The CIA's abuse of intelligence ethics

"Melvin Goodman, who spent 24 years at the CIA, says the agency has lost its way. In a recent speech at the University of St. Thomas, Goodman argued that intelligence analysts should be telling "truth to power," but instead he said the CIA has become politicized."  

The CIA's abuse of intelligence ethics, audio broadcast (Real Player), Minnesota Public Radio, 2007

Report on Detainee Treatment Released

The Constitution Project's Task Force on Detainee Treatment released their 602-page report on April 15, 2013.

The Report of The Constitution Project's Task Force on Detainee Treatment

2012 Report on Security Clearance Determinations

"The Intelligence Authorization Act for the Fiscal Year 2010 established a requirement for the President to submit an annual report to Congress on the security clearance process, to include the total number of security clearances across government and in-depth metrics on the timeliness of security clearance determinations in the Intelligence Community (IC). In response to this requirement, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) has prepared this 2012 Report on Security Clearance Determinations..."

2012 Report on Security Clearance Determinations

A Report on the CIA's Detention and Rendition Program

Globalizing Torture: CIA Secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition, Open Society Foundations, February 2013

Legality of Drone Strikes on U.S. Citizens

Justice Department memo reveals legal case for drone strikes on Americans, Michael Isikoff, NBC News (February 5, 2013)

Department of Justice White Paper: Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a U.S. Citizen Who Is a Senior Operational Leader of Al-Qa'ida or An Associated Force

The CIA's Self-Serving Use of Secrecy

A short editorial piece on the selective use of secrecy by the CIA. 

Secret Double Standard, Ted Gup, New York Times, January 8, 2013

The Moral Choices on Interrogations

The new movie "Zero Dark Thirty" and a yet-to-be-released report approved by the United Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on the CIA interrogation program have turned the media spotlight once again on the issue of enhanced interrogation methods. While this article by David Ignatius doesn't cover new ground, it does raise once more the issue of whether the key factor in determining whether enhanced interrogation methods are permissible is the effectiveness of these methods to obtain valuable information. Perhaps certain interrogation methods are never justifiable despite their alleged effectiveness.

Executive Order 13491, signed by President Obama on January 22, 2009, limits interrogation techniques to those "authorized by and listed in Army Field Manual 2 22.3". Certain interrogation techniques deemed "enhanced interrogation methods" used by U.S. officials in the aftermath of the attacks of 9/11 would not be permitted under Executive Order 13491. However, this has not stopped the public debate. Amy Zegart has pointed out, in her recent article "Torture Creep", that surveys indicate that the American public in 2012 is more accepting of enhanced interrogation methods than was the case in 2005. One possible reason for this is that many people might not believe claims that the most vital information can be derived from detainees through non-coercive means. Additionally, in their minds, harsh interrogation methods might demonstrate a level of seriousness in stopping terrorism that other methods do not.

Ultimately, the general public is forced to view the issue as outsiders not privy to the full account of methods used or the actual information obtained. Therefore, outsiders are not in a position to decide what is effective or even whether non-coercive means would have obtained or did in fact obtain the same information. Reliance by the general public on expert opinion or the experiences of "insiders" is hardly unique to intelligence work. However, the secrecy surrounding intelligence work complicates exponentially any attempt at an informed decision on matters such as enhanced interrogation methods. This fumbling in the dark heightens the need for the robust internal oversight of activities whose impact few members of the general public feel directly and for which public information is scarce. 

The Moral Choices on Interrogations, David Ignatius, The Washington Post, December 12, 2012

CIA's Ex-Con Code Thief Reflects On His Career

From NPR:

"NEAL CONAN, HOST:
An elite team of CIA operatives flies overseas, breaks into foreign embassies and steals secret codes, all without leaving a trace. While that might sound like the plotline of a Hollywood film, former CIA officer Doug Groat conducted such missions until he questioned his superiors about sloppy procedures on one operation that almost cost him and his team their freedom or maybe their lives. The battle that ensued between Groat and the CIA led to charges of espionage and extortion and four years in prison. Doug Groat joins us now from member station WUOT in Knoxville. Nice to have you with us today."

CIA's Ex-Con Code Thief Reflects On His Career, National Public Radio, October 15, 2012

The CIA Burglar Who Went Rogue, Smithsonian Magazine, October 2012

Standing to Challenge NSA Surveillance

Standing is a concept in American jurisprudence in which a party has the right to make a legal claim. In general, an individual or organization filing the suit must demonstrate that they have suffered an actual injury due to the conduct in question. The standing rule prevents, in many cases, lawsuits filed on behalf of others. The standing rule also prevents lawsuits by a party that has not suffered an actual injury, but the potential for injury exists. For instance, the fact that the National Security Agency is conducting a surveillance program, along with the mere possibility that a specific individual might be caught up in the dragnet, is potentially insufficient to meet the standing criteria without evidence that the specific individual actually was impacted by the surveillance. 

Before the United States Supreme Court this month is the case of Clapper v. Amnesty International USA, in which the plaintiffs seek prospective relief from the NSA surveillance program called "Stellar Wind". The following link is to a page maintained by the American Bar Association on the case.

Clapper v. Amnesty International USA

Torture Creep

"Why are more Americans accepting Bush-era policies than ever before?"

 Torture Creep by Amy Zegart, Foreign Policy, September 25, 2012