Regarding the letter, “Security clearance rightfully removed” (Star-Advertiser, Letters, Aug. 17): The letter writer has been misinformed that others believe the revocation of former CIA Director John Brennan’s security clearance is by itself a First Amendment issue. This is a mischaracterization.

The depth of knowledge and experience that former intelligence officers have is critical to understanding the nuances of sensitive international security matters. This is why the policy is that they retain their clearances.

Revoking Brennan’s clearance leaves our intelligence community unable to access the decades of analytical skills and insights that he accumulated. The sole reason for the revocation was that Brennan publicly criticized the president, who then revoked the clearance as a warning to anyone else with clearances who intended to speak out.

He was forcing them to decide if speaking out against the president was a greater duty to the country than retaining the access of others to the insights of experienced former operatives. For a president to place his own ego over the security of our country and to have our citizens accept this autocratic behavior is chilling.

Sue White

Maunawili