Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

C.I.A. to Let "Skeletons" Out of its Closet

CowboyNeal posted more than 7 years ago | from the taking-some-heat dept.

United States 235

sgt_doom writes "The C.I.A. announced it was going to reveal "skeletons" by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents detailing illegal abuses over the years. As a preamble, the National Security Archive at George Washington University released a separate set of documents covering internal government deliberations of the abuses from January 1975. Mandatory reading for all those history-challenged individuals who believe government knows best!"

cancel ×

235 comments

George Bush (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19619795)

is shit

Mod parent up. (-1, Troll)

aussersterne (212916) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619965)

Certainly not down.

dream on (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19619807)

Anyone who thinks government knows best probably can't/won't read anyway.

Re:dream on (3, Funny)

tinrobot (314936) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620479)

...but, government funded schools TAUGHT me to read.

Re:dream on (4, Insightful)

bigtomrodney (993427) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620691)

No they didn't. Schools were funded by the taxes you paid. Just remember that as much as it doesn't seem like it, the government work for you. They don't fund you, you fund them.

Fnord (4, Funny)

Dan Ost (415913) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620751)

Fnord.

(Sorry. I'm reading the book right now and it couldn't resist)

Re:dream on (1)

AJWM (19027) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620737)

It boggles the mind that anyone thinks that a body made up of the equivalent of pointy-haired bosses would know best.

How does it go? "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach, enter politics." Something like that...

(And while there might, in some cases, be some bright people in gov't service who advise those politicians, when was the last time you knew a PHB to follow advice, especially advice he didn't understand?)

Re:dream on (2, Insightful)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 6 years ago | (#19621049)

It boggles the mind that anyone thinks that a body made up of the equivalent of pointy-haired bosses would know best.

Even that is a misconception. "Pointy haired bosses" have accountability; in the end, they must make a profit as a consequence of their choices or the company will fold, because in a commercial enterprise, funds result from sales of a product and/or service, and said sale is at the option of the consumer.

The government suffers no loss of income, regardless of how poorly they perform. In fact, they often increase their income if they determine that performance is lacking. In the US, that income is taken by coercion (the threat of force, not to mention the occasional use of force) from the populace as income taxes, except of course for those who think that paying income taxes for services not in the general population's best interests is a good thing.

For instance, paying for an adequate national defense is easily argued to be in the populace's best interests; paying for an expeditionary force that attacks oil-rich countries is not. Paying the salaries of congress-people who make constitutional laws is easily argued to be in the populace's best interests; paying for ex-post facto law, law that abolishes habeas corpus, law that attempts to limit personal, consensual choices and liberties... these are the fruits of a coercive government out of control — argument for them is nonsensical.

The model for coercive tax-based government is defective with regard to ensuring performance at any level other than the elected personages. Even there, the political parties have created an assembly line of essentially similar candidates. These preserve the status quo of service to big money interests, with the people's interests placed dead last.

So while you may be entirely justified with regard to your derisive characterization of commercial command structure, just remember that such people do respond to a built-in and ultimately terminal feedback mechanism that the people have control of. This is not the case for government, or at least, the US government, which is the one I am most familiar with.

How does it go? "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach, enter politics."

Disclosure: I am both a teacher and a "pointy headed boss" of a series of successful commercial enterprises.

I forgot (3, Insightful)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619811)

Which country is it without sin?

Just saying...

Re:I forgot (5, Funny)

McGiraf (196030) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619851)

Vatican? oh wait.....

Re:I forgot (3, Insightful)

Dionysus (12737) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619919)

Which country is it without sin?
<sarcasme>Why that makes it all OK then<sarcasme> Especially a country who thinks of itself as the greatest in the world.
USA! USA! Greatest democracy in the world (when compared to Cuba and Saudi Arabia), greatest living standards (when compared to Bangladesh), greatest freedom (when compared to China), largest (when compared to the Vatican)

Re:I forgot (1, Insightful)

anmijagy (1118875) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620471)

Calm down, Disinformed.

Your post reeks of anti-American propaganda.

Not all Americans think they're the best in the world, just as America actually (still) is one of the better countries in the world.
Just as America is the most powerful. And, some would say, the most economically developed.

The US doesn't have any social nets to catch/elevate falling/underprivileged citizens and it has had governments who wage war entirely too easily.
Grave, perhaps, but the US has many great qualities, too.

There's no need to barf your own frustration over the first best thing the medias tell you to hate.

Re:I forgot (2, Insightful)

superphreak (785821) | more than 6 years ago | (#19621065)

If it's better somewhere else, feel free to move there. And I'm not automatically assuming that you are an American.

Re:I forgot (1)

blindd0t (855876) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619923)

Which country is it without sin?

Does it matter? I'm already gathering up as many stones as I can, and I suggest you do the same!

Kidding aside, how are we supposed to believe some information is selectively omitted? Also, how much is blatant disinformation? Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice... we all know how it goes. No government, person, or group of people in any position of power will ever have my trust, and I'll never simply believe their word.

