
How the CIA writes history - georgeoliver
https://theintercept.com/2016/04/25/how-the-cia-writes-history/
======
voxic11
This kind of manipulation of access to public records needs to stop if we are
to continue to have a free society. Reminds me of when the US Marshalls
deputized a local police officer to move stingray use records out of the state
of Florida after a reporter got a court order allowing him access to them.
[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/us-marshals-
step-...](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/us-marshals-step-in-
thwart-efforts-to-learn-about-cell-tracking-devices/)

~~~
jdimov9
Do Americans actually sincerely believe that they live in an actual "free
society" / "democracy" / whatever... Blows my mind.

~~~
sp332
But where else is better?

~~~
benevol
I'd say the Nordic countries plus Switzerland.

~~~
blue_dinner
The Nordic countries have their own problems.

The press is owned by the state, making the freedom of the press a little
difficult.

Because of the high taxes and plentiful regulations, your only options for
employment are huge corporations or government.

Hardly what I call freedom.

Switzerland, on the other hand, is more free. Mostly because the majority of
citizens have some wealth.

Many people associate more government programs and freebies with freedom. In
reality, it only creates dependent groups of people and gives more control and
power to the government. The exact opposite of freedom.

~~~
mbrock
The government doesn't own "the press" in Nordic countries.

In Sweden, there are a couple of TV channels (SVT) and a few radio channels
(SR) which are run according to the "public service" model.

The existence of SVT/SR is protected by the constitution and they are funded
by a kind of flat tax on media receivers while still managed independently of
the government (the majority coalition has no direct power over public
service).

Anyone familiar with SVT/SR or the public service model understands that they
aren't "state media" in an authoritarian sense, most obviously because there
is a plurality of commercial channels too.

There is no state press whatsoever, and the existing commercial papers are
mostly center-right liberal, except for the venerable social democratic
Aftonbladet.

I work at a small startup in Stockholm so I'm existence proof that there are
options other than huge corporations or the state....

Of course there are problems, but your criticism seems misinformed and
exaggerated.

------
SCdF
So maybe this article is a good example of why we§ let them:

\- It's ~2180 words long

\- It takes ~600 words (10 paragraphs) of stumbling around before the author
reminds themselves of what we're actually here to talk about: the CIA
rewriting (or erasing in this case) history

\- It takes another ~500 words (9 more paragraphs) before the article actually
mentions the factual thing that happened that this article is about (document
collections removed from public view).

People can write how they like, and it might just be that you enjoy the way
this person writes, and so enjoy the process of working through this prose to
the meat of his point.

However, I can't help but think that if this was shorter, and if it got to the
heart of the issue quicker, more people might finish reading and comprehending
it, and actually learn what the article is trying to get across.

§ I'm not from the US so when I say we I really more mean you (if you're from
the US) but you get the gist

~~~
justifier
i agree, i want the editorial to be given a backburner role in journalism
stead its seat as the one true way

in addition to burying even just the ideas in a mass of words, i think it
frustrating and detrimental to also bury sources beyond discovery.. why every
online article fails to have a hyperlink biblio at the bottom baffles me

your criticism reminded me of another cia classic: the simple sabotage field
manual(o); succinctly summarised here(i):

    
    
        > Insist on doing everything through "channels.
           "Never permit short-cuts to be taken in order
           to expedite decisions.
        > When possible, refer all matters to committees for
           "further study and consideration." Attempt to make
           the committees as large as possible -- never less 
           than five.
        > Haggle over precise wordings of communications,
           minutes, resolutions.
        > Advocate "caution.""Be "reasonable" and urge your 
           fellow-conferees to be "reasonable" and avoid haste
           which might result in embarrassments or difficulties 
           later on.
        > "Misunderstand" orders. Ask endless questions or 
           engage in long correspondence about such orders. 
           Quibble over them when you can."
        > Don't order new working materials until your current 
           stocks have been virtually exhausted so that the 
           slightest delay in filling your order will mean a 
           shutdown.
        > Insist on perfect work in relatively unimportant 
           products, send back for refinishing those which have 
           the least flaw. Approve other defective parts whose 
           flaws are not visible to the naked eye.
        > When training new workers, give incomplete or 
           misleading instructions.
        > Multiply paperwork in plausible ways. Start duplicate
           files.
    

(o) [https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-
archive/...](https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-
archive/2012-featured-story-archive/CleanedUOSSSimpleSabotage_sm.pdf)

(i) [http://www.business.com/company-culture/coworker-
sabotoging-...](http://www.business.com/company-culture/coworker-sabotoging-
your-office-maybe-shes-a-cia-spy/)

~~~
kafkaesq
_Insist on doing everything through "channels"_

 _When possible, refer all matters to committees for "further study and
consideration."_

 _Advocate "caution.""Be "reasonable" and urge your fellow-conferees to be
"reasonable" and avoid haste which might result in embarrassments or
difficulties later on._

 _" Misunderstand" orders._

 _Insist on perfect work in relatively unimportant products, send back for
refinishing those which have the least flaw._

Sounds like the way things normally roll at many departments and teams in
certain BigCorps we know and love, without anyone actually doing these things
with an attempt to be disruptive. It's just "the way things always work around
here."

