You are herecontent / President Obama's Most Inexplicable [although easily explained and typical] Failure

President Obama's Most Inexplicable [although easily explained and typical] Failure


By Melvin A. Goodman, t r u t h o u t

President Barack Obama has been a major disappointment to a liberal community that rallied to his call for genuine change. His administration has made no attempt to investigate the crimes that were committed by the Bush administration, including torture and abuse, secret prisons and renditions. President Obama rescued Wall Street, but not Main Street. And he has expanded the self-destructive war in Afghanistan, where there is no end in sight. President Obama cannot be blamed for the failure to close Guantanamo, but he continues to favor preventive detention. But the president's most inexplicable failure, in view of his Harvard Law School background and commitment to constitutional rights, is his unwillingness to name a statutory inspector general (IG) at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

READ THE REST at truthout.

Tags

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

"In view of" Obama's "Harvard Law School background and commitment to constitutional rights", why "is his unwillingness to name a statutory" IG at the CIA his "most inexplicable failure"?

What makes that more important than the following issues?

*) Ending the un- and anti-Constitutional wars of aggression;

*) A new, thorough, and independent 9/11 investigation;

*) Ceasing the criminal and un-, anti-Constitutional threats against Iran based on LIES, hegemony, hypocrisy, imperialism, corporatism, crony capitalism, allegiance with hell;

*) Respecting the treaties with indigenous Americans, the American Indians and providing them with real compensation;

*) Compensating Haitians for the many decades of evil US-empire crimes against these people;

*) Similarly for the people in the Congo and many other countries;

*) Providing sufficient financial aid to internally and externally forced Iraqi refugees, as well as for real reconstruction in Iraq;

*) Similarly for Afghans and Pakistanis;

*) Et cetera.

What's an IG for the CIA [really] going to do or change?

When the CIA told the Bush administration the truth about the WMD in Iraq, these CIA analysts were promptly replaced with cons by Rumsfeld and/or Cheney, who needed unquestioning obedience and, therefore, liars, instead of truth-tellers.

What the CIA needs is to abolish the operations part of the agency and which, today, apparently makes up around 90% of the agency.

What's an IG going to do about black, covert ops that aren't on any official agenda in order to keep them SECRET? How is an IG going to investigate this and the related international drug trafficking, which is used to fund these covert ops of the operations CIA?

How is a CIA IG going to get the government to put Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rover, Powell, Rice, and others on trial for their extreme and supreme international crimes, as well as their national crimes?

Create another fruitless govt position?

The population would be better off forming a massive lynch mob and then cleaning Washington out of all of the rogues there. This might potentially be productive, while a CIA IG is more likely just another fruitless position; theoretically or idealistically a good idea, but it would not amount to much real good, if any at all.

The govt is too overwhelmingly, thoroughly corrupt for the idea of the creation of a CIA IG position to cause [reality-based] hope. In reality-based terms, the govt is thoroughly corrupt at the highest levels of the body politic, departments and agencies; and the govt is controlled by large and rich corporations, banksters, et cetera.

A head of the CIA at the time that the idea of creating the operations branch was known to him opposed this quite strongly from what I've read. I don't know why, but what I read gives the impression that he was fighting against real demons, and he was, figuratively speaking anyway. And he lost.

The CIA should be abolished. It's 90% operations and the operations branch, except for some people or members kept in public view in order to provide a facade or apparence that the public accepts, stupidly, well, it's an EVIL branch and murder is its calling card; or one of its evil calling cards, anyway.

The analysts produce some good reports regarding other countries, but they never analyze the CIA and US govt, overall. They're always silent about the USA's evil nature and ways, nationally as well as internationally. I appreciate their good reports regarding other countries, but they're the Central Intelligence Agency and silent about the evils of the US, which is rather peculiar.

Of course that's a way to stay alive, but putting this little matter aside for the moment, their silence about the evil ways of the US is not welcome. Even after they retired they remain silent.

The only former CIA people I'm aware of having strongly spoken out in critically important ways are people who were in the operations part of the agency; John Stockwell, Phil Agee, Ralph McGehee, and a few others.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Support WarIsACrime



Donate.








Tweet your Congress critters here.


Advertise on this site!




Facebook      Twitter





Our Stores:























Movie Memorabilia.



The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.