Yeah, funding, arms, training, actual combat operations, etc. And also continued since the Cold War. And all over the planet, not just Latin America.
Well in the Human Resource Expoitation Manual it says: We will discuss some of those coercive techniques used by many, and the reasons why we are against the use of these techniques. So you're based on the first ten I've searched, saying that the CIA is a terrorist organization because they've (from conspriacy websites often) tried to off dangerous world leaders? Just let me get the argument straight first.
Dude, you should get that looked at by a doctor. "Will It Go Round in Circles" by Billy Preston, Billboard #1 July '73. One of my favorite '70s songs, found one bar in Houston with it on the juke (Leon's Lounge).
Did anyone read the 2000 Republican Platform? _________________ The following quotes are drawn from the Republican Party Platform at the 2000 convention: "The arrogance, inconsistency, and unreliability of the administration’s diplomacy have undermined American alliances, alienated friends, and emboldened our adversaries." "Gerrymandered congressional districts are an affront to democracy and an insult to the voters. We oppose that and any other attempt to rig the electoral process." "Nor should the intelligence community be made the scapegoat for political misjudgments. A Republican administration working with the Congress will respect the needs and quiet sacrifices of these public servants as it strengthens America’s intelligence and counter-intelligence capabilities and reorients them toward the dangers of the future." "The current administration has casually sent American armed forces on dozens of missions without clear goals, realizable objectives, favorable rules of engagement, or defined exit strategies. Over the past seven years, a shrunken American military has been run ragged by a deployment tempo that has eroded its military readiness. Many units have seen their operational requirements increased four-fold, wearing out both people and equipment." "The rule of law, the very foundation for a free society, has been under assault, not only by criminals from the ground up, but also from the top down. An administration that lives by evasion, coverup, stonewalling, and duplicity has given us a totally discredited Department of Justice." "Sending our military on vague, aimless, and endless missions rapidly saps morale. Even the highest morale is eventually undermined by back-to-back deployments, poor pay, shortages of spare parts and equipment, inadequate training, and rapidly declining readiness." "Our goal for NATO is a strong political and security fellowship of independent nations in which consultations are mutually respected and defense burdens mutually shared." "As the traditional advocate of America’s veterans, the Republican Party remains committed to fulfilling America’s obligations to them. That is why we defeated the administration’s attempt to replace veterans’ health care with a national system for everybody." "The weak leadership and neglect of the administration have allowed America’s intelligence capabilities, including space based systems, to atrophy, resulting in repeated proliferation surprises such as Iraq’s renewed chemical and biological weapons programs." "The Social Security surplus is off-limits, off budget, and will not be touched. We will not stop there, for we are also determined to protect Medicare and to pay down the national debt. Reducing that debt is both a sound policy goal and a moral imperative. Our families and most states are required to balance their budgets; it is reasonable to assume the federal government should do the same. Therefore, we reaffirm our support for a constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget." "Inspired by Presidents Reagan and Bush, Republicans hammered into place the framework for today’s prosperity and surpluses. We cut tax rates, simplified the tax code, deregulated industries, and opened world markets to American enterprise. The result was the tremendous growth in the 1980s that created the venture capital to launch the technology revolution of the 1990s. That’s the origin of what is now called the New Economy: the longest economic boom in the Twentieth Century, 40 million new jobs, the lowest inflation and unemployment in memory." "A Republican president will work with businesses and with other nations to reduce harmful emissions through new technologies without compromising America’s sovereignty or competitiveness — and without forcing Americans to walk to work." "We applaud Governor Bush’s pledge to name only judges who have demonstrated that they share his conservative beliefs and respect the Constitution." "Reacting belatedly to inevitable crises, the administration constantly enlarges the reach of its rhetoric — most recently in Vice President Gore’s "new security agenda" that adds disease, climate, and all the world’s ethnic or religious conflicts to an undiminished set of existing American responsibilities. If there is some limit to candidate Gore’s new agenda for America as global social worker, he has yet to define it." "A new Republican administration will patiently rebuild an international coalition opposed to Saddam Hussein and committed to joint action. We will insist that Iraq comply fully with its disarmament commitments. We will maintain the sanctions on the Iraqi regime while seeking to alleviate the suffering of innocent Iraqi people. We will react forcefully and unequivocally to any evidence of reconstituted Iraqi capabilities for producing weapons of mass destruction." "The administration has used an arsenal of dilatory tactics to block any serious support to the Iraqi National Congress, an umbrella organization reflecting a broad and representative group of Iraqis who wish to free their country from the scourge of Saddam Hussein's regime." "Republicans prefer an America that is far less dependent on foreign crude oil. A Republican president will not be so tolerant if OPEC colludes to drive up the world price of oil, as it has done this past year." ------------------------ The following quote comes from the Democratic Party Platform of the same year, and is the only section of either party platform that mentions Osama bin Laden or specific tactics, like breaking up cells and going after terrorist financing, for dealing with international terrorism: "Whether terrorism is sponsored by a foreign nation or inspired by a single fanatic individual, such as Osama Bin Laden, Forward Engagement requires trying to disrupt terrorist networks, even before they are ready to attack. We must improve coordination internationally and domestically to share intelligence and develop operational plans. We must continue the comprehensive approach that has resulted in the development of a national counter-terrorism strategy involving all arms and levels of our government. We must continue to target terrorist finances, break up support cells, and disrupt training. And we must close avenues of cyber-attack by improving the security of the Internet and the computers upon which our digital economy exists." "While fighting terrorism, we will protect the civil liberties of all Americans. Our justice system must guarantee fairness with procedures that protect the rights of the accused, even under the unusual circumstances of the investigation of threats to our national security. We must avoid stereotyping, for it defeats the highest purposes of our country if citizens feel automatically suspect by virtue of their ethnic origin. The purpose of terrorism is not only to intimidate, but also to divide and fracture, and we cannot permit that to happen."
