Thanks again Ray for being the credible, insightful voice that you are on intelligence matters. Your experience in the field and apparently selfless motivation make you so and I always appreciate the courage you demonstrate in revealing facts that a deceived population might not otherwise have access to and questioning those who would so shamelessly deceive the American people. You are truly a patriotic American working tirelessly in defense of our Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Of course, when Congress finally got around to investigating Nixon, he was spying not on foreign nationals but on his domestic political enemies. Lesson: don't believe the hype. Our representatives in Congress need to shine a light, publish the details, including whom the Hayden and the Bushies were spying on.

Thank you, Mr. Hayden.

Something about Hayden’s thinly veiled threat smells a little fishy. We already know about the torture and the illegal eavesdropping and the apologists for the Bush administration have used the excuse that these policies prevented additional terrorist attacks on the U.S. as, in their opinion, a valid justification for shredding the rule of law. Secondly legal experts have stated that the opinions penned by Alberto Gonzalez, Addington and Yoo, opinions that were printed on White House stationary, will provide an excellent defense should any of the players in these policies ever face a judge and jury.

No, the motivation for Hayden attempting to thwart any investigations into abuses of power during the Bush administration probably has much deeper roots. I suspect that Hayden is attempting to keep hidden abuses of power, should they come to light, that would be an even bigger affront than those we already know of.

What could those abuses be? Your guess is as good as mine but I doubt that wild horses could have kept Karl Rove from using illegally obtained evidence for political ends (Spitzer?). Also the nearly universal reluctance of democrats to confront the abuses of power by the Bush administration is lacking an explanation beyond a few anthrax laced letters mailed to congressional democrats…No given the complete lack of moral restraints in the way republicans play the game acts like those I’ve just speculated on would barely raise an eyebrow among the neocons…It’s something bigger…something bigger…

Outgoing CIA Director Michael Hayden's advice/threat to the incoming Obama administration that an investigation into black ops criminality meant "no one in Langley will ever take a risk again" should be recognized as the political extortion trap that it is.

It is a false choice to pretend that we must either give up on enforcing federal law within America's spy establishment, or give up on having a proactive counterintelligence capacity. Hayden's foray into transition partisan politics is rather like warning federal regulators that if they dare to investigate evidence of embezzlement at the local bank, no banker will ever loan money again.

But what if Hayden were right (in the blind squirrel finding an acorn sense)?

Just think back on all those black ops risks (and blowback) that have been boldly undertaken in the past by the CIA's 007 cowboy wannabes. And these are just a few such operations that have entered the public domain.

The overthrow of Mossadegh in Iran to put the Shah back in power.

The assassination of Patrice Lumumba in the Congo.

The coups against Diem in Saigon, Allende in Chile, and god knows how many countries in central America and the Carribbean.

The Bay of Pigs. The Vietnam War itself.

Arming radical Islamist mujadaheen to kill the Russians in Afghanistan in twisted, corruption-filled alliance with the Pakistani ISI during the Reagan era.

Watergate. Iran-Contra. Intelligence being fixed around the policy.

And of course, there are those big, messy instances where former CIA intelligence assets abroad turned back traitorously upon their handlers after years on the US clandestine payroll, former assets gone turncoat who had to be made an example of.

First Noriega in Panama.

Then Saddam in Iraq.

So if forced to make General Hayden's choice, then I'd certainly favor a decade or two of risk aversion from the boys out at Langley, thank you very much.

Too much bold and bloody bullshit. Too much blowback.

Bill from Saginaw

...if Obama authorizes an investigation into controversial activities like waterboarding, "no one in Langley will ever take a risk again".

Sounds good to me. Sack 'em all and recruit new, young patriots who will support the Constitution and take risks (with all respect to Ray's trusted co-workers).

George C. Brown - In my opinion, one of the first tasks to which Leon Panetta should be assigned is to revise the whole "Intelligence" structure throughout the Federal government. Twenty some different investigative bureaus is not only overkill and does not just create inter-agency jealousies and conflict, it is wasteful in the extreme. And if the CIA is any example, the use of the word "intelligence" is an oxymoron! Stupidity, inhumanity and paranoia are disastrous substitutes for diligent awareness!

Only thing I can say is none of those people should consider any trips abroad, as the possibility of them being arrested for their crimes is real and growing all the time.

Bring America Back !!!! Lets get it straight!! The US Constitution intends civilian control all these agencies===military officers have no business heading up any of those--CIA< NSA< Homeland Security....all should have civilian directors and top managers !!!!!

***Every nook and cranny at the Pentagon has its own intelligence outfit which is plenty for our defense needs==Keep Out of the top positions unless and until they retire or resign from the military !!!

***Dwight Eisenhower, in his parting farewell address as President, warned our Nation severely about an uncontrolled military-industrial complex taking over
the civilian as well as military functioning of the USA !! Every problem we now have with our Government can be traced to this VERY BIG PROBLEM ! The Tail is very predominently wagging The Dog !!

