America at the Crossroads

Remove all ads!

The CIA hasn't been around for "a very long time." It's a relatively new body which our Founders never envisioned and, I'm sure, many would be highly opposed to. So to say "well, it's been standard practice for so long..." is an invalid argument. You need to step back and look the big picture of what the US is and what it was meant to be... and of what it's become.

 

I guess you should define what you think 'a very long time' means. I wouldn't be quite so quick to say the founding fathers did not envision spies.

 

Well, there certainly were spies during the Revolution. The most famous, and notorious, was the traitor Benedict Arnold. The British had a network of spies, particularly in France, where Ben Franklin was stationed as special diplomat, along with John Adams and the Lees. Ben often knew who the spies were, and gave false information to those whom he suspected, and very effectively misled the British on a number of occasions.

But the Founders would not have envisioned something like the CIA - there was not even a standing, professional army during the early years of the nation. I think several of them would have been very disapponted to see the current stituation, especially Franklin, Madison and Jefferson.

On the other hand, Hamilton and a few of his allies in the High-Federalist camp would have probably approved of the CIA, with some resevations and would not like the way it is being used by the current administration, IMO. They were still men of high principle, especially Hamilton. Spying was still considered very dishonorable, and spies were usually hanged. There was the famous instance of where a British officer was caught spying by Washington. And even though Hamilton (since the spy was an officer and a gentleman) implored Washington to have him face the firing squad, Washington refused, and had him hanged instead, as a mark of dishonor.

[ September 24, 2006, 16:11: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]

 

Well, spying in the 'modern' bureaucratic sense (that is, collecting massive databases on other nations and your own, including military, economic, political, and cultural info as well as 'dossiers' on individual citizens) only began with Napoleon, so I doubt if the founding fathers could have conceived of anything like what we have today. Given the totalitarian implications of institutionalized spying, I'm sure it would have made them uncomfortable at the very least...

 

Hey!

 

So... I was just wondering, what would it take for an impeachment procedure against Bush? Technically, if he continually disregards the constitution he's supposed to protect, he's not doing a really good job, is he?

 

Nope.

 

Technically/legally? No.

Morally? If we can impeach a president for lying about where he puts his prick, we can impeach a president for getting a few thousand Americans and few tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed needlessly.

 

Everyone knows he put her in New York....

 

Actually, impeaching every president who lied might well be productive. We might end up getting one or two who don't lie then

I'm well aware of the legal difference; my point was that, when you get right down to it, what's legal and what's "just/right" aren't the same.