofď¬ce of the Presi-
128. Douglas Jehl, âIn a Few Words, Many Clues to CIAâ™s Working Method,â
New York Times, April 12, 2004, A12. For a contrary view of the PDBâ™s sig-
niď¬cance, see Thomas Blanton, âWhoâ™s Afraid of the PDB?â Slate, March
129. Edward Alden, âBush Close to Releasing Secret Brieď¬ng,â Financial
Times, April 10, 2004, 7.
130. Dan Eggen, â911 Panel To Have Rare Glimpse of Presidential Brieď¬ngs,â
Washington Post, November 16, 2003, A9.
131. Eric Lichtblau and David Sanger, âAugust â™01 Brief Is Said To Warn of
Attack Plans,â New York Times, April 10, 2004, 1.
132. Ofď¬ce of the Press Secretary, Background Brieď¬ng Via Conference Call on
the Presidentâ™s PDB of August 6, 2001 (Washington, DC: Executive Ofď¬ce
of the President, 2004).
133. Lydia Polgreen, âFamilies Savor Their Victory over Grief and a Reluctant
Government,â New York Times, July 23, 2004, 11.
134. National Commission On Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States,
Final Report. The new revelations were summarized by Philip Shenon,
Douglas Jehl, and David Johnston, âCorrecting the Record on Sept. 11,
in Great Detail,â New York Times, July 25, 2004, 1.
135. Joseph Wilson, âWhat I Didnâ™t Find in Africa,â New York Times, July 6,
136. James Risen and David Sanger, âCIA Chief To Face Panel on Dubious
Iraq Arms Data,â New York Times, July 16, 2003, 10.
137. See Prados, Hoodwinked; Cirincione, Mathews, and Perkovich, WMD in
Iraq: Evidence and Implications.
139. Steven Weisman, âAiring of Powellâ™s Misgivings Tests Ties in the
Cabinet,â New York Times, April 19, 2004, 1.
140. The Boston Phoenix subsequently reported that the author was Michael
Scheuer, a twenty-year veteran of the CIA who had been deeply involved
in its efforts against al Qaeda. The CIA had required that Scheuer publish
his book anonymously: Jason Vest, âThe Secret History of Anonymous,â
Boston Phoenix, July 2â“8, 2004.
141. Tommy Franks, American Soldier (New York: Regan Books, 2004),
142. Raymond Bonner, Don Van Natta, Jr., and Amy Waldham, âQuestioning
Terror Suspects in a Dark and Surreal World,â New York Times, March
9, 2003, 1.
143. Neil Lewis and Eric Schmitt, âLawyers Decided Bans on Torture Didnâ™t
Bind Bush,â New York Times, June 8, 2004, 1.
144. Jess Bravin, âPentagon Report Set Framework for Use of Torture,â Wall
Street Journal, June 7, 2004, A1.
Notes to Pages 77â“83
145. Lewis and Schmitt, âLawyers Decided Bans on Torture Didnâ™t Bind
Bushâ; Dana Priest and R. Jeffrey Smith, âMemo Offered Justiď¬cation
for Use of Torture,â Washington Post, June 8, 2004, A1.
146. Richard Serrano, âPrison Interrogatorsâ™s Gloves Came Off before Abu
Ghraib,â Los Angeles Times, June 9, 2004, 1.
147. Ofď¬ce of the Press Secretary, Press Brieď¬ng by White House Counsel Judge
Alberto Gonzales, DoD General Counsel William Haynes, DoD Deputy Gen-
eral Counsel Daniel Dellâ™orto and Army Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence
General Keith Alexander (Washington, DC: Executive Ofď¬ce of the Pres-
ident, 2004), Scott Lindlaw, âWhite House Plans To Release Large File
of Documents on Deliberations Leading to Interrogation Tactics,â Asso-
ciated Press, June 22, 2004.
148. Osha Gray Davidson, âThe Secret File of Abu Ghraib,â Rolling Stone,
August 19, 2004, 48.
149. Richard Serrano and Greg Miller, âDocuments Provide More Details