Re:I forgot (2, Insightful)

enrevanche (953125) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620381)

And you point is?

Are you an apologizer for atrocity?

"Just saying"? State what it is your implying. Is it that because other countries do bad things that it doesn't matter what yours does?

The only way things change is by pointing these things out and by being outraged when your country or your country's allies do these things.

Which country is it without sin? (1)

falconwolf (725481) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620755)

Tibet? Formosa?

Falcon

Re:I forgot (1)

dominion (3153) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620845)


I'm always surprised by the juvenile insistance on using the foul play of others to justify our own unethical activities.

If Columbia has death squads, does that mean the U.S. could have death squads? Because, hey, first stone and all that.

Re:I forgot (4, Insightful)

CdBee (742846) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620885)

Obviously, none of them. It's just that a lot of us were greatly saddened when the nation whose armies liberated Buchenwald concentration camp, invented Guantanamo & Abu Ghraib. Perhaps there's a perception that some spring-cleaning was needed.

Ba dum dum cha! (3, Funny)

skoaldipper (752281) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619813)

What do disgruntled CIA skeletons eat at restaurants?

Spare ribs!

I wonder if JFK is in there (3, Interesting)

Heir Of The Mess (939658) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619815)

So we can find out the truth about who killed JFK with their magic bullets.

Re:I wonder if JFK is in there (1)

kzdfbhikndzvfkjndff (1119193) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619947)

Probably not. Because that would mean that George Bush Sr. would goto prison,

Re:I wonder if JFK is in there (3, Interesting)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620205)

So we can find out the truth about who killed JFK with their magic bullets.
The JFK files are due to be released 70 years (the life expectancy) after the facts.
That way no one who was old enough to remember what happened will be around to contradict the official version of events (nor to suffer the consequences of their actions).
Sleep tight, your government is watching you sleep at night.

Re:I wonder if JFK is in there (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620773)

The JFK files are due to be released 70 years (the life expectancy) after the facts.

I think it has more to do with protecting people involved. Let's say a 22-year old person was involved, 70 years later he'll be 92, which means most likely dead.

Re:I wonder if JFK is in there (1)

sohare (1032056) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620499)

Why is the parent modded insightful? All conspiracy theories regarding JFK are grand, i.e., they collapse under their own weight. People act as if there is the Official Government version and then the Independent Conspiracy versions. Really what you have is a very well studied case, and a few woo-woos out there that anomaly hunt and deal in pseudoscience/intellectual dishonesty. There is really no reason to believe that anything surprising will be revealed about the JFK case. But then, to the true believer, anyone who disagrees with them is in on the conspiracy or a dupe. At least the honest skeptic hears evidence, is usually pretty impartial, and applies the scientific method.

Re:I wonder if JFK is in there (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620839)

So we can find out the truth about who killed JFK with their magic bullets.

Let me bet a few bucks on Cubans. Castro survived hundreds of american assassination attempts which for a lot of them have been ordered directly by JFK and RFK. Makes sense that the guys who didn't manage to prevent the guy they miserably failed at killing and who succesfully killed the guy they were supposed to protect tried to hide that to avoid sounding incompetent. IIRC, Johnson agrees with me (or maybe it's the other way around..).

Kudos to the cuban guy in charge of Castro's security tho!

Re:I wonder if JFK is in there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19620925)

Funny how comedy is so true [youtube.com] .

Re:I wonder if JFK is in there (4, Funny)

harry666t (1062422) | more than 6 years ago | (#19621007)

That reminds me of Bill Hicks' quote:

I have this feeling man, 'cause you know, it's just a handful of people who run everything, you know that's true, it's provable. It's not I'm not a fucking conspiracy nut, it's provable. A handful, a very small elite, run and own these corporations, which include the mainstream media. I have this feeling that whoever is elected president, like Clinton was, no matter what you promise on the campaign trail blah, blah, blah when you win, you go into this smoke-filled room with the twelve industrialist capitalist scum-fucks who got you in there. And you're in this smoky room, and this little film screen comes down and a big guy with a cigar goes, "Roll the film." And it's a shot of the Kennedy assassination from an angle you've never seen before that looks suspiciously like it's from the grassy knoll. And then the screen goes up and the lights come up, and they go to the new president, "Any questions?" "Er, just what my agenda is." "First we bomb Baghdad." "You got it "

First secret post (1)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619829)

It's rumoured the daffodils grow sideways in Odessa at this time of year.

Like this is a suprise (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19619841)

Nothing to see here. Carry on.

This is routine. (1, Flamebait)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619847)

The government routinely declassifies documents after 30 years and releases them to the public. I believe the idea is "well, in 30 years, everyone who dealt with this will be dead, so that's a good time frame." Stop trying to stir shit up and act like this is some big to-do.