***That is why Leon Panetta is a perfect fit to replace Hayden, as well as for
all the reasons enumerated in this most excellent article. Keeping Hayden on was sheer insanity===almost as much as keeping Robert Gates as Sec/Def !

***Our forefathers knew well when they mandated that the Commander in Chief should be our civilian Executive--The President...and NOT the military commanders of the defense forces. Let us hope that Barak Obama keeps focus on this precept from the founding fathers !!

"Fixing intelligence" is the key crime for Bush and Tenet and others. It rises to the crime of treason, but we all know the "t" word will be avoided during any of these chats. The euphemism used, "cherry-picking," when it comes to the crime Bush, Cheney and Tenet signed off on, is tired and defines culpability, yet it has reappeared in all the media like so many Sunday morning saviors for Bush. Get used to saying it though, 'fixing intelligence,' as I just believe that within a couple of weeks those who have been hiding evidence of these acts of treason will slip out of their hiding places and be drawn, like moths to a flame, to finally tell the truth. I also believe that the surfeit of out-of-work lawyers and writers will chase this dog till it learns how to hunt.

Hector

". . . Hayden's dubious claims that valuable intelligence has been gotten through waterboarding . . . the crystal-clear observation made on Sept. 6, 2006, by Lt. Gen. John Kimmons, head of U.S. Army intelligence: 'No good intelligence is going to come from abusive practices. I think history tells us that. I think the empirical evidence of the last five years, hard years, tells us that.'"

This past Friday John Nichols and Jim Geraghty were on the NPR radio show Radio Times. The subject of Holder's statement that "water boarding is torture" was raised. Geraghty's response was mocking, sarcastic and patronizing -- "If you want to try to protect the country from terrorists by shouting at them, OK". A caller asked Geraghty if he had grounds for concluding that the information gained from torture was reliable -- the caller said that he himself was in no way an expert on the subject, but that he'd many who claim to be experts and all said that the information obtained was not reliable.

Geraghty's response to THAT question was, "All I can say is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. He wouldn't talk, and within 10 seconds of being waterboarded he was singing like a canary". The caller then asked, "But was the information obtained accurate". Geraghty replied, "It was used three times".

Realizing both the total lack of responsiveness (to say nothing of reliability and credibility) in that response and the futility of continuing the questions (I know the caller's thoughts because I was the caller), the caller rang off. But of course "It was used three times" is less than utterly unreliable. Assume that "it was used" fifty times. If "all" Geraghty "can say is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed" a start on what I can say is Bay of Pigs, bio weapons lab, cakewalk -- it's a long list of "information" that was "used".

As to the meaning of Hayden's reference to a lack of risk taking at Langley -- I've no way of knowing what he meant, and neither, with all due respect, do any of the other posters here. But it seems to me most likely that what he meant was that if people in the CIA have reason to fear that actions taken by them in response to orders that come down the established chain might later be prosecuted when the people in the chain of command have changed, the CIA officers will refrain from any action that might conceivably, in future, be held to be unlawful (actions of far less clear cut illegality and far more possible utility than waterboarding) -- and that by so refraining, they will cause, or permit, harm to the country.

I find much of the conduct of the American government over the past more than eight years, including the conduct to which Ray McGovern refers, horrific, sinful, unlawful, and a grave threat to the constitutional structure of government that has served this country well since its founding. Given what is publicly know about Hayden, I have no sympathy for him and no trust in his statements. But it does seem to me that whatever Hayden may have had in mind in making his "no more risk taking" statement, the issue to which I referred in the immediately preceding paragraph is one that must be taken seriously. The resolution should NOT, in my view, be issuing blanket immunity for all conduct that cannot be shown to have been in breach of orders given by duly constituted authority. And I have enormous respect for, and gratitude to, all who do resist orders such as those issued by Bush and others in the government (walking among the thin memorial slabs of stone outside the Bundestag in Berlin, each bearing the name and place and manner of execution, of a man or woman who resisted such orders was among the most moving experiences I've ever had). But simply sitting outside the action and saying, "People should resist unlawful orders" will not solve the problem. Not everyone has the courage of those named on those granite slabs.

Media culpability? It is simple to follow the trail of lowlifes, like Hayden, to see where responsibility for hidden crimes lead, but, for media culpability, the trail is a bit more muddled between the Judy Miller acts of planting intelligence, undoubtedly at the request of someone, to the acts of Rupert Murdoch and Ailes who carefully orchestrated the framing and spin around the so-called 911 "Constitution" as if it somehow contained a clause for such things. Even the public radio and tv agenda has been manipulated. Without the media under control, none of this stuff is even attempted. What division of the CIA is responsible for the hoax of "free press" still being claimed? I expect Mr. McGovern knows exactly how this part works.

