SIGN IN to access Harper’s Magazine
1. Sign in to Customer Care using your account number or postal address.
2. Select Email/Password Information.
3. Enter your new information and click on Save My Changes.
Subscribers can find additional help here. Not a subscriber? Subscribe today!
When the New York Times disclosed yesterday that Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s black sheep brother, Ahmed Wali, was on the payroll of the CIA, Congressional leaders were quick to note that this was the first they had learned of the agency’s relationship with a man widely thought to be at the center of Afghan drug smuggling operations, and they demanded a briefing. And House intelligence committee member Jan Schakowsky was also quick to make note of what seemed to her an increasingly familiar pattern: Congressional leaders learn about CIA operations from the press. Their complaints to the agency meet with a familiar retort, Schakowsky said: “We’ve been meaning to brief you about that…”
The House Intelligence Committee is systematically surveying the CIA’s compliance record with its briefing obligations over the last eight years. The committee’s work isn’t yet finished, but it’s already come up with five reasonably clear-cut cases in which the CIA either failed to brief or lied to Congressional oversight. TPM’s Zachary Roth sums up the comments:
Earlier this year, Speaker Nancy Pelosi charged that the agency had lied to her about its enhanced interrogation techniques program, during a September 2002 briefing — provoking outrage from Republicans. But that episode was among the examples that Schakowsky and Eshoo pointed to today.
• Another concerned the top secret program to assassinate al Qaeda operatives which CIA director Leon Panetta first told Congress about in June.
• A third concerned the CIA’s 2005 destruction of videotapes showing the interrogation of al Qaeda operatives.
• And a fourth, already known, related to the shooting down of a plane carrying missionaries over Peru in 2001, information about which was concealed [from] Congress.
The CIA isn’t issuing a ringing defense in response. In a statement released to The Hill, it stresses that under current management, it will do better:
It is the policy of the Central Intelligence Agency to be clear and candid with the United States Congress. Director Panetta has made a relationship of trust, confidence, and respect a top priority.
Back in June, a political flap erupted over Pelosi’s charge that the CIA misled her about its torture program, and particularly the use of waterboarding. Republican leaders accused Pelosi of lying and suggested that she should be investigated to see if she had authorized the waterboarding program—even as they were staunchly opposing an investigation of the program itself. This political reduction to absurdity missed the point of the question, of course, since it cannot be answered in a binary yes-no fashion. There is at this point no question that briefings about the torture program occurred, but that many of the briefings the CIA claimed happened in fact did not, and that the briefings fell far short of disclosing what was being done and on what authority. The crux of the matter lies, as usual, in the details, and the CIA operatives conducting the briefings unsurprisingly go no further than their political bosses want them to go. In any event, however, the latest conclusions give Speaker Pelosi and her allies more ammunition, and the CIA’s whimpering response is telling.
More from Scott Horton:
Conversation — March 30, 2016, 3:44 pm
Joseph Hickman discusses his new book, The Burn Pits, which tells the story of thousands of U.S. soldiers who, after returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, have developed rare cancers and respiratory diseases.
i. stand with israel
I listen to a lot of conservative talk radio. Confident masculine voices telling me the enemy is everywhere and victory is near — I often find it affirming: there’s a reason I don’t think that way. Last spring, many right-wing commentators made much of a Bloomberg poll that asked Americans, “Are you more sympathetic to Netanyahu or Obama?” Republicans picked the Israeli prime minister over their own president, 67 to 16 percent. There was a lot of affected shock that things had come to this. Rush Limbaugh said of Netanyahu that he wished “we had this kind of forceful moral, ethical clarity leading our own country”; Mark Levin described him as “the leader of the free world.” For a few days there I yelled quite a bit in my car.
The one conservative radio show I do find myself enjoying is hosted by Dennis Prager. At the Thanksgiving dinner of American radio personalities (Limbaugh is your jittery brother-in-law, Michael Savage is your racist uncle, Hugh Hewitt is Hugh Hewitt) Dennis Prager is the turkey-carving patriarch trying to keep the conversation moderately high-minded. While Prager obviously doesn’t like liberals — “The gaps between the left and right on almost every issue that matters are in fact unbridgeable,” he has said — he often invites them onto his show for debate, which is rare among right-wing hosts. Yet his gently exasperated take on the Obama–Netanyahu matchup was among the least charitable: “Those who do not confront evil resent those who do.”
Average number of Americans who are injured by chain saws each year:
A farmer in Kenya bit a python who tried to eat him.
A former prison in Philadelphia that has served as a horror-movie set was being prepared as a detention center for protesters arrested at the upcoming Democratic National Convention, and presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump fired his campaign manager.
Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!
“Matt was happy enough to sustain himself on the detritus of a world he saw as careening toward self-destruction, and equally happy to scam a government he despised. 'I’m glad everyone’s so wasteful,' he told me. 'It supports my lifestyle.'”