Quick hit here. Read Eli Lake's piece on some controversy (what else?) related to the CIA's "Black Sites" papers.
I'll be honest. When it comes to subject matter like this, I find reporters, even investigative journalists, worthless. Why?
1) Their attempt to be even-handed hides their biases. I'd rather know what they think from the start and have them give me an opinion. Except...
2) They are outsiders. Being in a menage a trois is a wildly different experience than watching YouPorn. Journalists are voyuers. When it comes to the military industrial complex and a top-secret rumor mill, I'd rather hear from someone that knows the secret handshake. Even if they are long-retired or simply mouthing opinions based on self-preservation or self-interest, if they've got their decoder ring, I at least know they're focusing on the right issues, raising the appropriate stakes, highlighting the key players and showing us the sausage factory as only a line worker knows it. Knowing who they are gives me all the caveat emptor I need.
3) The public are, well, morons when it comes to the military-industrial complex. Most of what they know comes from 1) the movies, 2) the 1970's or 3) movies in the 1970's. The public's ignorance, journalist's naivete and the potential for casting shadow where there is none and shining light through an ideological prism make for a dangerous mix. You can end up with sensationalism, isolationism and conspiracy theories wrapped up into one Hollywood-ready melange.
So what about the article's content? Who knows? I stand firmly behind the policies criticized in the piece. And I trust the CIA a hell of a lot more than I trust Mark Udall and the US Senate.
But then, I'm probably the only one.