| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| The CIA Is No 'Rogue' Agency |
| 2004-11-24 |
| Seldom in my memory has there been such intense controversy about the CIA. This fellow is very young or he does not remember the Church Committee. Seldom has so much of what is said been so distorted and misinformed. Seldom has so much of what it said and repeated come from Langley soto voce. Seldom has there been so little concern about the potential impact on the agency's ability to perform its mission and the consequences that holds for national security. The time has come to turn down the temperature of the debate, to take a deep breath, and to get some balance and thoughtfulness into the discussion. Or the time has come for Langley to shut up, butt out of politics, and do its job Let's start by dispelling the myth that the CIA has become a "dysfunctional" and "rogue" agency. Like any organization of human beings, the CIA is far from perfect and has made mistakes -- mistakes we have recognized and Two dozen! And in the same time how many were bagged by the Army and Marines? If you never lost your focus on the drive to protect the U. S. homeland, why did a Department of Homeland Security have to be formed? This is the same agency that, through its operators and analysts, was in large part responsible for many of the victories against terrorists and weapons proliferators cited during the recent election campaign -- the penetration and destruction of the illicit A.Q. Khan nuclear supply network, the closely related surrender of Libya's weapons of mass destruction, the capture of many of the key perpetrators of Sept. 11 attacks, to mention just a few. This should go in the dictionary as the definition of chutzpah. Americans need to start thinking of these officers as our troops without uniforms, for that is what they are. Trying to pick up some of that military credibility, eh? The military worked damn hard in the '70's and '80's to rebuild itself. What was the CIA doing then? Hiring Scheuer and firing Ames. Put another way, is there real tolerance for things that go awry in carefully planned operations that must be carried out in circumstances not completely under anyone's control? There should be, because there is often as much "fog" in clandestine intelligence work as there is in wars. Wrapping yourselves in the military again. Very interesting. Beyond all this, it is alleged that the CIA was leaking material before the election to damage the president. There were leaks to be sure, but the truth is that no one, other than those who leaked and those who reported, knows where they were actually coming from. Provide Links! What I do know beyond a doubt is that the CIA was not institutionally plotting against the president, as some allege. I've checked all the minutes from the staff meetings and the Director never told us to. The accusation is absurd. CIA officers are career professionals who work for the president. Tell Congress. They see this as a solemn duty, regardless of which party holds the White House. Has everyone ruled out the possibility that the intelligence community during this period was simply doing its job -- calling things as it saw them -- and that people with a wide array of motives found it advantageous to put out this material when the CIA's views seemed at odds with the administration's? Many people have called for a return to civility in Washington. To me, civility means thoughtful and well-informed debate. Nowhere is this more needed than in the debate over intelligence. Like the U.S. military, Wrapping the CIA in the military again. our nation's intelligence officers face daunting challenges now and for years to come. Constructive criticism can help. Tirades and hyperbole will not. The writer is deputy director of central intelligence. |
| Posted by:Mrs. Davis |
| #8 Damn Damn Damn. This has me biting my tongue. All I can say is: this person is obviously still in his box, not thinking outside it. Typical "protect the empire" stuff instead of "protect the nation". I wish I could say more. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2004-11-24 11:38:13 AM |
| #7 Damn Damn Damn. This has me biting my tongue. All I can say is: this person is obviously still in his box, not thinking outside it. Typical "protect the empire" stuff instead of "protect the nation". I wish I could say more. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2004-11-24 11:38:13 AM |
| #6 LH, No doubt about that. But they aren't the problem and I hope no one have ever thought they were. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-11-24 12:14:38 PM |
| #5 just one thing. While I have lots of problems with Langley, and very much doubt the denial of deliberate leaks campaign, the links to the military thing is not bogus - a very considerable number of CIA operatives are killed in the line of duty. Their job is not easy, and they are heroic, whatever shenanigans happen at HQ. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2004-11-24 11:57:03 AM |
| #4 Come on, OS. If Scheuer can get away with it, so can you. I promise not to call Langley asking for an interview. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-11-24 11:47:00 AM |
| #3 Damn Damn Damn. This has me biting my tongue. All I can say is: this person is obviously still in his box, not thinking outside it. Typical "protect the empire" stuff instead of "protect the nation". I wish I could say more. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2004-11-24 11:38:13 AM |
| #2 Does Mr. McLaughlin know Mr. Anonymous? Never in my memory? How about during the 1970s and the Frank Church commission? In its final report, (The Church commission) issued in April 1976, the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities concluded: âDomestic intelligence activity has threatened and undermined the Constitutional rights of Americans to free speech, association and privacy. It has done so primarily because the Constitutional system for checking abuse of power has not been applied.â |
| Posted by: Capt America 2004-11-24 11:31:46 AM |
| #1 The writer is deputy director of central intelligence. He should be "ex-deputy director". I wonder if this guy thought up sending Wilson, or just signed off on the idea. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-11-24 9:31:10 AM |