Discuss Tim Rutten's Jan. 7 Op-Ed column.

Reading some of the comments here, it is obvious that the majority of you do not really know what goes on at the Company. Most CIA employees are analyst of one sort or another, only a few are the field agents you read about who engage in military type operations. You know nothing of the clandestine operations that are for collecting information, and a few who engage in some sort of sabotage. Panetta does not need to know how to spy, he needs to be able to organize and get the different divisions to work together, and to give the President accurate and unbiased information.

David U. @ 10:50 AM PST, Jan 8, 2009

So many mistakes in this column. (1)Tenet did NOT bring a "wheelbarrow full of intel experience" to the job. (2) CIA personnel are "officers" and not "agents." (3) Panneta's main qualifications are that he supports EO, civil rights and justice. These qualify him? Rutten shows ignorance of CIA history by writing that Helms and Colby were disasters. No competent historian would agree with that ludicrous statement. How about two other DCIs who had no intel experience - Turner and Deutsch, appointed by Democratic Presidents. If Panetta is as good as Obama says, then why was he not selected weeks ago?

Professor K @ 9:26 PM PST, Jan 7, 2009

While you mentioned Tenet, Goss and others, I would have added three points: First, when Goss was nominated by Bush, Feinstein said that a president should have the benefit of the doubt regarding the choice. Secondly, you quite properly noted that Goss, Tenet and others have had experience and have managed to damage the reputation of our intelligence agencies and our nation as a whole, I wish that you would have noted that Feinstein and others did not cover themselves in gloryin terms of oversight with regard to the NSA, FISA, telecom immunity, rendition, and on and on. Why give their opinions any credence?

GJL @ 5:20 PM PST, Jan 7, 2009

Once again the left media double standard strikes. Sarah Palin, in line for a purely political position, is tarred as having 'no foreign policy experience' as if VP's and presidents actually negotiate treaties etc. Now we have a man with, yes, vast Washington experience but zero intel experience, appointed to a semi-technical position, and suddenly experience doesn't matter. Frankly, I am inclined to agree that Panetta would be okay ... though its hard to see how is passions of civil rights etc have anything to do with national security. But you simply can't make that argument that experience doesn't matter after trashing Palin.

Mitchell Young @ 5:04 PM PST, Jan 7, 2009

"Establishing a truly effective intelligence agency is no problem. The only problem is getting our leaders to want one, and that problem may be insurmountable." — Ralph W. McGehee, in DEADLY DECEITS: My 25 years in the CIA, Sheridan Square Publications, Inc., New York, October 1983. P. 195 Panetta's appointment gives us reason to hope the problem has been surmounted, at least for a while.

BillBecker443 @ 4:41 PM PST, Jan 7, 2009

I'll buy that. Nice summary, Tim Rutten. And, by the way, I object to the comment that [running] a newspaper requires no specialized training and little trade craft. A vital national asset, the CIA, needs control and guidance from above, not a self-serving. org-serving operative. Time we on the ground took back that position. Lots of work to be done in Washington, whose first presidential election we celebrate today, Jan 7, reclaiming America's birthright, writ in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Kathleen Roberts @ 4:14 PM PST, Jan 7, 2009

Leon Panetta is in no way a political hack. Anyone who states that is stating his lack of knowledge. As Tim Rutten has persuasively outlined, it has been the "experienced professionals" who have demonstrated incompetence and a lack of ethical fiber. The appointment is one of Obama's best moves. Leon Panetta is likely to restore the CIA as a vital part of national defense, and lead it away from its recent disasters. The few strong professionals who have hung on in the CIA are ecstatic.

Larry Maxcy @ 3:18 PM PST, Jan 7, 2009

Robert C.J. Parry: Wow I'm surprised you're not embarrassed by that nonsensical rant you posted. You seem to have no intelligence at all, and used your full name, which makes me suspect you're a member of the intelligence community. lol.

Sean K @ 2:59 PM PST, Jan 7, 2009

The correctness of the choice for this position came to me with Tim's correct observation that LP has been at the very pointy end of the intelligence gathering efforts of this country. As Chief of Staff for the President he is one of the prime 'consumers' of the gathering effort. Consumers have a way of knowing good and bad product. LP's perspective as a conusmer of intelligence data is as good as any so called hands-on gathering experience. A person with a moral compass and useful experience with the product sounds like the right person for the job to me. RM Pasadena, CA

Robert Millard @ 2:34 PM PST, Jan 7, 2009

Leon Panetta has integrity and intelligence. He actually cares about this country. He will be perfect as CIA director. He can vet all the top officials at the CIA and keep the ones whom he finds to have the moral character and inside knowledge to lead our country's intelligence activities. They can make day-to-day decisions, but he would set the tone. And maybe telling the truth (and eschewing torture) would become an American ideal again.

Coleen Bondy @ 2:11 PM PST, Jan 7, 2009

Next