|
|
Home | Switchboard | Unix Administration | Red Hat | TCP/IP Networks | Neoliberalism | Toxic Managers |
| (slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and bastardization of classic Unix | |||||||
| Home | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 |
For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section
|
|
Switchboard | ||||
| Latest | |||||
| Past week | |||||
| Past month | |||||
 |
 |
 |
Oct 11, 2017 | www.counterpunch.org
Photo by jcrakow | CC BY 2.0
" Fascists are divided into two categories: the fascists and the anti-fascists ."
– Ennio Flaiano, Italian writer and co-author of Federico Fellini's greatest film scripts.
In recent weeks, a totally disoriented left has been widely exhorted to unify around a masked vanguard calling itself Antifa, for anti-fascist. Hooded and dressed in black, Antifa is essentially a variation of the Black Bloc, familiar for introducing violence into peaceful demonstrations in many countries. Imported from Europe, the label Antifa sounds more political. It also serves the purpose of stigmatizing those it attacks as "fascists".
Despite its imported European name, Antifa is basically just another example of America's steady descent into violence.
Historical Pretensions
Antifa first came to prominence from its role in reversing Berkeley's proud "free speech" tradition by preventing right wing personalities from speaking there. But its moment of glory was its clash with rightwingers in Charlottesville on August 12, largely because Trump commented that there were "good people on both sides". With exuberant Schadenfreude, commentators grabbed the opportunity to condemn the despised President for his "moral equivalence", thereby bestowing a moral blessing on Antifa.
Charlottesville served as a successful book launching for Antifa: the Antifascist Handbook , whose author, young academic Mark Bray, is an Antifa in both theory and practice. The book is "really taking off very fast", rejoiced the publisher, Melville House. It instantly won acclaim from leading mainstream media such as the New York Times , The Guardian and NBC, not hitherto known for rushing to review leftwing books, least of all those by revolutionary anarchists.
The Washington Post welcomed Bray as spokesman for "insurgent activist movements" and observed that: "The book's most enlightening contribution is on the history of anti-fascist efforts over the past century, but its most relevant for today is its justification for stifling speech and clobbering white supremacists."
Bray's "enlightening contribution" is to a tell a flattering version of the Antifa story to a generation whose dualistic, Holocaust-centered view of history has largely deprived them of both the factual and the analytical tools to judge multidimensional events such as the growth of fascism. Bray presents today's Antifa as though it were the glorious legitimate heir to every noble cause since abolitionism. But there were no anti-fascists before fascism, and the label "Antifa" by no means applies to all the many adversaries of fascism.
The implicit claim to carry on the tradition of the International Brigades who fought in Spain against Franco is nothing other than a form of innocence by association. Since we must revere the heroes of the Spanish Civil War, some of that esteem is supposed to rub off on their self-designated heirs. Unfortunately, there are no veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade still alive to point to the difference between a vast organized defense against invading fascist armies and skirmishes on the Berkeley campus. As for the Anarchists of Catalonia, the patent on anarchism ran out a long time ago, and anyone is free to market his own generic.
The original Antifascist movement was an effort by the Communist International to cease hostilities with Europe's Socialist Parties in order to build a common front against the triumphant movements led by Mussolini and Hitler.
Since Fascism thrived, and Antifa was never a serious adversary, its apologists thrive on the "nipped in the bud" claim: "if only" Antifascists had beat up the fascist movements early enough, the latter would have been nipped in the bud. Since reason and debate failed to stop the rise of fascism, they argue, we must use street violence – which, by the way, failed even more decisively.
This is totally ahistorical. Fascism exalted violence, and violence was its preferred testing ground. Both Communists and Fascists were fighting in the streets and the atmosphere of violence helped fascism thrive as a bulwark against Bolshevism, gaining the crucial support of leading capitalists and militarists in their countries, which brought them to power.
Since historic fascism no longer exists, Bray's Antifa have broadened their notion of "fascism" to include anything that violates the current Identity Politics canon: from "patriarchy" (a pre-fascist attitude to put it mildly) to "transphobia" (decidedly a post-fascist problem).
The masked militants of Antifa seem to be more inspired by Batman than by Marx or even by Bakunin.
Storm Troopers of the Neoliberal War Party
Since Mark Bray offers European credentials for current U.S. Antifa, it is appropriate to observe what Antifa amounts to in Europe today.
In Europe, the tendency takes two forms. Black Bloc activists regularly invade various leftist demonstrations in order to smash windows and fight the police. These testosterone exhibits are of minor political significance, other than provoking public calls to strengthen police forces. They are widely suspected of being influenced by police infiltration.
As an example, last September 23, several dozen black-clad masked ruffians, tearing down posters and throwing stones, attempted to storm the platform where the flamboyant Jean-Luc Mélenchon was to address the mass meeting of La France Insoumise , today the leading leftist party in France. Their unspoken message seemed to be that nobody is revolutionary enough for them. Occasionally, they do actually spot a random skinhead to beat up. This establishes their credentials as "anti-fascist".
They use these credentials to arrogate to themselves the right to slander others in a sort of informal self-appointed inquisition.
As prime example, in late 2010, a young woman named Ornella Guyet appeared in Paris seeking work as a journalist in various leftist periodicals and blogs. She "tried to infiltrate everywhere", according to the former director of Le Monde diplomatique , Maurice Lemoine, who "always intuitively distrusted her "when he hired her as an intern.
Viktor Dedaj, who manages one of the main leftist sites in France, Le Grand Soir , was among those who tried to help her, only to experience an unpleasant surprise a few months later. Ornella had become a self-appointed inquisitor dedicated to denouncing "conspirationism, confusionism, anti-Semitism and red-brown" on Internet. This took the form of personal attacks on individuals whom she judged to be guilty of those sins. What is significant is that all her targets were opposed to U.S. and NATO aggressive wars in the Middle East.
Indeed, the timing of her crusade coincided with the "regime change" wars that destroyed Libya and tore apart Syria. The attacks singled out leading critics of those wars.
Viktor Dedaj was on her hit list. So was Michel Collon, close to the Belgian Workers Party, author, activist and manager of the bilingual site Investig'action. So was François Ruffin, film-maker, editor of the leftist journal Fakir elected recently to the National Assembly on the list of Mélenchon's party La France Insoumise . And so on. The list is long.
The targeted personalities are diverse, but all have one thing in common: opposition to aggressive wars. What's more, so far as I can tell, just about everyone opposed to those wars is on her list.
The main technique is guilt by association. High on the list of mortal sins is criticism of the European Union, which is associated with "nationalism" which is associated with "fascism" which is associated with "anti-Semitism", hinting at a penchant for genocide. This coincides perfectly with the official policy of the EU and EU governments, but Antifa uses much harsher language.
In mid-June 2011, the anti-EU party Union Populaire Républicaine led by François Asselineau was the object of slanderous insinuations on Antifa internet sites signed by "Marie-Anne Boutoleau" (a pseudonym for Ornella Guyet). Fearing violence, owners cancelled scheduled UPR meeting places in Lyon. UPR did a little investigation, discovering that Ornella Guyet was on the speakers list at a March 2009 Seminar on International Media organized in Paris by the Center for the Study of International Communications and the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University. A surprising association for such a zealous crusader against "red-brown".
In case anyone has doubts, "red-brown" is a term used to smear anyone with generally leftist views – that is, "red" – with the fascist color "brown". This smear can be based on having the same opinion as someone on the right, speaking on the same platform with someone on the right, being published alongside someone on the right, being seen at an anti-war demonstration also attended by someone on the right, and so on. This is particularly useful for the War Party, since these days, many conservatives are more opposed to war than leftists who have bought into the "humanitarian war" mantra.
The government doesn't need to repress anti-war gatherings. Antifa does the job.
The Franco-African comedien Dieudonné M'Bala M'Bala, stigmatized for anti-Semitism since 2002 for his TV sketch lampooning an Israeli settler as part of George W. Bush's "Axis of Good", is not only a target, but serves as a guilty association for anyone who defends his right to free speech – such as Belgian professor Jean Bricmont, virtually blacklisted in France for trying to get in a word in favor of free speech during a TV talk show. Dieudonné has been banned from the media, sued and fined countless times, even sentenced to jail in Belgium, but continues to enjoy a full house of enthusiastic supporters at his one-man shows, where the main political message is opposition to war.
Still, accusations of being soft on Dieudonné can have serious effects on individuals in more precarious positions, since the mere hint of "anti-Semitism" can be a career killer in France. Invitations are cancelled, publications refused, messages go unanswered.
In April 2016, Ornella Guyet dropped out of sight, amid strong suspicions about her own peculiar associations.
The moral of this story is simple. Self-appointed radical revolutionaries can be the most useful thought police for the neoliberal war party.
I am not suggesting that all, or most, Antifa are agents of the establishment. But they can be manipulated, infiltrated or impersonated precisely because they are self-anointed and usually more or less disguised.
Silencing Necessary Debate
One who is certainly sincere is Mark Bray, author of The Intifa Handbook . It is clear where Mark Bray is coming from when he writes (p.36-7): " Hitler's 'final solution' murdered six million Jews in gas chambers, with firing squads, through hunger an lack of medical treatment in squalid camps and ghettoes, with beatings, by working them to death, and through suicidal despair. Approximately two out of every three Jews on the continent were killed, including some of my relatives."
This personal history explains why Mark Bray feels passionately about "fascism". This is perfectly understandable in one who is haunted by fear that "it can happen again".
However, even the most justifiable emotional concerns do not necessarily contribute to wise counsel. Violent reactions to fear may seem to be strong and effective when in reality they are morally weak and practically ineffectual.
We are in a period of great political confusion. Labeling every manifestation of "political incorrectness" as fascism impedes clarification of debate over issues that very much need to be defined and clarified.
The scarcity of fascists has been compensated by identifying criticism of immigration as fascism. This identification, in connection with rejection of national borders, derives much of its emotional force above all from the ancestral fear in the Jewish community of being excluded from the nations in which they find themselves.
The issue of immigration has different aspects in different places. It is not the same in European countries as in the United States. There is a basic distinction between immigrants and immigration. Immigrants are people who deserve consideration. Immigration is a policy that needs to be evaluated. It should be possible to discuss the policy without being accused of persecuting the people. After all, trade union leaders have traditionally opposed mass immigration, not out of racism, but because it can be a deliberate capitalist strategy to bring down wages.
In reality, immigration is a complex subject, with many aspects that can lead to reasonable compromise. But to polarize the issue misses the chances for compromise. By making mass immigration the litmus test of whether or not one is fascist, Antifa intimidation impedes reasonable discussion. Without discussion, without readiness to listen to all viewpoints, the issue will simply divide the population into two camps, for and against. And who will win such a confrontation?
A recent survey* shows that mass immigration is increasingly unpopular in all European countries. The complexity of the issue is shown by the fact that in the vast majority of European countries, most people believe they have a duty to welcome refugees, but disapprove of continued mass immigration. The official argument that immigration is a good thing is accepted by only 40%, compared to 60% of all Europeans who believe that "immigration is bad for our country". A left whose principal cause is open borders will become increasingly unpopular.
Childish Violence
The idea that the way to shut someone up is to punch him in the jaw is as American as Hollywood movies. It is also typical of the gang war that prevails in certain parts of Los Angeles. Banding together with others "like us" to fight against gangs of "them" for control of turf is characteristic of young men in uncertain circumstances. The search for a cause can involve endowing such conduct with a political purpose: either fascist or antifascist. For disoriented youth, this is an alternative to joining the U.S. Marines.
American Antifa looks very much like a middle class wedding between Identity Politics and gang warfare. Mark Bray (page 175) quotes his DC Antifa source as implying that the motive of would-be fascists is to side with "the most powerful kid in the block" and will retreat if scared. Our gang is tougher than your gang.
That is also the logic of U.S. imperialism, which habitually declares of its chosen enemies: "All they understand is force." Although Antifa claim to be radical revolutionaries, their mindset is perfectly typical the atmosphere of violence which prevails in militarized America.
In another vein, Antifa follows the trend of current Identity Politics excesses that are squelching free speech in what should be its citadel, academia. Words are considered so dangerous that "safe spaces" must be established to protect people from them. This extreme vulnerability to injury from words is strangely linked to tolerance of real physical violence.
Wild Goose Chase
In the United States, the worst thing about Antifa is the effort to lead the disoriented American left into a wild goose chase, tracking down imaginary "fascists" instead of getting together openly to work out a coherent positive program. The United States has more than its share of weird individuals, of gratuitous aggression, of crazy ideas, and tracking down these marginal characters, whether alone or in groups, is a huge distraction. The truly dangerous people in the United States are safely ensconced in Wall Street, in Washington Think Tanks, in the executive suites of the sprawling military industry, not to mention the editorial offices of some of the mainstream media currently adopting a benevolent attitude toward "anti-fascists" simply because they are useful in focusing on the maverick Trump instead of themselves.
Antifa USA, by defining "resistance to fascism" as resistance to lost causes – the Confederacy, white supremacists and for that matter Donald Trump – is actually distracting from resistance to the ruling neoliberal establishment, which is also opposed to the Confederacy and white supremacists and has already largely managed to capture Trump by its implacable campaign of denigration. That ruling establishment, which in its insatiable foreign wars and introduction of police state methods, has successfully used popular "resistance to Trump" to make him even worse than he already was.
The facile use of the term "fascist" gets in the way of thoughtful identification and definition of the real enemy of humanity today. In the contemporary chaos, the greatest and most dangerous upheavals in the world all stem from the same source, which is hard to name, but which we might give the provisional simplified label of Globalized Imperialism. This amounts to a multifaceted project to reshape the world to satisfy the demands of financial capitalism, the military industrial complex, United States ideological vanity and the megalomania of leaders of lesser "Western" powers, notably Israel. It could be called simply "imperialism", except that it is much vaster and more destructive than the historic imperialism of previous centuries. It is also much more disguised. And since it bears no clear label such as "fascism", it is difficult to denounce in simple terms.
The fixation on preventing a form of tyranny that arose over 80 years ago, under very different circumstances, obstructs recognition of the monstrous tyranny of today. Fighting the previous war leads to defeat.
Donald Trump is an outsider who will not be let inside. The election of Donald Trump is above all a grave symptom of the decadence of the American political system, totally ruled by money, lobbies, the military-industrial complex and corporate media. Their lies are undermining the very basis of democracy. Antifa has gone on the offensive against the one weapon still in the hands of the people: the right to free speech and assembly.
Notes.
* "Où va la démocratie?", une enquête de la Fondation pour l'innovation politique sous la direction de Dominique Reynié, (Plon, Paris, 2017).
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com
Patient Observer , October 28, 2017 at 2:29 pm
A walk down memory lane:Cortes , October 29, 2017 at 6:23 pm
http://theduran.com/5-discarded-anniversaries-of-western-led-aggression/
And here is the list:1 The Korean War ends (1953
2 President Kennedy invades South Vietnam (1962)
3 The US overthrows Allende in Chile (1973)
4 The West installs Iranian dictator the Shah (1953)
5 The US-led Iraq invasion (2003)Many honorable mentions including:
– NATO bombing of Serbia
– Libya
– Afghanistan
– Syria (support of ISIS and its predecessors and spinoffs)The US body count is simply staggering – many millions killed, millions more wounded or poisoned (Vietnam – agent orange and other chemical agents) and tens of millions of lives forever damaged.
USA! USA! USA! (its elites that rule us of course!)
And no mention ofIndonesia.
Just the 1m plus deaths.
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com
Patient Observer , October 28, 2017 at 2:29 pm
A walk down memory lane:Cortes , October 29, 2017 at 6:23 pm
http://theduran.com/5-discarded-anniversaries-of-western-led-aggression/
And here is the list:1 The Korean War ends (1953
2 President Kennedy invades South Vietnam (1962)
3 The US overthrows Allende in Chile (1973)
4 The West installs Iranian dictator the Shah (1953)
5 The US-led Iraq invasion (2003)Many honorable mentions including:
– NATO bombing of Serbia
– Libya
– Afghanistan
– Syria (support of ISIS and its predecessors and spinoffs)The US body count is simply staggering – many millions killed, millions more wounded or poisoned (Vietnam – agent orange and other chemical agents) and tens of millions of lives forever damaged.
USA! USA! USA! (its elites that rule us of course!)
And no mention ofIndonesia.
Just the 1m plus deaths.
|
|
|
Aug 27, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
Tyler Durden Aug 26, 2017 9:15 PM 0 SHARES US has had a military presence across the world , from almost day one of its independence. For those who have ever wanted a clearer picture of the true reach of the United States military - both historically and currently - but shied away due to the sheer volume of research required to find an answer, The Anti Media points out that a crew at the Independent just made things a whole lot simpler.Using data compiled by a Geography and Native Studies professor from Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, the indy100 team created an interactive map of U.S. military incursions outside its own borders from Argentina in 1890 to Syria in 2014.
To avoid confusion, indy100 laid out its prerequisites for what constitutes an invasion:
" Deployment of the military to evacuate American citizens, covert military actions by US intelligence, providing military support to an internal opposition group, providing military support in one side of a conflict, use of the army in drug enforcement actions.
But indy100 didn't stop there. To put all that history into context, using data from the Department of Defense (DOD), the team also put together a map to display all the countries in which nearly 200,000 active members of the U.S. military are now stationed.
For more details, click on the country:
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2017 | www.unz.com
Sean , August 25, 2017 at 6:42 pm GMT
As for Washington and the proverbially bombastic, failed futurists across the Beltway, do they even know what is the end game of "investing" in two never-ending wars with no visible benefits?
You start by assuming that the absence of war is the ultimate good, but none can say what a world without war would be like, or how long it would last.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/20/wars-john-gray-conflict-peace
Has the world seen moral progress? The answer should not depend on whether one has a sunny or a morose temperament. Everyone agrees that life is better than death, health better than sickness, prosperity better than privation, freedom better than tyranny, peace better than war. All of these can be measured, and the results plotted over time. If they go up, that's progress.For John Gray, this is a big problem. As a part of his campaign against reason, science and Enlightenment humanism, he insists that the strivings of humanity over the centuries have left us no better off. This dyspepsia was hard enough to sustain when Gray first expressed it in the teeth of obvious counterexamples such as the abolition of human sacrifice, chattel slavery and public torture-executions. But as scholars have increasingly measured human flourishing, they have found that Gray is not just wrong but howlingly, flat-earth, couldn't-be-more-wrong wrong. The numbers show that after millennia of near-universal poverty and despotism, a steadily growing proportion of humankind is surviving infancy and childbirth, going to school, voting in democracies, living free of disease, enjoying the necessities of modern life and surviving to old age.
And more people are living in peace. In the 1980s several military scholars noticed to their astonishment that the most destructive form of armed conflict – wars among great powers and developed states – had effectively ceased to exist. At the time this "long peace" could have been dismissed as a random lull, but it has held firm for an additional three decades.
In my opinion Gray, though wrong that violence is not decreasing, is onto something about the future being bleak because of the rise of meliorist assumptions, because perpetual peace will be humanity's tomb.
While many suggest a danger for our world along the lines of Brian Cox's explanation for the Fermi Paradox (ie intelligent life forms cross grainedly bring on self-annihilation through unlimited war) I take a different view.
