Jump to content

The CIA's new recruitment ad [lol]


lmao

Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Big, strong women, right out of central casting with tears in their eyes, they said "sir..."

That guy doesn't anger me. The thing that stands out about his message is how easily he lies. Anyone with an IQ north of that of a howler monkey can tell he's lying. It's like a cut and paste job from any random rally that Trump had for his death cult over the last 5 years. 

  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aggie08 said:

*and sometimes successfully convince my wife to make banana bread out of the overripe ones because I feel a little bad about wasting them. Sometimes.

banana pudding

You can get vanilla wafers from Slaton Bakery from HEB. Use those instead of Nilla.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Big, strong women, right out of central casting with tears in their eyes, they said "sir..."

Plus all this talk about bananas and over-ripeness and pudding got me thinking impure thoughts of hot Catrachas

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSMswI2Qa-rdMbmsTJ3MeE

 

Probably the real reason we have gov't agencies destroying our international reputation down there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Dick Tremayne said:

Ignoring the stupid fucking distraction that is this commercial, the book Legacy of Ashes by Tim Weiner is a great and thorough read on the full history of the CIA through the war on terror based on primary sources and interviews. Also the Jakarta Method by Vincent Bevins is an easier read that give good insight to just how evil the CIA is and has been throughout its history. If someone can read either and think that the CIA provides any kind of service or value for good, then I'd rather not meet that person.

Legacy of Ashes really is a great book and truly shows how truly off the rails CIA has been for the vast majority of its existence. Allen Dulles and his ilk were such complete pieces of shit who truly set the direction of the agency full-tilt toward the corrupt, anti-democratic organization that it is today.

 

I also recommend CIA as Organized Crime and The Phoenix Program by Douglas Valentine. What CIA did in Southeast Asia for decades is revolting and, unfortunately, it only served as a template for the carnage it has gone on to inflict all over the world.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We treat corporations as legal people for very good civil and tax purposes.  At some point we allowed this odd but necessary legal fiction to take over our logic and began to behave as if corporations have morals, ethics, thoughts, and politics beyond those of the actual physical people who work in them and direct them.   

The CIA is a collection of physical people who are working in jobs and does not have agency, morals, ethics, or politics beyond those of the people who work there, lead the agency, or oversee the agency (whom we elect).  Almost all the examples of the (actual) nasty things they may have done-- from intervening in foreign countries to killing people-- are done to greater success and at greater scale in the open by the U.S. military, or by domestic law enforcement.  We can and do have rigorous discussions about to what extent the U.S. military should be funded, how closely it should be overseen, and how broadly our elected leaders should be allowed to use it.  But virtually no one puts forth the fatuous argument that a military simply isn't needed or that it is somehow "evil."  

All nations have foreign intelligence collections and clandestine operations capability to some scale and larger powerful nations have extensive capabilities. That will never change. The temptation for the people in any organization dedicated to the use of secrecy and/or violence will have people within it that see those tools as the solution to every problem.  It's on elected leaders, and ultimately the people who elect them, to provide and demand responsible oversight. This isn't a pulp novel where there are elite cadres that operate above even the classification of the President, it's bizarre how the far-right and far-left converge to aim fire on a fictional "deep state."

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

We treat corporations as legal people for very good civil and tax purposes.  At some point we allowed this odd but necessary legal fiction to take over our logic and began to behave as if corporations have morals, ethics, thoughts, and politics beyond those of the actual physical people who work in them and direct them.   

The CIA is a collection of physical people who are working in jobs and does not have agency, morals, ethics, or politics beyond those of the people who work there, lead the agency, or oversee the agency (whom we elect).  Almost all the examples of the (actual) nasty things they may have done-- from intervening in foreign countries to killing people-- are done to greater success and at greater scale in the open by the U.S. military, or by domestic law enforcement.  We can and do have rigorous discussions about to what extent the U.S. military should be funded, how closely it should be overseen, and how broadly our elected leaders should be allowed to use it.  But virtually no one puts forth the fatuous argument that a military simply isn't needed or that it is somehow "evil."  

All nations have foreign intelligence collections and clandestine operations capability to some scale and larger powerful nations have extensive capabilities. That will never change. The temptation for the people in any organization dedicated to the use of secrecy and/or violence will have people within it that see those tools as the solution to every problem.  It's on elected leaders, and ultimately the people who elect them, to provide and demand responsible oversight. This isn't a pulp novel where there are elite cadres that operate above even the classification of the President, it's bizarre how the far-right and far-left converge to aim fire on a fictional "deep state."

Yes, this is true. The Military should absolutely be watched much, much more closely. And I agree, the CIA‘s actions are determined by the ethos of its individual leaders, but unfortunately the Agency has operated in a way where those who operate the most aggressively for their corporate and hawkish political overlords are the ones who ascend. CIA respects and cherishes democracy until it runs up against the objectives of their corporate/hawk paymasters, at which time democratic ideals must be set aside. 

 

However, as far as the ability of the average American voter to serve as an effective check on them at the ballot box, that’s pretty laughable given the intelligence of the average US voter when it comes to anything further afield than Cancun. And even if the voter had a clue, your point operates from the position that the elected officials and The People at large (even if they were inclined to give a fuck) have proper access to what these intelligence agencies are up to in a timeframe that could make a difference through an even remotely curious and critical media. The CIA has long manufactured consent for its nefarious deeds by playing a central role in creating a system where the media is dependent on toeing the IC line in order to get scoops or promotions. Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent and all that jazz.

 

So, no, their feet can’t be held to the fire when - at best - the truth comes out 10-30 years after the fact. Can anyone with a critical mind truly believe that the Agency stopped intense efforts to directly control media narratives when Mockingbird was said to have ended in the late 70s because Frank Church said to do so? Come on.

