Is Hollywood's Portrayal of the CIA Accurate?

[nsaspook]

... carrier acquired ...
It's a sad story.

 

[DaveC426913]

This 'visitor message' belongs here since it's relevant, so I'm posting it.

phoenix:
I do get it, you aren't exactly using "falsifiability" in the correct manner. They can prove the claims of movies of portrayal of the CIA wrong through their own data, yet they do not. In other words, proving that the depiction is incorrect, incorrect.

Can we be certain of any activity or operation the CIA is carrying out? They are a clandestine organization whose main strength lies in people not knowing what they are doing, so for people to claim they know is fallacious. No-one who isn't apart of the organization knows which should have been the answer given to the OP instead of, "no." Yet pitchforks and grenades seem to be targeted towards me because of some divergent opinion that isn't exactly agreeing with the movies.

I never claimed anything of the CIA being powerful or not. What I did was ask for proof of the claim of the CIA not being as powerful as the movies depict the organization to be because I am curious how people arrived at such conclusions with no evidence.

DaveC426913:
"...some divergent opinion..."
What divergent opinion? You haven't made any case.

"What I did was ask for proof...arrived at such conclusions with no evidence"
Have you ever heard the 'teapot orbIting near Jupiter' story? Or Carl Sagan's invisible dragon? The lesson is the same. There is no need to provide proof to refute something that has no compelling reason to exist in the first place. Occam's Razor. It is simply more likely that there is nothing to be said here. If you disagree YOU must make the case.

I ask a second time. Make your case. Why do you think CIA might be as powerful as the movies make it out to be? Why would the CIA's power be different than Tom Cruise riding an exploding helicopter's shock wave to land on a bullet train?

It's the movies. There's your refutation. nuff said.

I'm not saying you're wrong; I'm saying you haven't even made an assertion that could be wrong (let alone right).

 

[CheckMate]

The CIA does much more things than just intelligence gathering. Judging by its name, it should only be doing that but it is clearly involved in black operations. Henceforth, they have create the SAD (Special Activities Division) for that purpose.

Why else would a civilian agency have an armed unit who are mostly ex-special operatives ? Let's also not forget about the drug trafficking to finance certain operations the government did not want to fund.

(By the way this post is not meant to go off topic, the thread is about how powerful the CIA is so that is why I am saying they are powerful because they do P then Q with A,B,C at hand.)

 

[phoenix:\\]

Has the CIA operated on humans, has the CIA committed itself to programs of remote viewing, has the CIA carried out programs of mind control?

http://www.wanttoknow.info/mindcontrol

Other documents:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/

From their own main site:

Here at CIA, most of the work we do is classified. And the work done in the Directorate of Science and Technology (DS&T) is no exception. In fact, the men and women—the scientists, engineers and technical experts—in the DS&T produce technology so advanced, it’s classified. Think back to a James Bond movie and the work developed by the “Q Branch.” What our men and women do is even more impressive.

The use of science and technology is critical to the intelligence process, and the DS&T’s mission is to attack intelligence problems with cutting-edge technical solutions to help protect the nation.

https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-archive/directorate-of-science-and-technology.html

I am more inclined to believe them since they have the money and brilliant men and women working for them to back them up.

 

[Drakkith]

There is no way to define how "powerful" the organization is compared to movies. The portrayal of any agency varies enormously from movie to movie, even the more realistic ones.

 

[Borg]

When I went to school in the early 70s, the NSA was recruiting civilian mathematicians. I went to a preliminary interview at that time. At the interview I was told that if I applied not only would my background be investigated, but also that of family members, friends, acquaintances, anyone I had ever met, and anyone I hadn't ever met. I didn't want to put others through it so I didn't apply.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Absolutely amazing. I made the point that the word "powerful" doesn't have any specific meaning, but not one person even responded.

Unless one identifies specific claims and defines what is meant by "powerful", this discussion is ridiculous and has no meaning - just more internet nonsense.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Absolutely amazing. I made the point that the word "powerful" doesn't have any specific meaning, but not one person even responded.

Unless one identifies specific claims and defines what is meant by "powerful", this discussion is ridiculous and has no meaning - just more internet nonsense.

Let's take the movie "Body of Lies". Does the CIA actually have a bunch of drone spy craft with telescopes hovering over areas of interest that they can call into pinpoint and follow given individuals?

