/* Google Analytics Code asynchronous */

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Bush-Cheney Could Have Avoided This

The Mukasey-Hayden op-ed has to be the Hadrian's Arch over the Bush-Cheney cul-de-sac on torture.

It's so chock-full of barely sharpened pencils that it is almost laughable. THIS is what suffices for policy formation, among our secret services? Be afraid.

What is particularly annoying, on first read, is the ample use of the passive voice and well-situated pronouns, to hide the actors:

Beyond that, anyone in government who seeks an opinion from the OLC as to the propriety of any action, or who authors an opinion for the OLC, is on notice henceforth ...


I doubt that "anyone in government" can walk into the office of OLC and commandeer an opinion, a binding, written, opinion, right?

And this:

Even with a seemingly binding opinion in hand, which future CIA operations personnel would take the risk?


I'd like to challenge this. Did anyone really put the "binding opinions" in the hands of operations personnel?

Trying to protect the reputation of the CIA, rather than rebuild it, is a waste of time, because it doesn't have a good one to protect.

Pretending that more secrecy or greater moral latitude is required for an excellent intelligence service looks more like a dodge, than a serious effort at finally getting a CIA worth the money spent on it.
This is all done to mask the fact that a few people at the Director level or above made decisions and passed them down, most likely.

There are serious answers to most, if not all, of the concerns and questions laid out in this anxiety ridden plea. But, until the listeners are willing to hear, maybe, of what use is it?

Trying to protect the reputation of the CIA, rather than rebuild it, is a waste of time, because it doesn't have a good one to protect. Pretending that more secrecy or greater moral latitude is required for an excellent intelligence service looks more like a dodge, than a serious effort at finally getting a CIA worth the money spent on it.