Freeman sent a note to FP and I've also received it via email. Here is the link. I was going to let this one stand on its own without any comments from me but a few folks wanted my impression so here goes.
First, as I noted yesterday the debate around the appointment of Chas Freeman to lead the National Intelligence Council is about more than the man at its center. It is one area where we are currently seeing the boundaries around what can and cannot be raised in foreign policy discussion being tested. Freeman, it seems, has been appointed to the position because he is a smart analyst who has a tendency to push back against groupthink. His appointment has triggered a backlash among some who disagree with his views on Israel and the Middle East. I don't know and have never met CF but I do know that the lesson of the past 8 years is that debate on the tough issues within government is a good thing.
Let me be clear that I think the issue goes beyond Israel-Palestine and the Middle East. We see censorship and self censorship in Washington, DC on issues such as Cuba and India-Pakistan re: Kashmir.
I hope that the Freeman fight leads to a push from those outside government who have tired of a debate within these artificial boundaries.
Now here are pieces of Freeman's statement - it begins:
You will by now have seen the statement by Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair reporting that I have withdrawn my previous acceptance of his invitation to chair the National Intelligence Council.
I have concluded that the barrage of libelous distortions of my record would not cease upon my entry into office. The effort to smear me and to destroy my credibility would instead continue. I do not believe the National Intelligence Council could function effectively while its chair was under constant attack by unscrupulous people with a passionate attachment to the views of a political faction in a foreign country. I agreed to chair the NIC to strengthen it and protect it against politicization, not to introduce it to efforts by a special interest group to assert control over it through a protracted political campaign.
And it continues as follows (link here):
As those who know me are well aware, I have greatly enjoyed life since retiring from government. Nothing was further from my mind than a return to public service. When Admiral Blair asked me to chair the NIC I responded that I understood he was “asking me to give my freedom of speech, my leisure, the greater part of my income, subject myself to the mental colonoscopy of a polygraph, and resume a daily commute to a job with long working hours and a daily ration of political abuse.” I added that I wondered “whether there wasn’t some sort of downside to this offer.” I was mindful that no one is indispensable; I am not an exception. It took weeks of reflection for me to conclude that, given the unprecedentedly challenging circumstances in which our country now finds itself abroad and at home, I had no choice but accept the call to return to public service. I thereupon resigned from all positions that I had held and all activities in which I was engaged. I now look forward to returning to private life, freed of all previous obligations.
I am not so immodest as to believe that this controversy was about me rather than issues of public policy. These issues had little to do with the NIC and were not at the heart of what I hoped to contribute to the quality of analysis available to President Obama and his administration. Still, I am saddened by what the controversy and the manner in which the public vitriol of those who devoted themselves to sustaining it have revealed about the state of our civil society. It is apparent that we Americans cannot any longer conduct a serious public discussion or exercise independent judgment about matters of great importance to our country as well as to our allies and friends.
Then he gets into the tactics used against him before seeking to set the record straight:
Still, for the record: I have never sought to be paid or accepted payment from any foreign government, including Saudi Arabia or China, for any service, nor have I ever spoken on behalf of a foreign government, its interests, or its policies. I have never lobbied any branch of our government for any cause, foreign or domestic. I am my own man, no one else’s, and with my return to private life, I will once again – to my pleasure – serve no master other than myself. I will continue to speak out as I choose on issues of concern to me and other Americans.
And finally he ends with this:
I retain my respect and confidence in President Obama and DNI Blair. Our country now faces terrible challenges abroad as well as at home. Like all patriotic Americans, I continue to pray that our president can successfully lead us in surmounting them.
Remember you can read the entire thing at FP but I think this tees up the question well.