 

[CheckMate]

Absolutely amazing. I made the point that the word "powerful" doesn't have any specific meaning, but not one person even responded.

Unless one identifies specific claims and defines what is meant by "powerful", this discussion is ridiculous and has no meaning - just more internet nonsense.

Powerful : An individual or a group that holds power.
Power: An entity's ability to control/affect/influence its environment .

We could also define CIA, movies and every word used in this thread.

So let's use the word powerful with the definition I have provided.

Alex is more powerful than John because he is smarter, stronger and possesses a greater charisma.

USA is more powerful than China because it has a stronger military force and economy.

 

[Anonymous217]

If the covert ops in the CIA was doing its job correctly, we'd never know about them. I imagine that once a secret operation goes public, the "better" secret organizations shift names or go under a different authorization, whereas the original name remains only as a public facade.

 

[CheckMate]

If the covert ops in the CIA was doing its job correctly, we'd never know about them. I imagine that once a secret operation goes public, the "better" secret organizations shift names or go under a different authorization, whereas the original name remains only as a public facade.

If the CIA does an op in let's say the year 2000 , than they would try to make sure the general public doesn't know about it. However, from the CIA's POV, it doesn't matter if people get to know 15, 20 or 30 years later.

 

[Evo]

If the CIA does an op in let's say the year 2000 , than they would try to make sure the general public doesn't know about it. However, from the CIA's POV, it doesn't matter if people get to know 15, 20 or 30 years later.

That's not necessarily true. Things done 30 years ago and discovered now can have serious effects on what was put into play.

 

[wuliheron]

If the CIA does an op in let's say the year 2000 , than they would try to make sure the general public doesn't know about it. However, from the CIA's POV, it doesn't matter if people get to know 15, 20 or 30 years later.

The Catholic Church waited 500 years to admit they might have made a mistake imprisoning Galileo and the US congress took 150 years to apologize for slavery. When it comes to intelligence agencies if at all possible the public never even learns they exist much less just how nasty and vicious they can be. Out of sight, out of mind and the more out of the public eye they are the freer they are to do as they please.

 

[MarcoD]

That's not necessarily true. Things done 30 years ago and discovered now can have serious effects on what was put into play.

I have read some blog posts that alleged turning over of Islamists, and families, to the Gadaffi regime, as well as the bribing of Islamic fundamentalists by MI6 for an assassination attempt, gives the terrorists all the quid-pro-quo legitimization needed to further their actions.

So, yes, even if this would have happened thirty years ago, it would still be extrapolated to probably wide-scale unlawful actions taking place now, and be used to legitimize opposing terrorist actions.

(These were documents allegedly discovered at one of the regime's bases. I guess it was in the news in the US too.)

 

[klimatos]

I've always wondered how closely someone may have been looking at me. The NSA did finally admit that they were tracking people who visited their site, but I don't know how invasive this was.

That depends upon how much of a threat that they (the collective security agencies) think you pose. At a minimum, your name is certainly on one or more lists. At a maximum, they're watching you this very minute.

 

[CheckMate]

That's not necessarily true. Things done 30 years ago and discovered now can have serious effects on what was put into play.

Read exactly what I said. I wrote this : " from the CIA's POV". That is why they didn't midn ex-CIA to talk about the drug trafficking used as a way to finance certain ops.

 

[Char. Limit]

All I am saying is who knows what they are up to? To claim they are similar to some bargain bin agency where street-level cops could do the same job is a little bit absurd in my opinion. For them to even last, most common day people (we the people here) must be kept in* the dark of most activities and know little of what they are capable of in today's world. That is the reason why I am asking you how do you know they aren't as powerful?

How do I know? Money. It would take hundreds of billions of dollars a year for the CIA to be as powerful as it is in the movies. You think our budget-watchers wouldn't notice that?

 

[klimatos]

If I were associated with the CIA, I think that it would be to my advantage for the public (and other intelligence agencies) to think of me as not too bright, unaware of what was going on, bumbling, and inefficient. I might even work with the media to promote that idea!

 

[MarcoD]

If I were associated with the CIA, I would have some unconventional ideas to furthering world peace and a sustainable planet. None of which I can post here, of course, due to PF strict forum guidelines being enforced by our enlightened rulers.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Don't believe all you see on TV people, I'm sure that Hollywood does as good a job at representing the CIA as Pinewood Studios does for MI6.

As this thread is mainly concerned with unfalsifiable speculation it's time to call it a day.