RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

WPost’s Ignatius Forgives the CIA Again and Again

Editor: This op-ed was first published Aug. 25th at The Public Record, and is reprinted with the express permission of Mel Goodman.

The Washington Post’s David Ignatius simply cannot get off the wheel he spins for the Central Intelligence Agency. Only two days after the release of the 2004 CIA study of the detention and interrogation program, which provides sordid and sadistic details of an illegal and immoral program, Ignatius still opposes any criminal review of the conduct of CIA officers and echoes the CIA line that it is “glad to be out” of the interrogation business. He even cites deputy director of the CIA, Stephen Kappes, one of the key ideological drivers for the policy of detention and interrogation, as someone who “doesn’t want to have anything to do with interrogation.”

Ignatius strongly believes that it is time for the CIA to “get on with it,” which was the signature line of former CIA director Richard Helms, who Ignatius considers the “savviest spymaster this country has produced.” Let’s forget that Helms lied to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1973 on the overthrow of the elected government in Chile and that a grand jury was called to see if he should be indicted for perjury. Let’s forget that the Justice Department brought a lesser charge against Helms, who pleaded nolo contendere, and was fined $2,000 and given a two-year suspended prison sentence. And let’s forget that Helms was the major supporter of James Jesus Angleton, the crazed head of CIA counterintelligence for 20 years, who believed that the KGB had successfully penetrated the Agency. We called Angleton “The Ghost” when I was at the CIA because no one had ever seen the man. And it was “The Ghost” who befriended Kim Philby, the Soviet spy from British intelligence, introduced him to high-level CIA officials, and defended him to the end. So much for counterintelligence.

In his efforts to prevent any investigation of the CIA’s interrogation program, Ignatius has also forgotten the lessons of the Nuremberg Trials in 1945-1946. The International Tribunal taught us that crimes committed by individuals for state purposes were the responsibility of those individuals and punishable by state law. And, most importantly, following orders was not a defense. But Ignatius believes that all of the relevant evidence on torture and abuse was seen by “career prosecutors, who decided against bringing cases.” So, let’s forget that the career prosecutors were employed by the politicized Justice Department of the Bush administration and that they reported to a politically-appointed assistant attorney general.

Ignatius believes that investigation and accountability will hurt the Agency. It will actually restore the credibility of the Agency and lead to greater cooperation from important foreign intelligence services, which is essential to combating terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. It was CIA crimes such as secret prisons and extraordinary renditions that hurt the Agency, and led to reticence about sharing intelligence. For example, there is no intelligence service within the European Union that would assist in a rendition by the CIA; no EU country that would permit the CIA to transport a prisoner by aircraft; no EU country that would agree to a secret prison or “black site” within its borders.

Ignatius also reveals that he knows nothing about loyal dissent. He argues that “questioning presidential orders isn’t really the job” of the CIA leadership, “especially when those orders are backed by Justice Department legal opinions.” This country has fought two unnecessary wars in the past 45 years with the deaths of more than 60,000 American men and women simply because high-level officials failed to expose the deceptions and manipulations of the Johnson and Bush administrations. In supporting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Ignatius and the Washington Post appear enamored with U.S. military power, with the Post providing few opportunities for contrarian voices to be heard. The mainstream media, particularly the Post, has been far too complacent in holding the Bush and Obama administration’s feet to the fire in the case of these wars.

Finally, Ignatius claims that the CIA resorted to independent contractors for help in “waterboarding” and assassination programs because of a lack of expertise. In fact, the CIA turned to outside help in these egregious areas because it was trying to avoid accountability and there was internal resistance to both programs. There were many officers in the National Clandestine Service opposed to the renditions and detentions program; the Office of Medical Service had serious problems with the waterboarding program, which is outlined in the 2004 Inspector General Program. Presumably, there were some greybeards around who mentioned that resorting to Blackwater to run an assassination program resembled the CIA’s contacts with the Mafia in the early 1960s to kill Castro. The CIA assassination program led to the Church Commission hearings in the 1970s, which placed restrictions on covert action programs and created a congressional oversight process that has fallen into disarray.

