New CIA Chief Must Be Anti-Torture

The last month, I've been traveling around the world, trying to unwind from the intensity of the last year. But in the course of that, I've gained a greater perspective of America and our role in the world. I'll post more on that when I return, but the news that Leon Panetta has been nominated for head of the CIA caught my eye, because one of the things I've learned is that foreigners don't differentiate between the CIA, FBI, Marines, Army, Navy, Air Force, or civilian. To them, there is only "America."

How the CIA operates directly impacts the reception that America receives around the world, and how willing others are to work with us or against us. For our troops fighting in the warzone, America's reputation means a lot. For them, it is crucial that the new administration undo the torture policies of the Bush administration. That's why I was pleased that someone committed to ending torture policies, like Leon Panetta, has been tapped to be the new Director of the CIA.

When the United States tortures, it undermines our troops' ability to win the hearts and minds of potential allies, which is crucial to succeeding in the battles and wars we are in. Further, it gives the green light to our enemies to torture any Americans they capture.

Anecdotal evidence points to the success we have when we don't torture, and how non-torture policies lead to good things for those men and women in uniform. If you look at the first Gulf War, the enemy was more likely to surrender then, knowing that they would be treated humanely. In this war, it wasn't torture that led to the capture of Saddam Hussein. It was offers of money for information, which yielded good intelligence and the capture of the dictator. On the flipside, we know that torture yields bad information that puts our troops in unnecessary danger. For instance, information that tied al Qaeda to Iraq, and was used as a rationale for the entire Iraq War. For a host of other arguments on why torture and the military don't mix, I encourage you to read this piece from a former senior military interrogator in Iraq, MajorMatthew, at VetVoice.com.

For those of us who served, it's very simple: The new head of the CIA must be absolutely dogged in demanding that any forms of torture end immediately.

As to the qualifications, I'm not an intel guy, so it's not my place to judge. However, I do know that very qualified individuals like Porter Goss and George Tenet weren't good CIA chiefs, because they were all too willing to be enablers for George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. So, to me, principle has to stand for something, here. In fact, it means a lot.

Even still, Mr. Panetta certainly understands the role that intelligence plays in the greater scheme of things, having been Chief of Staff to President Clinton, and a member of the Iraq Study Group.

But, most importantly, he understands the importance of our intelligence apparatus operating on the moral, ethical, and legal high ground. This is a man who will change the way the agency works, for the better, and that will positively impact the atmosphere in which our troops are operating.

Comments

[Scar1]

CIA, FBI, they must all be held accountable for their actions. They are vital to our Nation. We do not need so much secrecy that even they don't know or the Commander in Chief. That is a "downer". You are all subject to the Law-the bottom line. You represent the People not yourselves or self interest.

I have worked Law Enforcement as an Administrative Assistant and it is extremely hard. We are treated like the enemy at times. Very few minorities are promoted or introduced to any weapons or training that will get them in a position to serve-even on the local level. There is always some reason not to promote. And, minorities are passed by as serving law enforcement. Ex-military is used too much. Recruit from Colleges as well.

And our youth are not as criminal as they are being treated. It makes me ill to see young 12 year olds put in handcuff and thrown in a police car. There should be alternative methods.

CIA, FBI, ICE have all gone over the top. They are not some organization separate from the Government. They are servants of the US. So, shake it up and get it correct. Counter Intelligence is not some "Klan" rally or cowboy gang. You are trained-yes. Maybe we should look at what you are being trained to do? Something has to click.

[rangeragainstwar]

To SanteFe: We do not defeat our adversaries by becoming them. We are a nation under the rule of law. When we lose that, we are ruffians, too, righteous in your opinion or not.

Ref. cited article by Major Matthew, we couldn't agree more wholeheartedly. Sharing his disgust with the concept of the War on Terror, we have dubbed it, the Phony War on Terror (PWOT).

[Berettasskeeter]

Hilarious! I am so amused. Too many of you complained that the U.S. was ill-served by poor the intelligence of our CIA and others, and now you applaud the pending appointment of someone with no intelligence background at all, but one who will depend on political good-will for his job. THAT will result in good, solid, intelligence, won't it!?!?
Semper fi

[Berettasskeeter]

As usual, Jon, you're off the mark. The U.S. does not torture, period. Water boarding is not torture, neither is loud music, sleep deprivation, unblinkered lights, withholding of food for brief periods, etc.
Further, no uniformed service of an enemy nation need fear even those, by and large, so your argument is specious, as you well know! The only people treated so, in the main, have been illegal combatants, which uniformed members of established State forces know, and so do you! Your distaste for your services comes across when you make statements like these, which you know to be untrue.
Semper fi

[MagisterLudi]

United States forces should not torture its prisoners. A clear policy should be issued defining what techniques can and cannot be used to interrogate the POWs and irregulars.
The policy should issued eyes- only to relevant people. Specific Interrogation techniques should not be made a fodder for political games. This is a serious business best left for qualified professionals and politicians. Now that Bush is almost out, public confidence should be restored in ability of leaders to make rational decisions.

