Panetta and the CIA

Either Leon Panetta doesn't know what he is doing or he doesn't know what he's talking about
or he doesn't write these essays.

he writes in "Congress and the CIA: Time to Move On" By Leon Panetta
Sunday, August 2, 2009:

"Last month, at a meeting overseas of intelligence service chiefs, one of my counterparts from a major Western ally pulled me aside. Why, he asked, is Washington so consumed with what the CIA did in the past, when the most pressing national security concerns are in the present? It was a very good question."

actually, it's not a good question at all. it's a question that only a simpleton would ask. why?

because, it's obvious that what the cia has done in the past will affect the world in the future.

consider the iranian revolution that kicked out the cia cronny sha palavi and installed the ayatola Khomeini!

consider the cia's backing of the authoritarian take over of argentina and the cia's assissination of the elected socialist president salvador allende.

consider the cia's role in vietnam and cambodia that lead right up to the victory of north vietnam over the croony stooge governments of the south and the take over of the Khmer Rouge of cambodia and the ensuing slaughter.

consider all of the bloody dictators the cia installed all over africa in the war against communism in the 1960s. that's left nothing but basket-case countries ripe for al-Qaeda.

consider the cia's arming of the al-Qaeda in the war against the commies in afghanistan.
well...you know what that led to!

Panetta writes:

"In its earliest days, the Obama administration made policy changes in intelligence that ended some controversial practices. The CIA no longer operates black sites and no longer employs "enhanced" interrogation techniques."

Oh yeah? Prove it! Panetta can't prove anything. No one working in the intel community can prove anything about what they do because its all classified. This is a very stupid situation. All anyone who leads this community can do is to ask the public to 'trust' them. And why should we? Do they trust us? Do they trust you? (Try getting a job in one of the agencies!)

Panetta writes:

"I recognize that there will always be tension in oversight relationships, but there are also shared
responsibilities. Those include protecting the classified information that shapes our conversations. Together, the CIA and Congress must find a balance between appropriate oversight and a recognition that the security of the United States depends on a CIA that is totally focused on the job of defending America."

How about the cia finding greater transperancy? This idea that "the security of the United States depends on a CIA" is no more than a matter of conjecture! Here I would definitely ask for proof!

Panetta writes:

"The time has come for both Democrats and Republicans to take a deep breath and recognize the reality of what happened after Sept. 11, 2001."

Hey Panetta, that is the question!! What did happen after Sept. 11, 2001?

Panetta writes:

"The question is not the sincerity or the patriotism of those who were dealing with the aftermath of Sept. 11."

Oh yes it is!!!!! These intel types tried to (and probably have) put into place all of the technical apparatus of an authoritarian state. (Chinese, eat your hearts out!)

Panetta writes:

"The country was frightened, and political leaders were trying to respond as best they could. Judgments were made. Some of them were wrong."

Panetta gets one right!

Panetta writes:

"But that should not taint those public servants who did their duty pursuant to the legal guidance provided."

Wait, so is Panetta saying that because these people did their jobs wrong and made bad judgments, they shouldn't be tainted? If not for doing their jobs wrong and making bad judgments, when should they be tainted? For doing their jobs correctly? Is there a CIA award
for doing your job wrong and making bad judgments?

Dear reader, try doing your job wrong and making bad judgments! See what happens to you!

Panetta writes:

"The last election made clear that the public wanted to move in a new direction."

Yes, that's true, but the new direction was not suppose to be the same old 'sweep it under
the rug' of the bush administration.

Panetta writes:

"Intelligence can be a valuable weapon..."

Wait, intelligence can also be used to avoid harm and harming, if you know what you're doing. When was intel 'weaponized'?

"...but it is not one we should use on each other."

tell that to ashcroft.

when an intelligence group is allowed to run counter-intelligence operations and dis-information operations, it's products are going to go everywhere and eventually come back to the home population. These sorts of operations are very hard to 'contain'. start lying and it comes right back to munch your sitter.

Panetta writes:

"As the president has said, this is not a time for retribution. Debates over who knew what
when -- or what happened seven years ago -- miss a larger, more important point: We are a nation at war in a dangerous world..."

Yes, but who are we really at war with? Who made it so dangerous? al-Qaeda or the american right-wing? who's done more damage? who's killed more people? who's running the 'tea bagging parties' and inciting treason and revolt? al-Qaeda or the american right-wing?

Panetta writes:

"Unlike the effort I canceled in June, our present tools are effective, we use them aggressively to go after our enemies, and Congress has been briefed on them."

Prove it! Let's us see how the CIA, NSA, and NRO really work. how about some tours?

Panetta writes:

"I also know that we can learn lessons from the past without getting stuck there. That is what the American people expect. The CIA is ready to do its part."

Panetta is dead wrong here. You never get stuck in the past because an understanding of the past changes the present and changing the present changes what the future would have been without the understanding of the past!

As for what the "American people expect", we really don't expect much out of the CIA. They seem to miss the mark every time. (If the don't, then show us!)

Why is it our public leaders can't think better than high schoolers? my guess is that the 'group think' that goes on in these organizations destroys a person's capabilities to reason on their own, unless that person is extraordinary (which Panetta really isn't). Panetta is just an ordinary guy. Not a bad guy. Not particularly morally courageous. But, this is true of all of the people in the current administration that i'm familiar with.