Obama’s Spy Surprise

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Retsos Nikos — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 22:39:44 GMT

Obama Spy Surprise? It is not a surprise at all. Baraq Obama was elected on a landslide mandate to flush down the toilet George Bush's global murder, torture and mayhem of the CIA.

And there can be no one better than Leon Paneta, a person with known character and integrity

in his past public life - as well as a a private American citizen.

What is wrong to appointing a CIA career officer or a military man to the top of CIA? Corrosion

of values, virtues and character by nature of their training. As a "FRONTLINE" documentary showed in 2008, the basic training on those branches is under the motto "Kill, Kill, Kill". It is the nature of the job. You don't win wars, nor the spy games by bowing to your enemies, and treat them dinner with champagne. You eliminate them. And the Frontline documentary was something beyond any doubt because I have gone through military training and service and know that firsthand myself.

Obama was elected in a landslide on the promise of "CHANGE!" And change, as well as what the whole world wants from Obama, means a civilized global behavior by the United States. And Obama can not achieve that by promoting yesterdays CIA torturers to the today's CIA directors.

George Bush's bloody warmongering has not achieved anything other than making the U.S. the most hated country in the planet. And change by Obama must mean a U.S. with a human face -as well as a human attitude.

Leon Paneta. I remember him during my teaching years as White House Chief of Staff, and I know he was a consensus builder. And since Obama campaigned on an "All Inclusive" America, Leon Paneta is the best man to lead the CIA, period! If the American public wanted more of the same of George Bush's global murder and mayhem, they would have elected John McCain with

a landslide. Nikos Retsos, retired professor of Pol. Sci.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Repubssuck — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 23:02:14 GMT

President-elect Obama has made it clear that he wanted to surround himself with those that spoke out. Leon will do just that. Bush can cease hoping that the dirt won't come out. It will and we'll be better for it. Bravo Leon!

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Jeanne021556 — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 00:26:55 GMT

Not only will he be honest as CIA director, but he is more qualified then when George H was appointed CIA director under Gerald Ford. He will be great.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Hopeful in VA — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 00:43:04 GMT

Mr. Nikos has hit all the buzz words like "warmonger," and "global murder." And I guess being a professor of Poli Sci makes him qualified to make such attacks.

But the change that people voted for, was more than a change in party, it was a change in the partisanship. Fanatics on both sides have dragged the US down in the later half of the 20th century.

I've been part of the miltary culture all my life and I can tell that most military people, regardless of training, are good people who fight when ordered by their civilian commanders (who rarely listen to the experts they've tapped to lead the men into battle). They are honorable and decent people who would only kill in the context of a battlefield environment. While there are exceptions, as in all walks of life, the main of our armed forces are just good folks.

The rest of the world will never "like us." The best we can hope for is a repect for our ideals and occassional support when it suits a particular country's internal or external policies.

It's the lack of objectivity and discourse that has led to our current state of affairs. And though I didn't vote for President-Elect Obama, he's my President for 4 years, and if he does a good job, maybe 4 more. Whether I agree with him or not, I respect his office and won't stoop to childish name calling, because I know that he will do his best (as did his predecessors), and being human he will fail, at times. I won't ascribe "evil" intent to him when he does something with which I disagree.

The bottom-line is that I hope all his efforts are his best, that he uses his obvious intellect to improve American lives, and our support the ideas set forth in the Declaration of Independence...All without destroying the Constitutional Republic that whose framework has made us the envy of many, and then enemy of a few.

Mostly, I hope he brings civility to the the process of governmental deliberations. And the new President, I pray for a healthy dose of luck....because we all need that occassionaly.

Hopeful in VA

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Lawmaster1 — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 00:50:07 GMT

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

notassmart — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 01:07:40 GMT

lets pick someone who will distance the new administration from bushes contriversial policies witch have protected us since 2001 so we can go back to the policy of clinton which was ingore it and it will go away. GREAT!!!! this is exactly what is going to get us hit again!

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

tired and old — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 01:11:10 GMT

ANOTHER CLINTON IN OBAMA ADMINISTRATION.

LACKING IN EXPERIENCE.

CHANGE ----- NOT REALLY !

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

GA.dem — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 01:12:31 GMT

Leon Panetta last March:

According to the latest polls, two-thirds of the American public believes that torturing suspected terrorists to gain important information is justified in some circumstances. How did we transform from champions of human dignity and individual rights into a nation of armchair torturers? One word: fear.

