Central Ingratiating Agency?

According to this story in today’s New York Times, new CIA director Porter Goss released an internal memo saying that the CIA’s “job is to ‘support the administration and its policies in our work,'” and that “‘as agency employees we do not identify with, support or champion opposition to the administration or its policies.'”

If true, it’s very disturbing. An agency like the CIA should do its best to present the facts regardless of what a politician wants them to be. Ideally, policy should be made based on the facts; facts shouldn’t be hushed (or doctored!) because they aren’t in agreement with an already-determined policy. Curiously, this is what Goss says in the exact same memo, noting that the CIA’s job is (presumably also) to “‘provide the intelligence as we see it – and let the facts alone speak to the policymaker.'”

Huh? But what if the facts happen not to be in accords with what the administration wants to do? I’m having trouble reconciling these two statements.

I’m worried that many of the early objections to Goss were actually justified.



  1. If it’s true that Goss wrote that it’s a big problem. The CIA has no business in politics in either direction–it’s there to provide information and analysis, period.

    Let’s hope that this didn’t happen, but I’m afraid it probably did.  

    <><><><>Posted by<><> <><>Anonymous


  2. And now the President has surrounded himself with a further yes-man/woman: Condi. 

    <><><><>Posted by<><> <><>< HREF="http://www.blogger.com/r?headlife.blogspot.com" TITLE="ronan at jhu dot edu">Ronan<>


Comments are closed.