Spies That Cross a Line

Article excerpt

United States intelligence-gathering is undoubtedly some of the best in the world. While finger-pointing is not appropriate as the nation heals itself, questions as to how 13 intelligence agencies failed to detect the massive attack on Sept. 11 need answers.

Suggestions that technology wasn't adequate, or that there was a lack of coordination and funding, may well be part of the story. But faced now with a sustained campaign to thwart terrorists, the US may need to use more covert spies. That practice declined as the US moved to high-tech surveillance and chose to avoid associating with "unsavory" foreign agents.

In the wake of news that a Guatemalan military officer being paid by the CIA was tied to the murder of a guerrilla in 1995, the CIA wisely approved a policy requiring approval before its field officers could recruit agents known to be human rights violators. It does not forbid hiring others with questionable records.

Still, when does the end justify the means in spying on terrorists? And just exactly what does "unsavory" mean? …


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.