Given that Pinker appears substantially correct that serious war (ie wars among great powers and developed states) have effectively ceased to exist, the trend is for peace and cooperation. Martin Nowak in his book The Supercoperators shows cooperation, not fighting, to be the defining human trait (and indeed the most cooperative groups won their wars in history, whereby nation states such the US are the result of not just individuals but familial tribal regional , and virtually continental groupings coming together for mutual advantage and defence .
The future is going to be global integration pursuit of economic objectives, and I think this exponential moral progress bill begat technological advances beyond imagining.. An escape from the war trap is almost complete and the Singularity becomes. The most likely culprit in the paradox is a technological black hole event horizon created by unlimited peace and progress.
Cross-grained though it may be to say that the good war hallows every cause, I think it not so bad in comparison with the alternative.
|
|
|
Aug 26, 2017 | www.amazon.com
Azblue on July 31, 2006
Alan H. Macdonald on April 1, 2013Barnett's main thesis in "The Pentagon's New Map" is that the world is composed of two types of states: those that are part of an integrated and connected "Core," which embrace globalization; and states of the "Gap," which are disconnected from the effects of globalization. Barnett proclaims that globalization will move the world into an era of peace and prosperity, but can only do so with the help of an indispensable United States. He writes that America is the lynchpin to the entire process and he believes that the United States should be midwife to a new world that will one day consist of peaceful democratic states and integrated economies. Barnett is proposing no less than a new grand strategy - the historical successor to the Cold War's strategy of containment. His approach to a future world defined by America's "exportation of security" is almost religious in its fervor and messianic in its language.
The foundation upon which Barnett builds his binary view of the world is heavily dependant upon the continued advancement of globalization - almost exclusively so. However, advancing globalization is not pre-ordained. Barnett himself makes the case that globalization is a fragile undertaking similar to an interconnected chain in which any broken link destroys the whole. Globalization could indeed be like the biblical statue whose feet are made of clay. Globalization, and therefore the integration of the Gap, may even stop or recede - just as the globalization of the early 20th century ended abruptly with the onset of WW I and a global depression. Moreover, Barnett's contention that the United States has an exceptional duty and moral responsibility for "remaking the world in America's image" might be seen by many as misguided and perhaps even dangerous.
The divide between the `Functioning Core' and the `Non-Integrating Gap' differs from the gulf between rich and poor in a subtle yet direct way. State governments make a conscious decision to become connected vs. disconnected to advancing globalization. States and their leaders can provide the infrastructure and the opening of large global markets to their citizens in ways that individuals cannot. An example can serve to illustrate the point: You can be rich and disconnected in Nigeria or poor and disconnected in North Korea. In each case the country you live in has decided to be disconnected. Citizens in this case have a limited likelihood of staying rich and unlimited prospects of staying poor. But by becoming part of the functioning Core, the enlightened state allows all citizens a running start at becoming part of a worldwide economic system and thus provide prospects for a better future because global jobs and markets are opened up to them. A connected economy such as India's, for example, enables citizens who once had no prospects for a better life to find well-paying jobs, such as computer-related employment. Prospects for a better Indian life are directly the result of the Indian government's conscious decision to become connected to the world economy, a.k.a. embracing globalization.
After placing his theory of the Core/Gap and preemptive war strategy firmly into the church of globalization, Barnett next places his theory squarely upon the alter of rule sets. Few would argue that the world is an anarchic place and Barnett tells us that rule sets are needed to define `good' and `evil' behavior of actors in this chaotic international system. An example of such a rule set is the desire of the Core to keep WMDs out of the hands of terrorist organizations. Other examples are the promulgation of human rights and the need to stop genocide. Barnett also uses rule sets to define `system' rules that govern and shape the actions, and even the psychology, of international actors. An example that Barnett gives of a system-wide rule set is the creation of the `rule' defined by the United States during the Cold War called Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD). Barnett claims that this rule set effectively ended the possibility of war for all time amongst nuclear-capable great powers. Barnett states that the U.S. now should export a brand new rule set called `preemptive war,' which aims to fight actors in the lawless Gap in order to end international terrorism for all time. Barnett makes it clear that the Core's enemy is neither a religion (Islam) nor a place (Middle East), but a condition (disconnectedness).
Next, Barnett points out that system-wide competition has moved into the economic arena and that military conflict, when it occurs, has moved away from the system-wide (Cold War), to inter-state war, ending up today with primarily state conflict vs. individuals (Core vs. bin Laden, Core vs. Kim, etc.). In other words, "we are moving progressively away from warfare against states or even blocs of states and toward a new era of warfare against individuals." Rephrased, we've moved from confrontations with evil empires, to evil states, to evil leaders. An example of this phenomenon is the fact that China dropped off the radar of many government hawks after 9/11 only to be replaced by terrorist groups and other dangerous NGOs "with global reach."
Barnett also points out that the idea of `connectivity' is central to the success of globalization. Without it, everything else fails. Connectivity is the glue that holds states together and helps prevent war between states. For example, the US is not likely to start a war with `connected' France, but America could more likely instigate a war with `disconnected' North Korea, Syria or Iran.
Barnett then examines the dangers associated with his definition of `disconnectedness.' He cleverly describes globalization as a condition defined by mutually assured dependence (MAD) and advises us that `Big Men', royal families, raw materials, theocracies and just bad luck can conspire to impede connectedness in the world. This is one of few places in his book that Barnett briefly discusses impediments to globalization - however, this short list looks at existing roadblocks to connectedness but not to future, system-wide dangers to globalization.
At this point in his book, Barnett also makes bold statements that America is never leaving the Gap and that we are therefore never "bringing our boys home." He believes that there is no exiting the Gap, only shrinking it. These statements have incited some of Barnett's critics to accuse him of fostering and advocating a state of perpetual war. Barnett rebuts these attacks by claiming that, "America's task is not perpetual war, nor the extension of empire. It is merely to serve as globalization's bodyguard wherever and whenever needed throughout the Gap." Barnett claims that the strategy of preemptive war is a "boundable problem," yet his earlier claim that we are never leaving the Gap and that our boys are never coming home does not square with his assertion that there will not be perpetual war. He cannot have it both ways.
Barnett then takes us on a pilgrimage to the Ten Commandments of globalization. Tellingly, this list is set up to be more like links in a chain than commandments. Each item in the list is connected to the next - meaning that each step is dependent upon its predecessor. If any of the links are broken or incomplete, the whole is destroyed. For example, Barnett warns us that if there is no security in the Gap, there can be no rules in the Gap. Barnett therefore undermines his own globalization-based grand strategy by pointing out in detail at least ten things that can go wrong with globalization - the foundation upon which his theory is built.
What else could kill globalization? Barnett himself tells us: "Labor, energy, money and security all need to flow as freely as possible from those places in the world where they are plentiful to those regions where they are scarce." Here he is implying that an interruption of any or all of these basic necessities can doom globalization. Barnett states clearly: "...(these are) the four massive flows I believe are essential to protect if Globalization III is going to advance." Simply put, any combination of American isolationism or closing of borders to immigration, a global energy crisis, a global financial crisis or rampant global insecurity could adversely affect "connectedness," a.k.a. globalization. These plausible future events, unnerving as they are, leave the inexorable advancement of globalization in doubt and we haven't yet explored other problems with Barnett's reliance on globalization to make the world peaceful, free and safe for democracy.
Barnett goes on to tell us that Operation Iraqi Freedom was an "overt attempt to create a "System Perturbation" centered in the Persian Gulf to trigger a Big Bang." His definition of a Big Bang in the Middle East is the democratization of the many totalitarian states in the region. He also claims that the Big Bang has targeted Iran's "sullen majority."
Barnett claims that our problem with shrinking the Gap is not our "motive or our means, but our inability to describe the enemies worth killing, the battles worth winning, and the future worth creating." Managing the global campaign to democratize the world is no easy task. Barnett admits that in a worst-case scenario we may be stuck in the "mother of all intifadas" in Iraq. Critics claim this is something that we should have planned for - that the insurgency should not have been a surprise, and that it should have been part of the "peacemaking" planning. Barnett blithely states that things will get better "...when America internationalizes the occupation." Barnett should not engage in wishful thinking here, as he also does when he predicted that Iraqis would be put in charge of their own country 18 months after the fall of Baghdad. It would be more accurate if he claimed this would happen 18 months after the cessation of hostilities. Some critics claim that Iraq is an example that we are an "empire in a hurry" (Michael Ignatieff), which then results in: 1) allocating insufficient resources to non-military aspects of the project and 2) attempting economic and political transformation in an unrealistically short time frame.
The final basic premise of Barnett's theory of the Core and the Gap is the concept of what he calls the "global transaction strategy." Barnett explains it best: "America's essential transaction with the outside world is one of our exporting security in return for the world's financing a lifestyle we could far more readily afford without all that defense spending." Barnett claims that America pays the most for global stability because we enjoy it the most. But what about the other 80 countries in the Core?
Why is America, like Atlas, bearing the weight of the world's security and stabilization on its shoulders?
Barnett claims that historical analogies are useless today and point us in the wrong direction. I disagree. James Madison cautioned us not to go abroad to seek monsters to destroy. We can learn from his simple and profound statement that there are simply too many state (and individual) monsters in today's world for the U.S. to destroy unilaterally or preemptively. We must also avoid overstretching our resources and power. Thucydides reminds us that the great democracy of Athens was brought to its knees by the ill-advised Sicilian expedition - which resulted in the destruction of everything the Athenians held dear. Do not ignore history as Barnett councils; heed it.
Globalization is likely here to stay, though it may be slowed down or even stopped in some regions of the planet. Therefore, America needs to stay engaged in the affairs of the world, but Barnett has not offered conclusive evidence that the U.S. needs to become the world's single Leviathan that must extinguish all global hot wars. Barnett also has not proved that America needs to be, as he writes, "the one willing to rush in when everyone else is running away." People like Barnett in academia and leaders in government may proclaim and ordain the U.S. to be a global Leviathan, but it is a conscious choice that should be thoroughly debated by the American people. After all, it is upon the backs of the American people that such a global Leviathan must ride. Where is the debate? The American people, upon reflection, may decide upon other courses of action.
I would strongly recommend "The Pentagon's New Map" to students who are studying U.S. foreign policy. I would also recommend it to those who are studying the Bush administration as well as the Pentagon. The ideas in the book seem to be popular with the military and many of its ideas can be seen in the current thinking and policy of the Pentagon and State Department.
It seems to be well researched - having 35 pages of notes. Many of Barnett's citations come from the Washington Post and the New York Times, which some may see as a liberal bias, but I see the sources as simply newspapers of record.
I would only caution the reader that Barnett's theories are heavily dependent upon the continued advancement of globalization, which in turn is dependent upon the continued economic ability of the U.S. to sustain military operations around the world indefinitely. Neither is guaranteed.
A misused book waiting for redemptionI don't think poorly of Thomas Barnett himself. He's very bright and, I think, good hearted, BUT his well thought-out, well argued pride and joy (and positive intellectual pursuit) is being badly distorted ---- which happens to all 'tools' that Empire gets its hands on.
For those who like predictions, I would predict that Barnett will wind up going through an epiphany much like Francis Fukuyama (but a decade later) and for much the same reason, that his life's work gets misused and abused so greatly that he works to reverse and correct its misuse. Fukuyama, also brilliant, wrote "The End of History" in 1992 (which was misused by the neocons to engender war), and now he's working just as hard to reverse a misuse that he may feel some guilt of his work supporting, and is writing "The Future of History" as a force for good --- and I suspect (and hope) that Barnett will, in even less time, be counter-thinking and developing the strategy and book to reverse the misuse of his 2004 book before the Global Empire pulls down the curtain.
"Globalization" has turned out to be nothing but the polite PR term to disguise and avoid the truth of using the more accurate name, "Global Empire" --- and there is no doubt that Barnett is more than smart enough to see that this has inexorably happened.
Best luck and love to the fast expanding 'Occupy the Empire' educational and revolutionary movement against this deceitful, guileful, disguised EMPIRE, which can't so easily be identified as wearing Red Coats, Red Stars, nor funny looking Nazi helmets ---- quite yet!
Liberty, democracy, justice, and equality Over Violent/'Vichy' Rel 2.0 Empire,
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, MaineWe don't MERELY have; a gun/fear problem, or a 'Fiscal Cliff', 'Sequestration', and 'Debt Limit' problem, or an expanding wars problem, or a 'drone assassinations' problem, or a vast income & wealth inequality problem, or a Wall Street 'looting' problem, or a Global Warming and environmental death-spiral problem, or a domestic tyranny NDAA FISA spying problem, or, or, or, or .... ad nauseam --- we have a hidden EMPIRE cancerous tumor which is the prime CAUSE of all these 'symptom problems'.
"If your country is treating you like ****, and bombing abroad, look carefully --- because it may not be your country, but a Global Empire only posing as your former country."
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2017 | www.unz.com
schrub , August 25, 2017 at 7:18 pm GMT
People who seem to think that Trump's generals will somehow go along and support his original vision are sadly mistaken.
Since 2003, Israel has had an increasingly strong hand in the vetting who gets promoted to upper positions in the American armed forces. All of the generals Trump has at his side went through a vetting procedure which definitely involved a very close look at their opinions about Israel.
Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski has written extensively about the purges of the patriots in the Defense Department that happened in Washington during the lead up and after the commencement of the Iraq war in 2003.
Officers who openly oppose the dictates of the Israel Lobby will see their prospects for advancement simply vanish like a whiff of smoke.. Those who support Israel's machinations are rewarded with promotions, the more fervent the support the more rapid the promotion especially if this knowledge is made known to their congressman or senator..
Generals who support Israel already know that this support will be heavily rewarded after their retirements by being given lucrative six figure positions on company boards of directors or positions in equally lucrative think tanks like the American Enterprise Institution or the Hoover Institute. They will receive hefty speaking fees. as well. They learned early that their retirements could be truly glorious if they only "went" along with The Lobby. They will be able to then live the good life in expensive places like Washington, New York or San Francisco, often invited to glitzy parties with unlimited amount of free prawns "the size of your hand".
On the other hand, upper officers who somehow get then get "bad" reputations for their negative views about Israel ( like Karen U. Kwiatkowski for instance) will end up, once retired, having to depend on just their often scanty pensions This requires getting an often demeaning second jobs to get by in some place where "their dollar goes further". No bright lights in big cities for them. No speaking fees, no college jobs. Once their fate becomes known, their still active duty contemporaries suddenly decide to "go along".
If anybody thinks what I have written is an exaggeration, research what the late Admiral Thomas Moorer had to say years ago about the total infiltration of the Defense Department by Israeli agents.
Face it, we live in a country under occupation by a hostile power that we willingly pay large amounts monetary tribute to. Our government does whatever benefits Israel regardless of how negatively this effects the USA. We are increasing troop strength in Afghanistan because, somehow, this benefits Israel. If our presence in Afghanistan (or the Mideast in general) didn't benefit Israel, our troops would simply not be there.
We are all Palestinians.
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2017 | warprofiteerstory.blogspot.com
JWalters , August 18, 2017 at 7:02 pm
Well put. These people are like the "nobles" of medieval times. They care not a whit about the "peasants" they trample. They are wealth bigots, compounded by some ethnic bigotry or other, in this case Jewish supremacism. America has an oligarchy problem. At the center of that oligarchy is a Jewish mafia controlling the banks, and thereby the big corporations, and thereby the media and the government. This oligarchy sees America as a big, dumb military machine that it can manipulate to generate war profits.
"War Profiteers and the Roots of the War on Terror" . http://warprofiteerstory.blogspot.com
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
Anonymous | Aug 4, 2017 7:00:33 PM | 37
Enrico Malatesta @13The Russians were there in Yugoslavia but they were not following NATO's script. There was an incident where Russian forces took control of a key airport to the total surprise of NATO. The US overall commander ordered the UK to go in and kick the Russians out. The UK ground commander wisely said he was not prepared to start WW III over Russian control of an airfield.
There has been a gradual decline in the rationality of UK forces thinking. They insisted on UN legal cover cover the invasion of Iraq but were totally on board with pre-emptive action in Libya, happily training effectively ISIS forces before Gaddafi was removed. They are now training Ukrainian Neo-Nazis and training ISIS/whatever in Syria, effectively invading the country. I guess this may reflect the increasing direct Zionist control of Perfidious Albion with attendant levels of hubris.
|
|
|
Jul 12, 2017 | www.antiwar.com
Consider this article a work of speculation; a jumble of ideas thrown at a blank canvas.
A lot of art depicts war scenes, and why not? War is incredibly exciting, dynamic, destructive, and otherwise captivating, if often in a horrific way. But I want to consider war and art in a different manner, in an impressionistic one. War, by its nature, is often spectacle; it is also often chaotic; complex; beyond comprehension. Perhaps art theory, and art styles, have something to teach us about war. Ways of representing it and capturing its meaning as well as its horrors. But also ways of misrepresenting it; of fracturing its meaning. Of manipulating it.
For example, America's overseas wars today are both abstractions and distractions. They're also somewhat surreal to most Americans, living as we do in comparative safety and material luxury (when compared to most other peoples of the world). Abstraction and surrealism: two art styles that may say something vital about America's wars.
If some aspects of America's wars are surreal and others abstract, if reports of those wars are often impressionistic and often blurred beyond recognition, this points to, I think, the highly stylized representations of war that are submitted for our consideration. What we don't get very often is realism. Recall how the Bush/Cheney administration forbade photos of flag-draped coffins returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Think of all the war reporting you've seen on U.S. TV and Cable networks, and ask how many times you saw severed American limbs and dead bodies on a battlefield. (On occasion, dead bodies of the enemy are shown, usually briefly and abstractly, with no human backstory.)
Of course, there's no "real" way to showcase the brutal reality of war, short of bringing a person to the front and having them face fire in combat -- a level of "participatory" art that sane people would likely seek to avoid. What we get, as spectators (which is what we're told to remain in America), is an impression of combat. Here and there, a surreal report. An abstract news clip. Blown up buildings become exercises in neo-Cubism; melted buildings and weapons become Daliesque displays. Severed limbs (of the enemy) are exercises in the grotesque. For the vast majority of Americans, what's lacking is raw immediacy and gut-wrenching reality.
Again, we are spectators, not participants. And our responses are often as stylized and limited as the representations are. As Rebecca Gordon put it from a different angle at TomDispatch.com , when it comes to America's wars, are we participating in reality or merely watching reality TV? And why are so many so prone to confuse or conflate the two?
Art, of course, isn't the only lens through which we can see and interpret America's wars. Advertising, especially hyperbole, is also quite revealing. Thus the US military has been sold, whether by George W. Bush or Barack Obama, as "the world's finest military in history" or WFMH, an acronym I just made up, and which should perhaps come with a copyright or trademark symbol after it. It's classic advertising hyperbole. It's salesmanship in place of reality.
So, when other peoples beat our WFMH, we should do what Americans do best: sue them for copyright infringement. Our legions of lawyers will most certainly beat their cadres of counsels. After all, under Bush/Cheney, our lawyers tortured logic and the law to support torture itself. Talk about surrealism!
My point (and I think I have one) is that America's wars are in some sense elaborate productions and representations, at least in the ways in which the government constructs and sells them to the American people. To understand these representations -- the ways in which they are both more than real war and less than it -- art theory, as well as advertising, may have a lot to teach us.
As I said, this is me throwing ideas at the canvas of my computer screen. Do they make any sense to you? Feel free to pick up your own brush and compose away in the comments section.
