"It is our fault that we have sullied our own name and called our own principles into question by standing for justice and self-determination while hiring assassins and deposing elected leaders we don't like. "

It's probable that the Kennedy administration and other adminstrations were involved in hiring (or at least being aware and agreeing with) assassination against non-friendly or hostile countries. It also was later made into American law to forbid this- probably because it was so unsuccessful at getting the desired result [if this had actually produced the desired result, then we probably wouldn't have altered our laws]. Apparently the outlawing of this practice, was so misunderstood that people were actually questioning the legal right to do this in a declared war against Saddam- it obvious in a declared overt war that you should attempt to kill, capture, or in some way disrupt the leadership involved with conducting a war.
The problem was that during the Cold war, we were involved in covert wars. And you can argue about this whole idea or it's tactics, but the Soviets were definitely involved in covert warfare, and in order to argue about it, you must take that into account.

"We have not been responsible for al Qaeda's crimes, but we are responsible for helping to create the moral abyss from which they emerged. The manipulative power politics played out backstage, while "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" is being sung for the insulated American people and our increasingly cynical foreign associates, has contributed to the hate that feeds the criminals and to the fear felt by the ordinary citizens in nations where they and other terrorists strike at will. Which face will America show to them today?"

I think our CIA generally follows US laws. I think that bad management promotes unlawful actions. I would say that CIA is similar to a police force. You can badly manage a police force and if you tolerate corruption [for PR/coverup reasons], it can destroy the effectiveness of the whole police force and create lawlessness. A well run police force or CIA would have a very low incident of violating US law. But a badly run and ineffective police force will tempt people to try "different solutions".

Now, I don't agree with the "current idea", that the problem with our CIA is that we restrict our agents from contacting and involving themselves with unsavory individuals. I think that this general principle is sound, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are minor aspects of this which could be wrong and/or are badly implemented.

Generally, speaking I would say you are holding too dear conspiracy type ideas. If I were to use a broad brush I would say the main problem with CIA is it too bureaucratic. In order to fix it, you would need to streamline it and simplify it so that it would actually be possible for Congress to effectively function in it's oversight capacity.

As far as moral abyss and al Qaeda's crimes. I don't buy it. I'm sure that it's possible that the Bush I & Clinton adminstration may not have been attentive enough to Afghanistan [or perhaps more concerned about controling drugs than anything else]. But I think OBL & company were and are simply delusional. It's like blaming a police force for some criminal's behavior or blaming FDR for the Japanese attacking Pearl Harbor.

"I'm an idealist in a nation whose cornerstone is idealist, but whose foundation is pure brilliant pragmatism. I'd like to see both parts of that national character lived, and lived gracefully, not just mumbled. "

The US is not controlling the world; you have allowed yourself to be deluded into thinking we had some dominatingly huge role in Iraq, [or Afghanistan] thereas if you simply look at the money owed, you would notice that France had a much larger role than the US did. And add to this, that French generally think we are naive and are quite silly about our "moral qualms".

If you want to blame the US, look at an Arab country where we did have the most "dominating" influence- Saudi Arabia. And considering that Americans were infidels and only tolerated because were assisting the country & kept in isolation from the rest of the society, it might not be called "dominating" except we were exclusively invited to their country and were paid by the oil wealth to actually change the whole country- developed their govt bureaucracy, made their banking system, and basically brought the 20th Century to the country. Now, Saudi Arabia isn't paradise, it certainly has problems, but it isn't a rathole either.