 

For example...There was a huge story here in Germany that was broken by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), Deutsche Welle, the Balkan Investigating Reporting Network (BIRN) and the Süddeutsche Zeitung (Munich newspaper, German paper of record) a couple of years back that went into deeeeeep detail of the US IC using US bases in Germany/Ex-yugo arms manufacturers to funnel well over two billion dollars in weapons into the hands of Syrian Sunni militias (and no, not the Kurds, but AQ types) in the early 2010s as part of the CIAs Operation Timber Sycamore. It was a HUGE spread with multiple parts and plenty of coverage.

 

There were verified emails to Balkan arms manufacturers from USG contractors, emails from Pentagon officials blatantly flouting arms control regs, invoices showing countless treaty violations, correspondence showing the US pushing for the de-mothballing of Balkan arms manufacturers (because what could go wrong with the Balkans re-igniting their arms trade?), flight logs showing illegal weapons shipments from CIA affiliated air transports...the whole 9 yards. Got so big that the Germans threatened to launch legal action against the US for violating intl arms conventions by using their territory for such bullshittery.

 

This was a story that warranted reporting in the US. Regardless of whether one supported arming Syria or not, it was news. 

 

But not a fucking word was mentioned in the US media. Not. A. Fucking. Word. Pulitzer level journos from abroad (who, by the way, are regularly cited on other matters by western media) definitely proving US IC and military violation arms control treaties and being threatened with suit by a loyal NATO ally...and what was the NYT and WaPo doing? Sweet fuck all is what. Oh, they will use OCCRP, Deutsche Welle, and Suddeutsche Zeitung ALLLLL the time on non-pentagon/non-IC matters, but oddly enough, not in this case. Or any other case in which SZ or BRIN or OCCRP have reported against US intelligence/military interests. Gun shop in Croatia? No. US-funded Bulgarian weapon trade? No. Ramstein being used as an illegal weapons depot? Not a fucking chance. I could go on and on about what all was reported.

 

It shouldn’t require a US Citizen to be able to read foreign language media regularly to get an idea of such huge violations using taxpayers money to arm jihadi insurgents. Regardless of where one falls on the issue of weapons shipments to Syria, it was news and it was embargoed by every single US media outlet. I can only imagine how frequently this plays out allllll over the world. Fortunately, I got a glimpse because I am a German speaker with a daily subscription to the SZ...otherwise, I'd have nary a clue.

 

So you have an IC (and military) community that essentially operates on an information black hole (or at most generous..a severe “information lag”) as far as its dirty deeds coming to light, so the entire idea of regulating them in the court of public opinion is naive. It won’t happen because it (by design) can’t happen given the state of our pathetic media.

 

And the CIAs awful behavior in SE Asia, Africa, the ME and Latin America was authorized, enabled and encouraged from the top of the organization. There is no way that Dulles, Colby, Casey, Helms, Bush Sr et al all the way to Woolsey Tenet and Haspel etc weren’t involved in overseeing and approving the terrible acts committed in our names. And they weren’t just “gathering intel”. They were actively toppling elected regimes, arming some of the worst people on the planet, enabling genocidal regimes from Central America to Africa to the ME and SE Asia, and robbing huge swathes of wealth from local populations through revolutions and puppet regimes for the benefit of their patrons. These aren't rogue agents. This is a systemically corrupt organization that both parties allow to operate because the parties are part of the problem.

 

If these acts were done by KGB most Americans would be absolutely (and rightly) appalled, so I don’t see why they should get a pass because they are “our team”.

Edited by Shady Ray
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your post just kind of goes to my point, you just didn’t follow the trail far enough.  Interestingly enough, you should take a look at who funds OCCRP, if the CIA really is doing media narrative control, I hope someone got a really bad evaluation.

The larger point stands.  Any of the things you outlined were done not at the direction of the Senate confirmed director or some rogue agents. They were done at the direction of the President of the United States, whom we elect.  It’s not really accurate to say that “the CIA toppled such and such regime,” it’s accurate to say that the government of the United States toppled it and tasked the organization with the work. 

The CIA and its capabilities are a tool, what that tool is used for is determined by people we elect. If we don’t like what they do, then we need to elect people who are different.  The implication here is that it’s more comfortable to project blame on a “corrupt organization” rather than grapple with the fact that whatever they do, they do with the approval and direction of people we elect and thus control. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, UpperWestside said:

That guy doesn't anger me. The thing that stands out about his message is how easily he lies. Anyone with an IQ north of that of a howler monkey can tell he's lying. It's like a cut and paste job from any random rally that Trump had for his death cult over the last 5 years. 

Repped for keeping it Central American.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I think your post just kind of goes to my point, you just didn’t follow the trail far enough.  Interestingly enough, you should take a look at who funds OCCRP, if the CIA really is doing media narrative control, I hope someone got a really bad evaluation.

The larger point stands.  Any of the things you outlined were done not at the direction of the Senate confirmed director or some rogue agents. They were done at the direction of the President of the United States, whom we elect.  It’s not really accurate to say that “the CIA toppled such and such regime,” it’s accurate to say that the government of the United States toppled it and tasked the organization with the work. 

The CIA and its capabilities are a tool, what that tool is used for is determined by people we elect. If we don’t like what they do, then we need to elect people who are different.  The implication here is that it’s more comfortable to project blame on a “corrupt organization” rather than grapple with the fact that whatever they do, they do with the approval and direction of people we elect and thus control. 

Well aware of OCCRP, but my point remains...this has (and remains) a sturdy source for Western media so long as it implicates non-US affiliated entities or narratives. The second it does not, it is conveniently overlooked. Convenient that. Same goes for the other media entities.

 

But I will agree with you otherwise...responsibility does go to the top, R or D. And none of them give a shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...