Have you ever wondered how an employer might check job references on a former CIA Operative? Imagine calling headquarters at the agency and asking about the work record for a job applicant who claims he was a clandestine operative for the CIA. I suspect it wouldn't produce a satisfactory result one way or the other.

I thought of this conundrum as I spent time on the road tonight catching up on a backlog of podcasts. Talk of the Nation on NPR broadcast an interview (12/22) with Reuel Marc Gerecht, who offered unsubstantiated claims that extraordinary rendition started as a policy during the Clinton Administration and that Obama may well find need to continue the program. This latter opinion was offered in a kind of "Oh, the American public is really naive. The CIA knows just how valuable these renditions are, and Obama will come to understand this as well once he gains access to all the security briefings that we insiders read on a daily basis."

In an op-ed piece published in the New York Times (Out of Site on 12/13/08) Mr. Gerecht makes the very same claim about Clinton and the same claims about the value of extraordinary rendition. And he obviously knows what he's talking about. After all, the NYT introduces him as "a former Central Intelligence Agency officer" and "a fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD)."

While listening to this expert discuss these "all important national security matters" with Neil Conan, however, I couldn't help wondering about these stated credentials. The guy sounded kind of like Barney Fife in that character's most brilliantly swaggering boastful self as when Barney would work to impress Sheriff Andy (or Otis, the town drunk - it didn't matter) of just how important he was and how he understood things that were beyond the reach of us mere mortals. I swear, you could almost see through the radio this guy's chest puff out as he drew himself taller to talk about matters few could truly understand, god bless our pointed little heads. In fact, he shared with us all just how difficult it is to withstand the "harsh interrogation methods" (better known as torture as specified in the Geneva Conventions) that he, himself, had endured during his training as a CIA Agent. 

It all just seemed to be a mite bit too convenient; the claims of the CIA's unequivocal endorsement of extraordinary rendition too outrageous. This just didn't seem to pass the smell test in offering assurance that this was indeed a credible source. Which leads me to my initial point: How can anyone be sure this guy actually worked for the CIA as a clandestine operative?

In checking the rest of this guy's background, I find that the FDD is a think tank (using the term loosely) populated by many of the same neocons who formed the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). There is little this group  has accomplished that inspires confidence that they, themselves, would feel any compunction about "truth in advertising." It is not outside the realm of possibilities that they would in fact put forth an "expert" to sell their snake oil and bestow upon him such bogus credentials, knowing the difficulty of verifying them.

And truthfully? I hope it is actually the case that Mr. Gerecht is indeed a fraud who is tasked with promoting and defending the criminal assault on our laws that has been committed by this Administration at the behest of PNAC. Because after listening to this Barney Fife channeling Dr. Strangelove for the few minutes he was on the program, I would most sincerely hope that this whack job has never worked for us even as a janitor at CIA Headquarters, let alone in a position where he would ever be allowed to come anywhere near having anything to do with our national security without benefit of first being renditioned into a straightjacket and an asshat.

Can anyone offer any help in determining just who this guy really is? Or perhaps explain how thoroughly NPR  and the New York Times check the background of the "experts" they place before us?