There has been a little stink at the CIA lately about an internal email sent by the new head honcho. Of note is the following:
As agency employees we do not identify with, support or champion opposition to the administration or its policies.
Now, the spin has been that he is trying to convey the idea that the data speaks for itself. That the CIA itself is neutral.
Well, I give the honcho an "F" for clarity. The statement, to me, reeks of one sidedness... not neutrality. To see why, let's change a phrase to it's opposite and see if the resulting statement can be contorted to still have the same meaning.
As agency employees we do not identify with, support or champion agreement with the administration or its policies.
I think that statement would cause a firestorm among the Republicans.
In mathematics |x| + |-x| gets larger as the value of x moves from zero. I think that negating the above statement shows just how far from neutral the original message is.
If the true intent was to promote neutrality, then this was an abysmal failure. Communication skills are the foundation of good leadership. I hope that is not a sign of things to come.
Not just that
vsergu on 2004-11-18T22:17:06
The other bit of the memo quoted in the news stories said that their job was to "support the administration and its policies in our work", which further clarifies the lack of neutrality.
Some people believe that the job of the intelligence services should be to provide the administration with a true picture of the world situation, whether that supports the administration's policies or not.