This is politically motivated (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19619895)

Yes, the US government is required to review ALL classified material after SOME period of time to determine when it can be released. However, the US gov. (CIA in this case) does NOT routinely announce in advance that it's going to release some exceptional material. Generally the stuff gets declassified as a result of a "Freedom of Information Act Request" on the part of some media organization or activist group.

I suspect that some of the stuff that's about to come out will be quite embarrasing to Jimmy Carter.

Re:This is politically motivated (3, Insightful)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619917)

I suspect that some of the stuff that's about to come out will be quite embarrasing to Jimmy Carter.
Exactly - He's been riding the talk show circuit and talking a lot of shit lately in order to sell his books. I'm sure he's pissed off enough people with enough power to do something about it.

Re:This is politically motivated. (1)

said213 (72685) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620059)

Are you sure you want to allege some deep conspiracy to discredit the liver pill guy? You know, "That guy's got more _____ than Carter's got liver pills." The political world marginalized this man as a joke before he was out of office... How will they ever stop that spin-meister peanut farmer! lol

Re:This is politically motivated (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19620229)

It's hard to imagine any revelation that could discredit Carter any more than some of the nutty talk he's been spewing lately... especially how the US should partner with Hamas against Fatah because Hamas is 'better organized'.

Re:This is politically motivated (2, Insightful)

jfengel (409917) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620033)

Well, given that Mr. Carter didn't become President until 1977, I don't think the contents of a 1975 report are going to have much on him except under-reporting peanut crops. The Governor of Georgia doesn't get to call out the CIA.

The other documents cover the "fifties to the seventies", and while that does include the Carter era, that's just the tail end of it. From the description it's largely about the targeting of leftists, and while that may have continued under Carter it sure wasn't his doing.

Re:This is politically motivated (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19620071)

I suspect that some of the stuff that's about to come out will be quite embarrasing to Jimmy Carter.
Probably correct. "State secrets" are much more likely to be facts that are embarrassing to the current administration than facts that, if generally known, would put us or our legitimate agents at risk.

This is historically true and currently true. Though the current administration does seem to be covering up like its predecessors did, only more.

The cost/benefit of declassifying EVERYTHING would be interesting indeed. No doubt, legitimate American interests would be damaged if we declassified everything. But one has to wonder, would the sunlight that it would shine on the dark corners of our government more than make up for the damage it did?

Re:This is politically motivated (1)

Planesdragon (210349) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620433)

"State secrets" are much more likely to be facts that are embarrassing to the current administration than facts that, if generally known, would put us or our legitimate agents at risk.

Care to cough up twenty or so examples? Because I can name four (F-117, Valerie Plame's identity, Invasion of Normandy, Manhattan Project) right off the top of my head that "put our legitimate agents at risk."

Yes, some state secrets are just embarrasing. But most are actual secrets that have a just reason to be secret.

Re:This is politically motivated (1)

Shihar (153932) | more than 6 years ago | (#19621043)

Carter has nothing to do with this because all of the stuff being released comes from the time right before Carter took office. Besides, embarrassing to Jimmy Carter is like dynamiting fish in a barrel. He was a terrible president and while he might have had some diplomatic successes in the past, he is a very bad diplomat now. He has done some very good things in this world in terms of his philanthropic causes, but outside of that work the guy does nothing but hug dictators and piss people off. It isn't even that I disagree with all of his positions; I don't. The problem is that even when I agree with his position I wish he would shut up and try and not help.

The reason why this is a big deal is that the CIA did some mighty sketchy ass stuff right up until 1970's. This stuff needs to come out, and the CIA recognizes this. The reason why they are making a big deal about this is because they want to take full credit for coming clean and not try and look like they were trying slip this stuff by. By calling full attention to it, admitting it is bad, and 'preparing' people for what is coming, it will to some extent lessen the shock and revelation.

You can't tell. (1)

twitter (104583) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620305)

When there's no transparency, there's no accounting or truth. This could be ongoing damage control from the break in to end all break ins [uniset.ca] or that could have been fake too. One thing is sure, the truth is actually worse. You can not tell what's true when people are lying to you and you will never know how screwed you are.

The thing to do is to quantify and reduce the secret budget, which is hard to justify since the fall of the Soviet Union anyway. The less money spooks have, the less harm they can do. This is easiest to do when there's a new release that causes outrage and a sense of betrayal.

Re:You can't tell. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19620545)

The less money spooks have, the less harm they can do.


Unfortunately that won't change anything,t he CIA will just continue to sell drugs to finance their operations.

If the CIA isn't doing it any longer... (1)

pooh666 (624584) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619861)

then some other agency is, this is just a bait and switch, hey we are all clean now, look at this hand not that one..

Re:If the CIA isn't doing it any longer... (1)

Angus McNitt (542101) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620003)

FBI, DOJ, DIA, DHS.... but at least we can trust the CIA! They are the good guys now.

it does not have operation gladius. (1, Troll)

Truekaiser (724672) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619863)

i am not surprised they left some things out like the cia run terrorist group in italy(and other European nations as well) killing people and blaming it on leftist groups during the cold war.