P.S. Danger, Will Robinson. I've never taken an art theory class or studied advertising closely.
William J. Astore is a retired lieutenant colonel (USAF). He taught history for fifteen years at military and civilian schools and blogs at Bracing Views . He can be reached at [email protected] . Reprinted from Bracing Views with the author's permission.
Afghanistan as the unfinished masterpiece....most people forget that the government is yet to complete it except when a Marine dies, they think about it for a day and then forget all over again.
|
|
|
Mar 31, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
anne , March 30, 2017 at 12:47 PMhttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/29/world/middleeast/us-war-footprint-grows-in-middle-east.htmlilsm -> anne... , March 30, 2017 at 01:51 PMMarch 29, 2017
U.S. War Footprint Grows, With No Endgame in Sight
By BEN HUBBARD and MICHAEL R. GORDONIn places like Yemen, Syria and Iraq, the United States is deepening its involvement in wars while diplomacy becomes largely an afterthought.
14 years as if US were going strong on Hanoi in '79!mulp -> anne... , March 30, 2017 at 04:30 PMPutin is a Tibetan Buddhist compared to Obama and so forth
Well, sending US troops is a US jobs program.Why would you object to government creating more demand for labor? Over time, wages will rise and higher wages will fund more demand for labor produced goods.
|
|
|
Aug 26, 2017 | www.unz.com
Alfred McCoy August 24, 2017
[ This piece has been adapted and expanded from the introduction to Alfred W. McCoy's new book, In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power .]
In the wake of the 2001 terrorist attacks, Washington pursued its elusive enemies across the landscapes of Asia and Africa, thanks in part to a massive expansion of its intelligence infrastructure, particularly of the emerging technologies for digital surveillance, agile drones, and biometric identification. In 2010, almost a decade into this secret war with its voracious appetite for information, the Washington Post reported that the national security state had swelled into a "fourth branch" of the federal government -- with 854,000 vetted officials, 263 security organizations, and over 3,000 intelligence units, issuing 50,000 special reports every year.
Though stunning, these statistics only skimmed the visible surface of what had become history's largest and most lethal clandestine apparatus. According to classified documents that Edward Snowden leaked in 2013, the nation's 16 intelligence agencies alone had 107,035 employees and a combined "black budget" of $52.6 billion, the equivalent of 10% percent of the vast defense budget.
By sweeping the skies and probing the worldwide web's undersea cables, the National Security Agency (NSA) could surgically penetrate the confidential communications of just about any leader on the planet, while simultaneously sweeping up billions of ordinary messages. For its classified missions, the CIA had access to the Pentagon's Special Operations Command, with 69,000 elite troops (Rangers, SEALs, Air Commandos) and their agile arsenal. In addition to this formidable paramilitary capacity, the CIA operated 30 Predator and Reaper drones responsible for more than 3,000 deaths in Pakistan and Yemen.
While Americans practiced a collective form of duck and cover as the Department of Homeland Security's colored alerts pulsed nervously from yellow to red, few paused to ask the hard question: Was all this security really directed solely at enemies beyond our borders? After half a century of domestic security abuses -- from the "red scare" of the 1920s through the FBI's illegal harassment of antiwar protesters in the 1960s and 1970s -- could we really be confident that there wasn't a hidden cost to all these secret measures right here at home? Maybe, just maybe, all this security wasn't really so benign when it came to us.
From my own personal experience over the past half-century, and my family's history over three generations, I've found out in the most personal way possible that there's a real cost to entrusting our civil liberties to the discretion of secret agencies. Let me share just a few of my own "war" stories to explain how I've been forced to keep learning and relearning this uncomfortable lesson the hard way.
On the Heroin Trail
After finishing college in the late 1960s, I decided to pursue a Ph.D. in Japanese history and was pleasantly surprised when Yale Graduate School admitted me with a full fellowship. But the Ivy League in those days was no ivory tower. During my first year at Yale, the Justice Department indicted Black Panther leader Bobby Seale for a local murder and the May Day protests that filled the New Haven green also shut the campus for a week. Almost simultaneously, President Nixon ordered the invasion of Cambodia and student protests closed hundreds of campuses across America for the rest of the semester.
In the midst of all this tumult, the focus of my studies shifted from Japan to Southeast Asia, and from the past to the war in Vietnam. Yes, that war. So what did I do about the draft? During my first semester at Yale, on December 1, 1969, to be precise, the Selective Service cut up the calendar for a lottery. The first 100 birthdays picked were certain to be drafted, but any dates above 200 were likely exempt. My birthday, June 8th, was the very last date drawn, not number 365 but 366 (don't forget leap year) -- the only lottery I have ever won, except for a Sunbeam electric frying pan in a high school raffle. Through a convoluted moral calculus typical of the 1960s, I decided that my draft exemption, although acquired by sheer luck, demanded that I devote myself, above all else, to thinking about, writing about, and working to end the Vietnam War.
During those campus protests over Cambodia in the spring of 1970, our small group of graduate students in Southeast Asian history at Yale realized that the U.S. strategic predicament in Indochina would soon require an invasion of Laos to cut the flow of enemy supplies into South Vietnam. So, while protests over Cambodia swept campuses nationwide, we were huddled inside the library, preparing for the next invasion by editing a book of essays on Laos for the publisher Harper & Row. A few months after that book appeared, one of the company's junior editors, Elizabeth Jakab, intrigued by an account we had included about that country's opium crop, telephoned from New York to ask if I could research and write a "quickie" paperback about the history behind the heroin epidemic then infecting the U.S. Army in Vietnam.
I promptly started the research at my student carrel in the Gothic tower that is Yale's Sterling Library, tracking old colonial reports about the Southeast Asian opium trade that ended suddenly in the 1950s, just as the story got interesting. So, quite tentatively at first, I stepped outside the library to do a few interviews and soon found myself following an investigative trail that circled the globe. First, I traveled across America for meetings with retired CIA operatives. Then I crossed the Pacific to Hong Kong to study drug syndicates, courtesy of that colony's police drug squad. Next, I went south to Saigon, then the capital of South Vietnam, to investigate the heroin traffic that was targeting the GIs, and on into the mountains of Laos to observe CIA alliances with opium warlords and the hill-tribe militias that grew the opium poppy. Finally, I flew from Singapore to Paris for interviews with retired French intelligence officers about their opium trafficking during the first Indochina War of the 1950s.
The drug traffic that supplied heroin for the U.S. troops fighting in South Vietnam was not, I discovered, exclusively the work of criminals. Once the opium left tribal poppy fields in Laos, the traffic required official complicity at every level. The helicopters of Air America, the airline the CIA then ran, carried raw opium out of the villages of its hill-tribe allies. The commander of the Royal Lao Army, a close American collaborator, operated the world's largest heroin lab and was so oblivious to the implications of the traffic that he opened his opium ledgers for my inspection. Several of Saigon's top generals were complicit in the drug's distribution to U.S. soldiers. By 1971, this web of collusion ensured that heroin, according to a later White House survey of a thousand veterans, would be "commonly used" by 34% of American troops in South Vietnam.
None of this had been covered in my college history seminars. I had no models for researching an uncharted netherworld of crime and covert operations. After stepping off the plane in Saigon, body slammed by the tropical heat, I found myself in a sprawling foreign city of four million, lost in a swarm of snarling motorcycles and a maze of nameless streets, without contacts or a clue about how to probe these secrets. Every day on the heroin trail confronted me with new challenges -- where to look, what to look for, and, above all, how to ask hard questions.
Reading all that history had, however, taught me something I didn't know I knew. Instead of confronting my sources with questions about sensitive current events, I started with the French colonial past when the opium trade was still legal, gradually uncovering the underlying, unchanging logistics of drug production. As I followed this historical trail into the present, when the traffic became illegal and dangerously controversial, I began to use pieces from this past to assemble the present puzzle, until the names of contemporary dealers fell into place. In short, I had crafted a historical method that would prove, over the next 40 years of my career, surprisingly useful in analyzing a diverse array of foreign policy controversies -- CIA alliances with drug lords, the agency's propagation of psychological torture, and our spreading state surveillance.
The CIA Makes Its Entrance in My Life
Those months on the road, meeting gangsters and warlords in isolated places, offered only one bit of real danger. While hiking in the mountains of Laos, interviewing Hmong farmers about their opium shipments on CIA helicopters, I was descending a steep slope when a burst of bullets ripped the ground at my feet. I had walked into an ambush by agency mercenaries.
While the five Hmong militia escorts whom the local village headman had prudently provided laid down a covering fire, my Australian photographer John Everingham and I flattened ourselves in the elephant grass and crawled through the mud to safety. Without those armed escorts, my research would have been at an end and so would I. After that ambush failed, a CIA paramilitary officer summoned me to a mountaintop meeting where he threatened to murder my Lao interpreter unless I ended my research. After winning assurances from the U.S. embassy that my interpreter would not be harmed, I decided to ignore that warning and keep going.
Six months and 30,000 miles later, I returned to New Haven. My investigation of CIA alliances with drug lords had taught me more than I could have imagined about the covert aspects of U.S. global power. Settling into my attic apartment for an academic year of writing, I was confident that I knew more than enough for a book on this unconventional topic. But my education, it turned out, was just beginning.
Within weeks, a massive, middle-aged guy in a suit interrupted my scholarly isolation. He appeared at my front door and identified himself as Tom Tripodi , senior agent for the Bureau of Narcotics, which later became the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). His agency, he confessed during a second visit, was worried about my writing and he had been sent to investigate. He needed something to tell his superiors. Tom was a guy you could trust. So I showed him a few draft pages of my book. He disappeared into the living room for a while and came back saying, "Pretty good stuff. You got your ducks in a row." But there were some things, he added, that weren't quite right, some things he could help me fix.
Best of all, there was the one about how the Bureau of Narcotics caught French intelligence protecting the Corsican syndicates smuggling heroin into New York City. Some of his stories, usually unacknowledged, would appear in my book, The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia . These conversations with an undercover operative, who had trained Cuban exiles for the CIA in Florida and later investigated Mafia heroin syndicates for the DEA in Sicily, were akin to an advanced seminar, a master class in covert operations.
In the summer of 1972, with the book at press, I went to Washington to testify before Congress. As I was making the rounds of congressional offices on Capitol Hill, my editor rang unexpectedly and summoned me to New York for a meeting with the president and vice president of Harper & Row, my book's publisher. Ushered into a plush suite of offices overlooking the spires of St. Patrick's Cathedral, I listened to those executives tell me that Cord Meyer, Jr., the CIA's deputy director for covert operations, had called on their company's president emeritus, Cass Canfield, Sr. The visit was no accident, for Canfield, according to an authoritative history , "enjoyed prolific links to the world of intelligence, both as a former psychological warfare officer and as a close personal friend of Allen Dulles," the ex-head of the CIA Meyer denounced my book as a threat to national security. He asked Canfield, also an old friend, to quietly suppress it.
I was in serious trouble. Not only was Meyer a senior CIA official but he also had impeccable social connections and covert assets in every corner of American intellectual life. After graduating from Yale in 1942, he served with the marines in the Pacific, writing eloquent war dispatches published in the Atlantic Monthly . He later worked with the U.S. delegation drafting the U.N. charter. Personally recruited by spymaster Allen Dulles, Meyer joined the CIA in 1951 and was soon running its International Organizations Division, which, in the words of that same history , "constituted the greatest single concentration of covert political and propaganda activities of the by now octopus-like CIA," including " Operation Mockingbird " that planted disinformation in major U.S. newspapers meant to aid agency operations. Informed sources told me that the CIA still had assets inside every major New York publisher and it already had every page of my manuscript.
As the child of a wealthy New York family, Cord Meyer moved in elite social circles, meeting and marrying Mary Pinchot, the niece of Gifford Pinchot, founder of the U.S. Forestry Service and a former governor of Pennsylvania. Pinchot was a breathtaking beauty who later became President Kennedy's mistress, making dozens of secret visits to the White House. When she was found shot dead along the banks of a canal in Washington in 1964, the head of CIA counterintelligence, James Jesus Angleton, another Yale alumnus, broke into her home in an unsuccessful attempt to secure her diary. Mary's sister Toni and her husband, Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee, later found the diary and gave it to Angleton for destruction by the agency. To this day, her unsolved murder remains a subject of mystery and controversy.
Cord Meyer was also in the Social Register of New York's fine families along with my publisher, Cass Canfield, which added a dash of social cachet to the pressure to suppress my book. By the time he walked into Harper & Row's office in that summer of 1972, two decades of CIA service had changed Meyer (according to that same authoritative history) from a liberal idealist into "a relentless, implacable advocate for his own ideas," driven by "a paranoiac distrust of everyone who didn't agree with him" and a manner that was "histrionic and even bellicose." An unpublished 26-year-old graduate student versus the master of CIA media manipulation. It was hardly a fair fight. I began to fear my book would never appear.
To his credit, Canfield refused Meyer's request to suppress the book. But he did allow the agency a chance to review the manuscript prior to publication. Instead of waiting quietly for the CIA's critique, I contacted Seymour Hersh, then an investigative reporter for the New York Times . The same day the CIA courier arrived from Langley to collect my manuscript, Hersh swept through Harper & Row's offices like a tropical storm, pelting hapless executives with incessant, unsettling questions. The next day, his exposé of the CIA's attempt at censorship appeared on the paper's front page . Other national media organizations followed his lead. Faced with a barrage of negative coverage, the CIA gave Harper & Row a critique full of unconvincing denials . The book was published unaltered.
My Life as an Open Book for the Agency
I had learned another important lesson: the Constitution's protection of press freedom could check even the world's most powerful espionage agency. Cord Meyer reportedly learned the same lesson. According to his obituary in the Washington Post , "It was assumed that Mr. Meyer would eventually advance" to head CIA covert operations, "but the public disclosure about the book deal apparently dampened his prospects." He was instead exiled to London and eased into early retirement.
Meyer and his colleagues were not, however, used to losing. Defeated in the public arena, the CIA retreated to the shadows and retaliated by tugging at every thread in the threadbare life of a graduate student. Over the next few months, federal officials from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare turned up at Yale to investigate my graduate fellowship. The Internal Revenue Service audited my poverty-level income. The FBI tapped my New Haven telephone (something I learned years later from a class-action lawsuit).
In August 1972, at the height of the controversy over the book, FBI agents told the bureau's director that they had "conducted [an] investigation concerning McCoy," searching the files they had compiled on me for the past two years and interviewing numerous "sources whose identities are concealed [who] have furnished reliable information in the past" -- thereby producing an 11-page report detailing my birth, education, and campus antiwar activities.
A college classmate I hadn't seen in four years, who served in military intelligence, magically appeared at my side in the book section of the Yale Co-op, seemingly eager to resume our relationship. The same week that a laudatory review of my book appeared on the front page of the New York Times Book Review , an extraordinary achievement for any historian, Yale's History Department placed me on academic probation. Unless I could somehow do a year's worth of overdue work in a single semester, I faced dismissal.
In those days, the ties between the CIA and Yale were wide and deep. The campus residential colleges screened students, including future CIA Director Porter Goss, for possible careers in espionage. Alumni like Cord Meyer and James Angleton held senior slots at the agency. Had I not had a faculty adviser visiting from Germany, the distinguished scholar Bernhard Dahm who was a stranger to this covert nexus, that probation would likely have become expulsion, ending my academic career and destroying my credibility.
During those difficult days, New York Congressman Ogden Reid, a ranking member of the House Foreign Relations Committee, telephoned to say that he was sending staff investigators to Laos to look into the opium situation. Amid this controversy, a CIA helicopter landed near the village where I had escaped that ambush and flew the Hmong headman who had helped my research to an agency airstrip. There, a CIA interrogator made it clear that he had better deny what he had said to me about the opium. Fearing, as he later told my photographer, that "they will send a helicopter to arrest me, or soldiers to shoot me," the Hmong headman did just that.
At a personal level, I was discovering just how deep the country's intelligence agencies could reach, even in a democracy, leaving no part of my life untouched: my publisher, my university, my sources, my taxes, my phone, and even my friends.
Although I had won the first battle of this war with a media blitz, the CIA was winning the longer bureaucratic struggle. By silencing my sources and denying any culpability, its officials convinced Congress that it was innocent of any direct complicity in the Indochina drug trade. During Senate hearings into CIA assassinations by the famed Church Committee three years later, Congress accepted the agency's assurance that none of its operatives had been directly involved in heroin trafficking (an allegation I had never actually made). The committee's report did confirm the core of my critique, however, finding that "the CIA is particularly vulnerable to criticism" over indigenous assets in Laos "of considerable importance to the Agency," including "people who either were known to be, or were suspected of being, involved in narcotics trafficking." But the senators did not press the CIA for any resolution or reform of what its own inspector general had called the "particular dilemma" posed by those alliances with drug lords -- the key aspect, in my view, of its complicity in the traffic.
During the mid-1970s, as the flow of drugs into the United States slowed and the number of addicts declined, the heroin problem receded into the inner cities and the media moved on to new sensations. Unfortunately, Congress had forfeited an opportunity to check the CIA and correct its way of waging covert wars. In less than 10 years, the problem of the CIA's tactical alliances with drug traffickers to support its far-flung covert wars was back with a vengeance.
During the 1980s, as the crack-cocaine epidemic swept America's cities, the agency, as its own Inspector General later reported , allied itself with the largest drug smuggler in the Caribbean, using his port facilities to ship arms to the Contra guerrillas fighting in Nicaragua and protecting him from any prosecution for five years. Simultaneously on the other side of the planet in Afghanistan, mujahedeen guerrillas imposed an opium tax on farmers to fund their fight against the Soviet occupation and, with the CIA's tacit consent , operated heroin labs along the Pakistani border to supply international markets. By the mid-1980s, Afghanistan's opium harvest had grown 10-fold and was providing 60% of the heroin for America's addicts and as much as 90% in New York City.
Almost by accident, I had launched my academic career by doing something a bit different. Embedded within that study of drug trafficking was an analytical approach that would take me, almost unwittingly, on a lifelong exploration of U.S. global hegemony in its many manifestations, including diplomatic alliances, CIA interventions, developing military technology, recourse to torture, and global surveillance. Step by step, topic by topic, decade after decade, I would slowly accumulate sufficient understanding of the parts to try to assemble the whole. In writing my new book, In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power , I drew on this research to assess the overall character of U.S. global power and the forces that might contribute to its perpetuation or decline.
In the process, I slowly came to see a striking continuity and coherence in Washington's century-long rise to global dominion. CIA torture techniques emerged at the start of the Cold War in the 1950s; much of its futuristic robotic aerospace technology had its first trial in the Vietnam War of the 1960s; and, above all, Washington's reliance on surveillance first appeared in the colonial Philippines around 1900 and soon became an essential though essentially illegal tool for the FBI's repression of domestic dissent that continued through the 1970s.
Surveillance Today
In the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks, I dusted off that historical method, and used it to explore the origins and character of domestic surveillance inside the United States.
After occupying the Philippines in 1898, the U.S. Army, facing a difficult pacification campaign in a restive land, discovered the power of systematic surveillance to crush the resistance of the country's political elite. Then, during World War I, the Army's "father of military intelligence," the dour General Ralph Van Deman, who had learned his trade in the Philippines, drew upon his years pacifying those islands to mobilize a legion of 1,700 soldiers and 350,000 citizen-vigilantes for an intense surveillance program against suspected enemy spies among German-Americans, including my own grandfather. In studying Military Intelligence files at the National Archives, I found "suspicious" letters purloined from my grandfather's army locker. In fact, his mother had been writing him in her native German about such subversive subjects as knitting him socks for guard duty.
