Happy Anniversary, CIA! 12 Years of Lawlessness!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-e-anders/happy-anniversary-cia_b_5655294.html

In an opinion article from the Huffington Post, Christopher E. Anders claims that, throughout its twelve years of existence, the CIA has functioned on immoral principles by exploiting their position of power. He justifies this lawlessness through the use of various examples, which have recently become public knowledge. He sets the article’s context by explaining the CIA's torture program that was characterized by abusive behavior and even killed a few people.  This was one of the first scandals faced by the agency, which simply seem to ignore the resulting discussions, since “no meaningful reform” has occurred yet. A second example is the worldwide network of secret prisons operated by agents of the CIA that also uses barbaric methods of torture. However, the author finds it important to clarify that the CIA is not a self-governing agency, since they must follow orders given by the White House. This leads to a different debate of the intentions of the American government and if it is parallel to the same principles it advocates. With this perspective, one must not condemn the CIA for its actions, but instead require that the state take responsibility as well.  This lawlessness Anders mentions actually comes from the secretive and unapproved actions of the CIA. It is believed that the agency “reportedly lied to Congress, the White House, and the Justice department.”

A second, follow up claim made by the author is that this “lawlessness remains because the Constitution’s system of checks and balances is broken.”  Anders mentions, “no one at the CIA was ever even charged with a crime. Some agents, in fact, got job promotions” and how they “seem to be getting a blank check.” So, there is no controlling factor to prevent this agency from acting immorally. The author’s solution to this problem is to “ban the CIA from holding anyone in its custody and running a secret prison.” In addition, “President Obama must also stand up to the CIA.” By making torture reports public, the government and the population can ensure that there is some sort of balance control.

The article can be condensed into the following syllogism: some actions of the CIA do not necessarily follow government orders, the Constitution has no means of avoiding or punishing these acts; the CIA remains lawless. The events described by Anders are linked to another recent scandal, the leaking of NSA files. So, when applying the coherence truth check to the article, one can see that this situation is consistent with others of the same nature. Both have moral issues as the basis and main problem with each situation. However we must not take all information from the article as absolute truth. The lack of sources when describing these incriminating evidences can be seen as simply a fallacy in the author’s part, who is essentially promoting his personal point of view. Anders also does not present any counter points, which limits the reader’s understanding of the topic and excludes a seconds or third valuable opinion. Most importantly, it is extremely difficult to discuss the boundaries that define being moral or immoral. So when the author implies that something is immoral he must make clear of the definition he is using to differentiate right from wrong and understand that not everyone follows the same principles.