« previous | MUCK HOME | next »

Panetta Spins Forthcoming Torture Report: We Were Told It Was Legal
With the Obama administration set later today to release an internal CIA report on torture, director Leon Panetta is preemptively defending his agency, claiming that CIA personnel simply followed the legal guidelines they were given.
In a message to agency employees -- but in fact intended for the reporters to whom it was sent moments ago -- Panetta called the information contained in the 2004 report "old news." He pointed out that the CIA referred cases of abuse to DOJ for prosecution. And he noted: "The Agency sought and received multiple written assurances that its methods were lawful."
Panetta's preemptive message may signal that the report contains even more damaging information than anticipated about Bush-era abuses.
Meanwhile, ABCNews.com is reporting that Panetta last month was involved in a "profanity-laced screaming match" at the White House over DOJ plans to probe whether CIA officers broke the law in carrying out the harsh interrogation techniques.
[Late Update: Greg Sargent adds that in addition to the report itself...
The CIA today will release the two documents Dick Cheney requested this spring that he claims will prove torture worked.I've also confirmed that the CIA will release a declassified version of the chapter in the CIA Inspector General's 2004 report that's widely expected to conclude that there's no proof torture foiled any attacks.
That jibes with Panetta's statement in his message that "the CIA materials include the 2004 report from our Office of Inspector General and two papers--one from 2004 and the other from 2005--that discuss the value of intelligence acquired from high-level detainees."]
The full message from Panetta follows...
Message from the Director: Release of Material on Past Detention PracticesToday, as part of a number of Freedom of Information Act cases, the government is responding to court orders to release more documents related to the Agency's past detention and interrogation of foreign terrorists. The CIA materials include the 2004 report from our Office of Inspector General and two papers--one from 2004 and the other from 2005--that discuss the value of intelligence acquired from high-level detainees. The complete package is hundreds of pages long. The declassification process, a mandatory part of the proceedings, was conducted in accord with established FOIA guidelines.
This is in many ways an old story. The outlines of prior interrogation practices, and many of the details, are public already. The use of enhanced interrogation techniques, begun when our country was responding to the horrors of September 11th, ended in January. For the CIA now, the challenge is not the battles of yesterday, but those of today and tomorrow. It is there that we must work to enhance the safety of our country. That is the job the American people want us to do, and that is my responsibility as the current Director of the CIA.
My emphasis on the future comes with a clear recognition that our Agency takes seriously proper accountability for the past. As the intelligence service of a democracy, that's an important part of who we are. When it comes to past detention and interrogation practices, here are some facts to bear in mind on that point:
* The CIA itself commissioned the Inspector General's review. The report, prepared five years ago, noted both the effectiveness of the interrogation program and concerns about how it had been run early on. Several Agency components, including the Office of General Counsel and the Directorate of Operations, disagreed with some of the findings and conclusions.
* The CIA referred allegations of abuse to the Department of Justice for potential prosecution. This Agency made no excuses for behavior, however rare, that went beyond the formal guidelines on counterterrorism. The Department of Justice has had the complete IG report since 2004. Its career prosecutors have examined that document--and other incidents from Iraq and Afghanistan--for legal accountability. They worked carefully and thoroughly, sometimes taking years to decide if prosecution was warranted or not. In one case, the Department obtained a criminal conviction of a CIA contractor. In other instances, after Justice chose not to pursue action in court, the Agency took disciplinary steps of its own.* The CIA provided the complete, unredacted IG report to the Congress. It was made available to the leadership of the Congressional intelligence committees in 2004 and to the full committees in 2006. All of the material in the document has been subject to Congressional oversight and reviewed for legal accountability.
As Director in 2009, my primary interest--when it comes to a program that no longer exists--is to stand up for those officers who did what their country asked and who followed the legal guidance they were given. That is the President's position, too. The CIA was aggressive over the years in seeking new opinions from the Department of Justice as the legal landscape changed. The Agency sought and received multiple written assurances that its methods were lawful. The CIA has a strong record in terms of following legal guidance and informing the Department of Justice of potentially illegal conduct.
I make no judgments on the accuracy of the 2004 IG report or the various views expressed about it. Nor am I eager to enter the debate, already politicized, over the ultimate utility of the Agency's past detention and interrogation effort. But this much is clear: The CIA obtained intelligence from high-value detainees when inside information on al-Qa'ida was in short supply. Whether this was the only way to obtain that information will remain a legitimate area of dispute, with Americans holding a range of views on the methods used. The CIA requested and received legal guidance and referred allegations of abuse to the Department of Justice. President Obama has established new policies for interrogation.
The CIA must also keep its focus on the primary responsibility of protecting the country. America is a nation at war. This Agency plays a decisive role in helping the United States meet the full range of security threats and opportunities overseas. That starts with the continuing fight against al-Qa'ida and its sympathizers. There, alongside all its other contributions, the CIA is helping our government chart a new way forward on interrogation, one in keeping with the President's Executive Order of January 22nd. You, the men and women of this great institution, do the hard work and take the tough risks that intelligence and espionage demand.
I am very proud of what you do, here and abroad, to protect the United States. Your skill, courage, commitment, and focus on mission make the CIA indispensable to the nation. It is a privilege to serve with you.
Leon E. Panetta

















Here's my spin: Investigate and indict those at the top!
Indict the professionals. Indict the leaders.
Yes, it's my spin!