Who shot the deputy (5, Funny)

coren2000 (788204) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619887)

I wonder if we learn who shot Sheriff John Brown's Deputy.

Re:Who shot the deputy (1)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620291)

My money's on Bob Marley, though he vehemently denies it. In any case, in my mind, the real question is who framed Roger Rabbit.

uh... (2, Interesting)

cosmocain (1060326) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619891)

this idea is an output of a crisis-meeting:

mr x: "hey, anoybody got a clue of how we can get those folks to forget our current abuses of law, like, err ...those search warrants and stuff.. ah, you all know. no need to heat it up." mr y: "we could just release old files. that will keep'em busy for some time. and we always can state: what's done, is done. we can't undo, but actually we are full of shame and guilt. forgive us, pleaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaase"

Re:uh... (1)

xystren (522982) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619957)

Again, proof that it is easier to beg for forgiveness than ask for permission....

Re:uh... (1)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620137)

You raise a good point. In 30 years time here will be some extreme issue in the white house and they'll release all the data from the current administrations 'doings' as a distraction.

At least then we'll get to see if the majority of Slashdotters were right....

Read about Project MONARCH MK-ULTRA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19619921)

If you want to get a jump on what SHOULD be included in the documents to be released, check out this document on CIA run Mind Control programs:

http://mirror.nw0.info/eBooks%20and%20Audio%20Book s/Monarch_undetectable.mind.control.pdf [nw0.info]

Re:Read about Project MONARCH MK-ULTRA (1)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620241)

If you want to get a jump on what SHOULD be included in the documents to be released, check out this document on CIA run Mind Control programs:
No doubt the CIA have been involved in mind control programs, successful or otherwise. Still, the document you linked to is Illuminati/New World Order conspiracy religious crap of the highest order. If there's any truth in there at all, it's so mixed up with paranoid borderline-schizo garbage that it's not worth going through for that reason. Though I might suggest reading it if you want an insight into the mindset of conspiracy psychos.

Of course, I might suggest that the CIA wrote this to discredit by association any reports of their activities :-/

CIA Just a Servant (5, Interesting)

ChePibe (882378) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619939)

I realize that picking on the CIA for what they do is all good fun for many, but the CIA is ultimately a servant of its masters - most often the president, especially before the Church committee which resulted in much more congressional oversight. Not to say the CIA hasn't exceeded its own orders from time to time - it most certainly has, and once is too many times - but instead of saying, "ooh, look what the dirty CIA did!", it may be useful to look at why they did it and where the order came from. Presidents have often used it for their dirty work, particularly prior to 1975 or so when signed directives were not required, which allowed presidents to order the CIA to do their bidding without a paper trail and have plausible deniability otherwise.

An interesting read on this and other espionage/covert action matters is James Olson's Fair Play [amazon.com] . After giving a brief overview of what espionage is like, he puts forward 50 or so "hypothetical" situations and collects ethical and other opinions from a wide variety of people. I highly recommend it to anyone who wants to look at common ethical questions the intelligence community faces and common pro and con arguments against them, as well as practical looks at how the intelligence gathering is done.

Why does so much people hate the USA? (5, Insightful)

ThiagoHP (910442) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620073)

Take a look at this article in Wikipedia about the School of the Americas [wikipedia.org] , an USA army institue that for decades taught torture, fear, bounties for enemy dead, false imprisonment, torture, execution, and kidnapping a target's family members to Latin America dictatorships in the 60's, 70's and 80's.

An excerpt:

The school has a controversial history of teaching the techniques of torture, and according to UN commissions, many of its graduates have been linked to the most egregious human rights crimes perpetrated in the western hemisphere, who were trained at the school at U.S. taxpayer expense.

It's not hard to figure out why some many people in Latin America hate the USA and its hipocrisy of allegedly spreading democracy while supporting dictatorships.

Check this out... (1, Offtopic)

ChePibe (882378) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620143)

It's a great recipe for Chicken Pasta BLT salad [recipesource.com] .

I mean, while we're making non sequitur comments that have nothing to do with the parent post we may as well do something tasty, right?

(Oh, and don't use the Chili sauce - the bbq sauce is much better)

Re:Check this out... (1)

ThiagoHP (910442) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620361)

I mean, while we're making non sequitur comments that have nothing to do with the parent post we may as well do something tasty, right?
Parent post title: CIA Just a Servant [of the government of the USA]. The government of the USA -> the ones that were elected to represent all the USA people. The government of the USA has taken actions that make people from Latin America countries really pissed off. QED. Nice use of nice sequitur, tough. :)

Re:Why does so much people hate the USA? (2, Insightful)

Xenna (37238) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620423)

That's not the real reason, mate. The real reason people hate the US is that they're rich ansd powerful. Hypocrital and criminal regimes are a dime a dozen (mostly much more hypocritical and criminal) but you can't get more powerful than the US, and that hurts.