It is unbelievable that Ignatius could read the chilling and appalling 2004 IG report and not temper some of his views. His continued support of the CIA points to fanaticism and reminds me of Stalin’s reference to Western journalists who defended Soviet policy—he called them “useful idiots.”

Melvin A. Goodman, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and adjunct professor of government at Johns Hopkins University, is The Public Record’s National Security and Intelligence columnist. He spent 42 years with the CIA, the National War College, and the U.S. Army. His latest book is Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA http ://www.amazon.com/Failure-Intelligence-Decline-Fall-CIA/dp/0742551105.

Trackback URL

RSS Feed for This Post22 Comments »

Comment by hokma | 2009-08-27 15:46:53

We are coming up to the 8th anniversary of September 11th and I have yet to read or hear precisely how the critics of CIA interrogation techniques could do a better job. I have heard hyperbolic phrases and metaphors about how immoral the CIA is and thus how immoral the USA is. But nothing about a more moral alternative and still keep the USA citizens safe.

I think these critics would be more useful focusing on the scum that the CIA has to detain and interrogate and how to stop them.

It seems that the CIA is the easy whipping post over the years for both Democrats and Republicans depending on the situation.

Obama gave his word that he would not go after CIA employees over past interrogation techniques. Once again Obama is a liar and a low life and a person whose word means zero.

Comment by Animal Control | 2009-08-27 16:06:30

Obama gave his word

What’s that worth!

His oath was to “…preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution…” that means the laws. If the CIA broke the law whomever is culpable should be prosecuted period!

Comment by hokma | 2009-08-27 17:52:47

If they are so interested in prosecuting people who broke the law, then why did they drop the charges against the New Black Panthers who were intimidating voters on election day?
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/28/justice-department-drops-charges-in-voter-intimidation-case/

As far as the CIA is concerned, this is not a police force dealing with civilians. If these was actual abuse then there are internal ways of dealing with those actions, and have been in the past. This is a pure witch hunt to divert attention from Obama’s socialist power grab and at the expense of CIA employees who followed orders and will now be the subject of this witch hunt. Also understand the context of this charge, which under Obama has changed from “torture” to “abuse.” The enhanced interrogation that has been described is nasty but it is not abuse or torture. These are enemies of war and I believe the CIA has handled themselves remarkably well under the circumstances after 9/11.

Comment by Animal Control | 2009-08-27 19:05:09

why did they drop the charges against the New Black Panthers

I agree with you–no favoritisms, the Law is The Law and should be enforced/applied without fear or favor.

Comment by Ferd Berfle | 2009-08-27 19:26:32

the Law is The Law

Indeed–it is the only constant in our society. People come and go but the law is always there.

 
 

Comment by Jim S | 2009-08-28 02:16:58

Add Bill Richardson to the list, he just got a get out of jail card from Øbama and Holder.

 

Comment by Regina | 2009-08-30 11:58:57

Correct me if I am wrong….but isn’t Shabbaz Malcolm X’s wife’s name? Malik Shabbaz may be Malcolm X’s grandson…….does anyone know? That would explain the actions of Eric Holder and the unjust justice department.

 
 
 
 

Comment by Doc99 | 2009-08-27 16:10:04

Misdirection, Stanley. Misdirection.

 

Comment by candymarl | 2009-08-27 16:16:29

I can’t read the whole article. It comes up as error 404 page not found.

 
 

Comment by mark connette | 2009-08-27 19:28:24

Ignatius is right. And the dems bashing the people charged with protecting the united states will pay dearly for politicizing the issue

Comment by Ferd Berfle | 2009-08-27 19:39:30

Ignatius is wrong and so are you. I believe in the rule of law. When we twist it to meet some alleged need (which has never been proven) or outright break it, we open the door for all sorts of abuses. You’re always hammering away at the liberals and their misdeeds but turn a blind eye to those you feel a political connection with. I don’t like That One or his disdain for the law and didn’t like Bush/Cheney and theirs. This isn’t about Republicans or Democrats, liberals or conservatives. This is about the rule of law. The politicizing of the issue was started after 9/11 and has continued since. Both sides have used it and to object only to the use of it by people with whom you disagree is nothing short of hypocrisy. Change a couple of words here and there and you would be an obamabot–same old selective indignation rearing its ugly head.

