Hacker News Reader

Have you read the first one or two paragraphs?

Well, then we have a slightly different view on well-researched, neutrally reported facts.

And I somehow suspect you would be absolutely outraged by an equally poorly written summary that has the opposite viewpoint. Just a guess...

Yes, and they did us the favor of backing up those paragraphs with detailed research and facts that support their argument.

The meat of the content is the documented acts of the CIA.

But the narrative spin and rhetoric used are not. This is not an objective, dispassionate round up of the facts.

Click around the website. It's a deeply ideological source.

If you take issue with the timeline they present, you’re free to post your own fact based argument to refute it.

"If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table" In this case the table pounding is in the form of saying it's not dispassionate enough for their high standards.

The detailed research is all taken from a single source.

Those are well know historical incidents that are documented with many, many sources. For instance:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra

Reply on news.ycombinator.com