Fear is blinding, hateful, and vengeful. It makes the end justify the means. And why not? If torture can stop the next terrorist attack, the next suicide bomber, then what's wrong with a little waterboarding or electric shock?

The simple answer is the rule of law. Our Constitution defines the rules that guide our nation. It was drafted by those who looked around the world of the eighteenth century and saw persecution, torture, and other crimes against humanity and believed that America could be better than that. This new nation would recognize that every individual has an inherent right to personal dignity, to justice, to freedom from cruel and unusual punishment.

We have preached these values to the world. We have made clear that there are certain lines Americans will not cross because we respect the dignity of every human being. That pledge was written into the oath of office given to every president, "to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution." It's what is supposed to make our leaders different from every tyrant, dictator, or despot. We are sworn to govern by the rule of law, not by brute force.

We cannot simply suspend these beliefs in the name of national security. Those who support torture may believe that we can abuse captives in certain select circumstances and still be true to our values. But that is a false compromise. We either believe in the dignity of the individual, the rule of law, and the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment, or we don't. There is no middle ground.

We cannot and we must not use torture under any circumstances. We are better than that.

That certainly makes him head and shoulders better than anyone around / involved with the current administration now.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Lawmaster1 — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 01:18:45 GMT

To my dear Prof Nikos

As a person who was at Woodstock ..we recall the 1960's ..and who lived in the age of "love " can we get real !!! The 1960's are gone !!!

As an American who served this nation for over twenty -five years with the executive branch in a investigative capacity I had the ability view from the inside . In addition one who was part of the investigation of the '93 attack at World Trade and yes I was there for the 9/11 attacks ....you my dear Prof. are NOT dealing with reality .

What we hear in the media is the treatment of Islamic fanatics at Gitmo or on the battle field . We have a public outcry when a pair of women 's panties are put on fanatics head , or a dog barks . The Islamic fanatics that captured our contractors or military return them in parts !

I agree we as the United States must act in a civilized way ..even if we are dealing with sub humans ( I consider the attack at World Trade on 9/11 , killing of non military persons an act by animals and I am NOT sorry )

The selection of DCIA should NOT be a political choice .. GW Bush will not be the President in a few days . In reality the animals that want to destroy our nation , freedon and way of life don't care who is selected for any position within the US Gov't . They have hate and are sick . Prof . Nikos I hope and pray that you did not loose a loved one on 9/11 .

Oh and for the record as a educator of higher learing I do hold three

advance degrees , two in law and one in management

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Impressed citizen — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 01:26:15 GMT

In general terms I do agree with Prof. Niko's point of view and the humanistic sentiment with which he expressed it, although some of his words I believe are too harsh towards both our people in the Armed services and to some extent towards the outgoing Administration. We can't totally deny the way Bush handled the situation immediately after 9/11. Unfortunately, there afterwards, he "listened too much" the advise and followed the hawkish members in his Administration. That has been the part of his misjudgement, which he tried to correct to some extent in the later part of his presidency.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Repubssuck — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 01:41:14 GMT

Please forgive tired and old. He is a charter member of the GOP party of hate and has fallen and can't get up!

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Repubssuck — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 01:54:04 GMT

lawmaster, is there anything else you want to tell us about yourself? Didn't you leave out a few accomplishments? Aren't you being a little too modest? Weren't you also the firdt man in space? Didn't you invent the first artifical heart? Please tell us how you cured polio. Don't leave out your award for modest person of the year in 2008. I can't wait to hear how you found Noah's Ark!

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Repubssuck — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 02:07:50 GMT

Impressed citizen, Bush followed too much hawkish advice? Which hawk advised him to manufacture evidence to justify the Iraq invasion that has direstly caused the lives of thousands of our best and bravest young men and women? Don't try selling that crap here. Take it to Fox where you'll be welcomed with open arms. Do you think a person who knowingly defends a lie has some share of the responsibility? Do you accept your share?

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

aschwitzer — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 03:01:40 GMT

Appointing Penetta-another Clinton era politician with zero intelligence experience-to head the CIA is like appointing Dean Smith to coach the New England Patriots. My god, the danger of a terrorist nuclear attack iin the United States in the near future is estimated to be 50%, and the brilliant Obama is appointing a complete amatuer to the post.

