Obama on Panetta: 'Breaking with ... the past'
By David Neiwert Tuesday Jan 06, 2009 6:00pm
It's been assumed that Barack Obama's planned nomination of Leon Panetta as CIA chief was intended to send a signal to the intelligence community about the use of torture. And Obama made that explicit in his press conference today:
REPORTER: Some are questioning Leon Panetta's lack of intelligence -- lack of experience on intelligence matters. Sorry about that. I know this is tricky for you since you haven't announced him yet but what does he bring to the table for you.
OBAMA: Well, as you noted, I haven't made a formal announcement about my intelligence team. That may be him calling now -- finding out where it's at. I have the utmost respect for Leon Panetta. I think that he's one of the finest public servants that we've had. He brings extraordinary management skills, great political savvy, an impeccable record of integrity. As chief of staff, he's somebody who, to the president, he's somebody who was fully versed in international affairs, crisis management, and had to evaluate intelligence consistently on a day-to-day basis.
Having said all that, I have not made an announcement. When we make the announcement, I think what people will see is that we are putting together a top-notch intelligence team that is not only going to assure that I get the best possible intelligence -- unvarnished -- but that the intelligence community is no longer geared toward telling the president what they think the president wants to hear but instead are going to be delivering the information that the president needs to make critical decisions to keep the American people safe.
I think what you're also going to see is a team that is committed to breaking with some of the past practices and concerns that have, I think, tarnished the image of the agencies and intelligence agencies and U.S. foreign policy. Last point I will make on this is that there are outstanding intelligence professionals in the CIA, DNI and others and I have the utmost regard for the work that they've done and we are committed to making sure that this is a team effort that's not looking backwards but is looking forward to figure out how we're going to serve the American people best.
Of course, a Panetta appointment would send such a signal, since he has been such a pronounced critic of waterboarding and other such practices indulged by the CIA under Bush.
As with all these appointments, though, we should also be looking out for disinformation from the right. Today on Fox, Bill Kristol was trying to stir up opposition to Panetta from the left, pointing out that he was chief of staff at the White House in the 1990s when it began the policy of "extraordinary rendition" (i.e., capturing terrorists and then shipping them to nations where they can be interrogated by governments with fewer prohibitions.
It's true that Panetta was CoS at the time Clinton adopted that policy (he signed the executive order in June 1995, during Panetta's tenure), but that is not prima facie evidence he favored it. Moreover, rendition under Clinton occurred only occasionally; as compared to the massive program involving hundreds of prisoners it became under Bush.
Expect, however, for the question to be raised during confirmation hearings. If it's coming from neocons, though, expect it to turn out to be wrong.
Login or Register to post comments.
offered up an incredible commentary about "Accountability"...
i don't think diane's gonna show up on the show, rachel...
but what you had to say about her - and accountability - very much needed to be said! thank you!
how infrequently extraordinary rendition was used by Clinton. It is, in and of itself, a moral violation. Torture doesn't work. But how would either Clinton or Bush know that? They are both cowards. So rendition would be quite natural for the likes of them.
That's why Panetta quit as CoS.
No one has come up with a reason why he quit the Clinton admin CoS.
But it occurred nonetheless. *sigh*. Well the good news is, everything new is Clinton again! Obama will soon be announcing his official intern will be Monika Lewinsky, his dog groomer will be former Clinton hairstylist Boom Boom Spaghetti, his official ball washer will be Clintons former ball washer, his official underwear washer will be former Clinton..............................
Is this not the second coming to power of the DLC or what? Wowzers. It's too bad that he already gave Hillary the Secretary of State job or he could have sworn her in as official first lady.
Can other countries do extraordinary renditions in the US?
That would be something if we all got extraordinary on each other at once.
Only to Gitmo, only for a limited time. Right now, booosh is offering a "2 for 1" incentive plan where by a country can send 2 people to Gitmo for the price of 1, as long as 1 is a prisoner of conscience or fate.
:P
Oh and if we elected Mitt Romney we could have had a dozen first ladies.
Be audacious. Have some hope. He didn't nominate Diane Feinstein, afterall.
Kristol and the rest of the neocons continue to say that Clinton planted the seeds that led to the rotten fruit. No one ever asked them why they never burned the crops, so to speak. They could have walked back every one of these policies anytime they wanted to. Most of them were negotiated with the Republican Congress at the time.
Diane Feinstein sent a letter to the Illinios Govenor saying she would not allow anyone he picked for Obama's seat. She wrote and sigened the letter herself. Today she says Burris has a right to seat in the Senate. Now yes we know Diane's husband Mr. Blume has been getting favors in contracts from the White House with cooperation from Diane's voting in favor of Bush's Policies. Now she is scared that informaation might come out that her husband worked closely with conviced felon Fargo and now she wants one of Bush's appointees to be the Assistant to the Director. Look Diane needs someone in the CIA to stop Leon Panetta from finding out the corruption done. Diane has been working with the White House for 8 years and even was forced to confirem the current AG or else. Rahm Emanuel mostly knows all the secrets and Diane might think about retiring quick. Look for Pelosi to find an excuse to leave as she got her husband a big US contract and all she had to do was Keep the Impeachment off the Table.
"...we know Diane's husband Mr. Blume has been getting favors in contracts from the White House with cooperation from Diane's voting in favor of Bush's Policies." Link please.
They show Kristol in the video. But really that guy needs to wear a sign whenever he's in public, and it should read: "This man has never, ever been correct about a single thing."
Selecting Panetta is one thing - but dissing the CIA and the present intelligience community in the process seems like a maneuver that could be dangerous to one's health.
...just try to justify Panetta by saying Clinton only did extraordinary rendition occasionally.
I love Crooks and Liars, and have been very involved with trying to expose the Neocons and Bush over the last eight maddening and horrifying years. It's important to remember however, that it is not enough to win the argument on a technical point, but to make the argument from solid ground, from solid legal, ethical, and moral positions.
If we start trying to win an argument or prove a position with phrases that equate to "our guy only tortured a little", you are headed down the slippery slope to Coulter-ville.
Let's not get lazy here folks. There's ample justifiable ways to make the argument. Torture as an American policy is unacceptable, and antithetical to what we profess (on paper) to believe in.
Just say Kristol is a douche and leave it at that.
This has been a major area of "concern" for the New Obstructionists (aka, Sore Losers). Somehow it wasn't an issue when George H. W. was selected to run the CIA. As I recall, he had 6 years of Congressional experience, spent a short time as a UN ambassador, and then an envoy to China, before his intelligence gig. That was hardly reassuring at a time when the CIA had been running plenty of ugly black ops in Nam and Latin America.
or the black and wet ops that they run in the US.
"New Obstructionists" - perfect! Nuf sed.
...renditions does not change the fact that is is a crime and a crime against humanity. I condemn it whether it's Bush, Clinton or anybody else, including Obama. If you did it, or allowed it, you are a war criminal who should be subjected to justice.
"Obama on Panetta: 'Breaking with ... the past'"
Breaking wind.
I was hoping that the Rachel Maddow segment on this subject would be posted today. I like what she said.
I guess the fact that we're not going to torture anymore on paper is supposed to make the left-leaning majority in this country feel fuzzy inside.
I think the real issue here is that the interests that controlled the Clinton administration... along with all their post-presidency financial shenanigans, will now control the white house and the CIA.
When Obama said "I think America is ready for change", I wasn't envisioning Clinton Presidency II... how naive to believe in this corrupt system.
Whatever Bill Kristol says, do the opposite. This clown hasn't been right on anything; anything!!!
Login or Register to post comments.