X. (not American)

Re:Why does so much people hate the USA? (1)

sohare (1032056) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620519)

America's power is about as illusory as China's economy. I've been living in a trashcan in Georgia for 23 years and so have all my friends!

Re:Why does so much people hate the USA? (2, Insightful)

Xenna (37238) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620577)

Even your trashcans are so big they leave the rest of us in awe!

X.

Re:Why does so much people hate the USA? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19620573)

That's not the real reason, mate. The real reason people hate the US is that they're rich ansd powerful. Hypocrital and criminal regimes are a dime a dozen (mostly much more hypocritical and criminal) but you can't get more powerful than the US, and that hurts.

No, the reason is that they're rich and powerful and hypocritical and criminal.

Meet the new boss... (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620409)

the CIA is ultimately a servant of its masters - most often the president
Remind again, what did Bush the First do around 1976, 1977... before he became their 'master', as you put it?

And perhaps you could point out... (1)

ChePibe (882378) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620451)

What on earth that has to do with the comment above?

Re:And perhaps you could point out... (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620557)

What on earth that has to do with the comment above?
If the CIA's master is the president, and heads of the CIA become presidents... There is no line between the master and the servant.

Who decided to invade Iraq in 2003? The Bush administration, or the intelligence community? Bush says he was only acting on the intelligence supplied to him, his critics say he put pressure on intelligence agencies to serve him the selective data he wanted.
What makes you think they didn't shake hands on it, and agreed to give each other what they both wanted?

We're Much Better Now (2, Insightful)

MrSteveSD (801820) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619963)

I think the idea is to say, "Oh we were bad back then up until 1975, but since then we've been really nice.". Sadly that isn't true at all. Maybe in 30 years they will be explaining how they were bad up until 2007 with involvement with the murderous contras in the 80s and secret prisons and torture in the "War on Terror" in the 2000s etc.

Re:We're Much Better Now (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620777)

How about the involvement in Algeria today? You really don't have to look far to see how low they can go to help out an ally. When these guys come home what sort of things are they going to do on US soil?

Motivation? (3, Interesting)

spiritraveller (641174) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619967)

Are they changing their tune or are they just trying to show us what they are capable of so that we won't get out of line?

Hmmmmmmmm.

Re:Motivation? (2, Informative)

Elsapotk421 (1097205) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620015)

I'd say that it's mainly just because the information no longer proves useful for enemies of the government. Most classified documents are not like this completely crucial and ultimately secret documents. What's special about them is the way they place information together. Which is ultimately where the intelligence part comes in. It's not what you got, it's how you use it. But like someone said earlier....it's not that it never happens, it's just not usually announced.

The actual reason... (5, Funny)

gfilion (80497) | more than 7 years ago | (#19619983)

The actual reason for letting these old skeletons out of the closet is that they need to make place for the new ones!

Ba da bing! Thanks a lot! I'll be here all week! Try the fish!

Destined to Repeat It (1)

rueger (210566) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620009)

Mandatory reading for all those history-challenged individuals who believe government knows best!"

Unfortunately many of those individuals are steadfast in their conviction that no Fact should be allowed to interfere with their Beliefs.

Especially during our War With Terror(TM).

Re:Destined to Repeat It (0, Troll)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620103)

You mean like the ones who think this same government should decide who gets health care?

[OT] Re:Destined to Repeat It (1)

kasparov (105041) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620439)

If by "decide who gets health care", you mean "decides that everyone should get health care", then yes.

Re:Destined to Repeat It (0, Offtopic)

Elsapotk421 (1097205) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620115)

War on Terror In America WE control the prepositions.

why would you believe what the CIA tells? (1)

rawdirt (464725) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620017)

n/t

Up to what year? (1)

lawpoop (604919) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620083)

Up to what year are they going to release documents? Surely they aren't current to release information about recent or ongoing 'skeletons'.

Why do they hate US? (1)

Seiruu (808321) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620131)

http://www.doublestandards.org/enemies.htm [doublestandards.org]

Most US citizens have no idea why anyone could hate them. This is not surprising considering their ignorance of US foreign policy. Citizens of many countries have been the victims of US subversion, US support for corrupt dictators, and US state terrorism.
I'm definitely curious as to what level of conformity we're able conclude with the things listed on this page.

History Challenged? (4, Interesting)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620141)

Mandatory reading for all those history-challenged individuals who believe government knows best!

As compared to whom? The history challenged individuals who think corporations know best?

Like Shell Oil? [oxfordjournals.org]

Or Texaco? [american.edu]

Or Enron? [wikipedia.org]

Or These 14 rapacious monsters (Caterpillar, Chevron, CocaCola, Dow, Dyncorp, Ford, KBR-Halliburton, Lockheed, Monsanto, Nestle, Phillip Morris, Pfizer, SLDE, Walmart [karim.gnn.tv] all of whom have disgusting track records of either exploitation, environmental destruction, corruption, or some combination thereof?

