Comment by johnea
6 months ago
The information in the article is shocking and disturbing, and largely known to most informed people.
So I'm not sure what's meant by the "got away with" part.
It's hard to call it "getting away with", when it's the standard operating procedure of the agency. What is it exactly that they don't get away with? With people being routinely killed worldwide.
When I saw a little old lady, literally in a doily hat, in the BWI airport, looking terrified as she was forced to sit in the stainless steel seat, with her feet in the marked feet positions, as she was being questioned, because TSA had found a nail file in her bag 8-/ I knew the gangsters were out of the closet.
Cornering, questioning, and roughing up the public, in public, was now fair game for the federal government.
Dick Chaney's wet dream come true.
All of this is now massively superseded by the cheeto administration. Masked people, in unmarked cars, dragging people off of the streets for shipment to foreign country's dark prisons.
But the democratic administrations have also been eager user's of the "Fascist State United Act". Terrorism is functionally defined as anyone impeding the revenue stream of a large powerful organization.
And once designated, there are many avenues of intimidation, up to and including murder. Which isn't usually needed, but is always available as an option.
Recreating the Church commission today wouldn't be just difficult, it is completely impossible. The two dominant poitical parties have no interest in reform, and no one is going to stop them.
> So I'm not sure what's meant by the "got away with" part.
The agency still exists, in the exact same form, with no additional oversight. Did you think it just meant remaining obscured from the public? Shouldn't someone have gone to jail for this?
> Recreating the Church commission today wouldn't be just difficult, it is completely impossible.
The CIA has literally taken "ex-employees" and run them into the House and the Senate. It's far worse than you imagine. They "got away" with it and they continue to "get away" with it.
Schlesinger was right. The CIA needs to be divided into two separate firms. One responsible for research which reports directly to the civilian administration and the other responsible for operations which reports directly to the military administration.
It's not hard to kill people or anything. Doesn't exactly take a lot of research to do either. If your agency is developing a bunch of new ways to kill people, it doesn't actually increase capabilities, doesn't it just mean they're bored?
> It's not hard to kill people or anything.
Unless you want to be completely clandestine about it. Then it is very hard. My understanding is this is why the CIA exists, to perform work, and remain unknown.
> Doesn't exactly take a lot of research to do either.
You're basing this off of years of experience within or with the agency? You've reviewed many CIA political assassinations over the years and came to a careful conclusion on this point?
> it doesn't actually increase capabilities
Yea. The world is static. So developing new techniques is just "for funsies." It's not like cameras, cell phones, and advanced sensors haven't made this more difficult or anything.
> doesn't it just mean they're bored?
Doesn't it just mean they no longer have a reason to exist?
There are individuals in the parties who are interested though. Not everyone is a sycophant willing to do whatever their party leaders say, fearing the president's call to be primaried or something. It will take people with strong reputations to do it though.
[flagged]