I keep re-reading this and finding little incongruities that have haunted me for many decades. The line about Hayden choosing to salute Cheney is creepy to me and makes me wonder if he was making some sort of statement or simply stoked to finally get to play God. I guess that is what separates men, and I have no idea how it may affect women. Some men get to sell off their own judgment and, in Ray's term, resort to 'blind fealty' for some higher power. Personally, this speaks to the other taboo we continue to dignify, the soldier who protects other soldiers even when they deliberately murder innocents. Few soldiers in battle worry about the Constitution. Even fewer want to question dicey decisions they made even when they haunt their dreams and drive them mad. Soon, men, and surreally some women, will sit in front of the tube and worship our latest war teaching celebration: the Super Bowl. If we ever intend to reach a higher plain as humans, get away from warring and focus on child development globally, we need to tear down the icons of war along with the peddlers of it.

"The first duty of a man is the seeking after and investigation of the truth"
and
"Let the punishment match the offense." Cicero - De Legibus
But,
"Law stands mute in the midst of arms." Cicero - Pro Milone

The political and corporate media impetus to 'forget along to get along' regarding the high crimes and misdemeanors of the Shrubbery and its central cast of ghouls is, so far, camouflaged under a dense smog of grey umbrella national security cheese whiz. The media and senior DLC apparatchiks are complicit in the worst of Team Bush's and the pre-'06 GOP Congresses' crimes. The law, indeed, has stood mute for seven years before all this squirming Congressional self-interest equipped with such a perfect all purpose national security excuse.

That said, anyone familiar with the facts who has seen Hayden's warrantless surveillance schtick on television interviews and listened to the, by equal parts, self-righteous, self-serving and jingo-fried patriotism that mewls from his mealy mouth would know him for a dangerous fraud on sight. Most people who have observed his bizarre facial and verbal tics (including his macabre Strangelovian habit of asking for confirmation under his breath at the end of his most dubious assertions) would recognize the man as a sociopath or worse. To me he's like a German shepherd trained by the SS, who, though it is off the leash still wuffs its need for approval no matter how disgusting its behavior. The fact that he looks like an exact cross between Elmer Fudd and Heinrich Himmler doesn't help him either.

If the Establishment ever needed a handy scapegoat--and the list of the Shrubbery's high crimes demanding pretend public expiation is mighty lengthy--this Hayden creep is perfect. I wonder if he has realized yet that he has "PATSY" and "Bullseye" written all over his smugly little puss. He only had juice as a Sith Dark Lord so long as Emperor Cheney was in the White House to lend him the Force. And Hayden publicly admitted he took it upon his imperial self to break the law to activate warrantless surveillance even BEFORE Team Bush's lawyers could falsify still half-secret legalisms to mock-justify it. If there is a God in heaven the hootenanny those two will do in hell along with George Tenet, Geoffrey and Judith Miller and the White House lawyers would be the must have DVD of S&M hell watchers for the next thousand years.

Hayden and Cheney use an identical tack when pressed on the torture issue. First they deny, then they cite KSM and claim all sorts of "valuable intelligence" was obtained using "enhanced interrogation" and if, rarely, they are pressed for more precise details on this "valuable intelligence" they then cite the capture of this or that immediately replaceable Al Quaeda leader/martyr, or "foiled plans" to attack the US or Britain that are either proven to be hoaxes or are always described in the vaguest terms. But if pressed yet again for concrete details they ALWAYS resort to the old grey umbrella clause: "Uh, that's classified to protect US and British national security."

Big Media always serenely co-forgets how, according to the State Department's own annual figures and the NYU study The Iraq Effect, the numbers of terrorists and terror events worldwide soared at least six-fold after the illegal 2003 Occuvasion of Iraq. They never question how much of the diminution of Al Quaeda attacks inside Iraq has to do with the regular, massive bribes the Pentagon hands out to the Sunni tribal sheiks inside Iraq. They also never mention the tens of thousands of extremist madrasses still actively cranking out extremists from the Middle East to Central Asia--especially in Pakistan--and why they haven't shut down their sources of funding.

The Machine made KSM so squirrelly from torture that he confessed to an impossible litany of crimes and it was a degrading experience to hear Jim Lehrer read out this absurd kitchen sink list on the PBS News Hour one night. As degrading to the listeners as it probably was even for Lehrer, who was only following orders, no doubt, since he never questioned the torture-obtained veracity of any of it or even pointed out that confessions obtained under torture might be suspect in the first place because flesh and blood human beings tend to say ANYTHING under torture to get their torturers to stop. How much of what any of the people "detained" and tortured by the military and CIA since 2001 could be proven? Two percent? Seven percent? Eleventy-five percent?

Hayden secretes the same dark Military/Petrol/Torture/Prison Industrial Complex juice from his pores that Cheney does and Cheney didn't hesitate to publicly out and destroy the career of a CIA NOC (Valerie Plame). These thugs and mass murderers only send down deeper roots the longer they are tolerated.

If I were heading into the White House in the current milieu my first orders would be to investigate how far and deep does the Cheney/Hayden/pro-neocon Pentagon personnel Shadow Government still extend; what agencies and individuals have the power and guts to root it out and prosecute it or, where that is not possible, terminate it with extreme prejudice. This shadow government represents a continuing threat to the true national security of the United States and any US administration that is not sympathetic to its ultra-violent, anti-Consitutional extreme fascism.

But, as I've said before, we'll know in 101 days where Obama stands and how really smart or self-deluded he is.