In the 1950s, Hoover's FBI agents tapped thousands of phones without warrants and kept suspected subversives under close surveillance, including my mother's cousin Gerard Piel, an anti-nuclear activist and the publisher of Scientific American magazine. During the Vietnam War, the bureau expanded its activities with an amazing array of spiteful, often illegal, intrigues in a bid to cripple the antiwar movement with pervasive surveillance of the sort seen in my own FBI file.
Memory of the FBI's illegal surveillance programs was largely washed away after the Vietnam War thanks to Congressional reforms that required judicial warrants for all government wiretaps. The terror attacks of September 2001, however, gave the National Security Agency the leeway to launch renewed surveillance on a previously unimaginable scale. Writing for TomDispatch in 2009, I observed that coercive methods first tested in the Middle East were being repatriated and might lay the groundwork for "a domestic surveillance state." Sophisticated biometric and cyber techniques forged in the war zones of Afghanistan and Iraq had made a "digital surveillance state a reality" and so were fundamentally changing the character of American democracy.
Four years later, Edward Snowden's leak of secret NSA documents revealed that, after a century-long gestation period, a U.S. digital surveillance state had finally arrived. In the age of the Internet, the NSA could monitor tens of millions of private lives worldwide, including American ones, via a few hundred computerized probes into the global grid of fiber-optic cables.
And then, as if to remind me in the most personal way possible of our new reality, four years ago, I found myself the target yet again of an IRS audit, of TSA body searches at national airports, and -- as I discovered when the line went dead -- a tap on my office telephone at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Why? Maybe it was my current writing on sensitive topics like CIA torture and NSA surveillance, or maybe my name popped up from some old database of suspected subversives left over from the 1970s. Whatever the explanation, it was a reasonable reminder that, if my own family's experience across three generations is in any way representative, state surveillance has been an integral part of American political life far longer than we might imagine.
At the cost of personal privacy, Washington's worldwide web of surveillance has now become a weapon of exceptional power in a bid to extend U.S. global hegemony deeper into the twenty-first century. Yet it's worth remembering that sooner or later what we do overseas always seems to come home to haunt us, just as the CIA and crew have haunted me this last half-century. When we learn to love Big Brother, the world becomes a more, not less, dangerous place.
Alfred W. McCoy, a TomDispatch regular , is the Harrington professor of history at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is the author of the now-classic book The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade , which probed the conjuncture of illicit narcotics and covert operations over 50 years, and the forthcoming In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power (Dispatch Books, September) from which this piece is adapted. (Republished from TomDispatch by permission of author or representative)
Grandpa Charlie > , August 24, 2017 at 8:13 pm GMT
Anon > , Disclaimer August 25, 2017 at 1:10 pm GMT"In the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks, I dusted off that historical method, and used it to explore the origins and character of domestic surveillance inside the United States." -- Alfred McCoy
What about using the historical method to explore the nature of USA's reducing EU nations to "vassals" – and keeping them in the status of vassals, such that they can be depended on to undermine their own economies and sovereignty for the sake of USA's global initiatives?
An interesting question might be whether the NATO-to-Afghanistan highway (truck route for munitions, etc.), c. 2010, was also, on the back-haul – Afghanistan to EU – the major supply route for heroin throughout the EU and thus the key to corruption of EU governments (and of Russia) and domination of those governments by USA's neocon operatives? (E.g., was/is the distribution system of the "Chocolate King" Petro Poroshenko, President of Ukraine, delivering something besides just chocolate?)
"Just over one third of all cargo goes on routes dubbed the "northern distribution network" through Central Asia, and the Caucasus or Russia. " -- Reuters, 2011
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-afghanistan-pakistan-isaf-idUSTRE7AR0XK20111128
Just a thought, speculative, based in part on the assumption that such trucks would not be subject to narcotics search-and-seizure going across borders.
hyperbola > , August 25, 2017 at 4:12 pm GMTThanks for this serious, high-quality content, Mr. Unz.
The Puppet Masters Behind Georgia President Saakashvili http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20569.htm
WikiLeaks exposes US cover-up of Georgian attack on South Ossetia
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2010/12/geor-d06.html one of the suggestions was that drugs were involved.
Myth, Meth and the Georgian Invasion https://www.thenation.com/article/myth-meth-and-georgian-invasion/
Soros, drugs, British Empire and Saakashvili http://www.vijayvaani.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?aid=64
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2017 | www.truth-out.org
The CIA's mission has gone dangerously and lethally astray, argues Melvin A. Goodman, former CIA intelligence analyst.
In this excerpt, , former CIA intelligence analyst Melvin A. Goodman ponders the meanings of the words whistleblower, dissident and contrarian, how they apply to himself and others, and whether the CIA can ever be repaired or rebuilt.
Whistleblowers. Dissidents. Contrarians.
The terms are used synonymously by pundits and the public, and I've been all three at one time or another in order to expose improprieties and illegalities in the secret government, and to inform the American public of policies that compromise the freedom and security of US citizens and weaken US standing in the global community.
I have never liked the terms contrarian or dissident. I've always believed that my criticism should be conventional wisdom. The term whistleblower is more complex because it often raises questions of patriotism or sedition. Chelsea Manning received commutation from her 35-year prison sentence for revealing so-called secrets that documented the terror and violence of the baseless US war in Iraq. Members of the Bush administration who launched the invasion of Iraq in 2003 are considered honorable members of our society, although their acts involved the corruption of intelligence; caused the death of thousands of US soldiers and foreign civilians; terrorized civilian populations; perpetrated the criminal use of torture and abuse; sanctioned use of secret prisons and extraordinary rendition; and caused the destabilization of the region that has set the stage for strategic advances by Al Qaeda and ISIS.
Edward Snowden, if he had remained in the United States, would have faced an even longer prison sentence because he revealed the massive NSA surveillance program that was illegal and immoral, and that violated the Fourth Amendment protection against illegal seizures and searches. Manning and Snowden admit to breaking US laws, but their actions were never as serious as the law-breaking, including massive violations of privacy, that they exposed.
The debate over whether Snowden was a traitor is fatuous. As a result of Snowden's revelations, we learned that the National Security Agency logged domestic phone calls and emails for years, recorded the metadata of correspondence between Americans, and, in some cases, exploited the content of emails. The case against Private Manning was similarly fatuous. Manning provided evidence of the US cover-up of torture by our Iraqi allies; a US Army helicopter opening fire on a group of civilians, including two Reuters journalists; and the use of an air strike to cover up the execution of civilians. Some of these acts were war crimes.
There is no more compelling evidence of the unconscionable behavior of US personnel in Iraq than the callous dialogue between the crew members of the helicopter regarding the civilian deaths and particularly the firing on those Iraqis who came to recover the dead bodies of Iraqi civilians. Manning's documents exposed this behavior, but her efforts were ridiculed by former secretary of defense Robert Gates, who described it as examining war by "looking through a straw."
To make matters worse, American journalists have criticized their colleagues (Julian Assange of WikiLeaks and Glenn Greenwald [then of The Guardian]) who brought the Snowden-Manning revelations to the attention of the public. David Gregory, then host of the venerable "Meet the Press" on NBC, asked Greenwald "to the extent that you have aided and abetted Snowden ... why shouldn't you ... be charged with a crime?"
Jeffrey Toobin, a lawyer who labors for CNN and The New Yorker, called Snowden a "grandiose narcissist who belongs in prison" and referred to Greenwald's partner, David Miranda, who was detained by British authorities for nine hours under anti-terror laws, the equivalent of a "drug mule."
The king of calumny is Michael Grunwald, a senior correspondent for Time, who wrote on Twitter that he couldn't "wait to write a defense of the drone strike that takes out Julian Assange." The New York Times also targeted Assange, although the paper cooperated with WikiLeaks in 2010 in publishing reams of information from Private Manning's revelations. Of course, if Time or the New York Times had broken these stories, they would have built new shelves to hold their Pulitzer Prizes.
Their hypocrisy was exposed by David Carr of the New York Times, who expressed shock at finding Assange and Greenwald "under attack, not just from a government bent on keeping its secrets, but from friendly fire by fellow journalists."
I didn't reveal abuses as great as those revealed by Manning and Snowden or Daniel Ellsberg, but I do claim status as a whistleblower because of my revelations before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence during confirmation hearings for Bob Gates, who was nominated by President George H.W. Bush in 1991 to be director of central intelligence.
According to US law, the term "whistleblower" applies to anyone who "reasonably believes" he or she is disclosing a violation of law or gross mismanagement, gross waste, or abuse of authority. My testimony documented for the first time the intentional distortion of intelligence by CIA director William Casey and Deputy Director Gates in order to serve the agenda of Ronald Reagan and his administration.
Bob Gates was an old friend, but the friendship ended when he routinely distorted intelligence throughout the 1980s as deputy director for intelligence and deputy director of the CIA In destroying the political culture of the CIA, he created a toxic and corrupt environment at the Agency, and the Senate Intelligence Committee's report on CIA detention and torture reminds us that the Agency hasn't recovered.
Being a contrarian was easy and natural for me. In fact, no one should think about entering the intelligence profession without good contrarian instincts. Such instincts would include an innate skepticism, the doubting of conventional wisdom and a willingness to challenge authority, which translates to an ability to tell truth to power. These contrarian instincts are essential to the success of any intelligence organization. As Rogers and Hammerstein would have it, it was "doing what comes naturally!"
My book The Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA was the first insider account from an intelligence analyst regarding the skewed and politicized assessments of the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence -- the Agency's analytic arm. I also exposed the strategic failure of covert actions that were never intended to be a part of President Harry Truman's CIA
I wrote the book for many reasons, including the need to describe the inability of journalists to take into account, let alone understand, the dangers of politicization and the actions of CIA directors such as Casey, Gates, and more recently Goss and Tenet. The political pliancy of these directors fully compromised the intelligence mission of the CIA, and it was political pliancy that made directors such as Gates and Tenet so attractive to Presidents Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II.
Truthout Progressive Pick
"Urgent, timely, and deeply recommended." -- Daniel Ellsberg. Click here now to get the book!
For the past quarter century, my testimony and writings have exposed the failure to honor President Truman's purpose in creating a CIA to provide policymakers with accurate, unbiased accounts of international developments, and have highlighted the CIA's readiness to cater to the White House. This view is not original with me; in fact, it was President Truman who first acknowledged that the CIA he created in 1947 had gotten off the tracks under Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy in the 1950s and early 1960s.
In December 1963, less than a month after the assassination of President Kennedy, Truman wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post to document the wrongs of the CIA He concluded that his efforts to "create the quiet intelligence arm of the Presidency" had been subverted by a "sinister" and "mysterious" agency that was conducting far too many clandestine activities in peacetime. I lectured at the Truman Library in the summer of 2014, and found a note in Truman's hand that stated the CIA was not designed to "initiate policy or to act as a spy organization. That was never the intention when it was organized."
In The Failure of Intelligence , I documented the CIA's resistance to reform and the corruption in both the analytical and operational directorates. I made a case for starting over at the CIA, not dissimilar from the case made by Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan 25 years ago as a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Not every agency or department of government can be reformed, and it is possible that the intricate web of habits, procedures, and culture places the CIA in the non-reformable category. Once the political culture of an institution such as the CIA has been broken, it is extremely difficult -- if not impossible -- to rebuild or repair it.
Copyright (2017) by Melvin A. Goodman. Not be reprinted without permission of the publisher, City Lights Books. Melvin A. Goodman Melvin A. Goodman served as a senior analyst and Division Chief at the CIA from 1966 to 1990. An expert on US relations with Russia, his writing has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, Harper's and many others. He is author of six books on US intelligence and international security. Related Stories CIA Asked to Release Documents Related to Massacre in El Salvador By Carmen Rodriguez, CIP Americas Program | Report CIA Watchdog "Mistakenly" Destroys Its Sole Copy of Senate Torture Report By Sarah Lazare, AlterNet | News Analysis CIA Cables Detail Its New Deputy Director's Role in Torture By Raymond Bonner, ProPublica | Report
|
|
|
May 16, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
By Mark Ames, founding editor of the Moscow satirical paper The eXile and co-host of the Radio War Nerd podcast with Gary Brecher (aka John Dolan). Subscribe here . Originally published at The Exiled
I made the mistake of listening to NPR last week to find out what Conventional Wisdom had to say about Trump firing Comey, on the assumption that their standardized Mister-Rogers-on-Nyquil voice tones would rein in the hysteria pitch a little. And on the surface, it did-the NPR host and guests weren't directly shrieking "the world is ending! We're all gonna die SHEEPLE!" the way they were on CNN. But in a sense they were screaming "fire!", if you know how to distinguish the very minute pitch level differences in the standard NPR Nyquil voice.
The host of the daytime NPR program asked his guests how serious, and how "unprecedented" Trump's decision to fire his FBI chief was. The guests answers were strange: they spoke about "rule of law" and "violating the Constitution" but then switched to Trump "violating norms"-and back again, interchanging "norms" and "laws" as if they're synonyms. One of the guests admitted that Trump firing Comey was 100% legal, but that didn't seem to matter in this talk about Trump having abandoned rule-of-law for a Putinist dictatorship. These guys wouldn't pass a high school civics class, but there they were, garbling it all up. What mattered was the proper sense of panic and outrage-I'm not sure anyone really cared about the actual legality of the thing, or the legal, political or "normative" history of the FBI.
For starters, the FBI hardly belongs in the same set with concepts like "constitutional" or " rule of law." That's because the FBI was never established by a law. US Lawmakers refused to approve an FBI bureau over a century ago when it was first proposed by Teddy Roosevelt. So he ignored Congress, and went ahead and set it up by presidential fiat. That's one thing the civil liberties crowd hates discussing - how centralized US political power is in the executive branch, a feature in the constitutional system put there by the holy Founders.
In the late 1970s, at the tail end of our brief Glasnost, there was a lot of talk in Washington about finally creating a legal charter for the FBI -70 years after its founding. A lot of serious ink was spilled trying to transform the FBI from an extralegal secret police agency to something legal and defined. If you want to play archeologist to America's recent history, you can find this in the New York Times' archives, articles with headlines like "Draft of Charter for F.B.I. Limits Inquiry Methods" :
The Carter Administration will soon send to Congress the first governing charter for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The proposed charter imposes extensive but not absolute restrictions on the bureau's employment of controversial investigative techniques, .including the use of informers, undercover agents and covert criminal activity.
The charter also specifies the duties and powers of the bureau, setting precise standards and procedures for the initiation ,and conduct of investigations. It specifically requires the F.B.I. to observe constitutional rights and establishes safeguards against unchecked harassment, break‐ins and other abuses.
followed by the inevitable lament, like this editorial from the Christian Science Monitor a year later, "Don't Forget the FBI Charter". Which of course we did forget-that was Reagan's purpose and value for the post-Glasnost reaction: forgetting. As historian Athan Theoharis wrote , "After 1981, Congress never seriously considered again any of the FBI charter proposals."
The origins of the FBI have been obscured both because of its dubious legality and because of its original political purpose-to help the president battle the all-powerful American capitalists. It wasn't that Teddy Roosevelt was a radical leftist-he was a Progressive Republican, which sounds like an oxymoron today but which was mainstream and ascendant politics in his time. Roosevelt was probably the first president since Andrew Jackson to try to smash concentrated wealth-power, or at least some of it. He could be brutally anti-labor, but so were the powerful capitalists he fought, and all the structures of government power. He met little opposition pursuing his imperial Social Darwinist ambitions outside America's borders-but he had a much harder time fighting the powerful capitalists at home against Roosevelt's most honorable political obsession: preserving forests, parks and public lands from greedy capitalists. An early FBI memo to Hoover about the FBI's origins explains,
"Roosevelt, in his characteristic dynamic fashion, asserted that the plunderers of the public domain would be prosecuted and brought to justice."
According to New York Times reporter Tim Wiener's Enemies: A History of the FBI , it was the Oregon land fraud scandal of 1905-6 that put the idea of an FBI in TR's hyperactive mind. The scandal involved leading Oregon politicians helping railroad tycoon Edward Harriman illegally sell off pristine Oregon forest lands to timber interests, and it ended with an Oregon senator and the state's only two House representatives criminally charged and put on trial-along with dozens of other Oregonians. Basically, they were raping the state's public lands and forests like colonists stripping a foreign country-and that stuck in TR's craw.
TR wanted his attorney general-Charles Bonaparte (yes, he really was a descendant of that Bonaparte)-to make a full report to on the rampant land fraud scams that the robber barons were running to despoil the American West, and which threatened TR's vision of land and forest conservation and parks. Bonaparte created an investigative team from the US Secret Service, but TR thought their report was a "whitewash" and proposed a new separate federal investigative service within Bonaparte's Department of Justice that would report only to the Attorney General.
Until then, the US government had to rely on private contractors like the notorious, dreaded Pinkerton Agency, who were great at strikebreaking, clubbing workers and shooting organizers, but not so good at taking down down robber barons, who happened to also be important clients for the private detective agencies.
In early 1908, Attorney General Bonaparte wrote to Congress asking for the legal authority (and budget funds) to create a "permanent detective force" under the DOJ. Congress rebelled, denouncing it as a plan to create an American okhrana . Democrat Joseph Sherley wrote that "spying on men and prying into what would ordinarily be considered their private affairs" went against "American ideas of government"; Rep. George Waldo, a New York Republican, said the proposed FBI was a "great blow to freedom and to free institutions if there should arise in this country any such great central secret-service bureau as there is in Russia."
So Congress's response was the opposite, banning Bonaparte's DOJ from spending any funds at all on a proposed FBI. Another Congressman wrote another provision into the budget bill banning the DOJ from hiring Secret Service employees for any sort of FBI type agency. So Bonaparte waited until Congress took its summer recess, set aside some DOJ funds, recruited some Secret Service agents, and created a new federal detective bureau with 34 agents. This was how the FBI was born. Congress wasn't notified until the end of 1908, in a few lines in a standard report - "oh yeah, forgot to tell you-the executive branch went ahead and created an American okhrana because, well, the ol' joke about dogs licking their balls. Happy New Year!"
The sordid history of America's extralegal secret police-initially named the Bureau of Investigation, changed to the FBI ("Federal") in the 30's, is mostly a history of xenophobic panic-mongering, illegal domestic spying, mass roundups and plans for mass-roundups, false entrapment schemes, and planting what Russians call "kompromat"- compromising information about a target's sex life-to blackmail or destroy American political figures that the FBI didn't like.
The first political victim of J Edgar Hoover's kompromat was Louis Post, the assistant secretary of labor under Woodrow Wilson. Post's crime was releasing over 1,000 alleged Reds from detention facilities near the end of the FBI's Red Scare crackdown, when they jailed and deported untold thousands on suspicion of being Communists. The FBI's mass purge began with popular media support in 1919, but by the middle of 1920, some (not the FBI) were starting to get a little queasy. A legal challenge to the FBI's mass purges and exiles in Boston ended with a federal judge denouncing the FBI. After that ruling, assistant secretary Louis Post, a 71-year-old well-meaning progressive, reviewed the cases against the last 1500 detainees that the FBI wanted to deport, and found that there was absolutely nothing on at least 75 percent of the cases. Post's review threatened to undo thousands more FBI persecutions of alleged Moscow-controlled radicals.