Government is the only remaining bullwark between the thugs who run industry and the people they use up as labour resource and then destroy as a product. It is the only safeguard the environment has: if governments do not constrain industry, then industry will always look at the quarterly report and continue to crap all over the planet. And given how collusive government is with industry, it is NOT a pretty or welcoming picture - as government has, for the past several thousand years, proven itself to be little more than the means of protecting and projecting the interests of the ruling classes. The struggle is real, not imagined. And it is only through a re-imagined and re-energised public sector will our species have any hope of surviving the coming crises in Energy, Environment, and Population reduction.

It is the poster who is historically challenged and politically ignorant.

RS

Re:History Challenged? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19620209)

This article is about releasing the secret mis-deeds of the CIA.

In general, do you think the mis-deeds of the CIA will involved illegal spying on bad corporations to protect the US Public, or will they involve illegal spying to protect the big corporations ?

Stop and think, buddy.

Re:History Challenged? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19620401)

The only thing government should do is to keep people from harming each other. That means enforcing contracts, preventing corporations from polluting the environment, etc. Once government crosses the line into nationalizing industry, you're just asking for corruption. If the government is doing its job then an abusive corporation will be punished, and in either event you can take their abuses as an indication not to give them any money. What is the recourse from an abusive or inept government? Revolution? It clearly isn't "voting them out", we just tried that and I don't see the Democrats paying down the debt or curbing the executive's abuses much at all better than the Republicans. At least if the government does less, it can screw up less. And if a corporation screws it up, you can get a new corporation. Good luck getting a new government.

When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. -P. J. O'Rourke

Re:History Challenged? (4, Insightful)

hab136 (30884) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620435)

Mandatory reading for all those history-challenged individuals who believe government knows best!
As compared to whom? The history challenged individuals who think corporations know best?

Why do people reduce everything to A versus B? ("false dichotomy") It's not "govt or corps, choose one" - how about they both have good and bad qualities, and we need to reign in BOTH of them so that we can enjoy their good qualities while not suffering their ill effects?

Corporations allow for pooling of capital to achieve great efficiencies and new products. Abusive corporations can squeeze out competitors, raise prices, and prevent new products from challenging their dominance.

Government allows for a fair system of law and order. Abuse of governmental authority allow for repression and deprivation of life and liberty.

Thinking the either govt or business (or even the people) always know best is silly. All three are both right and wrong quite often.

Re:History Challenged? (4, Interesting)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620511)

Corporations allow for pooling of capital to achieve great efficiencies and new products. Abusive corporations can squeeze out competitors, raise prices, and prevent new products from challenging their dominance.
And kill hundreds of thousands of people in one go.
Read GP's link, the DOW section provides a perfect example of how much worse corps are than you think.

Aside from that, your point about false dichotomies is spot on. Keep enlightening people.

the Complex, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961 (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620449)

These 14 rapacious monsters (Caterpillar, Chevron, CocaCola, Dow, Dyncorp, Ford, KBR-Halliburton, Lockheed, Monsanto, Nestle, Phillip Morris, Pfizer, SLDE, Walmart [karim.gnn.tv] all of whom have disgusting track records of either exploitation, environmental destruction, corruption, or some combination thereof?
Government is the only remaining bullwark between the thugs who run industry and the people they use up as labour resource and then destroy as a product.
Yeah... because no one involved in the highest decision making layers of these corporations ever got elected?

Re:History Challenged? (1)

d34thm0nk3y (653414) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620559)

As compared to whom? The history challenged individuals who think corporations know best?

That is a false dichotomy. Government and industry should both have oversight.

Re:History Challenged? (1)

MACC (21597) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620605)

Government is the only remaining bullwark between the thugs who run industry and the people they use up as labour resource and then destroy as a product.
You are in error. ( at least in respect to the US )
The Government is the sales / public relations department of these entities.

G!
MACC

BAD presupposition, BAD! (1)

dlcarrol (712729) | more than 6 years ago | (#19621051)

Government is the only remaining bullwark between the thugs who run industry and the people they use up as labour resource and then destroy as a product. It is the only safeguard the environment has: if governments do not constrain industry, then industry will always look at the quarterly report and continue to crap all over the planet.

Look, people are evil. If you don't believe it, you're naive. Governments and companies alike (can) share this malady. However, companies aren't able to pull off that crap without government permission. Putting the government in charge of restraining these abuses is the ol' "fox in charge of the hen-house" problem. You think Haliburton could be in Iraq now-- under any pretense, had not the US government taken the steps that they did? Could they "exploit" (I'll even grant you the usage of the word as I didn't read your linkage) a small, resource-rich nation without the complicity of the local/regional government? One might object that the corporations "put 'em up to it," but that is kind like complaining about sunlight and menstrual cycles: it's gonna happen. The avoidable problem is when you give government the power to do these silly things. The right thing is to give government the ability to punish evil and stop there. I'll leave the rest of the thread below for people that still think government is a good nanny to "tear me up."

