Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The CIA's Reckless Breach of Trust

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 94 posts

Re: The CIA's Reckless Breach of Trust

#61

Post by poof131 »

mikestew wrote: post #53
poof131 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t believe that is an entirely fair characterization of that action. Was the United States not supposed to go after Osama Bin Laden? Hiding in an allied country whose intelligence services derailed previous missions? [1] I’m impressed by the diligence in trying to make sure your most wanted target is there before taking lethal military action. I’m disappointed by the immediate release of operational details for…

> Was the United States not supposed to go after Osama Bin Laden? Not at any cost, no. Now what with all of the "America...fuck yeah!" rhetoric after Bin Laden was killed, I gather that I might be writing for the minority opinion. How many kids will die because they now won't be getting polio vaccines? How does that number compare to the number killed at the World Trade Center? If the numbers are comparable, then we…

Of course not at any cost. The irony of this tragedy is that the intent of the operation was to mitigate the possibility of collateral damage and going after the wrong target. I'm pretty sure Cowboy Bush would have been all in at the mention of Osama and never done the vaccination op.

To depict targeting Osama as a revenge killing is not right. I try to empathize with the grievances he had and represents against the US, but I believe the world is better off without him. We don't need people who inspire others to suicide and homicide in the name of religion.

Re: The CIA's Reckless Breach of Trust

#62

Post by poof131 »

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #59
poof131 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t believe that is an entirely fair characterization of that action. Was the United States not supposed to go after Osama Bin Laden? Hiding in an allied country whose intelligence services derailed previous missions? [1] I’m impressed by the diligence in trying to make sure your most wanted target is there before taking lethal military action. I’m disappointed by the immediate release of operational details for…

>I’m impressed by the diligence in trying to make sure your most wanted target is there before taking lethal military action. Diligence would have required following through with the vaccination campaign. For pennies they could have vaccinated the kids, and probably evaded detection, but in their haste they carelessly exposed their operation. > I’m disappointed by the immediate release of operational details for poli…

I agree with your first point: They should have vaccinated everyone. I don't agree with your second point, way too much information about the operation was released. And your last point I find most discouraging. It's the president who is most responsible for the actions of the government both at home and abroad. It's too easy to blame a 3 letter agency than the leaders we elect for then we would have to blame ourselves.

Re: The CIA's Reckless Breach of Trust

#63

Post by poof131 »

auxbuss wrote: post #60
mikeash wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Killing one guy who isn't even all that important in the organization should definitely not have taken priority over seriously harming polio eradication efforts. Yes, sometimes you should let the bad guy get away if the consequences of what's required to catch him are worse. This should be obvious, but people's minds shut down when confronted with "terrorism".

"... but people's minds shut down when confronted with "terrorism"." And why is that? I ask, because, like many here -- well, as few, at least -- I grew up in the UK with the IRA bombing things around me every now and again. These were frequent events. I saw the aftermath of a few of them myself. They were as hideous, as you can imagine. I narrowly missed being caught up in two. My girlfriend and I had a picnic on th…

Thank you for sharing your personal accounts. I wish the politicians and the media wouldn't exploit citizens' fears. It's time to end the 'war on terror.'

Re: The CIA's Reckless Breach of Trust

#64

Post by ajmurmann »

Alupis wrote: post #4
kyllo wrote: post #2

No surprises here, of course this is what happens when you create an agency whose mission is to lie, decieve, and break the law, and then give it limited oversight and almost unlimited funding. The CIA's entire history is just one scandal after another.

The CIA's charter forbids any domestic campaigns...

They didn't mind when they drugged up people in SF as part of MKUltra.

Re: The CIA's Reckless Breach of Trust

#65

Post by sitkack »

Symmetry wrote: post #45
poof131 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t believe that is an entirely fair characterization of that action. Was the United States not supposed to go after Osama Bin Laden? Hiding in an allied country whose intelligence services derailed previous missions? [1] I’m impressed by the diligence in trying to make sure your most wanted target is there before taking lethal military action. I’m disappointed by the immediate release of operational details for…

Was the United States not supposed to go after Osama Bin Laden? No, but sometimes the price of a just aim is too high to pay. In retrospect at least the damage to the anti-polio campaign was too high a price to pay for his death, just as nuking the city to get him wouldn't have been justified. I find the mistake they made somewhat understandable since they could easily have failed to foresee the consequences of their…

The CIA is !precluded! operationally and I think legally from operating with USAID for this very reason. It wasn't a _mistake_, it was 'not-fucking-caring.'

Re: The CIA's Reckless Breach of Trust

#66

Post by ajmurmann »

I am of the opinion that nothing is worse for a society than corrupt law enforcement of any kind. I am generally against death penalty, but think it should be applied for even minor breaches by law enforcement. If we cannot trust the people who are supposed to keep us save the entire system is broken.

Re: The CIA's Reckless Breach of Trust

#67

Post by sroerick »

krapp wrote: post #15
higherpurpose wrote: post #9

How come nobody in the media is calling this treason ? We're talking about a government agency hacking and spying on the US Senate. This is like a Will Smith movie plot about the government "bad guys". "Improper access"? Are you kidding me? I guess Manning was a fool for not "apologizing" for his "improper access". That would've definitely saved him. What's worse is that even after Feinstein accused them of hacking a…

It's not the media's purpose to declare something treason - doing so would make them look like partisan hacks.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=snowden+treason

Re: The CIA's Reckless Breach of Trust

#68

Post by sroerick »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #58

The nation needs an intelligence community. In the modern world, that's non-negotiable. But having said that, there are a few breaches of trust that warrant extreme action, and this is one of them. This isn't some low-level analyst using his pull to get out of a parking ticket. This is the executive branch of government running an intelligence operation against another branch of the government . There's no known univ…

What do you think about the open intelligence movement?

Re: The CIA's Reckless Breach of Trust

#69

Post by DanielBMarkham »

sroerick wrote: post #68
DanielBMarkham wrote: post #58

The nation needs an intelligence community. In the modern world, that's non-negotiable. But having said that, there are a few breaches of trust that warrant extreme action, and this is one of them. This isn't some low-level analyst using his pull to get out of a parking ticket. This is the executive branch of government running an intelligence operation against another branch of the government . There's no known univ…

What do you think about the open intelligence movement?

Never heard of it. The title sounds interesting.

Re: The CIA's Reckless Breach of Trust

#70

Post by lotsofmangos »

poof131 wrote: post #61
mikestew wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Was the United States not supposed to go after Osama Bin Laden? Not at any cost, no. Now what with all of the "America...fuck yeah!" rhetoric after Bin Laden was killed, I gather that I might be writing for the minority opinion. How many kids will die because they now won't be getting polio vaccines? How does that number compare to the number killed at the World Trade Center? If the numbers are comparable, then we…

Of course not at any cost. The irony of this tragedy is that the intent of the operation was to mitigate the possibility of collateral damage and going after the wrong target. I'm pretty sure Cowboy Bush would have been all in at the mention of Osama and never done the vaccination op. To depict targeting Osama as a revenge killing is not right. I try to empathize with the grievances he had and represents against the…

“Jacques,” he said, “You and I share a common faith. You’re Roman Catholic, I’m Methodist, but we are both Christians committed to the teachings of the Bible. We share one common Lord”

Chirac said nothing. He didn’t know where Bush was going with this.

“Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East,” Bush said. ‘’Biblical prophecies are being fulfilled.”

Gog and Magog? What was that?, thought Chirac.

“This confrontation,” Bush said, “is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a new age begins.”

Chirac was bewildered. The American president, he thought, sounded dangerously fanatical.

After the call ended, Chirac called together his senior staff members and relayed the conversation.

“He said, ‘Gog and Magog.’ Do any of you know what he is talking about?”

Blank faces and head shakes.

“Find out,” Chirac said.

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/10/kurt-eichenwald-50...

Post reply on HN