[fairandjust]

Well Said - Thank you. For all that you do in speaking out.

I am hopeful by this choice of Mr. Panetta for CIA director - that he can get rid of the too-many Ideology-oriented Neo-con wingnuts - that are entrenched in the CIA - and misdirecting what good foreign policy should be.

Now if we can only get rid of the horrible 'military industrial complex' control of DOD and the Pentagon - we might actually become a just and prosperous nation again.

[whatevahs]

Yes, perhaps we will finally have a kinder and gentler intelligence agency and military. Where battles can be fought by throwing marshmallows at each other or pillow fights in the middle of pretty meadows filled with flowers. Where we can simply ask other countries to please be nice and not commit terrorist attacks and of course they will comply since we are a kinder and gentler country now that Obama and Biden have been elected.

[Martymar74]

Anti-spying on U.S. citizens too.

[Rule Of Law]

If Obama repeals the Patriot and Military Commissions Acts, I will personally lead a movement to have his face added to Mount Rushmore!

[whatevahs]

Perhaps the new CIA chief could use some interrogation techniques like those used by the Spanish Inquisition. I am of course talking about the comfy chair and the soft cushions!
LOL

[Paulo1]

Excuse me? We are actually reading an opinion piece (very well written by the way) on whether the CIA director should be anti-torture?

The dialog in this country has shifted so far without it seeming laughable and no one notices. Eight years ago there would have been no debate, no question, and no publication of such an obvious assumption that an official of the US government would be anti-torture. A high moral stand would be assumed. Now we have to ask.

And that is a sad statement indeed

[Liberoservative]

Well said..... It is, indeed, a sad state of affairs when we have to speak out against torture.

It is, also, a sad state of affairs when we watch our Nation being robbed blind in Wall Street bailouts and that we have no idea where that money is going.

It is a sad state when we have drifted so far to the right that we think that upholding the Constitution is a bold move.

It is a sad state when we have the highest levels of government proven to have lied to the American people in bringing us into the worst fiasco of military involvement in our history and we do nothing about it.

It is a sad state when we have our highest levels of government shredding our Constitution and we all are just sitting around on our hands waiting for Obama to come into office and, hopefully, set things aright again.

[dapperd72]

The obvious legal reason to abolish torture is that it prima facie violates the US Constitution's 8th Amendment proscription against "cruel or unusual punishment." If anyone honestly believes that any legal, moral or national-security justification exists for torture by American officials, then we may as well institute the measures exhibited in the Torture Museum depicted in the gut-wrenching film, "Hostel," in which tourists were lured into torture and murder for hire, literally how to make a killing in business. The CIA was illegally created without Congressional appproval since its activities mostly violate all domestic and international laws applicable to it. If I had my druthers, I'd issue an Executive Order to eliminate the CIA entirely, but I'd be pleasantly surprised if Obama is that morally courageous. At least, Panetta has a progressive background as Director of the Center for American Progress, as I recall from C-SPAN, so he is likely to institute policies that don't condone these hideous practices that seem to have become mainstays over the past 8 years. These atrocities obviously endanger our troops as much as the direct victims themselves and a so-called "democracy" must have elected officials who keep an eagle-eye on "intelligence" representatives to prevent them from abusing power, which always corrupts absolutely.

[Berettasskeeter]

And exactly who would you have doing the vital intelligence work our country requires?
Semper fi

[UnrulyPeasant]

Amen to that..

[MPeter]

Panetta is a solid, competent and honest guy. He has the smarts that the CIA needs right now. He is better than the slum dunks we have had under W. Confirm Panetta and get on with the cleaning up.

[skaterdon66]

I'd like to pose a question to the parents out there.......if your child was kidnapped, and you could "waterboard" a person to gain your child's freedom,..would you do it??

[kimleehan]

Its not only that the U.S. tortures, its also illegal detaining individuals against their will.
Of the 517 detainees whose historys were reviewed, 55% are not determined not to have committed any hostile acts against the U.S. Only 8% were conciedered Al Qaeda fighters, and get this,
Only 5% of the detainees were captured by the U.S. 86% were captured by Pakistan or northern alliance, and were eather handed over or sold to the U.S.
Winston Churchill said, probibly before most of us were even born, "Nothing can be more abhorrant to democracy than to imprison a person or keep him in a prison because he is unpopular, this is really the test of civilization."
But to be fair now he also said" A prisoner of war is a man who tries to kill you and fails, and than asks you not to kill him."

[ConAir]

I heard that 87% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

[skaterdon66]

If Panetta is confirmed, he had better do whatever is necessary to see that terrorists do not gain access to us ever again..Just because it hurts, does not make it torture...

[SantaFeConservative]

So what do we do when these terrorists start sawing the heads off of our citizens again because there will be no retribution?