Comment by wallace_f | Hacker News Reader

Comment by wallace_f | Hacker News Reader

The CIA:

-Funded and militarized terrorists in foreign countries^6

-Funded Blood and Crips gangs in California through drug smuggling^1

-Facilitated distribution of crack cocaine, contributing to the explosion of crack cocaine in America (The reporter who broke this story was later found to have died to two gunshot wounds to the head. It was ruled a suicide)^2

-Influenced media and created propaganda through Operation Mockingbird^3

-Claimed 'Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.' No such weapons were ever found

-Funded Jihad and Islamic fundamentalist terrorist groups^4

-Carried out an illegal and failed invasion of Cuba^5

Sources: 1 https://oig.justice.gov/special/9712/ch01p1.htm 2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb#Dark_Alliance_series 3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird 4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone 5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion 6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair

Unfortunately, this list only covers errors of the CIA, and while it is far fall inclusive of all of them, there is, however, no doubt that they have also made contributions to the public good. I am merely pointing out that the CIA is not a purely altruistic and infallible source.

This list does not even include their long history of regime change (often of democratically elected governments), torture, forced human experimentation, arms dealing, etc. The CIA is by any definition a criminal gang and terrorist organization, and the Clintons are quite wrapped up in their nasty activities. Any good they've done is likely incidental to their other objectives. I hate Trump as much as anyone, but the word of the CIA means nothing.

The CIA is an "ends justify means" organization. And I don't think the ends for them are anything other than "the good of the country" (whatever that means to them at the time). The shady (sometimes downright horrific) things they have done in the past have fit in with that idea. Within that framework, I don't think that they would make these allegations without either good reason to be worried about interference or good reason to be worried about Trump's ties to Russia.

Also, Bay of Pigs was far from an invasion. We didn't even send in air support!

> The CIA is an "ends justify means" organization.

Yes, so take what they say or do with a grain of salt. For instance, as I wrote, they told us they had proven Iraq had WMDs but that was later found to not be true.

> Also, Bay of Pigs was far from an invasion. We didn't even send in air support!

You're manipulating the definition of invasion. An invasion is an invasion. Yes we did not send air planes.

And I already agreed with your point that the CIA is an organization whose intentions are allied with US national interests, I wrote that in my post actually.

Instead of downvoting, I wish people would say why they disagree

In other words they are experts in what influencing another nation illicitly looks like.

This is my view exactly. The NSA/CIA/Pentagon are not new to the game. This is what it looks like when it's done to everyday people, the kind of thing Snowden was concerned about:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/world/europe/vladimir-puti...

And it looks like the people working in our US intelligence agencies also get toyed with from time to time. Either that or there is a bigger pedophile ring in the intelligence agencies than the Vatican:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6W8H5Z0XAc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bf5T1lFyaL4

> The reporter who broke this story was later found to have died to two gunshot wounds to the head. It was ruled a suicide

How was it even ruled suicide? How does one shoot ones own head and then shoot it again for a second time? No, am not going to try it and I mean it, so don't make me suicide for questioning this.

> Funded Jihad and Islamic fundamentalist terrorist groups

If CIA did it, then isn't CIA a terrorist organization? And if its doing it with support of the president, then ..?

> When asked by local reporters about the possibility of two gunshots being a suicide, Lyons replied: "It's unusual in a suicide case to have two shots, but it has been done in the past, and it is in fact a distinct possibility." News coverage noted that there were widespread rumors on the Internet at the time that Webb had been killed as retribution for his 'Dark Alliance' series, published eight years before, but Webb's ex-wife Susan Bell told reporters that she believed Webb had committed suicide.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb#Death

Two self-inflicted gunshot wounds directly through the cranial cavity approaches near impossibility. A gunshot wound to other parts of the head might not be instantly self-incapacitating. It would be incredibly interesting to know more details about what exactly happened, here.

I was unable to find any other details of this case, or of other cases of multiple self-inflicted gunshot wounds to the head.

> Two self-inflicted gunshot wounds directly through the cranial cavity approaches near impossibility.

I'm not sure that's the case. A second round consciously fired would be practically impossible, sure - but if the person is using a semi-automatic handgun (the most common type) and their finger muscles contract automatically upon the disruption to their CNS, I can totally see a second round being fired.

Sure. But wouldn't the CIA be more likely to side with the Republican?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com