Maybe the OP didn't also rip corrupt companies, but he didn't posit a myopic view of human government, either. Lightweight.

DC

corporate misdeeds (2, Informative)

falconwolf (725481) | more than 6 years ago | (#19621067)

Government is the only remaining bullwark between the thugs who run industry and the people they use up as labour resource and then destroy as a product.

Ah but it's govrnemtn that lets these corporations get away with all this. Especially under Bush who installed industry insiders as the head of government watch agencies. His admin is even trying to gut or remove from the law books [citymaker.com] the Alien Tort Claims Act [wikipedia.org] . This law, from 1789, is a method by which foreign nationals can hold US corporations responsible for actions they take or actions they support in other nations.

Falcon

Well thats a good thing (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620207)

trying to come clean is commendable.

Re:Well thats a good thing (2, Interesting)

Emetophobe (878584) | more than 6 years ago | (#19621059)

Or it could just be another limited hangout [wikipedia.org]

A "limited hangout" is a form of deception, misdirection, or coverup often associated with intelligence agencies involving a release or "mea culpa" type of confession of only part of a set of previously hidden sensitive information, that establishes credibility for the one releasing the information who by the very act of confession appears to be "coming clean" and acting with integrity; but in actuality by withholding key facts is protecting a deeper crime and those who could be exposed if the whole truth came out.

Hundreds? Maybe one paragraph... (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 7 years ago | (#19620251)

Anybody who ever read an official document will know that a typical official 200 page document may have one paragraph of tangential information. The rest is sign-off pages, configuration management, tables of contents, referenced documents and indexes...

Re:Hundreds? Maybe one paragraph... (1)

green453 (889049) | more than 6 years ago | (#19621073)

I don't think that word means what you think it means...

Re:Hundreds? Maybe one paragraph... (1)

green453 (889049) | more than 6 years ago | (#19621115)

Reading your post again and thinking about it, maybe it *does* make sense, but it is so sad that it does.

What it bought (1, Flamebait)

toddhisattva (127032) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620541)

These CIA actions helped win the Cold War.

The "abuses" did have a purpose, a lofty one at that.

Yes, yes, I understand, the losers of the Cold War are still upset.

Seems they were born that way.

Re:What it bought (1)

Paisley Phrog (685921) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620667)

The Soviet Union did an excellent job of defeating themselves through mismanagement of food resources and relying upon a volatile oil industry for their country's income and expansion.

Limited Skeletal Hangouts? (1)

handy_vandal (606174) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620549)

Perhaps it's a limited hangout [wikipedia.org] -- reveal some skeletons, bury other skeletons deeper.

-kgj

What about the things being done right now? (3, Insightful)

Fantastic Lad (198284) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620701)

Geez. Everybody knows the CIA has been up to no good. I don't know what a bunch of mild reading is good for. Do they get into their mind control experiments? Or their involvement in the JFK and MLK assassinations? Or any of the really dark stuff? No? Whatever. I don't know what's up with this, but stuff that happened 30 years ago isn't. Plus, they're just the CIA. What about the heads of state? Here's a snippet from an article detailing what's going on right now in full public view. . .

Sure, you've heard of the Patriot Act, and you know about the NSA warrantless surveillance controversy. Many Americans are cynical about the human rights record of the Bush administration. But, what do you know about these directives and acts Bush signed into law in the past few months -- The John Warner Defense Appropriation Act, The Military Commissions Act, The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directives? These acts and directives give dictatorial powers to the President of the United States, and leave open the question -- are these guys planning to leave office?

[. . .]

Good-bye Habeas

The United States Military Commissions Act of 2006, (Senate Bill 3930[1]) signed on October 17, 2006, set out to "facilitate bringing to justice terrorists and other unlawful enemy combatants through full and fair trials by military commissions." The Act creates the category of "unlawful enemy combatants," who lack the right of habeas corpus, and traditional protections from torture under the Geneva Conventions. Furthermore, the Act avoids any clear language ensuring that U.S. citizens will not be classified as unlawful enemy combatants. This Act side-steps the traditional protections associated with the judiciary branch. The determination of the status of an individual as an "unlawful enemy combatant" is made by tribunals established under the authority of the President.

Good-bye Posse Comitatus

The John Warner Defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5122.ENR), signed on the same day, allows the President to "...employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to... 1. restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when... the President determines that,...domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; 2. suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy..."

Good-bye Separation of Powers

The National Security Presidential Directive (NSPD 51), and the Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD-20), signed on May 9, 2007, give special powers to the President in the event of a "Catastrophic Emergency," which means "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions." In such situations, "The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government."

During the Bush presidency these totalitarian laws have arisen. At the same time there has emerged a rising cynicism among the people. There is a hope for a silver lining during oppressive presidencies that at least the people get to see how bad unchecked power abuses are. I once read that when Hitler came to power, the German communists were relieved that at least the people would get the opportunity to see how bad the Nazis were, and would therefore be more likely to vote communist in the next election. But there was no next election. [. . .]