August 24, 2009 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Watch out for what they do with the OPR report. From Wheeler:
"If it is, indeed, DOJ’s plan to release the IG Report and announce an investigation without, at the same time, releasing the OPR report, it will serve the goal of exposing the Lynndie England’s of the torture regime while still protecting those who instituted that regime."
August 24, 2009 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
See below dear pug. Yes, I too am for going after those who were at the TOP of they pyramid!
August 24, 2009 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
By "professionals", I mean the lawyers, the psychologists - those calling the shots, those "justifying" war crimes - and the "principals". (I'd accord more leniency to the career CIA folks - but definitely all crimes must be investigated and prosecuted.
August 24, 2009 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
What the hell, Leon? If we wanted someone to just blindly protect the agency and spin every spook misdeed, we would have kept Porter Goss!
August 24, 2009 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Legal and ethical are not necessarily the same thing. C'mon now. Act intelligently and do the ethical thing without hiding behind "we were told it was legal". It reminds me of the Seinfeld episode where George is caught having sex with the cleaning woman and professes not to know or understand that it was wrong, only this is not a comedy, it is reality.
August 24, 2009 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't matter. It was illegal under international law. Would it hold up at Nuremberg? That is the question. In short, no.
August 24, 2009 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is good stuff.
Anything Pannetta can do to shift the focus of any legal inquiry upward is good stuff.
Individual interrogators and their immediate supervisors deserve blame and punishment for not refusing to follow obviously unethical and unlawful orders.
But the inquiry must go all the way up the chain of command.
No justice until Bush and Cheney (and Bybee and Yoo and Rice and...) are in chains, in orange jumpsuits, in prison.
August 24, 2009 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a dilemma. Torture was perfectly legal in Japan and Germany. Taliban and Al Qaida leaders have and currently condone it. Even in this country, torture was considered legal up until those folks were caught and the information known openly.
Fortunately, the world was not impressed that some satanic, less than human beings with absolutely no morality or ethical standards of decency... decided they could hire yeas men to say it was legal.
Those in the past were justifiably prosecuted.
The dilemma?
This nation is now all powerful and on our downhill slide, those in power (the Democrat and Republican parties) have, in their zeal for power, have resolved that they have absolute power... that the millions of patriots in this nation's history have no bearing on our actions today (their deaths mean nothing).
Anything goes!!
We can kidnap other heads of states, We can put anyone in prison for any length of time without due process. We can attack any nation, anywhere, at any time, without reason. We can torture whoever we want, any time we want... or send them to other folks who will.
Those in power at this time have decided freedom, democracy, openness of government, rule of law, morality, ethics... those things which have proven to be needed to bind this nation together... are not worth their effort because those are things which limit their power... and will not be tolerated.
If we as a nation are not capable of keeping control over our leadership, perhaps other nations, after our demise (which, on our current path is inevitable) will be honorable enough to punish those who we refuse to punish. IMHO
August 24, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's called the Nuremberg Defense, isn't it? "I was just following orders." They should have, and probably did, know better.
August 24, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right Panetta..nice logic..a cop tells me to rob a bank..it will be legal, cause a lawyer told him it would be legal, and we wouldn't go to prison..right..(for conspiracy and ? Jesus, do you think we are all as stupid as some Republicans are...?
August 24, 2009 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
But it's legal if I said it was because I am...was...the President! Besides, those terrorists deserved everything they got--trying to destroy America, etc.
August 24, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
And if his friends told him to jump off a bridge, would he?
Somehow the wisdom my mother shared—as annoying as it was to hear at the time—is still finding useful applications.
August 24, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Am I the only person who sees the flaw with the CIA going with a reliance-on-advice-of-counsel defense? I mean, a "flaw" from the CIA's perspective?
Here's a clue:
Bye-bye, attorney-client privilege. Bye-bye deliberative process privilege.
August 24, 2009 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think Mr. Panetta is being genuine here. He isn't concerned about the fate of the gruntsin the field. What scares the bejesus out of everyone is the prospect of those grunts becoming informants. Who knows how many of them said, ok, I'll torture this dude if you order me to, but I'm keeping a secret record of everything you told me to do. It doesn't matter how well Cheney shredded his office before he left if some dude sitting behind a desk in Milan has copies of everything. And you just know there are copies.
August 24, 2009 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, basically, the CIA was only following orders. Nuremberg Defense. Didn't work 60 years ago, but everything old is new again, including waterboarding.
August 24, 2009 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can't President Obama find any one who isn't a CYA advocate...a GOP apologist or a Corporate prostitute...DUH..! no wonder the public doesn't "trust" government..clean up government, Obama, or go down with the crooks, liars, colluder's, thieves and lawbreakers........
August 24, 2009 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Intro: "With the Obama administration set later today to release an internal CIA report on torture, director Leon Panetta is preemptively defending his agency, claiming that CIA personnel simply followed the legal guidelines they were given.:
A lot of folks are trying to cling to this: it is bogus. Professional Interrogators (or which I was one for over 10 years in the Marine Corps) know the rules and they also know that "just following orders, when those orders are about something illegal, unlawful and a war crimes - torture - was not and could not have been justified under any circumstances, period.
Our national honor, if that matters to anyone, is at stake and perhaps a heluva lot more, too. ~ dan francis
My Blog on Torture
August 24, 2009 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nothing surprising here, really - more beginnings of the crap starting to hit the fan. This is going to be one dirty fan, assuming it survives.
- Eric
August 24, 2009 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink