Is the FBI worse for the environment than the CIA?



  1. 0 Votes

    Unfortunately, to make such a comparison, we would have to define our terms -namely by stating what maleficent activities each group has done. It is my understanding that the FBI was rather ruthless in their assessment of many environmentalists during the 1960’s and ’70’s, whereas the CIA had little to do with environmentalists per se. As for the affect of each group on the environment itself (as you asked), war is terrible for the environment, and war and weapons sales are areas that the CIA has been guilty of propagating. So, in the U.S., the FBI has been worse; outside of it, the CIA tends to be more culpable.

  2. 0 Votes

    I would say that the FBI probably is. The CIA’s previously mentioned weapons sales are more the result of the usage of the agency as a vehicle, rather than an independent action. The FBI did persecute environmentalists back when a strong negative social stigma was attached that linked it with extremist activism, but I’m not certain that directly harms the environment either.

    The CIA does, however, compile information on environmental issues, which the FBI does not due to the same extent, at least not publicly, and for that they get major points from me.

Please signup or login to answer this question.

Sorry,At this time user registration is disabled. We will open registration soon!