On 6/17/2015 10:15 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
On 6/17/15, Tim Beelen <[email protected]> wrote:
On 6/16/2015 9:16 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
On 6/17/15, Tim Beelen <[email protected]> wrote:
On 6/16/2015 7:13 AM, John Young wrote:
WikiLeaks WikiTweets only .05% of Snowden documents have been
declassified for release by the spy-micking hoarders, out of nearly 1M.
Cryptome tallies 7% of Guardian's magically variable 58,000 or .02%
of DoD's defense industry mass overkill 1.7M.
The reason for this is the work that /all/ of these institutes do. It is
bigger then what an individual or, is some cases, a small group can
accomplish. And can easily be undermined if details are published. Who
is it to say that what CIA has been doing is not in U.S. best interest.
You? Me?
You just bought not only the false presumption, but a logical
impossibility - without knowledge in detail of the CIA's actual
actions, I am unable to prove their violations.
So, you have no knowledge of all the details of the CIA's actions, but
you are sure that they consist of violations? Is that right?
By the way, the CIA is under congressional oversight. That is where
accountability ends. They don't have to explain themselves to you.
How effective is this oversight? I think the vast majority Members of
Congress in general do not have the cognitive skills to understand the
issues that the CIA creates. Let alone come to an agreement on how to
handle the agency.
To summarize the problem: the CIA is has about 20.000 employees. Which
is substantially bigger then in the 1950s where they had maybe about
4-5.000. They are an intelligence office. They started out gathering
intelligence, gained intelligence gathering capabilities and now have
capabilities to operate independently to some extent for some years.
Now, we know they spy on Congress. Manipulate congress. Overthrow
governments.
And somehow you presume such things are in the best interests of the USA?
Good luck convincing people on that one...
No, we know that it's not necessarily in the best interest of stability,
people outside of the U.S. or the U.S. for that matter. Apart from
creating a unipolar world. And how the status quo serves the U.S. Which,
not unlike smoking cigarettes causes cancer but reliefs my anxiety. Not
saying that the CIA causes cancer. But I'm also not saying that the CIA
functions in the best interest of the US. But I don't even think we want
to have this discussion.
Steer elections. But who controls them? With no oversight
they basically do 'whatever' and 'whatever' is quite a dangerous thing
to do. Now, in hindsight, I don't care if they go around the world and
bully people into playing nice. But that is besides the point.
The problem is the culture. Recent breaches of security contractors have
shown that information technology information gatherers (ITIG) employs a
lot of clowns. Like you, you want a polarized version of the world where
the CIA is bad.
What I want is for "loose cannon power wielders" to principle the fuck
up.
Yes. Agreed.
Overthrowing governments does not mesh with my idea of principle,
nor human rights, nor national strength, dignity, rule of law - not a
damn thing I hold important.
Not much of a government then eh? This is mostly semantics. As a
non-ISIS-supporter I'd like to see ISIS' governing body overthrown and
their constituents heading in a different direction. But yea, that might
mean your principles take a hit.
There appears to be abundant evidence over the years that the US is
throwing its political, economic and military might around, all over
the world, just being a bully, without respect for ethics, principle,
national sovereignty, dignity, human rights, without even respect for
the rule of law and as a total hypocrite to its own past behaviour -
compare Kosovo actions to Ukraine dialog.
Simply not true. Transgressions yes. But to put it like that is
polarizing the issue. How many pin France as the steward of the
Vietnamese conflict?
How many pin the ECB as the steward of growing inequality in Greece?
Cases of kids fainting from malnutrition? With all their economists they
could not reliably tell Greece was never fit to join the Monetary Union?
Europe's unilaterally dropping the ball on Ukraine, and in very recent
history, Kosovo.
Sure, in principle we can say "every one is doing their best".
Yes, great starting point.
Well, their best is not fucking good enough, since almost no one (it
appears) sacrifices personal convenience for their greater ideals and
principles, and somewhere up the chains of command those with "genuine
power" run amok far too often.
Actually, more specifically it's a concentration of power in the hands
of a few (1?) individual(s).
By all means dear CIA and CIA apologists (and NSA, FBI, USAGOV,
ANY_OTHER_ENTITY), publicize your good outcomes and your stands for
what we common folk consider principles, human rights, fairness and
the like. Give us hope. Give us stories of the great democtratic
benefits you've brought to the countries whos governments you've
successively installed, overthrown, installed, overthrown.
European diplomacy works only because of NATO. And NATO is U.S.
Firepower to put it bluntly.
Love to hear genuine positivity facts.
The fact that Putin understands that projecting power without
repercussions is so delicious. You really want to be at the mercy of a
that person? Talk about concentrated power....
Facts to the contrary ('negative' outcomes) abound by incontrovertible
evidence or for thinking men and women, incontrovertible conclusion.
Bring on the CIA is Wonderful for The World facts. Please! I really,
really want to believe the world is in better shape than it bloody
well appears to be!
Demonstrate the three letter agencies of USAGOV that have upheld,
rather than violated, human rights around the world (hell, even in
their own country!). From where we peasants sit, those in power
continue to justify their every apparent misdeed somehow - 'the end
justifies the means' perhaps? Meanwhile the world goes to hell in a
hurry. Since the far less than admirable 'means' predominate, over and
over and over again.
"The World" is very good digging it's own grave.
Just bad. And by your own admission you don't even care
what they do, you are just looking to punish them. That is not a data
Find some other idiot's mouth to put words in. This one's evidently
failed to raise the tone of this particular dialog.
Good luck with your thesis and here's hoping others can do a better
job of bringing something higher to this world.
Zenaan
Surely, you understand why they did this? There is a perfectly good
rationale for running these kind of operations. It's just that you're
miffed about the fact that you're not able to do anything about it.
So if you're part of some impotent government that does not know how to,
or wants to project power, instantly you're at the mercy of institutions
of governments that can. No amount of tree-hugging or moral high ground
is going to save you from extinction.
And it's not all that bad. It's mostly power-play and politics really.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_involvement_in_Contra_cocaine_trafficking
"Once you set up a covert operation to supply arms and money, it's
very difficult to separate it from the kind of people who are involved
in other forms of trade, and especially drugs. There is a limited
number of planes, pilots and landing strips. By developing a system
for supply of the Contras, the US built a road for drug supply into
the US."
Former CIA agent David MacMichael[1]
"