So one of the FBI's most ambitious young agents, J Edgar Hoover, collected kompromat on Post and his alleged associations with other alleged Moscow-controlled leftists, and gave the file to the Republican-controlled House of Representatives-which promptly announced it would hold hearings to investigate Post as a left subversive. The House tried to impeach Post, but ultimately he defended himself. Post's lawyer compared his political persecutors to the okhrana (Russia, again!): "We in America have sunk to the level of the government of Russia under the Czarist regime," describing the FBI's smear campaign as "even lower in some of their methods than the old Russian officials."
Under Harding, the FBI had a new chief, William Burns, who made headlines blaming the terror bombing attack on Wall Street of 1920 that killed 34 people on a Kremlin-run conspiracy. The FBI claimed it had a highly reliable inside source who told them that Lenin sent $30,000 to the Soviets' diplomatic mission in New York, which was distributed to four local Communist agents who arranged the Wall Street bombing. The source claimed to have personally spoken with Lenin, who boasted that the bombing was so successful he'd ordered up more.
The only problem was that the FBI's reliable source, a Jewish-Polish petty criminal named Wolf Lindenfeld, turned out to be a bullshitter-nicknamed "Windy Linde"-who thought his fake confession about Lenin funding the bombing campaign would get him out of Poland's jails and set up in a comfortable new life in New York.
By 1923, the FBI had thoroughly destroyed America's communist and radical labor movements-allowing it to focus on its other favorite pastime: spying on and destroying political opponents. The FBI spied on US Senators who supported opening diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union: Idaho's William Borah, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee; Thomas Walsh of the Judiciary Committee, and Burton K Wheeler, the prairie Populist senator from Montana, who visited the Soviet Union and pushed for diplomatic relations. Harding's corrupt Attorney General Dougherty denounced Sen. Wheeler as "the Communist leader in the Senate" and "no more a Democrat than Stalin, his comrade in Moscow." Dougherty accused Sen. Wheeler of being part of a conspiracy "to capture, by deceit and design, as many members of the Senate as possible and to spread through Washington and the cloakrooms of Congress a poison gas as deadly as that which sapped and destroyed brave soldiers in the last war."
Hoover, now a top FBI official, quietly fed kompromat to journalists he cultivated, particularly an AP reporter named Richard Whitney, who published a popular book in 1924, "Reds In America" alleging Kremlin agents "had an all-pervasive influence over American institutions; they had infiltrated every corner of American life." Whitney named Charlie Chaplin as a Kremlin agent, along with Felix Frankfurter and members of the Senate pushing for recognition of the Soviet Union. That killed any hope for diplomatic recognition for the next decade.
Then the first Harding scandals broke-Teapot Dome, Veterans Affairs, bribery at the highest rungs. When Senators Wheeler and Walsh opened bribery investigations, the FBI sent agents to the senators' home state to drum up false bribery charges against Sen. Wheeler. The charges were clearly fake, and a jury dismissed the charges. But Attorney General Dougherty was indicted for fraud and forced to resign, as was his FBI chief Burns-but not Burns' underling Hoover, who stayed in the shadows.
"We want no Gestapo or Secret Police. FBI is tending in that direction. They are dabbling in sex-life scandals and plain blackmail This must stop."
With the Cold War, the FBI became obsessed with homosexuals as America's Fifth Column under Moscow's control. Homosexuals, the FBI believed, were susceptible to Kremlin kompromat-so the FBI collected and disseminated its own kompromat on alleged American homosexuals, supposedly to protect America from the Kremlin. In the early 1950s, Hoover launched the Sex Deviates Program to spy on American homosexuals and purge them from public life. The FBI built up 300,000 pages of files on suspected homosexuals and contacted their employers, local law enforcement and universities to "to drive homosexuals from every institution of government, higher learning, and law enforcement in the nation," according to Tim Weiner's book Enemies. No one but the FBI knows exactly how many Americans' lives and careers were destroyed by the FBI's Sex Deviants Program but Hoover-who never married, lived with his mother until he was 40, and traveled everywhere with his "friend" Clyde Tolson .
In the 1952 election, Hoover was so committed to helping the Republicans and Eisenhower win that he compiled and disseminated a 19-page kompromat file alleging that his Democratic Party rival Adlai Stevenson was gay. The FBI's file on Stevenson was kept in the Sex Deviants Program section-it included libelous gossip, claiming that Stevenson was one of Illinois' "best known homosexuals" who went by the name "Adeline" in gay cruising circles.
In the 1960s, Hoover and his FBI chiefs collected kompromat on the sex lives of JFK and Martin Luther King. Hoover presented some of his kompromat on JFK to Bobby Kennedy, in a concern-trollish way claiming to "warn" him that the president was opening himself up to blackmail. It was really a way for Hoover to let the despised Kennedy brothers know he could destroy them, should they try to Comey him out of his FBI office. Hoover's kompromat on MLK's sex life was a particular obsession of his-he now believed that African-Americans, not homosexuals, posed the greatest threat to become a Kremlin Fifth Column. The FBI wiretapped MLK's private life, collecting tapes of his affairs with other women, which a top FBI official then mailed to Martin Luther King's wife, along with a note urging King to commit suicide.
FBI letter anonymously mailed to Martin Luther King Jr's wife, along with kompromat sex tapes
After JFK was murdered, when Bobby Kennedy ran for the Senate in 1964, he recounted another disturbing FBI/kompromat story that President Johnson shared with him on the campaign trail. LBJ told Bobby about a stack of kompromat files - FBI reports "detailing the sexual debauchery of members of the Senate and House who consorted with prostitutes." LBJ asked RFK if the kompromat should be leaked selectively to destroy Republicans before the 1964 elections. Kennedy recalled,
"He told me he had spent all night sitting up and reading the files of the FBI on all these people. And Lyndon talks about that information and material so freely. Lyndon talks about everybody, you see, with everybody. And of course that's dangerous."
Kennedy had seen some of the same FBI kompromat files as attorney general, but he was totally opposed to releasing such unsubstantiated kompromat-such as, say, the Trump piss files-because doing so would "destroy the confidence that people in the United States had in their government and really make us a laughingstock around the world."
Imagine that.
Which brings me to the big analogy every hack threw around last week, calling Trump firing Comey "Nixonian." Actually, what Trump did was more like the very opposite of Nixon, who badly wanted to fire Hoover in 1971-2, but was too afraid of the kompromat Hoover might've had on him to make the move. Nixon fell out with his old friend and onetime mentor J Edgar Hoover in 1971, when the ailing old FBI chief refused to get sucked in to the Daniel Ellsberg/Pentagon Papers investigation, especially after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the New York Times. Part of the reason Nixon created his Plumbers team of black bag burglars was because Hoover had become a bit skittish in his last year on this planet-and that drove Nixon crazy.
Nixon called his chief of staff Haldeman:
Nixon: I talked to Hoover last night and Hoover is not going after this case [Ellsberg] as strong as I would like. There's something dragging him.
Haldeman: You don't have the feeling the FBI is really pursuing this?
Nixon: Yeah, particularly the conspiracy side. I want to go after everyone. I'm not so interested in Ellsberg, but we have to go after everybody who's a member of this conspiracy.
Hoover's ambitious deputies in the FBI were smelling blood, angling to replace him. His number 3, Bill Sullivan (who sent MLK the sex tapes and suicide note) was especially keen to get rid of Hoover and take his place. So as J Edgar was stonewalling the Daniel Ellsberg investigation, Sullivan showed up in a Department of Justice office with two suitcases packed full of transcripts and summaries of illegal wiretaps that Kissinger and Nixon had ordered on their own staff and on American journalists. The taps were ordered in Nixon's first months in the White House in 1969, to plug up the barrage of leaks, the likes of which no one had ever seen before. Sullivan took the leaks from J Edgar's possession and told the DOJ official that they needed to be hidden from Hoover, who planned to use them as kompromat to blackmail Nixon.
Nixon decided he was going to fire J Edgar the next day. This was in September, 1971. But the next day came, and Nixon got scared. So he tried to convince his attorney general John Mitchell to fire Hoover for him, but Mitchell said only the President could fire J Edgar Hoover. So Nixon met him for breakfast, and, well, he just didn't have the guts. Over breakfast, Hoover flattered Nixon and told him there was nothing more in the world he wanted than to see Nixon re-elected. Nixon caved; the next day, J Edgar Hoover unceremoniously fired his number 3 Bill Sullivan, locking him out of the building and out of his office so that he couldn't take anything with him. Sullivan was done.
The lesson here, I suppose, is that if an FBI director doesn't want to be fired, it's best to keep your kompromat a little closer to your chest, as a gun to hold to your boss's head. Comey's crew already released the piss tapes kompromat on Trump-the damage was done. What was left to hold back Trump from firing Comey? "Laws"? The FBI isn't even legal. "Norms" would be the real reason. Which pretty much sums up everything Trump has been doing so far. We've learned the past two decades that we're hardly a nation of laws, at least not when it comes to the plutocratic ruling class. What does bind them are "norms"-and while those norms may mean everything to the ruling class, it's an open question how much these norms mean to a lot of Americans outside that club.
Huey Long , May 16, 2017 at 2:33 am3.14e-9 , May 16, 2017 at 3:04 amWow, and this whole time I thought the NSA had a kompromat monopoly as they have everybody's porn site search terms and viewing habits on file.
I had no idea the FBI practically invented it!
voteforno6 , May 16, 2017 at 6:06 amThe Native tribes don't have a great history with the FBI, either.
Disturbed Voter , May 16, 2017 at 6:42 amHas anyone ever used the FBI's lack of a charter as a defense in court?
Synoia , May 16, 2017 at 9:46 pmThe USA doesn't have a legal basis either, it is a revolting crown colony of the British Empire. Treason and heresy all the way down. Maybe the British need to burn Washington DC again?
Ignim Brites , May 16, 2017 at 7:55 amBritain burning DC, and the so call ed "war" of 1812, got no mention in my History Books. Napoleon on the other hand, featured greatly
In 1812 Napoleon was busy going to Russia. That went well.
Watt4Bob , May 16, 2017 at 7:56 amWondered how Comey thought he could get away with his conviction and pardon of Sec Clinton. Seems like part of the culture of FBI is a "above and beyond" the law mentality.
JMarco , May 16, 2017 at 2:52 pmBack in the early 1970s a high school friend moved to Alabama because his father was transferred by his employer.
My friend sent a post card describing among other things the fact that Alabama had done away with the requirement of a math class to graduate high school, and substituted a required class called "The Evils of Communism" complete with a text-book written by J. Edgar Hoover; Masters of Deceit.
Watt4Bob , May 16, 2017 at 4:47 pmIn Dallas,Texas my 1959 Civics class had to read the same book. We all were given paperback copies of it to take home and read. It was required reading enacted by Texas legislature.
Carolinian , May 16, 2017 at 8:35 amSo I'd guess you weren't fooled by any of those commie plots of the sixties, like the campaigns for civil rights or against the Vietnamese war.
I can't really brag, I didn't stop worrying about the Red Menace until 1970 or so, that's when I started running into returning vets who mostly had no patience for that stuff.
Katharine , May 16, 2017 at 8:37 amWe've learned the past two decades that we're hardly a nation of laws, at least not when it comes to the plutocratic ruling class. What does bind them are "norms"
Or as David Broder put it (re Bill Clinton): he came in and trashed the place and it wasn't his place.
It was David Broder's place. Of course the media play a key role with all that kompromat since they are the ones needed to convey it to the public. The tragedy is that even many of the sensible in their ranks such as Bill Moyers have been sucked into the kompromat due to their hysteria over Trump. Ames is surely on point in this great article. The mistake was allowing secret police agencies like the FBI and CIA to be created in the first place.
Carolinian , May 16, 2017 at 9:12 amSorry, my initial reaction was that people who don't know the difference between "rein" and "reign" are not to be trusted to provide reliable information. Recognizing that as petty, I kept reading, and presently found the statement that Congress was not informed of the founding of the FBI until a century after the fact, which seems implausible. If in fact the author meant the end of 1908 it was quite an achievement to write 2008.
Interesting to the extent it may be true, but with few sources, no footnotes, and little evidence of critical editing who knows what that may be?
Katharine , May 16, 2017 at 10:08 amDo you even know who Mark Ames is?
Petty .yes.
Bill Smith , May 16, 2017 at 12:00 pmWho he is is irrelevant. I don't take things on faith because "the Pope said" or because Mark Ames said. People who expect their information to be taken seriously should substantiate it.
Fiery Hunt , May 16, 2017 at 9:21 amYeah, in the first sentence
Interesting article though.
Katharine , May 16, 2017 at 10:13 amYeah, Kathatine, you're right .very petty.
And completely missed the point.
Or worse, you got the point and your best rejection of that point was pointing out a typo.
sid_finster , May 16, 2017 at 10:50 amI neither missed the point nor rejected it. I reserved judgment, as I thought was apparent from my comment.
JTMcPhee , May 16, 2017 at 9:21 amBut Trump is bad. Very Bad.
So anything the FBI does to get rid of him must by definition be ok! Besides, surely our civic-minded IC would never use their power on the Good Guys™!
Right?
Katharine , May 16, 2017 at 10:19 amAh yes, the voice of "caution." And such attention to the lack of footnotes, in this day when the curious can so easily cut and paste a bit of salient text into a search engine and pull up a feast of parse-able writings and video, from which they can "judiciously assess" claims and statements. If they care to spend the time, which is in such short supply among those who are struggling to keep up with the horrors and revelations people of good will confront every blinking day
Classic impeachment indeed. All from the height of "academic rigor" and "caution." Especially the "apologetic" bit about "reign" vs "rein." Typos destroy credibility, don't they? And the coup de grass (sic), the unrebuttable "plausibility" claim.
One wonders at the nature of the author's curriculum vitae. One also marvels at the yawning gulf between the Very Serious Stuff I was taught in grade and high school civics and history, back in the late '50s and the '60s, about the Fundamental Nature Of Our Great Nation and its founding fathers and the Beautiful Documents they wrote, on the one hand, and what we mopes learn, through a drip-drip-drip process punctuated occasionally by Major Revelations, about the real nature of the Empire and our fellow creatures
PS: My earliest memory of television viewing was a day at a friend's house - his middle-class parents had the first "set" in the neighborhood, I think an RCA, in a massive sideboard cabinet where the picture tube pointed up and you viewed the "content" in a mirror mounted to the underside of the lid. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5onSwx7_Cn0 The family was watching a hearing of Joe McCarthy's kangaroo court, complete with announcements of the latest number in the "list of known Communists in the State Department" and how Commyanism was spreading like an unstoppable epidemic mortal disease through the Great US Body Politic and its Heroic Institutions of Democracy. I was maybe 6 years old, but that grainy black and white "reality TV" content had me asking "WTF?" at a very early age. And I'd say it's on the commentor to show that the "2008" claim is wrong, by something other than "implausible" as drive-by impeachment. Given the content of the original post, and what people paying attention to all this stuff have a pretty good idea is the general contours of a vast corruption and manipulation.
"Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no."
Edward , May 16, 2017 at 9:22 pmIt is the author's job to substantiate information, not the reader's. If he thinks his work is so important, why does he not make a better job of it?
nonsense factory , May 16, 2017 at 11:16 amI think the MLK blackmail scheme is well-established. Much of the article seems to be based on Tim Wiener's "Enemies: A History of the FBI".
Andrew Watts , May 16, 2017 at 3:58 pmInteresting article on the history of the FBI, although the post-Hoover era doesn't get any treatment. The Church Committee hearings on the CIA and FBI, after the exposure of notably Operation CHAOS (early 60s to early 70s) by the CIA and COINTELPRO(late 1950s to early 1970s) by the FBI, didn't really get to the bottom of the issue although some reforms were initiated.
Today, it seems, the best description of the FBI's main activity is corporate enforcer for the white-collar mafia known as Wall Street. There is an analogy to organized crime, where the most powerful mobsters settled disputes between other gangs of criminals. Similarly, if a criminal gang is robbed by one of its own members, the mafia would go after the guilty party; the FBI plays this role for Wall Street institutions targeted by con artists and fraudsters. Compare and contrast a pharmaceutical company making opiates which is targeted by thieves vs. a black market drug cartel targeted by thieves. In one case, the FBI investigates; in the other, a violent vendetta ensues (such as street murders in Mexico).
The FBI executives are rewarded for this service with lucrative post-retirement careers within corporate America – Louis Freeh went to credit card fraudster, MBNA, Richard Mueller to a corporate Washington law firm, WilmerHale, and Comey, before Obama picked him as Director, worked for Lockheed Martin and HSBC (cleaning up after their $2 billion drug cartel marketing scandal) after leaving the FBI in 2005.
Maybe this is legitimate, but this only applies to their protection of the interests of large corporations – as the 2008 economic collapse and aftermath showed, they don't prosecute corporate executives who rip off poor people and middle-class homeowners. Banks who rob people, they aren't investigated or prosecuted; that's just for people who rob banks.
When it comes to political issues and national security, however, the FBI has such a terrible record on so many issues over the years that anything they claim has to be taken with a grain or two of salt. Consider domestic political activity: from the McCarthyite 'Red Scare' of the 1950s to COINTELPRO in the 1960s and 1970s to targeting of environmental groups in the 1980s and 1990s to targeting anti-war protesters under GW Bush to their obsession with domestic mass surveillance under Obama, it's not a record that should inspire any confidence.
Some say they have a key role to play in national security and terrorism – but their record on the 2001 anthrax attacks is incredibly shady and suspicious. The final suspect, Bruce Ivins, is clearly innocent of the crime, just as their previous suspect, Steven Hatfill was. Ivins, if still alive, could have won a similar multi-million dollar defamation lawsuit against the FBI. All honest bioweapons experts know this to be true – the perpetrators of those anthrax letters are still at large, and may very well have had close associations with the Bush Administration itself.
As far as terrorist activities? Many of their low-level agents did seem concerned about the Saudis and bin Laden in the late 1990s and pre-9/11 – but Saudi investigations were considered politically problematic due to "geostrategic relationships with our Saudi allies" – hence people like John O'Neil and Coleen Rowley were sidelined and ignored, with disastrous consequences. The Saudi intelligence agency role in 9/11 was buried for over a decade, as well. Since 9/11, most of the FBI investigations seem to have involved recruiting mentally disabled young Islamic men in sting operations in which the FBI provides everything needed. You could probably get any number of mentally ill homeless people across the U.S., regardless of race or religion, to play this role.
Comey's actions over the past year are certainly highly questionable, as well. Neglecting to investigate the Clinton Foundation ties to Saudi Arabia and other foreign governments and corporations, particularly things like State Department approval of various arms deals in which bribes may have been paid, is as much a dereliction of duty as neglecting to investigate Trump ties to Russian business interests – but then, Trump has a record of shady business dealings dating back to the 1970s, of strange bankruptcies and bailouts and government sales that the FBI never looked at either.
