C.I.A. to Let "Skeletons" Out of its Closet
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!"
So we can find out the truth about who killed JFK with their magic bullets.
Australian running a company that does C# / C++ / Java / SQL / Python / Mathematica
this idea is an output of a crisis-meeting:
...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"
mr x: "hey, anoybody got a clue of how we can get those folks to forget our current abuses of law, like, err
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.
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. 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.
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.
As compared to whom? The history challenged individuals who think corporations know best?
Like Shell Oil?
Or Texaco?
Or Enron?
Or These 14 rapacious monsters (Caterpillar, Chevron, CocaCola, Dow, Dyncorp, Ford, KBR-Halliburton, Lockheed, Monsanto, Nestle, Phillip Morris, Pfizer, SLDE, Walmart 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
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Government (at least the people in it) do carry accountability, if they don't perform well, they can be voted out of office (at least in a working democracy, yes, you can argue that is a fiction but so is a free market with customers who have perfect information).
On the other hand, with a private enterprise it's one dollar, one vote and sometimes not even that: A company (unless it's a public one) doesn't have to make a profit. For example, if I'm rich and want to influence public opinion at all cost, I can run a private enterprise at a loss, possibly to support a profitable one (for example by distorting the market through misinformation).
Does government have problems? Yes. Is it sometimes the wrong approach to solve something? Yes. Does private enterprise have problems too? Most definitely yes.
It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man
-James Baldwin