By 'dangerous' you mean popularly elected, but not doing what we wanted? And replaced them, time and again, with murderous tyrants? You're actually ok with htis? A terrorist is a terrorist whether or not he's on your side. For example, the 'terrorists' we're fighting in Iraq right now...do you know where the majority of them began doing the exact same things they're doing now? In Afghanistan...under our training and funding. ( BTW, I'm talking about the minority of those opposing us in Iraq who are actually terrorists from outside the country, as opposed to the Iraqis who, for right or wrong, believe they are fighting for their own country.) And the Mujah Hadeen were probalbly the easiest to excuse of any of our incursions into this area.
Neither did Saddam. What Saddam did was give money to FAMILIES of martyrs who died in the cause against Israel. He believed that suicide bombers were among those martyrs. However the money to the families was paid out many many times more to families of civilians killed by the IDF than it was to families of suicide bombers. Yes, suicide bombers families were paid, but the majority of the fund did not go to them, and they were only a small part of the issue.
A) I'm questioning the veracity of many of the names you gave me to google and the possibility that our CIA offed them. B) No I'm not ok with this but there is a distinct difference between them (and I'm granting you the argument that all of these conspiracy sites are correct, let's just say for the sake of the argument that they are) and a terrorist orginanization fueled by religous extremism and suicidal tendencies. These are covert operations, not meant to strike fear into the heart of the people (regardless of what the bloodthirsty tyrant who followed did). Terrorism makes people live in fear. I hate taking the Metro to downtown DC after what happened in Madrid. I'm living in fear for my life everyday from their actions. I'm not seeing covert CIA ops (which if true, I really don't agree with although I see the strategic importance and realize that govt. is a crappy business)
didn't finish my damn sentence... ...I don't see covert CIA ops putting a nation to fear for their security.
1) Uh, ok. But, for example, AJAX has been declassified. It's on record. 2) Not meant to make people live in fear!?!? It's not just the assassinations/overthrows, it's the death squads and torture camps we helped fund, set up, and train for decades, whose entire purpose was to make the people live in fear. How much have you looked into Savak, etc.? The people under those dictatorships lived in fear of everything; they were killed/tortured, so were their families, if they were caught reading materal the government didn't approve! If a memeber of their family of circle of friends spoke out against the government, they were all rounded up, tortured, and many killed. Fear!?!? Come on, man, take the blinders off. You claim to be absolute about good and evil; evil is as evil does.
Listen...I said I didn't approve of what they did...offings, replacements. Would you care to rephrase your statement? But you can't say the terror level is the same as what an Al-Queda or a Hamas does.
No, I'll agree. They killed hundreds of thousand, millions even. And kept nations in terror for decades. But AQ, if given time and support, will probably get into their ball park in a few decades.
twhy77 I'll give you example of what Macbeth's talking about. In 1954 the CIA participated in coup that led to the overthrow of Jacobo Arbenz, the democratically elected president of Guatemala. This coup was followed by a series of right wing military dictatorships that literally tortured and killed hundreds of thousands of Guatemalan citizens. This is not conspiracy theory or speculation. It is a matter of public record. If you want to see actual CIA documents related to these events go here- http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/
So the cold war was basically a fight between communism and capitalism, oligarchy vs. democracy; we made mistakes while trying to win that war, no doubt about that... But saying the CIA is directly responsible for *everything* that the idiot tyrants did when we put them in power is at best, a stretch. Responsible? You bet we are. For all? No. They were trying to get rid of communist rule and instead implemented tyranny. I'm not arguing with that. But terrorists they are not.
AAArrrgghh!! We led death squads. We trained them. We funded them. AAARRGGHH!!!! We taught them how to 'interogate'...it's ON RECORD. Look up the Dulles brothers, for God's sake. And the Cold War excuse doesn't work, unless you give AQ, Saddam etc. a pass for also believing their in a war. Goose, gander.
Did you read the maual, it says, do not use these techniques and here is why. Those Dulles guys look pretty sneaky but it seems like more of a hoodwink than CIA policy. Which name led the death squads? So when the Cubans had Soviet missles pointed at Florida and we stared them down, that wasn't war? There was no threat in the Cold War? All a hoax propagated by the CIA? We are at war with AQ. Sadaam (well we're in a war) still deciding if that was the right choice.