Ultimately, this is because FBI executives are paid off not to investigate Wall Street criminality, nor shady U.S. government activity, with lucrative positions as corporate board members and so on after their 'retirements'. I don't doubt that many of their junior members mean well and are dedicated to their jobs – but the fish rots from the head down.
verifyfirst , May 16, 2017 at 12:53 pmAs far as terrorist activities? Many of their low-level agents did seem concerned about the Saudis and bin Laden in the late 1990s and pre-9/11 – but Saudi investigations were considered politically problematic due to "geostrategic relationships with our Saudi allies" – hence people like John O'Neil and Coleen Rowley were sidelined and ignored, with disastrous consequences.
The Clinton Administration had other priorities. You know, I think I'll let ex-FBI Director Freeh explain what happened when the FBI tried to get the Saudis to cooperate with their investigation into the bombing of the Khobar Towers.
"That September, Crown Prince Abdullah and his entourage took over the entire 143-room Hay-Adams Hotel, just across from Lafayette Park from the White House, for six days. The visit, I figured, was pretty much our last chance. Again, we prepared talking points for the president. Again, I contacted Prince Bandar and asked him to soften up the crown prince for the moment when Clinton, -- or Al Gore I didn't care who -- would raise the matter and start to exert the necessary pressure."
"The story that came back to me, from "usually reliable sources," as they say in Washington, was that Bill Clinton briefly raised the subject only to tell the Crown Prince that he certainly understood the Saudis; reluctance to cooperate. Then, according to my sources, he hit Abdullah up for a contribution to the still-to-be-built Clinton presidential library. Gore, who was supposed to press hardest of all in his meeting with the crown Prince, barely mentioned the matter, I was told." -Louis J. Freeh, My FBI (2005)
In my defense I picked the book up to see if there was any dirt on the DNC's electoral funding scandal in 1996. I'm actually glad I did. The best part of the book is when Freeh recounts running into a veteran of the Lincoln Brigade and listens to how Hoover's FBI ruined his life despite having broken no laws. As if a little thing like laws mattered to Hoover. The commies were after our precious bodily fluids!
lyman alpha blob , May 16, 2017 at 1:14 pmI'm not sure there are many functioning norms left within the national political leadership. Seemed to me Gingrich started blowing those up and it just got worse from there. McConnell not allowing Garland to be considered comes to mind
JMarco , May 16, 2017 at 2:59 pmGreat article – thanks for this. I had no idea the FBI never had a legal charter – very enlightening.
Thanks to Mark Ames now we know what Pres. Trump meant when he tweeted about his tapes with AG Comey. Not some taped conversation between Pres. Trump & AG Comey but bunch of kompromat tapes that AG Comey has provided Pres. Trump that might not make departing AG Comey looked so clean.
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2017 | www.unz.com
Fran Macadam , October 20, 2017 at 3:08 pm GMT
A credible reading of the diverse facts, Mike.Kirk Elarbee , October 20, 2017 at 8:27 pm GMTSadly, Brennan's propaganda coup only works on what the Bell Curve crowd up there would call the dumbest and most technologically helpless 1.2σ. Here is how people with half a brain interpret the latest CIA whoppers.utu , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 5:18 am GMTAgain Mike Whitney does not get it. Though in the first part of the article I thought he would. He was almost getting there. The objective was to push new administration into the corner from which it could not improve relations with Russia as Trump indicated that he wanted to during the campaign.anon , Disclaimer Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 5:54 am GMTConvincing Americans in Russia's influence or Russia collusion with Trump was only a tool that would create pressure on Trump that together with the fear of paralysis of his administration and impeachment would push Trump into the corner from which the only thing he could do was to worsen relations with Russia. What American people believe or not is really secondary. With firing of Gen. Flynn Trump acted exactly as they wanted him to act. This was the beginning of downward slope.
Anyway, the mission was accomplished and the relations with Russia are worse now than during Obama administration. Trump can concentrate on Iran in which he will be supported by all sides and factions including the media. Even Larry David will approve not only the zionist harpies like Pam Geller, Rita Katz and Ilana Mercer.
Pamela Geller: Thank You, Larry David
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2017/10/19/pamela-geller-thank-larry-david/
OK.ThereisaGod , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 6:37 am GMTThe only part that is absurd is that Russia posed a bona fide threat to the US. I'm fine with the idea that he ruined Brennen's plans in Syria. But thats just ego we shouldn't have been there anyway.
No one really cares about Ukraine. And the European/Russian trade zone? No one cares. The Eurozone has its hands full with Greece and the rest of the old EU. I have a feeling they have already gone way too far and are more likely to shrink than expand in any meaningful way
The one thing I am not positive about. If the elite really believe that Russia is a threat, then Americans have done psych ops on themselves.
The US was only interested in Ukraine because it was there. Next in line on a map. The rather shocking disinterest in investing money -- on both sides -- is inexplicable if it was really important. Most of it would be a waste -- but still. The US stupidly spent $5 billion on something -- getting duped by politicians and got theoretical regime change, but it was hell to pry even $1 billion for real economic aid.
jilles dykstra , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 6:46 am GMT" ..factions within the state whose interests do not coincide with those of the American people."All the more powerfully put because of its recognisably comical. understatement. Thank you Mr Whitney. Brilliant article that would be all over the mainstream media were the US MSM an instrument of American rather than globalist interests.
I am reading Howard Zinn, A Peoples History of the USA, 1492 to the Present. A sad story, how the USA always was a police state, where the two percent rich manipulated the 98% poor, to stay rich. When there were insurrections federal troops restored order. Also FDR put down strikes with troops.Logan , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 11:16 am GMT@jilles dykstraDESERT FOX , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 1:30 pm GMTYou should be aware that Zinn's book is not, IMO, an honest attempt at writing history. It is conscious propaganda intended to make Americans believe exactly what you are taking from it.
The elephant in the room is Israel and the neocons , this is the force that controls America and Americas foreign policy , Brennan and the 17 intel agencies are puppets of the mossad and Israel, that is the brutal fact of the matter.TG , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 2:03 pm GMTUntil that fact changes Americans will continue to fight and die for Israel.
Anonymous , Disclaimer Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 2:05 pm GMT"The absence of evidence suggests that Russia hacking narrative is a sloppy and unprofessional disinformation campaign that was hastily slapped together by over confident Intelligence officials who believed that saturating the public airwaves with one absurd story after another would achieve the desired result "But it DID achieve the desired result! Trump folded under the pressure, and went full out neoliberal. Starting with his missile attack on Syria, he is now OK with spending trillions fighting pointless endless foreign wars on the other side of the world.
I think maybe half the US population does believe the Russian hacking thing, but that's not really the issue. I think that the pre-Syrian attack media blitz was more a statement of brute power to Trump: WE are in charge here, and WE can take you down and impeach you, and facts don't matter!
Sometimes propaganda is about persuading people. And sometimes, I think, it is about intimidating them.
Whitney is another author who declares the "Russians did it" narrative a psyop. He then devotes entire columns to the psyop, "naww Russia didn't do it". There could be plenty to write about – recent laws that do undercut liberty, but no, the Washington Post needs fake opposition to its fake news so you have guys like Whitney in the less-mainstream fake news media.Jake , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 2:32 pm GMTSo Brennan wanted revenge? Well that's simple enough to understand, without being too stupid. But Whitney's whopper of a lie is what you're supposed to unquestionably believe. The US has "rival political parties". Did you miss it?
The US is doing nothing more than acting as the British Empire 2.0. WASP culture was born of a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism. That meant that the WASP Elites of every are pro-Jewish, especially in order to wage war, physical and/or cultural, against the vast majority of white Christians they rule.Logan , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 3:04 pm GMTBy the early 19th century, The Brit Empire's Elites also had a strong, and growing, dose of pro-Arabic/pro-Islamic philoSemitism. Most of that group became ardently pro-Sunni, and most of the pro-Sunni ones eventually coalescing around promotion of the House of Saud, which means being pro-Wahhabi and permanently desirous of killing or enslaving virtually all Shiite Mohammedans.
So, by the time of Victoria's high reign, the Brit WASP Elites were a strange brew of hardcoree pro-Jewish and hardcore pro-Arabic/islamic. The US foreign policy of today is an attempt to put those two together and force it on everyone and make it work.
The Brit secret service, in effect, created and trained not merely the CIA but also the Mossad and Saudi Arabia's General Intelligence Presidency. All four are defined by endless lies, endless acts of utterly amoral savagery. All 4 are at least as bad as the KGB ever was, and that means as bad as Hell itself.
@Grandpa CharlieWally , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 3:16 pm GMTFair enough. I didn't know that about the foreword. If accurate, that's a reasonable approach for a book.
Here's the problem.
Back when O. Cromwell was the dictator of England, he retained an artist to paint him. The custom of the time was for artists to "clean up" their subjects, in a primitive form of photoshopping.
OC being a religious fanatic, he informed the artist he wished to be portrayed as God had made him, "warts and all." (Ollie had a bunch of unattractive facial warts.) Or the artist wouldn't be paid.
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/nov/08/cromwell-portraitist-samuel-cooper-exhibition
Traditional triumphalist American narrative history, as taught in schools up through the 60s or so, portrayed America as "wart-free." Since then, with Zinn's book playing a major role, it has increasingly been portrayed as "warts-only," which is of course at least equally flawed. I would say more so.
All I am asking is that American (and other) history be written "warts and all." The triumphalist version is true, largely, and so is the Zinn version. Gone With the Wind and Roots both portray certain aspects of the pre-war south fairly accurately..
America has been, and is, both evil and good. As is/was true of every human institution and government in history. Personally, I believe America, net/net, has been one of the greatest forces for human good ever. But nobody will realize that if only the negative side of American history is taught.
@Michael KennyLogan , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 3:20 pm GMTHasbarist 'Kenny', you said:
"There must be something really dirty in Russigate that hasn't yet come out to generate this level of panic."
You continue to claim what you cannot prove.
But then you are a Jews First Zionist.
Russia-Gate Jumps the Shark
Russia-gate has jumped the shark with laughable new claims about a tiny number of "Russia-linked" social media ads, but the US mainstream media is determined to keep a straight facehttps://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/10/robert-parry/jumping-the-shark/
Yet Another Major Russia Story Falls Apart. Is Skepticism Permissible Yet?
+ review of other frauds
@JakeGrandpa Charlie , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 3:25 pm GMTMost of that group became ardently pro-Sunni, and most of the pro-Sunni ones eventually coalescing around promotion of the House of Saud, which means being pro-Wahhabi and permanently desirous of killing or enslaving virtually all Shiite Mohammedans.
Thanks for the laugh. During the 19th century, the Sauds were toothless, dirt-poor hicks from the deep desert of zero importance on the world stage.
The Brits were not Saudi proponents, in fact promoting the Husseins of Hejaz, the guys Lawrence of Arabia worked with. The Husseins, the Sharifs of Mecca and rulers of Hejaz, were the hereditary enemies of the Sauds of Nejd.
After WWI, the Brits installed Husseins as rulers of both Transjordan and Iraq, which with the Hejaz meant the Sauds were pretty much surrounded. The Sauds conquered the Hejaz in 1924, despite lukewarm British support for the Hejaz.
Nobody in the world cared much about the Saudis one way or another until massive oil fields were discovered, by Americans not Brits, starting in 1938. There was no reason they should. Prior to that Saudi prominence in world affairs was about equal to that of Chad today, and for much the same reason. Chad (and Saudi Arabia) had nothing anybody else wanted.
@Michael KennySeamus Padraig , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 3:39 pm GMT'Putin stopped talking about the "Lisbon to Vladivostok" free trade area long ago" -- Michael Kenney
Putin was simply trying to sell Russia's application for EU membership with the catch-phrase "Lisbon to Vladivostok". He continued that until the issue was triply mooted (1) by implosion of EU growth and boosterism, (2) by NATO's aggressive stance, in effect taken by NATO in Ukraine events and in the Baltics, and, (3) Russia's alliance with China.
It is surely still true that Russians think of themselves, categorically, as Europeans. OTOH, we can easily imagine that Russians in Vladivostok look at things differently than do Russians in St. Petersburg. Then again, Vladivostok only goes back about a century and a half.
@utuSeamus Padraig , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 3:45 pm GMTAnyway, the mission was accomplished and the relations with Russia are worse now than during Obama administration.
I generally agree with your comment, but that part strikes me as a bit of an exaggeration. While relations with Russia certainly haven't improved, how have they really worsened? The second round of sanctions that Trump reluctantly approved have yet to be implemented by Europe, which was the goal. And apart from that, what of substance has changed?
@Grandpa CharlieLudwig Watzal , Website Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 3:46 pm GMTThat pre-9/11 "cooperation" nearly destroyed Russia. Nobody in Russia (except, perhaps, for Pussy Riot) wants a return to the Yeltsin era.
It's not surprising that 57 percent of the American people believe in Russian meddling. Didn't two-thirds of the same crowd believe that Saddam was behind 9/11, too? The American public is being brainwashed 24 hours a day all year long.anonymous , Disclaimer Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 3:50 pm GMTThe CIA is the world largest criminal and terrorist organization. With Brennan the worst has come to the worst. The whole Russian meddling affair was initiated by the Obama/Clinton gang in cooperation with 95 percent of the media. Nothing will come out of it.
This disinformation campaign might be the prelude to an upcoming war.
Right now, the US is run by jerks and idiots. Watch the video.Only dumb people does not know that TRUMP IS NETANYAHU'S PUPPET.Miro23 , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 4:56 pm GMTThe fifth column zionist jews are running the albino stooge and foreign policy in the Middle East to expand Israel's interest against American interest that is TREASON. One of these FIFTH COLUMNISTS is Jared Kushner. He should be arrested.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/donald-trumps-likudist-campaign-against-iran/5614264
[The key figures who had primary influence on both Trump's and Bush's Iran policies held views close to those of Israel's right-wing Likud Party. The main conduit for the Likudist line in the Trump White House is Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law, primary foreign policy advisor, and longtime friend and supporter of Netanyahu. Kushner's parents are also long-time supporters of Israeli settlements on the occupied West Bank.
Another figure to whom the Trump White House has turned is John Bolton, undersecretary of state and a key policymaker on Iran in the Bush administration. Although Bolton was not appointed Trump's secretary of state, as he'd hoped, he suddenly reemerged as a player on Iran policy thanks to his relationship with Kushner. Politico reports that Bolton met with Kushner a few days before the final policy statement was released and urged a complete withdrawal from the deal in favor of his own plan for containing Iran.
Bolton spoke with Trump by phone on Thursday about the paragraph in the deal that vowed it would be "terminated" if there was any renegotiation, according to Politico. He was calling Trump from Las Vegas, where he'd been meeting with casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, the third major figure behind Trump's shift towards Israeli issues. Adelson is a Likud supporter who has long been a close friend of Netanyahu's and has used his Israeli tabloid newspaper Israel Hayomto support Netanyahu's campaigns. He was Trump's main campaign contributor in 2016, donating $100 million. Adelson's real interest has been in supporting Israel's interests in Washington -- especially with regard to Iran.]
A great article with some excellent points:CanSpeccy , Website Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 5:11 pm GMTPutin's dream of Greater Europe is the death knell for the unipolar world order. It means the economic center of the world will shift to Central Asia where abundant resources and cheap labor of the east will be linked to the technological advances and the Capital the of the west eliminating the need to trade in dollars or recycle profits into US debt. The US economy will slip into irreversible decline, and the global hegemon will steadily lose its grip on power. That's why it is imperative for the US prevail in Ukraine– a critical land bridge connecting the two continents– and to topple Assad in Syria in order to control vital resources and pipeline corridors. Washington must be in a position where it can continue to force its trading partners to denominate their resources in dollars and recycle the proceeds into US Treasuries if it is to maintain its global primacy. The main problem is that Russia is blocking Uncle Sam's path to success which is roiling the political establishment in Washington.
American dominance is very much tied to the dollar's role as the world's reserve currency, and the rest of the world no longer want to fund this bankrupt, warlike state – particularly the Chinese.
First, it confirms that the US did not want to see the jihadist extremists defeated by Russia. These mainly-Sunni militias served as Washington's proxy-army conducting an ambitious regime change operation which coincided with US strategic ambitions.
The CIA run US/Israeli/ISIS alliance.
Second, Zakharova confirms that the western media is not an independent news gathering organization, but a propaganda organ for the foreign policy establishment who dictates what they can and can't say.
They are given the political line and they broadcast it.
The loosening of rules governing the dissemination of domestic propaganda coupled with the extraordinary advances in surveillance technology, create the perfect conditions for the full implementation of an American police state. But what is more concerning, is that the primary levers of state power are no longer controlled by elected officials but by factions within the state whose interests do not coincide with those of the American people. That can only lead to trouble.
At some point Americans are going to get a "War on Domestic Terror" cheered along by the media. More or less the arrest and incarceration of any opposition following the Soviet Bolshevik model.
@utuThales the Milesian , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 5:53 pm GMTOn the plus side, everyone now knows that the Anglo-US media from the NY Times to the Economist, from WaPo to the Gruniard, and from the BBC to CNN, the CBC and Weinstein's Hollywood are a worthless bunch of depraved lying bastards.
Brennan did this, CIA did that .AB_Anonymous , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 5:59 pm GMTSo what are you going to do about all this?
Continue to whine?
Continue to keep your head stuck in your ass?
So then continue with your blah, blah, blah, and eat sh*t.
You, disgusting self-elected democratic people/institutions!!!
Such a truthful portrait of reality ! The ruling elite is indeed massively corrupt, compromised, and controlled by dark forces. And the police state is already here. For most people, so far, in the form of massive collection of personal data and increasing number of mandatory regulations. But just one or two big false-flags away from progressing into something much worse.Art , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 6:18 pm GMTThe thing is, no matter how thick the mental cages are, and how carefully they are maintained by the daily massive injections of "certified" truth (via MSM), along with neutralizing or compromising of "troublemakers", the presence of multiple alternative sources in the age of Internet makes people to slip out of these cages one by one, and as the last events show – with acceleration.
It means that there's a fast approaching tipping point after which it'd be impossible for those in power both to keep a nice "civilized" face and to control the "cage-free" population. So, no matter how the next war will be called, it will be the war against the free Internet and free people. That's probably why N. Korean leader has no fear to start one.
An aside:Mr. Anon , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 7:07 pm GMTAll government secrecy is a curse on mankind. Trump is releasing the JFK murder files to the public. Kudos! Let us hope he will follow up with a full 9/11 investigation.
Think Peace -- Art
@utuArt , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 7:11 pm GMTThe objective was to push new administration into the corner from which it could not improve relations with Russia as Trump indicated that he wanted to during the campaign.
Good point. That was probably one of the objectives (and from the point of view of the deep-state, perhaps the most important objective) of the "Russia hacked our democracy" narrative, in addition to the general deligitimization of the Trump administration.
And, keep in mind, Washington's Sunni proxies were not a division of the Pentagon; they were entirely a CIA confection: CIA recruited, CIA-armed, CIA-funded and CIA-trained.Rurik , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 7:12 pm GMTClearly the CIA was making war on Syria. Is secret coercive covert action against sovereign nations Ok? Is it legal? When was the CIA designated a war making entity – what part of the constitution OK's that? Isn't the congress obliged by constitutional law to declare war? (These are NOT six month actions – they go on and on.)
Are committees of six congressman and six senators, who meet in secret, just avoiding the grave constitutional questions of war? We the People cannot even interrogate these politicians. (These politicians make big money in the secrecy swamp when they leave office.)