~~~
justifier
exactly.. the document simply draws the curtain back

have you seen samantha bee's piece on super delegates where she breaks down
the rest of the metaphor of the "great and powerful"?(o)

    
    
       you do realise the whole point was that oz wasn't powerful, right?
       oz is just a midwestern snake oil salesman displaced to a fantasy land
       full of cowards, heartless people, and strawmen
    

(o) [https://youtu.be/XtuWiHYmr4U?t=239](https://youtu.be/XtuWiHYmr4U?t=239)
.. whole clip is worth a watch at 6m7s

------
smoyer
Well ... the author could play dirty as well.

If the CIA paid $500,000 per "settlement" and 1000 people left their service
between 1960 and 1974, then it's obviously a cool half billion dollars.

In other words, make something up ... then bury a note deep at the end of the
end-notes that admits the numbers are "estimates". Who says you have to play
fair?

~~~
mfoy_
Because if the author isn't scrupulous he loses his credibility, then no one
will take him seriously.

~~~
SolarNet
I think if the author copy pastes this article and then says: "So I'll be
estimating the cost was approximately half a billion dollars" the agency might
release the papers to prove him wrong. Either way they are punished for using
this tactic.

------
MichaelBurge
> In that case, the assistant attorney general told the court that the
> Tallahassee Police Department was under a non-disclosure agreement—likely
> from the leading manufacturer, Harris Corporation—forbidding it from
> acknowledging the use of a stingray, never mind describing it in detail.

The US government has sovereign immunity to lawsuits, and a weaker right to
petition the government in the constitution. I had wondered about this a bit,
but here's at least a clear example of a case where you might plausibly want
your government to not be bound by a civil contract.

In reality, I'm sure commercial contracts aren't actually granted immunity.
It's just an example.

I wonder if it makes sense to do any of these:

* Ban the government from being able to sign an NDA for a commercial contract. Maybe some exceptions for military use.

* Require approval from the local, state, or federal legislature before the local, state, or federal executive branches can sign NDAs(since NDAs are effectively mini-laws that constrain the government).

* Allow NDAs, but have a public list of (Agency, Supplier) pairs for which NDAs exist

------
Aelinsaar
It's been their country for decades now, it's just that people are only now
vaguely coming to terms with what that means.

------
known
"Media does not spread free opinion; it generates opinion." \--Oswald Spengler

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_the_West](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_the_West)

------
akshatpradhan
I think this is huge because it truly affects what actions people take and
each action is a new point in history that may have gone the correct/normal
course had there not been interference.

------
syntiux
I'm sorry if I'm completely off but wouldn't the storage of this type of data
(public records) be a very compelling use-case for blockchains?

~~~
imglorp
Blockchains kinda stink for broadcast because you can't store tons of actual
data on them, just a hash of your data. They're very good for an irrevocable
log of small facts.

What does work is if you can find a bunch of servers or networks like IPFS or
BT or what have you, publish your censorship-prone data there, and then just
publish the hash to the block chain signed by the the author's key. You'd need
an index of some sort also.

Then if someone wants to read the censor-prone document, they'd retrieve it
from wherever they can find it, check the hash from the blockchain, and then
know it was authentic.

------
policestate201
Yet another example of the corrupt American police state.

~~~
duaneb
Intelligence state would be a much better term.

The police have their own issues, but they are very much in the public eye.

~~~
mindslight
Is this not ultimately still in the public eye? We're discussing it right now!
The public has short attention span, no consensus, and no direction over the
machine.

In a different country, perhaps the author would be disappeared and we'd be
arrested for discussing such things. Overt confrontation makes it very clear
who the evildoers are and directly polarizes the population. The lack of it is
what makes our strain of totalitarianism so insidious.

Instead, we're given a choice at every step of the way. It's the path of least
resistance to pay taxes, pick from the manufactured selection of republicrat
celebs, and not engage in direct action against our occupiers. Individuals can
buck the easy choice for a short time, but eventually any individual will get
tired, find their place to fit into the system, and kick the can down the road
for the next generation.

~~~
duaneb
The power to redact underlined in the article is not available to police.

~~~
mindslight
Sure - they wear different attire too.

------
chinathrow
"The Cold War is over"

It is back. Reading a book right now how Putin fights Cold War II. It's not
pretty.

~~~
ljf
Which book?

~~~
chinathrow
[http://www.amazon.de/Putins-verdeckter-Krieg-Moskau-
destabil...](http://www.amazon.de/Putins-verdeckter-Krieg-Moskau-
destabilisiert/dp/3430202078)

It is in german though.

~~~
ljf
Thanks.

