Russia and China crack Snowden Cache

[Juan]

On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 08:53:55 -0400
Tim Beelen <tim at diffalt.com> wrote:

>
> 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?


	Of course. Government is a criminal organization, by
	definition. 

	That's all you need to know about it. 


> 
> 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. 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. 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 driven assessment, it's just operating on
> assumptions. Which is what the U.S. Government's foreign policies are
> based on. Which is why I know that either a. the CIA does not hold
> it's information gathering capabilities to a professional standard,
> or b, they listen to clowns.
> 
> And this brings us back to the CIA who is SUPPOSED TO JUST FUCKING BE 
> MIDDLE MANAGEMENT. Instead they gave middle management a gun and told 
> them to go fix things in the world. Middle management has always been 
> decorated five U.S. flags, with sprinkles with red white and blue and 
> enough U.S. jingoism to fill a stadium. I.e. it created the CIA.
> 
> Now I assume, as a Congressional committee, that every time you ask
> the CIA for a report on a foreign issue they do a little sing and
> dance and ask for more money to go solve it. Because the following
> things are *always* valid: a. They can claim they have limited
> capabilities to get men on the ground. and b. With the right people
> and equipment and amount of cash Congress does not have to send in
> the military if things get really nasty if they solve it for them.
> 
> Other then that I don't think people working for the CIA are that 
> different from the majority in that they polarize the world to
> preserve their sanity: They want every Arab to be bad. And actively
> want to know everything about them, just to make them look bad. They
> know that ever Congress Member or committee might not vote in their
> best interest, so everyone needs to be manipulated.
> 
> And if I had a track record of overthrowing governments, fixing 
> elections and operating with impunity overseas because foreign 
> governments *allow* them. I'd be feeling pretty awesome about myself 
> too. All the while they are operating under the grace of congress.
> 
> This is not the only institute that grew out of control in the United 
> States.
> 
> And the fact that I don't sleep well is that even if I printed this 
> piece of text on a piece of paper and went around congress and tacked
> it on each of their foreheads it would not change anything. It is
> just that to be make a person aware of a problem does not give them
> the skills or knowledge to deal with it.
> 
> And really, all congress has to do is take the gun away from middle 
> management. This ofc is a bad analogy. I believe everyone should be
> able to carry a gun if they please.
> 
> > Are you suggesting CIA, NSA, FBI, etc ought do what they will,
> > except ath someone is able to say that what they've been doing is
> > not in U.S. best interest? That sounds inane.
> >
> > I am not even in U.S. nor a U.S. citizen - to me your statement
> > sounds highly problematic and indicative and problematic
> > nationalist think.
> Yes. I like my country. I has lots of nice people.
> > Yes we need a balance of powers in the world - we need national
> > strength and unity, but this applies to all countries, not just to
> > the U.S.!
> Considering what you said about the problems with nationalistic think
> in your last paragraph I take this as an admission you're well versed
> in doublethink.
> > Collections of power, as happens with govt, attract more power
> > abusers than benevolent dictators, unfortunately. For this reason,
> > a one world government would be doomed from the outset. We need a
> > strong Russia, a strong America, and strong small countries etc.
> I don't need a stronk Russia. Russian culture is not conducive to how 
> I'd like people to run things. Emphasis on people. Not the government.
> > It's the only hope for any long term semblance of balance. If the
> > world we a single U.S.A.W. entity, Snowden could never have
> > happened. Of course Snowden required a courageous individual too,
> > but it would have required someone willing to actually give up the
> > rest of their life if there were no possbility of sanction anywhere
> > in the world.
> The Ed event would still have happened. It is just the retarded
> notion that to be make a person aware of somehow gives them the
> insight to deal with it.
> > You might reconsider your push to have someone other than yourself
> > somehow prove that the CIA's actions over the decades have not been
> > in U.S. best interests, or that this is a relevant question!
> I frankly don't care. I just don't want them to have the ability to
> muck things up. Because it kinda proves they have issues. I don't
> mind them doing good for the wrong reasons. It's doing bad for the
> right reasons.
> 
> The CIA has very well funded issues. VERY WELL FUNDED... VERY WELL... 
> VERY... WELL... funded? And if they don't get the funds directly they 
> start running dope and sell guns.
> 
> So, CIA's issues are a domestic issue. So I'm pointing my finger at 
> Congress. And since this is a democracy I'm kinda limited to the rule
> of the majority.