Syria is only one of many nations that the CIA is attacking – how many countries are we attacking with drones? Where is congress?
Spying is one thing – covert action is another – covert is wrong – it goes against world order. Every year after 9/11 they say things are worse – give them more money more power and they will make things safe. That is BS!
9/11 has opened the flood gates to the US government attacking at will, the various peoples of this Earth. That is NOT our prerogative.
We are being exceptionally arrogant.
Close the CIA – give the spying to the 16 other agencies.
Think Peace -- Art
@Ben10Mr. Anon , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 7:15 pm GMTright at 1:47
when he says 'we can't move on as a country'
his butt hurt is so ruefully obvious, that I couldn't help notice a wry smile on my face
that bitch spent millions on the war sow, and now all that mullah won't even wipe his butt hurt
when I see ((guys)) like this raging their inner crybaby angst, I feel really, really good about President Trump
MAGA bitches!
@jilles dykstraTradecraft46 , Next New Comment October 21, 2017 at 8:04 pm GMTI am reading Howard Zinn, A Peoples History of the USA
A Peoples History of the USA? Which Peoples?
I am SAIS 70 so know the drill and the article is on point.Here is the dealio. Most reporters are dim and have no experience, and it is real easy to lead them by the nose with promises of better in the future.
|
|
|
Feb 19, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
And on the heels of Dennis Kucinich's warnings , The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald, who opposes Trump for a variety of reasons, warns that siding with the evidently powerful Deep State in the hopes of undermining Trump is dangerous. As TheAntiMedia's Carey Wedler notes , Greenwald asserted in an interview with Democracy Now, published on Thursday, that this boils down to a fight between the Deep State and the Trump administration.https://www.democracynow.org/embed/story/2017/2/16/greenwald_empowering_the_deep_state_to
Though Greenwald has argued the leaks were "wholly justified" in spite of the fact they violated criminal law, he also questioned the motives behind them.
"It's very possible - I'd say likely - that the motive here was vindictive rather than noble," he wrote. "Whatever else is true, this is a case where the intelligence community, through strategic (and illegal) leaks, destroyed one of its primary adversaries in the Trump White House."
According to an in-depth report by journalist Mike Lofgren:
"The Deep State does not consist of the entire government. It is a hybrid of national security and law enforcement agencies: the Department of Defense, the Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Justice Department. I also include the Department of the Treasury because of its jurisdiction over financial flows, its enforcement of international sanctions and its organic symbiosis with Wall Street."
As Greenwald explained during his interview:
"It's agencies like the CIA, the NSA and the other intelligence agencies, that are essentially designed to disseminate disinformation and deceit and propaganda, and have a long history of doing not only that, but also have a long history of the world's worst war crimes, atrocities and death squads."
Greenwald believes this division is a result of the Deep State's disapproval of Trump's foreign policy and the fact that the intelligence community overwhelmingly supported Hillary Clinton over Trump because of her hawkish views. Greenwald noted that Mike Morell, acting CIA chief under Obama, and Michael Hayden, who ran both the CIA and NSA under George W. Bush, openly spoke out against Trump during the presidential campaign.
Greenwald asserts the the CIA preferred Clinton because, like the clandestine agency, she supported regime change in Syria. In contrast, Trump dismissed America's practice of nation-building and declined to tow the line on ousting foreign leaders, instead advocating working with Russia to defeat ISIS and other extremist groups.
"So, Trump's agenda that he ran on was completely antithetical to what the CIA wanted," Greenwald argued. "Clinton's was exactly what the CIA wanted, and so they were behind her. And so, they've been trying to undermine Trump for many months throughout the election. And now that he won, they are not just undermining him with leaks, but actively subverting him."
"[In] the closing months of the Obama administration, they put together a deal with Russia to create peace in Syria. A few days later, a military strike in Syria killed a hundred Syrian soldiers and that ended the agreement. What happened is inside the intelligence and the Pentagon there was a deliberate effort to sabotage an agreement the White House made."
Greenwald, who opposes Trump for a variety of reasons, warns that siding with the evidently powerful Deep State in the hopes of undermining Trump is dangerous. "Trump was democratically elected and is subject to democratic controls, as these courts just demonstrated and as the media is showing, as citizens are proving," he said, likely alluding to a recent court ruling that nullified Trump's travel ban.
He continued:
"But on the other hand, the CIA was elected by nobody. They're barely subject to democratic controls at all. And so, to urge that the CIA and the intelligence community empower itself to undermine the elected branches of government is insanity."
He argues that mentality is "a prescription for destroying democracy overnight in the name of saving it," highlighting that members of both prevailing political parties are praising the Deep State's audacity in leaking details of Flynn's conversations.
As he wrote in his article, " it's hard to put into words how strange it is to watch the very same people - from both parties, across the ideological spectrum - who called for the heads of Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Tom Drake, and so many other Obama-era leakers today heap praise on those who leaked the highly sensitive, classified SIGINT information that brought down Gen. Flynn."
He also points out the left's hypocrisy in condemning Flynn for lying when James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence during the Obama administration, perpetuated lies without ever being held accountable.
|
|
|
Feb 19, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
And on the heels of Dennis Kucinich's warnings , The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald, who opposes Trump for a variety of reasons, warns that siding with the evidently powerful Deep State in the hopes of undermining Trump is dangerous. As TheAntiMedia's Carey Wedler notes , Greenwald asserted in an interview with Democracy Now, published on Thursday, that this boils down to a fight between the Deep State and the Trump administration.https://www.democracynow.org/embed/story/2017/2/16/greenwald_empowering_the_deep_state_to
Though Greenwald has argued the leaks were "wholly justified" in spite of the fact they violated criminal law, he also questioned the motives behind them.
"It's very possible - I'd say likely - that the motive here was vindictive rather than noble," he wrote. "Whatever else is true, this is a case where the intelligence community, through strategic (and illegal) leaks, destroyed one of its primary adversaries in the Trump White House."
According to an in-depth report by journalist Mike Lofgren:
"The Deep State does not consist of the entire government. It is a hybrid of national security and law enforcement agencies: the Department of Defense, the Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Justice Department. I also include the Department of the Treasury because of its jurisdiction over financial flows, its enforcement of international sanctions and its organic symbiosis with Wall Street."
As Greenwald explained during his interview:
"It's agencies like the CIA, the NSA and the other intelligence agencies, that are essentially designed to disseminate disinformation and deceit and propaganda, and have a long history of doing not only that, but also have a long history of the world's worst war crimes, atrocities and death squads."
Greenwald believes this division is a result of the Deep State's disapproval of Trump's foreign policy and the fact that the intelligence community overwhelmingly supported Hillary Clinton over Trump because of her hawkish views. Greenwald noted that Mike Morell, acting CIA chief under Obama, and Michael Hayden, who ran both the CIA and NSA under George W. Bush, openly spoke out against Trump during the presidential campaign.
Greenwald asserts the the CIA preferred Clinton because, like the clandestine agency, she supported regime change in Syria. In contrast, Trump dismissed America's practice of nation-building and declined to tow the line on ousting foreign leaders, instead advocating working with Russia to defeat ISIS and other extremist groups.
"So, Trump's agenda that he ran on was completely antithetical to what the CIA wanted," Greenwald argued. "Clinton's was exactly what the CIA wanted, and so they were behind her. And so, they've been trying to undermine Trump for many months throughout the election. And now that he won, they are not just undermining him with leaks, but actively subverting him."
"[In] the closing months of the Obama administration, they put together a deal with Russia to create peace in Syria. A few days later, a military strike in Syria killed a hundred Syrian soldiers and that ended the agreement. What happened is inside the intelligence and the Pentagon there was a deliberate effort to sabotage an agreement the White House made."
Greenwald, who opposes Trump for a variety of reasons, warns that siding with the evidently powerful Deep State in the hopes of undermining Trump is dangerous. "Trump was democratically elected and is subject to democratic controls, as these courts just demonstrated and as the media is showing, as citizens are proving," he said, likely alluding to a recent court ruling that nullified Trump's travel ban.
He continued:
"But on the other hand, the CIA was elected by nobody. They're barely subject to democratic controls at all. And so, to urge that the CIA and the intelligence community empower itself to undermine the elected branches of government is insanity."
He argues that mentality is "a prescription for destroying democracy overnight in the name of saving it," highlighting that members of both prevailing political parties are praising the Deep State's audacity in leaking details of Flynn's conversations.
As he wrote in his article, " it's hard to put into words how strange it is to watch the very same people - from both parties, across the ideological spectrum - who called for the heads of Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Tom Drake, and so many other Obama-era leakers today heap praise on those who leaked the highly sensitive, classified SIGINT information that brought down Gen. Flynn."
He also points out the left's hypocrisy in condemning Flynn for lying when James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence during the Obama administration, perpetuated lies without ever being held accountable.
|
|
|
Feb 18, 2017 | www.youtube.com
Pete Hegseth and Jesse Watters discuss the bitter establishment's desperation to manufacture a Trump scandalLouis John 2 hours ago
@hexencoffGary M 3 hours agoMcCain is a trouble maker. supporter of the terrorist and warmonger Iraq Libya Syria he is behind all the trouble scumbag
McCain is a globalistbelaghoulashi 2 hours ago(edited) McCain has always been full of horseshit. And he has always relied on people calling him a hero to get away with it. That schtick is old, the man is a monumental failure for this country, and he needs to have his sorry butt kicked.ryvr madduck 1 hour ago
Michael Cambo 4 hours ago+belaghoulashi
Most people don't know that after the 134 men died on the Forrestal fire in 1967 McCain was the ONLY person helicoptered off the ship. It was done for his own safety as many on the ship blamed him for causing the fire by "wet" starting his jet causing a plume of fire to shoot out his plane's exhaust and into the plane behind McCain causing the ordnance to cook off on that jet. McCain then panicked and dropped his own bombs onto the deck making matters much worse. McCain should have ended his career in jail. Oh, wait, he kinda did, maybe karma justice?
When you start to drain the swamp, the swamp creatures start to show.Alexus Highfield 3 hours ago@Michael Cambodon't they...they do say shit floats.
Geoffry Allan 41 minutes ago
tim sparks 3 hours ago@Michael Cambo - Trump has not drained the swamp he has surrounded himself with billionaires in his cabinet who don't give a damn about the working middle class who struggle e eryday to make a living - explain to me how he is draining the swamp
Trump is trying so fucking hard to do a good job for us.Integrity Truth-seeker 2 hours ago@tim sparksJodi Boin 3 hours agoHe is not trying... HE IS DOING IT... Like A Boss. Thank God Mark Taylor Prophecies 2017 the best is yet to come
McCain is a traitor and is bought and paid for by Soros.Grant Davidson 4 hours agoLove him or hate him. The guy is a frikkin Genius...Patrick Reagan 4 hours agoFakeStream MediaMichael Cambo 4 hours ago@Patrick Reaganaspengold5 4 hours agoVery FakeStream Media
I am so disappointed in McCain.orlando pablo 4 hours agomy 401k is keep on going up....thank u mr trump....Dumbass Libtard 3 hours agoMcCain is not a Republican. He is a loser. Yuge difference.1Mitchel Colvin 3 hours agoShut up McCain! I can't stand this clown anymore! Unfortunately, Arizona re-elected him for six more years!robert barham 4 hours agoThe very Fake Media has met their matchH My ways of thinking! 3 hours agoWhy does everyone feel that if they don't kiss McCain's ass, they are being un American? Mccain has sold out to George Soros. He is a piece of shit who is guilty of no less than treason! Look up the definition for treason if you're in doubt!Sam Nardo 3 hours ago(edited) Mc Cain and Graham are two of the best democrats in the GOP. They are called RINOSkazzicup 3 hours agoWe love and support our President Donald Trump. The media is so dishonest. CNN = Criminal News Network.Geoffry Allan 34 minutes ago
@kazzicup - yeah if you get rid of the media Trump becomes a dictator - is that what you want he will censor everything and tell you what he wants - Trump is still president and he is doing his job and fulfilling his promises even though the media is there and reporting - so what's the problem - I don't want a got damn dictator running this country - if you don't like the media then just listen to Trump - 2nd amendment free speech and the right to bear arms we have to respect it even if we may disagree
|
|
|
Feb 18, 2017 | www.youtube.com
Pete Hegseth and Jesse Watters discuss the bitter establishment's desperation to manufacture a Trump scandalLouis John 2 hours ago
@hexencoffGary M 3 hours agoMcCain is a trouble maker. supporter of the terrorist and warmonger Iraq Libya Syria he is behind all the trouble scumbag
McCain is a globalistbelaghoulashi 2 hours ago(edited) McCain has always been full of horseshit. And he has always relied on people calling him a hero to get away with it. That schtick is old, the man is a monumental failure for this country, and he needs to have his sorry butt kicked.ryvr madduck 1 hour ago
Michael Cambo 4 hours ago+belaghoulashi
Most people don't know that after the 134 men died on the Forrestal fire in 1967 McCain was the ONLY person helicoptered off the ship. It was done for his own safety as many on the ship blamed him for causing the fire by "wet" starting his jet causing a plume of fire to shoot out his plane's exhaust and into the plane behind McCain causing the ordnance to cook off on that jet. McCain then panicked and dropped his own bombs onto the deck making matters much worse. McCain should have ended his career in jail. Oh, wait, he kinda did, maybe karma justice?
When you start to drain the swamp, the swamp creatures start to show.Alexus Highfield 3 hours ago@Michael Cambodon't they...they do say shit floats.
Geoffry Allan 41 minutes ago
tim sparks 3 hours ago@Michael Cambo - Trump has not drained the swamp he has surrounded himself with billionaires in his cabinet who don't give a damn about the working middle class who struggle e eryday to make a living - explain to me how he is draining the swamp
Trump is trying so fucking hard to do a good job for us.Integrity Truth-seeker 2 hours ago@tim sparksJodi Boin 3 hours agoHe is not trying... HE IS DOING IT... Like A Boss. Thank God Mark Taylor Prophecies 2017 the best is yet to come
McCain is a traitor and is bought and paid for by Soros.Grant Davidson 4 hours agoLove him or hate him. The guy is a frikkin Genius...Patrick Reagan 4 hours agoFakeStream MediaMichael Cambo 4 hours ago@Patrick Reaganaspengold5 4 hours agoVery FakeStream Media
I am so disappointed in McCain.orlando pablo 4 hours agomy 401k is keep on going up....thank u mr trump....Dumbass Libtard 3 hours agoMcCain is not a Republican. He is a loser. Yuge difference.1Mitchel Colvin 3 hours agoShut up McCain! I can't stand this clown anymore! Unfortunately, Arizona re-elected him for six more years!robert barham 4 hours agoThe very Fake Media has met their matchH My ways of thinking! 3 hours agoWhy does everyone feel that if they don't kiss McCain's ass, they are being un American? Mccain has sold out to George Soros. He is a piece of shit who is guilty of no less than treason! Look up the definition for treason if you're in doubt!Sam Nardo 3 hours ago(edited) Mc Cain and Graham are two of the best democrats in the GOP. They are called RINOSkazzicup 3 hours agoWe love and support our President Donald Trump. The media is so dishonest. CNN = Criminal News Network.Geoffry Allan 34 minutes ago
@kazzicup - yeah if you get rid of the media Trump becomes a dictator - is that what you want he will censor everything and tell you what he wants - Trump is still president and he is doing his job and fulfilling his promises even though the media is there and reporting - so what's the problem - I don't want a got damn dictator running this country - if you don't like the media then just listen to Trump - 2nd amendment free speech and the right to bear arms we have to respect it even if we may disagree
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2017 | consortiumnews.com
Exclusive: President-elect Trump is fending off a U.S. intelligence leak of unproven allegations that he cavorted with Russian prostitutes, but the darker story might be the CIA's intervention in U.S. politics, reports Robert Parry.
The decision by the U.S. intelligence community to include in an official report some unverified and salacious accusations against President-elect Donald Trump resembles a tactic out of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover's playbook on government-style blackmail: I have some very derogatory information about you that I'd sure hate to see end up in the press.
Legendary FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover
In this case, as leaders of the U.S. intelligence community were pressing Trump to accept their assessment that the Russian government had tried to bolster Trump's campaign by stealing and leaking actual emails harmful to Hillary Clinton's campaign, Trump was confronted with this classified "appendix" describing claims about him cavorting with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel room.
Supposedly, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan included the unproven allegations in the report under the rationale that the Russian government might have videotaped Trump's misbehavior and thus could use it to blackmail him. But the U.S. intelligence community also had reasons to want to threaten Trump who has been critical of its performance and who has expressed doubts about its analysis of the Russian "hacking."
After the briefing last Friday, Trump and his incoming administration did shift their position, accepting the intelligence community's assessment that the Russian government hacked the emails of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton's campaign chief John Podesta. But I'm told Trump saw no evidence that Russia then leaked the material to WikiLeaks and has avoided making that concession.
Still, Trump's change in tone was noted by the mainstream media and was treated as an admission that he was abandoning his earlier skepticism. In other words, he was finally getting onboard the intelligence community's Russia-did-it bandwagon. Now, however, we know that Trump simultaneously had been confronted with the possibility that the unproven stories about him engaging in unorthodox sex acts with prostitutes could be released, embarrassing him barely a week before his inauguration.
The classified report, with the explosive appendix, was also given to President Obama and the so-called "Gang of Eight," bipartisan senior members of Congress responsible for oversight of the intelligence community, which increased chances that the Trump accusations would be leaked to the press, which indeed did happen.
Circulating Rumors
The stories about Russian intelligence supposedly filming Trump in a high-end Moscow hotel with prostitutes have been circulating around Washington for months. I was briefed about them by a Hillary Clinton associate who was clearly hopeful that the accusations would be released before the election and thus further damage Trump's chances. But the alleged video never seemed to surface and the claims had all the earmarks of a campaign dirty trick.
However, now the tales of illicit frolic have been elevated to another level. They have been inserted into an official U.S. intelligence report, the details of which were leaked first to CNN and then to other mainstream U.S. news media outlets.
Trump has denounced the story as "fake news" and it is certainly true that the juicy details – reportedly assembled by a former British MI-6 spy named Christopher Steele – have yet to check out. But the placement of the rumors in a U.S. government document gave the mainstream media an excuse to publicize the material.
It's also allowed the media to again trot out the Russian word "kompromat" as if the Russians invented the game of assembling derogatory information about someone and then using it to discredit or blackmail the person.
In American history, legendary FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was infamous for using his agency to develop negative information on a political figure and then letting the person know that the FBI had the dirt and certainly would not want it to become public – if only the person would do what the FBI wanted, whether that was to reappoint Hoover to another term or to boost the FBI's budget or – in the infamous case of civil rights leader Martin Luther King – perhaps to commit suicide.
However, in this case, it is not even known whether the Russians have any dirt on Trump. It could just be rumors concocted in the middle of a hard-fought campaign, first among Republicans battling Trump for the nomination (this opposition research was reportedly initiated by backers of Sen. Marco Rubio in the GOP race) before being picked up by Clinton supporters for use in the general election.
Still, perhaps the more troubling issue is whether the U.S. intelligence community has entered a new phase of politicization in which its leadership feels that it has the responsibility to weed out "unfit" contenders for the presidency. During the general election campaign, a well-placed intelligence source told me that the intelligence community disdained both Clinton and Trump and hoped to discredit both of them with the hope that a more "acceptable" person could move into the White House for the next four years.