Article [narconews.com]

It's easy to slip into a little nap and forget what's just around the corner. War with Iran, and either 'terrorist' attacks on U.S. soil, or a U.S. ecconomic collapse, (or both), which provide the excuse for The Big Clamp Down. I wonder if it will come before Bush leaves office, or if some other shmuck will pick up where he left off. (Giuliani? Schwarzenegger? ) It's hard to predict how the roller coaster will go, except that it will go. So hold on to your hats, (and your food stamps)!


-FL

Re:What about the things being done right now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19620983)

At least one court is looking at the legality of parts of the Military Commissions Act. The part about declaring a citizen an enemy combatant and then not giving them due process.

http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/200 7/06/president_denie.html [scotusblog.com]

This is a step. Definitely not enough to overturn everything, but a good step in the right direction.

From the link:

"The President cannot eliminate constitutional protections with the stroke of a pen by proclaiming a civilian, even a criminal civilian, an enemy combatant subject to indefinite military detention," the Court said.

We will have to see how this plays out.

Re:What about the things being done right now? (1)

Emetophobe (878584) | more than 6 years ago | (#19621005)

Do they get into their mind control experiments?

Actually....yes (althought very briefly). From the last paragraph on page 3 of http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB222/fami ly_jewels_wilderotter.pdf [gwu.edu] (I'm manually copying the paragraph here so please forgive any spelling mistakes).

"Between 1963 and 1973, the CIA funded research in some institutions, apparently including academic institutions, on the general subject of behavioral modification. According to Colby, these activities included the participation -- on a "unwitting basis" -- of some U. S. citizens, who were not told of the true nature of the testing. The examples given by Colby was that of a pole put in the middle of a sidewalk, with peoples' observations recorded as to which side of the pole they would walk. Apparently, some of the other testing also included reactions to certain drugs, although it is not known whether any "unwitting" individuals were used with respect to that type of experiment. In response to a question from LHS, Colby and Warner indicated they would provide more information on these activities, but that their own knowledge of them was very limited at this point."

Slow Learners (3, Insightful)

vtcodger (957785) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620775)

The CIA et al (There are about two dozen intelligence agencies) really are involved in two quite different jobs. The jobs overlap, but they are different.

The first job is to try to determine what is going on in foreign countries. Where is Osama bin Laden? (Who the hell knows) Is Iran trying to build a nuclear bomb? (probably) How many ICBMs does China have (not a lot), etc. This is where most of the money goes because it involves a lot of expensive technology.-- satellite photos, communications intercepts, etc. It's hard to object to this except for the issue of at what point the sum cost of getting data exceeds the value of the data. And keep in mind that the value of the data includes the costs of acting on bad data or data that should probably have been available -- about $400 billion so far for the Iraq fiasco alone.

There is also a covert action component -- the James Bond stuff. This seems to be overwhelmingly attractive to certain overgrown adolescents. The problem is that covert action frequently misfires. On good days, the misfire is harmless. Castro doen't smoke the booby trapped cigar. Sometimes it comes back to haunt us. We overthrow a democratic government in Iran in the 1950s and -- suprise -- our chosen stooge, the Shaw gets pitched out in the 1970s and we find ourselves faced with a theocracy that doesn't much like us.

These papers seem to deal with the covert stuff and to chronicle what went wrong and (I assume) what went right as well.

Probably nothing recent. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19620883)

I wonder how many of these people are still alive?

Let me guess.....

Zero!

Re:Probably nothing recent. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19620969)


how many ? i would say quite a few of them, in fact most of them seem to be running your government today

Partial Accounting? Does Best Remains Classified? (1)

littlewink (996298) | more than 6 years ago | (#19620921)

The recently-unclassified actions are minor in scope. They reveal only incidents that make the CIA appear sometimes clumsy, sometimes well-intentioned but misled. The point appears to be to make the CIA appear harmless and ineffectual.

Really juicy incidents, where obvious malfeasance and physical harm occurred and civil rights were grossly denied, likely won't be declassified in our lifetimes if ever. In many cases there are probably no records remaining whatsoever and the only remaining record is in the memories of those involved.

There's probably a job description in the CIA for "Permanent Eraser", a person whose task is to quietly ensure the quiet offing of those knowledgeable of highly clandestine operations. And a second job description for "Permanent Eraser Eraser", just to make sure.

Da Truth! (4, Insightful)

Brandybuck (704397) | more than 6 years ago | (#19621161)

Mandatory reading for all those history-challenged individuals who believe government knows best!

Also mandatory reading for those conspiracists among you. While you do not believe that goverment knows best, you do believe that government has super-human powers of secrecy, competency and planning. Did the CIA assassinate Kennedy? Did they shoot Reagan to keep him in line? Was the moonshot faked? Was 9/11 and inside job?

There will be lots of eyebrow-raising information in this collection, but none of it will help the conspiracists. They'll just claim more of the same coverup when they don't find their smoking gun.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...