Share

Panetta: Obama Won't O.K. "Extraordinary Rendition"

by: Pamela Hess  |  The Associated Press

photo
Leon Panetta, the nominee for Central Intelligence Agency director, said that Obama would not authorize "extraordinary rendition." (Photo: Reuters)

    Washington - CIA Director nominee Leon Panetta assured senators Thursday that the Obama administration will not send prisoners to countries for torture or other treatment that violates U.S. values as he contended had occurred during the Bush presidency.

    Panetta, testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee, later acknowledged that he does not know specifically what happened in the secret program allowing so-called "extraordinary rendition." CIA Director Michael Hayden has said that the Bush administration moved secret prisoners between countries for interrogation and incarceration, separate from the judicial system, fewer than 100 times.

    Panetta said that President Barack Obama forbids what Panetta called "that kind of extraordinary rendition - when we send someone for the purpose of torture or actions by another country that violate our human values."

    "What happened I can't tell you specifically," he said later, "but clearly steps were taken that prompted this president to say those things ought not to happen again."

    Rendition has been used by U.S. presidents for several decades; Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., said the Clinton administration used it 80 times. However, Panetta said the difference is whether the prisoner is transferred to another government for prosecution in its judicial system or for secret interrogations that may lead to torture.

    Panetta said renditions that send individuals to other countries to face prosecution are appropriate.

    "Having said that, if we capture a high-value prisoner, I believe we have the right to hold that individual temporarily, to debrief that individual and to make sure that individual is properly incarcerated so we can maintain control over that individual," he said.

    While the Obama administration is turning its back on some Bush administration practices, Panetta said there is no intention to hold CIA officers responsible for the policies they were told to carry out. CIA interrogators who used waterboarding or other harsh techniques against prisoners with the permission of the White House should not be prosecuted, he said.

    The Bush White House approved CIA waterboarding, a form of simulated drowning, for three prisoners in 2002 and 2003. The CIA banned the practice internally in 2006. Obama has prohibited harsh interrogation techniques going forward.

    But Panetta said if interrogators went beyond the methods they were told were legal, they should be investigated.

    "We can protect this country, we can get the information we need, we can provide for the security of the American people and we can abide by the law. I'm absolutely convinced that we can do that," he said.

    Panetta said he would come to the job with a list of questions he wants the CIA to be able to answer, including the location of Osama bin Laden and when and where al-Qaida will next try to attack the U.S. He also said he wants to increase intelligence gathering and analyses on potential problems with Russia, China, Africa and Latin America, as well as the effects of the unfolding economic crisis.

    "Our first responsibility is to prevent surprise," he said.

    The former White House chief of staff under President Clinton and ex-congressman from California has extensive experience in government but little in intelligence gathering or analysis. He told the committee that he has asked former CIA chiefs_ notably former President George H.W. Bush - how to compensate for that shortcoming.

    "They all told me to listen carefully to the professionals at the agency but also to stay closely engaged with Congress," Panetta said. "I am a creature of Congress."

    Panetta acknowledged that he has little professional intelligence experience. But, he added: "I know Washington. I know how it works. I think I also know why it fails to work."

    For intelligence expertise, he said, he would retain the top four officials now at the CIA, including Deputy Director Steven Kappes. He promised not to meddle in day-to-day intelligence operations.

    "I anticipate focusing primarily on ensuring policy and procedure is handled correctly, rather than intervening personally in the details of operational planning or the production of individual pieces of analysis," he said. "But let me assure you, the decisions at the CIA will be mine."

    He promised to root out any "yes men," saying: "I would encourage dissent. I always have."

    Panetta also told the committee that he would brief the entire House and Senate intelligence committees as much as possible, rather than just its top members. He said the Bush administration abused that practice.

    "Too often critical issues were kept from this committee," he said.

    One of those issues, according to the senators, was the information that the CIA last October recalled its top spy in Algeria because he allegedly raped two women. The committee only learned of the action from news reports this week.

    Panetta said Congress should have been informed last fall, and he said the CIA officer should not only have been called back to Washington but fired immediately.

