CLOSING STATEMENT
I thank MemoryShock for this debate; I have learned much from his fine technique. I will now make a few responses and comments, present one more
piece of the puzzle, and conclude my case.
RESPONSE
it is the only major American intelligence agency designed for international Intel.
*snip*
There has been no replacement of CIA performance.
My opponent has returned to this contention, made in his opening statement, despite the fact the he himself cited four other agencies (NSA, NRO, DIA,
NGA) with major responsibilities in that area. I would also remind the reader that there are at least nine other agencies in the American
intelligence community as yet unmentioned in this debate. Clearly, the CIA no longer holds a monopoly on international intelligence, if they ever
did.
The statement was made that CIA provides necessary and competent service to the wider intelligence community and the US government. To be sure,
individuals within the CIA have, in many ways, served with distinction and excellence, and many tasks undertaken have strengthened and protected this
country. That does not excuse the flaws of the Agency itself. Nor does it excuse the illegal, unethical, and inhuman
[1] actions undertaken by the Agency. We cannot let the unaccountability and deceit the Agency has
practiced continue.
Heavy reformation is required. To the extent that, as in the past, reformation is unviable or ineffective, elimination is the only acceptable
alternative.
My opponent claims that Congress is overwhelmed, and that the American public is blind, blithely ignoring the root of these problems. We must address
that issue directly:
CIA: DECEIVING THE PUBLIC
In addition to lies to Congress, a structural organization that evades accountability, and the undertaking of illegal acts, the CIA has deliberately
and calculatedly deceived and propagandized the American public.
This activity began at the agency's inception. In 1948, Frank Wisner created the "Office of Policy Coordination" inside the CIA. His instructions
were:
create an organization that concentrated on "propaganda, economic warfare; preventive direct action, including sabotage, anti-sabotage,
demolition and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of
indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world."
[2]
By 1953, the propaganda portion of this initiative, which became known as Operation Mockingbird, influenced or 'owned' members of over 25 newspaper
and wire agencies. Included in the list: CBS, Time Magazine, Life Magazine, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Christian Science
Monitor, to name a few.
[2]
In 1977, the operation was still in effect:
In 1977, Rolling Stone alleged that one of the most important journalists under the control of Operation Mockingbird was Joseph Alsop, whose
articles appeared in over 300 different newspapers. Other journalists alleged by Rolling Stone Magazine to have been willing to promote the views of
the CIA included Stewart Alsop (New York Herald Tribune), Ben Bradlee (Newsweek), James Reston (New York Times), Charles Douglas Jackson (Time
Magazine), Walter Pincus (Washington Post), William C. Baggs (The Miami News), Herb Gold (The Miami News) and Charles Bartlett (Chattanooga Times).
The CIA also provided them with classified information to help them with their work.
[2]
As well as undermining objective reporting, Operation Mockingbird was also able to censor stories that may have raised the concerns of the American
public:
Wisner was also able to restrict newspapers from reporting about certain events. For example, the CIA plots to overthrow the governments of Iran
(See: Operation Ajax) [2]
In 1953, Operation Ajax covertly overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran, replacing it with a pro-Western dictatorship
[3]. The Iranian people are still mindful of the history of US intervention in their country,
a history that no doubt underlies much of their current animosity towards the United States. Perhaps the drums of war would not be pounding quite so
loudly today, if the CIA had not acted to deceive the American public so long ago.
CONCLUSION
The world in which the CIA lives has changed. The Soviet Union has long-fallen.
The American philosophical basis of the Cold War was: fight fire with fire. It was considered that only an active yet covert response could counter
the economic and political might of the Soviet Union, bent on the elimination of the United States and its way of life.
Those days are gone. The new enemy of terrorism is shown as consisting of fragmented, secretive cells, perhaps tangentially sponsored by states, but
having none of the constancy or stability of ligitimate nations. Those attributes have reshaped the battle.
In the past, we have known our enemies, the rough scope thereof, and could make somewhat reasonable and accurate guesses about their capabilities.
Field agents could act, to some extent, within a reliably known context. This is no longer the case, the scope of the enemies extent is vague,
connection and coordination is chaotic and ever-changing.
Intelligence gathering is thus separated from response. The field intelligence of the CIA now only makes sense within the larger context of a
diversified intelligence community -- integration with communications intelligence, signal intelligence, satellite reconnaissance, military
intelligence, and foreign policy is the only way in which a larger picture can be pieced together, and it is the only scope in which effective
response can be formulated.
And the CIA is not structured to mediate such a collaboration. We have seen that the approach to centralized, controlled information flow in
analysis, within a single Agency, only leads to hidden inefficiencies, unaccountability, and the possibility of biased conclusions. Perhaps the
specialized agencies in the new intelligence community must work together, directly with one another, though all possible lines of cooperation and
communication, driven by openly-managed, secure
emergent coordination, resulting from
all agencies' quest for highest-quality
results.
Smaller version of the 'overall picture' no longer resemble the whole. In the past, we could guess at a state's motives, means, and opportunities,
and be reasonable certain that the actions of their various agencies, and what intelligence was gathered, could be fit correctly within that
understanding.
Today's enemies are unlikely bedfellows. Disparate groups act in coordination, even though ideologies, aims, and methods contradict. Non-state
sponsors of terrorism can influence several terrorist organizations, without those organizations even being aware they're being coordinated. The
small picture is no longer a valid means of extrapolation.
There is no longer a need for a multi-purpose agency such as the CIA, with its intelligence gathering, analysis, propaganda, paramilitary, scientific
and technological research, and strategic capabilities all under one roof.
Indeed, we have seen the dangers of a monolith such as the CIA: the inefficiencies it can lead to, the internal paranoia and uncooperative attitude
with which it interacts with the larger government community, the extent to which it can be subverted to deceive and threaten the very people it was
meant to protect.
My opponent and I agree that this unacceptable, that reforms must be enacted, and that the CIA, as it exists and acts today, cannot be allowed to
continue.
The specifics of action are, as always, debatable. Many good points and ideas have been raised during the course of this discussion. One thing is
certain: we must look with clear eyes to the past, accepting and even demanding accountability for flaws and mistakes, and be willing to look forward,
with cooperation and determination: towards the structure of a better intelligence community, not just for the United States, but as a model for the
world.
Thank you.