It seems that the media is so preoccupied with praising Obama that they won't question on how he is actually gong to "change" Washington with those Clinton appointees, or with Bush's Secretary of Defense. Or what he has ever done-except give great speeches.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

JohnInAustin — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 04:14:10 GMT

Nominating Leon Panetta is definitely out-of-the-box, but he seems an excellent choice to me. Frankly, cracking some of the insularity of our intelligence community may actually improve the quality of their work. Leon Panetta is a distinguished public servant with extrodinary managerial skills. I am delighted with President-elect Obama's choice.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

newbieeveryday — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 07:21:59 GMT

Shoot, George H W Bush was appointed Director of Central Intelligence in the mid-'70's, and he didn't have any intelligence experience...right? Right?! (Wink, wink, nudge, nudge...) Not if you don't count 1961, and 1963...

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

dunnhaupt — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:24:18 GMT

You don't have to sing like Caruso to run a music school. Panetta has hands-on intelligence experience, but he is not tainted by these incessant international charges against the US about Guantanamo and torture. Some Americans may be unaware of this, but there are numerous cases pending in the United Nations and the International Court in The Hague. It is essential to have an untainted person in charge.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

dlaurels — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:34:42 GMT

Listen, I believe in President Elect Obama's ability to appoint good people. I do not believe that congress should be trying to use its power to change the appointments. And, it does absolutely no good for ridiculous comments to be made by the members of the congress.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Bama Bevos — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:12:45 GMT

My prediction is in one yr. we will have some of the biggest changes we have had in yrs. and in three yrs.,it will be unbelieveable, the ADVANCES we will have made. I have been a republican for longer than I can remember. But this last term, I can't believe the ignorance with which our country has been run. I could have done a better job. This time I voted for Mr Obama. I was so impressed with him. And you Anti-Obamas can cut him down all you want, (you know who you are) but He is going to make you eat your words.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

tired and old — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:30:04 GMT

OBAMA HAS MADE CLINTON CHOICES.

THIS IS A CLEAR SIGN THAT GOOD PERSONS ARE RARE IN THE BELTWAY AREA.

TOM DASCHLE -- RESPONSIBLE FOR DOCTORS DYING IN SOUTH DAKOTA.

HILLARY CLINTON - LIAR AND EMBELLISHER OF FACTS.

IF YOU ARE DISGUSTING AND LACK INTEGRITY, BARACK OBAMA NEEDS YOU TO SERVE YOUR SELF INTERESTS IN WASHINGTON D.C..

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

DianaO — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 16:58:12 GMT

What do people want? They complain if the person has too much experience and now it is too little. Well, I would trust the President's-elect judgment. It stance to reason he would have to pick candidates from a job pool that worked with the Clintons. Would they prefer him to pick people who had experince from either of the Bush administrations? The ones from the Carter administration, maybe too old. If he picked some one who is not tested with no experience, there would be critism too. So the best thing he needs to do is continue to use his best judgement, because he will not be able to please everybody.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

grandpa-in-mississippi — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:02:01 GMT

MR CLINTON RUINED THE CIA AND WE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF 9-11 BECAUSE OF HIS WEAK SPY SYSTEM. WE NOW HAVE A PROBLEM OF 2 WAR ZONES, IS THERE TIME FOR MR PANETTA TO GAIN THE KNOWLEDGE NEEDED? IF NOT THEN WE WILL SEE MORE BLOOD SHED HERE ON OUR SOIL. WHO WOULD YOU HIRE TO BUILD YOUR HOUSE, A PERSON RECIEVING ON THE JOB TRAINING OR A EXPERIENCED CARPENTER? iF WE DON'T STAND FOR SOMETHING WE WILL FALL FOR ANYTHING... I'M GLAD THAT GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL AND THAT HE IS NOT MAD AT ME....

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

muskegon — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:23:32 GMT

Hmm, so all you you people that are okay with Panetta, here's a question:

You need life-saving surgery immediately to repair you heart. Only two surgeons are available.

The first being a doctor who has never performed a surgery before, but is well liked by all his colleagues and by the medical profession as a whole.

The second doctor has successfully performed the surgery you need at least 50 times in the past. All of his colleagues hate him and the medical profession as a whole thinks that he is an arrogant jerk.

Who would you have perfrom the surgery?????