Comment by Jim S | 2009-08-28 02:27:55

Since you brought up an ugly head, let’s take a look at what SanFran Nan had to say about her being briefed on Enhanced Interrogation Techniques. According to the documents just released although not mentioned by name, only title, she was there when, by law, they informed the congress about the EIT program. She said not complain about what was done or about what the CIA was preparing to do to detainees. SHE LIED! How about impeachment?

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/are_pelosis_lies_impeachable.html

 

Comment by mark connette | 2009-08-28 10:38:53

never been proven? thats a laugh ksm starting singing like a bird after some water was splashed in his face. next?

 

Comment by mark connette | 2009-08-28 10:41:26

do you want to prosecute the trainers who waterboard our own service members? so they are prepared for being captured by islamic terrorists. by your definition they broke the “law’ too. your argument is shallow and weak

 
 
 

Comment by Doc99 | 2009-08-27 19:56:50

I again question the propriety of Holder’s DOJ investigation of CIA while members of his law firm, Covington & Burling’s represent those who would want to kill us. I’m hoping Larry is all over this one. I’m thinking this defines versimilitude.

 

Comment by Lisa | 2009-08-28 10:54:18

Mel- It bother me that you are so persistent to try to sway some of us in your direction. I would rather that the CIA uses techniques and get answers, rather than to have our people beheaded & tortured.

Comment by tzada | 2009-08-28 14:03:28

Lisa I am with you. Here is a very good article about that creature we call the speaker of the house.

I hope everyone takes the time to read the below article.

Are Pelosi’s lies impeachable?

Nancy Pelosi is a liar.

And not just the typical, sniveling, inside-the-Beltway-talking-head prevaricator, either.

Nancy Pelosi is a wide-eyed, stare-you-in-the-face, What-planet-are-you-from? liar.

Proof is provided in Thursday’s Wall Street Journal. Rather than just regurgitating Democrat talking points - -Why is it I always have the feeling that Rahm Emmanuel is barking questions into Chris Matthews IFB? — about recently released documents on the CIA’s use of enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs), the WSJ actually read the reports.

Their conclusion?

Whoever advised people to be skeptical of what they read in the papers must have had in mind this week’s coverage of the documents about CIA interrogations. Now that we’ve had a chance to read the reports, it’s clear the real story isn’t the few cases of abuse played up by the media. The news is that the program was thoughtfully developed, carefully circumscribed, briefed to Congress, and yielded information crucial to disrupting al Qaeda.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/are_pelosis_lies_impeachable.html

Is this what we can expect? Well I hope they go after squeeker in the house first. I asked pm to consider doing an article on it.

FOUR HINDU GIRLS ABDUCTED/CONVERTED TO ISLAM/RAPED AND MURDERED

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/08/four-hindu-girls-abductedconverted-to-islamraped-and-murdered.html

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/08/soros-shadow-potus-soros-behind-cia-witch-hunt.html

 
 

Comment by tzada | 2009-08-29 11:09:29

per good article at the link

CIA Investigation insanity

Flashback to 9/11 and imagine the reaction if George Bush stood with the firemen amid the smoldering ruins and said the United States government will prosecute CIA interrogators for blowing cigar smoke in the face of the terrorist masterminds. The Bush administration would have been overthrown by the Honduran military. Seven years later and all common sense seems to be going up in smoke. Long gone are the images of Green Berets on horseback. Ranches, action heroes, and slap shots are out. Social media massages are in. The quitters can eat a hockey puck. The White House is white, not the American flag

.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/cia_investigation_insanity.html

 

Comment by Doc99 | 2009-08-29 17:32:34

Dr. Evil released a new tape.
mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/198628.php

What war on terror? Miranda Rights for this guy?

 

Comment by Regina | 2009-08-29 20:30:30

Obama is shoring up his base at the expense of the safety of the American People. Can’t the investigation be done internally? Otherwise our enemies will see us as weak and use it against us?

 

RSS Feed for This PostPost a Comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)