The Center for Cooperative Research
U:     P:    
Not registered yet? Register here
Advanced Search

Main Menu
History Engine Sub-Menu
Miscellaneous Sub-Menu
End of Main Menu

Volunteers Needed!
Submit a timeline entry
Donate: If you think this site is important, please help us out financially. We need your help!
Email updates

Click here to join: Suggest changes to existing data, add new data to the website, or compile your own timeline. More Info >>


Profile: Patrick Leahy


Positions that Patrick Leahy has held:

  • US Senator, Democrat from Vermont




No quotes or excerpts for this entity.




No related entities for this entity.


Patrick Leahy actively participated in the following events:


October 2001: Anthrax Letters Kill Five, Heighten Terrorist Fears      Complete 911 Timeline

The anthrax letter received by Senator Daschle's office.
A total of four letters containing anthrax are mailed to NBC, the New York Post, and Democratic senators Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy. The letters sent to the senators both contain the words “Death to America, Death to Israel, Allah is Great.” Twenty-three people are infected and five people die. Panic sweeps the nation. On October 16, the Senate office buildings are shut down, followed by the House of Representatives, after 28 congressional staffers test positive for exposure to anthrax. A number of hoax letters containing harmless powder turn up. [South Florida Sun-Sentinel, 12/8/01] Initially it is suspected that either al-Qaeda or Iraq are behind the anthrax letters. [Times of London, 10/27/01; BBC, 10/16/01; Observer, 10/14/01] However, further investigation leads the US government to conclude that, “everything seems to lean toward a domestic source. ... Nothing seems to fit with an overseas terrorist type operation.” [St. Petersburg Times, 11/10/01; Washington Post, 10/27/01] In August 2002, the FBI names Steven Hatfill, a bioweapons researcher who worked for the US government, as a “person of interest” in the case. [Associated Press, 8/1/02; Times of London, 8/2/02] Though he undergoes intense scrutiny by the FBI, he is never charged with any crime. As of mid-2004, no one has been charged in relation to the anthrax letter attacks.
People and organizations involved: Iraq, Patrick Leahy, Tom Daschle, al-Qaeda, New York Post, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Steven Hatfill, NBC

June 2003      Torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere

       Senator Patrick Leahy, a Democrat from Vermont, sends letters to the White House, the CIA, and the Pentagon with complaints about the treatment of detainees in Afghanistan and “other locations outside the United States.” He writes that according to unnamed officials, the prisoners are being subjected to beatings, lengthy sleep- and food-deprivation, and other “stress and duress” techniques (see April 16, 2003). He asks if these techniques are indeed being employed and urges the administration to issue a clear statement that cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment of detainees will not be tolerated. The Pentagon and CIA respond with denials that the United States is torturing its prisoners. [Human Rights Watch, 5/7/2004; USA Today, 5/13/2004]
People and organizations involved: Patrick Leahy

June 25, 2003      Torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere

       Department of Defense General Counsel William Haynes responds to a letter from Senator Patrick Leahy which asked for clarification on the administration's interrogation policy (see June 2003). Haynes replies that “it is the policy of the United States to comply with all its legal obligations in its treatment of detainees [and] ... to treat all detainees and conduct all interrogations, wherever they may occur” in a manner consistent with US obligations under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment. He adds that the US “does not permit, tolerate, or condone any such torture by its employees under any circumstances.” He also says that the Fifth, Eighth, and/or Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution require the US “to prevent other acts of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment which do not amount to torture.” Notably, he does not provide information about the specific interrogation tactics that US forces are permitted to use. “It would not be appropriate to catalogue the interrogation techniques used by US personnel thus we cannot comment on specific cases or practices,” Haynes says. [Human Rights Watch, 5/7/2004; Wall Street Journal, 6/7/2004]
People and organizations involved: Patrick Leahy, William J. Haynes

September 9, 2003      Torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere

       Senator Patrick Leahy responds to Department of Defense William Haynes' letter of June 25, 2003 (see June 25, 2003). He asks him to explain how the standards he outlined are implemented and communicated to US soldiers and asks for assurances that other agencies, including the CIA, abide by the same standards as the US military. [Human Rights Watch, 5/7/2004]
People and organizations involved: William J. Haynes, Patrick Leahy

November 18, 2003      Torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere

       Department of Defense Principal Deputy General Counsel Daniel Dell'Orto writes to Senator Patrick Leahy and confirms that earlier Pentagon statements (see June 25, 2003) about the treatment of detainees bind the entire executive branch. But he fails to answer specific questions about interrogation guidelines and adds that articles reporting improper treatment of detainees “often contain allegations that are untrue.” [Human Rights Watch, 5/7/2004]
People and organizations involved: Daniel J. Dell'Orto, Patrick Leahy

June 2004      Torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere

       Critics in the Senate argue that the Bush administration created an atmosphere of legal permissiveness that led to the abusive treatment of detainees. Senator Edward Kennedy says he believes that the April 2003 Pentagon memo laid the foundations for abuse. “We know when we have these kinds of orders what happens,” he says, “we get the stress test, we get the use of dogs, we get the forced nakedness that we've all seen and we get the hooding.” [The Guardian, 6/9/2004] Senator Patrick Leahy, the Democrat member of the Senate subcommittee on foreign operations, says, the “cruel and degrading treatment” in Afghanistan “were part of a wider pattern stemming from a White House attitude that ‘anything goes’ in the war against terrorism, even if it crosses the line of illegality.” [The Guardian, 6/23/2004]
People and organizations involved: Edward Kennedy, Bush administration, Patrick Leahy

July 2004: Report on FBI's 9/11 Failures Is Completed, But Remains Unreleased Until After Presidential Election      Complete 911 Timeline

       In November 2002, as the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry was finishing its investigation, it had formally asked for a report by the Justice Department (which oversees the FBI) to determine “whether and to what extent personnel at all levels should be held accountable” for the failure to stop the 9/11 attacks. An identical request was made to the CIA (see June-November 2004). [New York Times, 9/14/04] The Justice Department report, titled “A Review of the FBI's Handling of Intelligence Information Related to the September 11 Attacks,” is completed this month. [Washington Post, 4/30/05] It centers on three FBI failures before 9/11: the failure to follow up on the arrest of Zacarias Moussaoui in August 2001 (see August 15, 2001), the failure to follow up on FBI agent Ken Williams' memo (see July 10, 2001) warning about Islamic militants training in US flight schools, and the FBI's failure to follow up on many leads to hijackers Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar. The report provides some new details about miscommunications, inaction, and other problems. [New York Times, 9/14/04] The report remains classified. Senior Senate Judiciary Committee members Patrick Leahy (D) and Charles Grassley (R) call for its release. The senators state, “While the needs of national security must be weighed seriously, we fear the designation of information as classified, in some cases, serves to protect the executive branch against embarrassing revelations and full accountability. We hope that is not the case here.” [New York Times, 9/14/04; Washington Times, 7/12/04] One problem complicating the issuing of even a declassified version is the possibility that the material would taint the criminal proceedings against Zacarias Moussaoui. In early 2005, the Justice Department inspector general's office will ask the judge presiding over Moussaoui's case for permission to release a declassified version of the report. But the judge will turn down the request in April 2005, even after Moussaoui pleads guilty (see April 30, 2005). The report will finally be released in June 2005 without the section on Moussaoui (see June 9, 2005). [New York Times, 2/13/05]
People and organizations involved: Charles Grassley, US Department of Justice, Patrick Leahy, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Nawaf Alhazmi, Ken Williams, Khalid Almihdhar, Zacarias Moussaoui

'Observer' in the following events:

Except where otherwise noted, the textual content of each timeline is licensed under the Creative Commons License below:

Creative Commons License Home |  About this Site |  Development |  Donate |  Contact Us
Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use