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

IMinIowa — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:45:29 GMT

This is the CIA. How do you know he doesn't have experience? Would you have guessed Valerie Plame was covert? Anyhoo...I am sure Obama has no desire to nominate screw-ups to run this country. We will see how the Bush appointees still in positions of government work out. I predict there will be plenty of headlines in the near future of Bushie people throwing sand in the gears.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

androsmoon — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:27:43 GMT

Just a thought here to those who are comparing this job to surgery or building a house. Like those jobs, this position does not work alone. It requires team work and the ability to work very closely with others and be trusted by those who work underneath him/her. The best surgeon in the world can't perform surgery alone. He/she needs an anesthesiologist, surgical techs, etc., etc., etc. I would rather have a first-timer who the others in the room are willing to work with, to tell you the truth. Someone who is despised by those who work with/underneath him/her is likely being gossiped about, criticized, and undermined and plotted against by those persons, and that takes their focus away from their own jobs - which means things - and probably crucial things - are going to slip through the cracks.

Before passing judgement, consider that this man is not someone hired off the street. To use your analogy, muskegon, he may have performed bypass surgery a million times - just not repaired an aorta. It doesn't mean he hasn't studied and learned how to perform that particular surgery, and it doesn't mean he is dooming his patient to death from his inexperience. Every surgeon starts on some patient - that's how they become great surgeons. Every person had to start somewhere, but you generally get offered job positions based on your qualifications and your prior knowledge. It's apparent that this man has good credentials and something to offer, or he wouldn't have been given this opportunity. Just my .02, for what it's worth.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

muskegon — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:46:55 GMT

androsmoon,

"Every surgeon starts on some patient - that's how they become great surgeons. Every person had to start somewhere, but you generally get offered job positions based on your qualifications and your prior knowledge."

Maybe you get offered a job based on your qualifications if you're going to be head dog-catcher, but when you're talking about the security of this country I would rather have someone who knows what he's doing and doesn't have to "learn on the job." BTW, would you want a loved one operated on by a surgeon who has never performed a procedure?

I doubt it very much.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Repubssuck — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:30:42 GMT

The GOP party of hate lost no time in criticizing Leaon's appointment. Bush, Cheney and Rice are on the verge of soiling their underwear, knowing that all of their dispicable deeds will soon be made public.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

NotFooledByDistractions — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:46:28 GMT

I don't have a problem with the Panetta selection. After all, we've had so called "intelligence experts" running the show for the last 8 years, and look where that landed us. I think it's time for a new approach, and this pick indicates just that.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

theycita — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:43:46 GMT

iam really depresing obama is the most big mistake american people picks, he pichs thes most gabinet was when clintons time, is more american around him, about pasnetta, came on, onanother from clintons administration, his not experience, i thing obama have to pay back to thopse people give money to to him running his presidence elccion, and now he traid to pay banck with important position in his gabinet. is so sad. i am thing our country future wil be very poor with america faces a lot international problems and we need people with experience no matter republicans or independets. america is first. than everything Sorry for may english but is my opinion and i love so much usa.) god bless america

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

KennedyReyes — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:52:16 GMT

Name one thing the CIA has done right in it's whole history......abolish the whole thing and start over

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

archmsu — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:00:33 GMT

I love how Obama supporters just agree w/ everything he does and they still blame Bush for everything. What a bunch of "broken records." Obama = Change = Bullshit He appointed old Democratic dinosaurs who are all part of the problem. You liberals are so quick to blame the the GOP but you never look in mirror at your own Senators (Reid-Pelosi) which have been in control of congress for the last two years. "Do as i say, not as i do," right? You liberals are a bunch of frauds.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

REALITY CHECK — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:45:39 GMT

The problem with Panetta is that he is a Lawyer/Politician, which is one of the worst posible choices for CIA Director.

Why? Because lawyers typically make lousy managers. Their focus is on avoiding any decision that might involve risk, but that is impossible with a CIA Director that must choose between solutions that are neither clear or necessarily correct and all involve a measure of risk. Lawyers are "Risk Averse", so they play up the risks without necessarily considering the rewards, and they always worry about the "methods" used to obtain vital information.

And a Politician will always play CYA (Cover Your A**") so they can avoid being criticized. This makes it nearly impossible for a Politician to function, especially in the Intelligence Community, where all decisions need to be based on "best available evidence" which is frequently wrong (witness the lack of WMD's in Iraq).

It's hard to see how Panetta will be able to function effectively in that kind of environment.