  

»


Comments

This is a moderated forum. Β It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

"While the Obama

"While the Obama administration is turning its back on some Bush administration practices, Panetta said there is no intention to hold CIA officers responsible for the policies they were told to carry out. CIA interrogators who used waterboarding or other harsh techniques against prisoners with the permission of the White House should not be prosecuted, he said." Ah, then torture *is* permissible when performed under orders. Glad to have that cleared up.

"as he contended had

"as he contended had occurred during the Bush presidency" For cryin' out loud. There is no contended about it. Why is it that MSM continually bought in to the GOP claims (really contentious contendeds) but decides to doubt any dem who speaks already, well known events. Do we just contend that Guantanamo has a few holding cells? Just contend that ..... I really am sick of MSM "responsible journalism" methods which are so inconsistent.

I am in total opposition to

I am in total opposition to torture for any reason. However, it doesn't make sense to me that those at the bottom should pay the price for the decisions of those at the top. CIA should not bear the responsibility for BushCo's crimes. It is not fair to them to hold them accountable instead of those who were driving the policy. ~~ Rev. Lane Baldwin -- lifewithspirit.org

No, torture is not

No, torture is not permissible; that's not what Panetta implied. The officers were carrying out orders. It's the higher ups who issued those orders who are responsible, and, I hope, will be brought to justice. In fact, those officers could be valuable witnesses to prosecute the big boys. There is a problem that the new administration faces--in every department--and that is to gain cooperation and compliance from the permanent civil service. Treat them like criminals and goodbye cooperation. This is especially true of the covert ops. And remember, this institution is potentially dangerous if unleashed. Whether JFK was killed because he ran afoul of the CIA/FBI is a favorite conspiracy theory. What Panetta must do is gain civilian control of the agency. That's unlikely to happen if he attacks its operatives.

Hmm...CIA officers not

Hmm...CIA officers not responsible for carrying out crimes against humanity? Can anyone remember another time in history when people asked to be excused of such crimes because they were "just following orders"?

Tiger by the tail. Wasn't

Tiger by the tail. Wasn't there huge intramural conflict at the CIA and the Pentagon between those who would "follow orders" and those Constitutionally minded patriots who would not cook the books, politicize intelligence, or rationalize torture? Bush & Co aimed to get the good guys out and did. Now the Obama Administration has a tigers by the tail and must take care to defang and neuter the beasts. There must be some indemnity offered to get the cooperation of the rank and file so the planners and perpetrators can be prevented from ever having any power again. Careful prosecutions are necessary to substantiate law and reinforce the meaning of the chain of command. It needs to be done skillfully to get allies in the middle and also to avoid insurrection. No doubt Mr. Panetta knows this. Citizens should do everything possible to reinforce a return to Rule of Law.

War Criminals, Complicit

War Criminals, Complicit Panetta. Shows you the real morals of the Obama administration. "Just following orders" didn't work at Nueremberg and shouldn't work now. Why NOT prosecute them? And Panetta has now contradicted himself by saying that "renditions" will continue. People, just realize that Obama is no savior. He is controlled by the same vicious, demonic elites who controlled Bush. Panetta is a sell-out and a coward.

Rendition is just a

Rendition is just a euphemism for kidnapping just as harsh interrogation has been used as a kinder gentler wording of torture, least people at home suffer from hearing an accurate depiction of what our government is doing to real people. The only thing extraordinary is that the majority of people in power under Bush and now under Obama think it is important to this country's security to be able to kidnap and torture people. And the torture will continue, even if water boarding specifically no longer occurs, with isolation and sleep deprivation and other techniques designed to break people down. Somehow this destruction of a person's mind is not considered torture by our government. If that is our frame of reference we should legalize rape as there is no organ failure involved. Or does the rape have to be performed by a member of the CIA or the US military to be truly legal?

I never understood why the

I never understood why the Bush Administration engaged in "extraordinary rendition," sending prisoners off to other countries that engaged in torture. After all, why involve another country in torture when you can do it so well, yourself?

That pervasive stink that we

That pervasive stink that we have all noticed lately is the smell of a decaying nation, rotting from the inside out.