Last week CIA whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling went to prison. If he were white, he probably wouldn't be there. Sterling was one of the CIA's few African-American case officers, and he became the first to file a racial discrimination lawsuit.
A dozen years before his recent sentencing to a 42-month prison term based, former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling was in the midst of a protracted and fruitless effort to find someone in Congress willing to look into his accusations about racial discrimination at the agency.
President Barack Obama made some progress on his agenda in his passage to India. But events in the Middle East and Washington demonstrated again how hamstrung his administration continues to be.
Mr. Obama, in ruling out prosecution for torture, may have thought he spared us bother, but actually he did us harm. By casting accountability into limbo, he makes possible government-sponsored torture in the future and prevents America from recovering the thing most precious: our good name.
Allowing CIA career employees or contractors to get away with torturing people free from legal accountability telegraphs to the rest of the world that the United States reserves unto itself the right to commit war crimes.
The torture program was a failure in all respects except one -- helping our global competitors. Bush's program helped undermine American leadership in the world.
It's safe to say that Senator Dianne Feinstein has been anything but a boat-rocker during her six years as chair of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee.
President Barack Obama's got a lot of problems, some of his making, many not. The last thing he need is one of his former top officials feeding attack lines to his enemies. So naturally, that's what he has.
President Obama is being praised by some for use of the term "torture" during a recent press conference when he referred to post-9/11 interrogation techniques employed on behalf of our government.
Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, we all believe that government should be transparent and accountable, right? How should we decide where we stand on a controversial government policy? A crucial first step is to try to establish key facts in the public record.
The Senate-CIA fight is jaw-dropping but Mary and David disagree if it's about oversight and/or Bush-Cheney 'torture.' Then: Is Obama a 'weak joke'(MM)? Were Ike, LBJ after Soviets invaded Hungry, Czechoslovakia (DC)? Was W while looking into Putin's soulful eyes (MG)?
Our nation needs an effective and unburdened CIA, a restoration of trust between the branches of government, and an opportunity to reassert our moral leadership internationally in pursuit of a more just and peaceful world. To do this, secrecy about the mistakes of the past must end.
If the CIA becomes regarded as monstrous and out of control by not just the usual critics but also by much of the mainstream in the U.S. and around the world -- and they are on that cusp right now -- some of the most important tools in protecting the United States and its interests short of war become, at best, decidedly double-edged swords.
The Senate must prevail in this Constitutional showdown between a secretive Executive Branch relic of the Cold War that has a long history of doing nasty things in our name.
CIA Director John O. Brennan's defense of the IC is that of a fierce loyalist. He speaks, but provides little substance -- not because of "sources and methods," but because of the politics in which all intelligence agencies are now immersed.
The very arrogance and presumption defining this action by the intelligence community -- increasingly opaque and beyond the control of the State Department -- help make sense of any number of otherwise bewildering features of U.S. foreign policy.