I fear for our safety.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Crush — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:53:35 GMT

The fact is, every nominee comes with Pros & Cons. Some people will like the pick and some won't. It's rare that everyone loves a Presidential appointee.

Either Panetta will be confirmed or he won't. He'll either do a good job or he won't. Either way, Barack Obama will not wait to make a change if needed.

Anyone who knows the President-Elect will tell you, the man has no time for those who fail to perform.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Crush — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:56:09 GMT

The fact is, every nominee comes with Pros & Cons. Some people will like the pick and some won't. It's rare that everyone loves a Presidential appointee.

Either Panetta will be confirmed or he won't. He'll either do a good job or he won't. Either way, Barack Obama will not wait to make a change if needed.

Anyone who knows the President-Elect will tell you, the man has no time for those who fail to perform.

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

Bona Phide — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:12:12 GMT

To Grandpa in Mississippi:

You can't seriously be trying to blame Clinton for 9-11. It was well documented that many members of Clinton's national security team tried to warn Bush of am impending threat of attack from Al Quaeda. They were ignored repeatedly... Richard Clarke tried numerous times to warn the Bush administration, and once again was ignored...

Now to those of you saying that this is a bad pick, because he isn't a spy:

When, in the history of the CIA, have you heard of a CIA director going undercover? I would look to the fact that as COS he heard intellegence reports every day, is a great manager (despite being a lawyer), and has a lot of experience from the White House to Capital Hill.

To go with the popular analogy, I don't want a surgeon to operate on me using techniques I deem immoral and wrong regardless of whether or not he has performed a million surgeries. If I am maimed, or disfigured I would not feel happy just to be alive. I would look for the surgeon who takes his time, does it the right way, and leaves me in the best possible shape for recovery afterwards...

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

androsmoon — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:05:51 GMT

From what I can gather from some postings, there are those who believe we should not appoint Mr. Panetta because he has not had direct experience with "spying". Ok, I can understand that. However, this article makes clear that he is credentialed to work for the CIA due to his other experiences and qualifications. Unfortunately, this closely-related experience isn't considered direct experience with "spying", so he should not have the position. Again, this is my summation of what some others seem to be saying.

Fine, but using this logic, this country would never be able to democratically elect a properly -qualified commander-in-chief. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe any candidate in the history of our nation has ever had direct experience running a country. They may have been a state Senator, maybe a state Governor, whatever. But nobody has had the "direct" qualification of being in charge of a nation. And have all political appointees always been subject to this level of scrutiny from you all? I'm quite sure that every president has appointed persons to positions that some consider them to be unqualified for. We have to assume that the commander-in-chief of our country knows just a bit more about these people, the job itself, and the qualifications of all involved than we as members of the populace do. God help us if they do not.

I don't know Mr. Panetta and I don't feel one way or the other about his appointment, truthfully. I am just willing to give him and our president a chance to make changes and make a difference in the way they plan to; if he or they let the nation down, then we are entitled to expect some answers. Every other president has been given this opportunity to appoint their own cabinet as they see fit - why should that change now?

On a side note, to muskegon, not to belabor a point, but having worked in many hospitals myself, I can tell you from experience (as both a patient and an employee) that chances are very good that during any surgery, you are being operated on by inexperienced hands. Most hospitals are teaching hospitals, and surgeries are generally performed by differing levels of resident surgeons - some first-year, some ready to fly out of the nest. The patient never knows who they get, and most never think to ask who their actual surgeon is. They automatically assume it is the consulting surgeon they see during rounds. Odds are good that the consultant didn't even enter the OR - it was a resident perfoming the procedure under a higher-level resident's watch. Just something to think about. :)

re: Obama’s Spy Surprise

DDale — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 08:27:45 GMT

New Trouble for an Obama Nominee: Admiral Dennis Blair Aided Perpetrators of 1999 Church Killings in East Timor

Investigative journalist Allan Nairn reveals Admiral Dennis Blair played a critical role in backing the Indonesian occupation of East Timor during the 1990s. At the height of a wave of ruthless attacks on Timorese that killed hundreds and displaced tens of thousands.

Read the story at;Democracy Now.org

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/1/7/obama_nominee_admiral_dennis_blair_aided

Dennis Blair went against Bill Clinton and pushed more killing of innocent cililians in Timor. What the hell,we don't need Dennis Blair....he needs to be punished for war crimes.