Hurting Both Candidates
Though I was skeptical of that information, it did turn out that FBI Director James Comey, one of the top officials in the intelligence community, badly damaged Clinton's campaign by deeming her handling of her emails as Secretary of State "extremely careless" but deciding not to prosecute her – and then in the last week of the campaign briefly reopening and then re-closing the investigation.
Then, after the election, President Obama's CIA began leaking allegations that Russian President Vladimir Putin had orchestrated the hacking of Democratic emails and provided them to WikiLeaks to reveal how the DNC undermined Sen. Bernie Sanders's campaign and what Clinton had told Wall Street bigwigs in paid speeches that she had sought to keep secret from the American people.
The intelligence community's assessment set the stage for what could have been a revolt by the Electoral College in which enough Trump delegates could have refused to vote for him to send the election into the House of Representatives, where the states would choose the President from one of the top three vote-getters in the Electoral College. The third-place finisher turned out to be former Secretary of State Colin Powell who got four votes from Clinton delegates in Washington State. But the Electoral College ploy failed when Trump's delegates proved overwhelmingly faithful to the GOP candidate.
Now, we are seeing what looks like a new phase in this "stop (or damage) Trump" strategy, the inclusion of anti-Trump dirt in an official intelligence report that was then leaked to the major media.
Whether this move was meant to soften up Trump or whether the intelligence community genuinely thought that the accusations might be true and deserved inclusion in a report on alleged Russian interference in U.S. politics or whether it was some combination of the two, we are witnessing a historic moment when the U.S. intelligence community has deployed its extraordinary powers within the domain of U.S. politics. J. Edgar Hoover would be proud.
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com ).
Bryan Hemming , January 12, 2017 at 11:06 am
Jean-David , January 12, 2017 at 11:22 amExcuse the mixed metaphors, but this looks like another entirely predictable nail in the coffin of US democracy, as the chickens come home to roost. For some time it has been quite obvious the CIA has been pulling strings from behind the scenes to make whatever puppet occupies the White House dance to its tune. But it won't end there. Only when the CIA climbs completely out of the coffin can the epic finale between the CIA, FBI and NSA begin.
The big question is as to how long the people of states like Texas and Florida stand by in the wings as the theater catches fire.
There are moments in history when it seems almost the entire population of a nation has been struck with deafness and blindess. This maybe one such moment for the United States as a political elite begins the process of tearing the Union apart.
Bill Bodden , January 12, 2017 at 2:05 pmDon't mix your metaphors before they are hatched. ;-) Reply
Common Tater , January 12, 2017 at 4:59 pmThere are moments in history when it seems almost the entire population of a nation has been struck with deafness and blindess. This maybe one such moment for the United States as a political elite begins the process of tearing the Union apart.
The United States has been accused of decadence for decades by Americans and non-Americans without much concern being shown by anyone not in a certain minority. The great tragedy of a decadent way of life is its durability.
In 1961 William Lederer's book, "A Nation of Sheep" revealed the abuse of American power and the ignorance of the American people regarding this misrule. Nothing much has changed since then except the names of the aggressors and their primary geographic areas of intended domination. The mass of people are essentially clueless and content to believe whatever lies and salacious tales are told them from the nation's Towers of Babel. This is in line with human history that shows people of authoritarian dispositions tend to be more aggressive and dominant in politics and commerce and the masses accept their lot as long as they get enough crumbs from establishment's plate..
(The title of the book was also an insult to sheep, but that is another story.)
Jack Flanigan , January 14, 2017 at 1:47 amThe saying goes, "power corrupts," but i believe that it is the corrupt who seek power to begin with.
Most people are content to live and let live, to live by the golden rule, mind their own and reciprocate kindness etc., etc.
Then there are those who get a thrill from exercising control over others. Those are the ones who shoot straight to the top.Curious , January 12, 2017 at 6:09 pmAn interesting and clear observation. As an australian I note our system is dominated by two major parties (and I mean dominated) similar to the US. The two parties are vehicles for ambitious and corrupt individuals to fast track political careers. The power rests in these organizations and attracts the corrupt like bees to honey. Reply
Curious , January 12, 2017 at 6:32 pmBill, regarding your sense of human history I might add that for many centuries people couldn't read, except for the aristocracy and the religious sects mostly. The reformation produced a 100 year war and literacy was at an all time low in Luthers time but something motivated them to fight for such a long time, and it wasn't information nor intellect.
Where has our literacy gone which would prevent a repeat of endless war and violence these days? Oh yes, corporate controlled media hiring people who are certain to have no critical thinking skills, no moral rudder, nor worldly experience to shed the scales from their eyes. We are almost in pre-Gutenberg times of short attention spans and 140 character 'news truths' covering the landscape of the ignorant. One can only hope the Tower of the oligarchs Babel has rapidly decaying clay feet. We certainly know how to reduce cultures more ancient than ours to ashes without so much as a second thought regarding the sanctity of life. Where are all the pro-lifers now? Oh yeh, that's only in the womb, and after the umbilical cord is cut they are fair game for destruction. The US values we rave about will really hurt when other cultures treat us as they have been treated.
Curious , January 12, 2017 at 6:34 pmOr better yet, we are in Gutenberg times where the "type" is set by the big players and the papers around the country keep the same type and only add ink. It's their only function now at the national level to inhibit discourse, excluding this site of course. Reply
Wendi , January 12, 2017 at 5:41 pmOr better yet, we are in times of the early press machines, where the "type" is set by the big players and the papers around the country keep the same type and only add ink. It's their only function now at the national level, meant to inhibit discourse and ideas. (excluding this site of course) Reply
Bill Bodden , January 12, 2017 at 10:04 pmIn its Hoover relation, this article reprises the passage in The Craft of Intelligence, by Allen Dulles, (1965, if memory serves; alas, that book's text seems unavailable on the internet).
It describes the power struggle involved post-FDR, during-HST 1946-48, at the institution of the CIA (The Agency was not legislatively enacted, only instituted through Executive Order.)
Hoover opposed the creation of an intelligence collection that would compete with the FBI's monopoly of spies snoops and snitches.The compromise settlement set the FBI with domestic coverage and the CIA with international haunts for its spooks.
Come the the present day, they still have turf wars in power rivalry for budget money.
However, in effect, after the budget shuffle the two legions merge their 'assets' - making each one double its real size. They join in advocating for (the oxymoronic) 'authoritarian morality,' gaining both the unlawfulness funded in the Judiciary with same unlawfulness, (or, being 'outlaw,' 'above the law'), funded by the Executive.You can depend that they employ the same techniques. Coercion, extortion, blackmail, assassination, torture, defamation, slander and Press Release aspersion. The polity is hung pendant on those strings the outlaws pull. Or, 'hanged' pendant.
As Hoover, so Clapper et al.
Trump seems to have reconsided, maybe recanted, his defiance of 'intelligence' after he has seen some truth in it regarding things he knows he did in places he knows he was. He knows he dare not let the public see him through the cyclopian 'eye' of the intelligentia illumination.
_____
My wit sez, Lo! That explains his undocumented wife - he heard about Russian mail-order brides and flew off to visit the showroom. And brought back some capital equipment, manufactured in foreign lands.Joe Lauria , January 14, 2017 at 9:08 amThe Craft of Intelligence, by Allen Dulles, (1965, if memory serves; alas, that book's text seems unavailable on the internet)
Try alibris or abebooks dot coms. They have copies.
Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 8:34 amThere's a Kindle edition available. Reply
Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 11:39 amGood comment Bryan, but I wonder if we should pay attention at all to this decline of everything, not only of democracy. Yet, I wish to highlight two humorous comments which best characterise the situation.
The first one was a title I saw on Russia-Insider website: "Trump watch out! John Brennan throws even a kitchen sink at Trump in desperation."
The other was a comment by a zero-hedge reader: "Trump could have had sex with a goat in a Moscow hotel room and be videod as much as I care if he only delivers on his election promises. I voted based on his policy promises, not on his sexual preferences."
The sexual smear is so 20th century, the same as the CIA – obsolete.
rosemerry , January 13, 2017 at 5:10 pmTo continue on the humorous side, the vile RT has one on the Pornhub reporting a huge increase in searches for "Golden Showers". Perhaps the kiddies are adding a new term to their vocabularies.
https://www.rt.com/viral/373545-pornhub-golden-showers-trump/ Reply
W. R. Knight , January 12, 2017 at 11:06 amIt seems that Trump supporters are many and varied, and very loyal. To pretend that all these shenanigans were needed to help elect him against such a faulty candidate as Hillary is pathetic in the extreme. The terrible results, when we see how the new Administration is being gently helped by the Senate including Democrats, will be bad for us all if their warlike statements lead to facts. However, Obama's sending of 2800 tanks and 4000 troops to help Germany(!) and Poland against "Russian aggression" right now, plus Hillary's promises, do not give a hopeful alternative scenario for the "land of the free" or peace on earth. Reply
J. D. , January 12, 2017 at 1:35 pmThe saddest part of this entire debacle is that the intelligence agencies, as well as main stream media, the president and most members of Congress have destroyed their own credibility. Lacking credibility, they cannot be believed; and when they cannot be believed, they cannot be trusted; and a government that cannot be trusted is doomed.
Anna , January 12, 2017 at 9:52 pmTrump proved more feisty than expected at his first press conference as President-Elect, hitting back at both Buzzfeed ('You're fake news" and CNN ("you're organization is terrible") And went on to say that "If Putin likes Donald Trump, guess what, folks? That's called an asset, not a liability," describing the urgency of cooperation in defeating terrorism. Lost in the shuffle however was the source of the lies - British intelligence agencies.In fact, the NYTimes reported Jan. 6 that the official report released last week by the US intelligence agencies, which accused Putin of subverting the U.S. election, also came from British intelligence, which "raised an alarm that Moscow had hacked into the Democratic National Committee's computer servers, and alerted their American counterparts.Talk about foreign interference.
Furtive , January 12, 2017 at 11:40 pmfriends of Israel in action in the UK Reply
Steve Abbott , January 12, 2017 at 2:15 pmA 4 chan blogger wrote it as a hoax Reply
Godfree Roberts , January 13, 2017 at 4:55 amGet with the program! We are supposed to believe that all we have heard from and about the CIA in this century was pure and innocent incompetence, and should therefore continue to put all of our faith in their motives and methods. Reply
Dan Kuhn , January 12, 2017 at 11:08 amDo you know which major government is the most trusted by its citizens?
The Edelman Corporation does. They've been doing 'government trust' surveys for decades. Check it out. http://www.slideshare.net/EdelmanAPAC/2016-edelman-trust-barometer-china-english .
Hint: China ReplyZnam Svashta , January 12, 2017 at 11:22 amThe entire sordid mess needs to be dismantled brick by brick and rebuilt from the ground up. Washington should be razed to the ground. It is beyond rescuing. it is beyond saving. It is rotten from the foundations to the pinicle of the obilisk. The American People should declare war on Washington DC and invade the place and clean house. Bring the Guillotine along with them and the baskets for the heads.
The stench is overwhelming. It needs to be cleaned up. No it needs to be wiped from the face of the earth. One of the founding fathers said that periodically, the tree of democracy had to be watered with blood. That time has arrived. Reply
Lin Cleveland , January 12, 2017 at 11:50 amGeorge Orwell predicted our current mess in his classic, "1984". Interestingly, that was the year that the neocons took over the Pentagon's Office of Risk Assessment, the State Department, and the whore-house American media. Reply
floyd gardner , January 12, 2017 at 2:02 pmWhat's going on here? I think Julian Assange may be on to something. ( my bold )
"Hillary Clinton's election would have been a consolidation of power in the existing ruling class of the United States. Donald Trump is not a D.C. insider , he is part of the wealthy ruling elite of the United States, and he is gathering around him a spectrum of other rich people and several idiosyncratic personalities. They do not by themselves form an existing structure, so it is a weak structure which is displacing and destabilizing the pre-existing central power network within D.C. It is a new patronage structure which will evolve rapidly, but at the moment its looseness means there are opportunities for change in the United States: change for the worse and change for the better."–Julian Assange
Jessejean , January 12, 2017 at 2:10 pmThanks, Lin [for your 'bold.' Assange and Snowden are two voices "in the wilderness" always worth listening to. Reply
D5-5 , January 12, 2017 at 4:50 pmBrilliant– as always. No matter how vilified JA is and no matter how much he's lied about, he still is a force for reason and subversion, both of which we desparately need. Thanks for the quote. Reply
floyd gardner , January 12, 2017 at 9:36 pmCurious to me in the two-pronged attack on Trump (a. demonizing to delegitimize and replace with Pence coming from the political establishment; b. hysterical fear of Trump coming from left wing journalism sources including left-oriented alternative news sites) is why the hysteria in the left continues so virulently. Assange's comment, to me, is balanced and sober. We don't know what will happen out of Trump and his collection of "idiosyncratic personalities," we don't know what will turn out "change for the worse and change for the better," and all the fear-mongering from people like Robert Reich, appearing regularly in Truthdig, is entirely speculative. I then question–would these same people on the left, that I once thought to be colleagues, prefer Hillary Clinton and "consolidation of power in the existing ruling class"? This fracturing in what I had thought was an intelligent left opposition is disturbing.
Mark West , January 12, 2017 at 5:10 pmAs an "old leftie" myself, I'd have to agree with Paul Craig Roberts that there IS no left anymore. It was co-opted and bought by Big Money. Maybe we need to forget about "left" and "right" and operate according to our own minds rather tha taking our cues from apologists for the establishment like Robert Reich. But it sounds like you're already doing that. Reply
Anna , January 12, 2017 at 9:54 pmChange that will undoubtedly benefit the privileged in a big way.
I don't give a crap about if Trump had prostitutes. That's between he and his wife. What I do care about is if there are Trump financial threads to Russia and if his team had illegal meetings with Moscow before the election. There are too many questions that need to be answered.
Why does Trump continue to dote on Putin? He's a vicious killer who has no qualms of eliminating his opponents. Those are facts.
Why won't he release his tax returns? It could only mean he is hiding something.
What benefit does the world intelligence community gain in smearing a president elect? Is it financial? idealogical? Power? Are they not tied and beholdened more to the entrenched financial hierarchies then to the ever changing political landscape?
What advantage did this operative from British intelligence gain from compiling this info? Money, fame, a 2nd home in Portugal?
How does anyone watching that press conference not come away with the chilly realization that our president-elect is psychologically impaired? My god you don't have to be a trained psychologist to see the guy has some serious mental health issues.
JayHobeSound , January 13, 2017 at 4:10 am"He's a vicious killer " – this is a music for the Kagans' clan Reply
Godfree Roberts , January 13, 2017 at 4:59 am"What advantage did this operative from British intelligence gain from compiling this info?"
Reportedly he asked his neighbours to feed his cats and he went into hiding. Bizarre.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article126129709.html Reply
Truth First , January 13, 2017 at 6:20 pm'Why does Trump continue to dote on Putin? He's a vicious killer who has no qualms of eliminating his opponents. Those are facts.'
Facts? I'm pretty familiar with Putin's career and I've seen nothing to suggest that Putin is a killer at all.
Can you provide links to evidence? Not just links to other people making assertions without evidence, please. Replystinky rafsanjani , January 16, 2017 at 9:36 am"Why does Trump continue to dote on Putin? He's a vicious killer who has no qualms of eliminating his opponents. Those are facts."
You talking about Trump or Putin? In any case has Russia or Putin killed as many people as America or Obama. The "facts" say no, not even close. ReplyJames van Oosterom , January 16, 2017 at 11:45 amvicious killer? since when is that a bad thing? jinkies, obama of nobel fame
sends missiles and drones around the planet, bombing and killing for fun and
profit. why, he even orders the assassination of citizens of his own country,
without trial even. meanwhile, putin has, umm look! a squirrel!Andreas Wirsén , January 12, 2017 at 11:54 amNobody said it was a bad thing. You're inferring things. Stick to squirrels . Ah yes, the door . Reply
floyd gardner , January 12, 2017 at 2:08 pmA "new phase" in Intelligence meddling with presidential candidates, yes – but only in how openly they stand behind it as the source. Campaigns to scandalize unwanted primary challengers have been alleged before. Senator Gary Hart, for one, has said in interviews he believes he was caught in a honey trap, which cost him his candidacy.
LongGoneJohn , January 12, 2017 at 12:04 pmGary Hart, a potentially strong contender, was also [like Trump] not up to Deep State's standards in Russophobia. Reply
floyd gardner , January 12, 2017 at 2:12 pmDidn't Trump just acknowledge that attacks on cyber US infrastructure including the DNC takes place, in a general way? That is what his statement read and to me that does not sound like "Trump acknowledges Russian DNC hack" at all.
So is it me, or ?
Michael Morrissey , January 12, 2017 at 12:05 pmNo, LGJ, it's not just you who can read through MSMB[ullsh t.] Reply
Zachary Smith , January 12, 2017 at 1:07 pmIf Trump & Co. accept "the intelligence community's assessment that the Russian government hacked the emails," they are only saying that, as is common knowledge, everybody hacks everybody. This is not, as Parry says, an acceptance of the intelligence "assessment" that Putin or Russian hackers released the emails, or even got them. Assange and Murray have said unequivocally that the source was inside the DNC, which means it cannot have been the Russians.
Jessejean , January 12, 2017 at 2:18 pmAssange and Murray have said unequivocally that the source was inside the DNC, which means it cannot have been the Russians.
Assange and Murray might be right, and they might not. There is a term being tossed around – "cutout". Just because an intermediary claims to be a DNC leaker doesn't mean he actually was such.
Under the circumstances I just don't care. Now if the Russians or Chinese or Ugandans or anybody else had done more than facilitate the release of true information useful to voters, I'd be agitated myself. Not that I'd expect anybody else to be. US votes have been hacked ever since the no-verify touchscreen devices were first introduced, and nobody in authority has given a hoot about it.
Sam F , January 13, 2017 at 6:52 amZachary–you are so right. It drives me crazy that Bush got away with stealing the voting system and all the Damn Dems care about is using it themselves. And now it drives me crazy that the Clintonistas took down Bernie and are getting away with it. With that cat's paw Obusha hanging around to "work" on rebuilding the DNC, we'll never see democracy again.
RMDC , January 13, 2017 at 9:28 amWe must indeed Dump the Dems. We need a progressive party.
There is a strong progressive majority everywhere which is being deliberately fragmented by the Dems. In the US, Clinton supporters must unify not only with the critics of Dem warmongering for Israel and KSA, but also with the Trumpers who want economic security in a rapacious oligarchic state. Clinton supporters will have to admit their mistake and abandon the Dems as a scam of oligarchy serving only as a backstop for the Repubs.
The solution is for a third party to align moderate progressives (national health care, no wars of choice, income security) with parts of the traditional right (fundamentalists, flag-wavers, make America great) leaving out only the extreme right (wars, discrimination, big business imperialism), use individual funding, and rely upon broad platform appeal to marginalize the Dems as the third party.
Sam F , January 13, 2017 at 2:20 pmSam F. I agree with you but you have to stop using the term "progressive." The Clinton faction of the demo party owns that term. It arose with John Podesta's Center for American Progress. Podesta is the ideologue of contemporary progressivism. It has nothing to do with the Progressive movement of the early 20th century.
The right term is Sander's term: Democratic Socialism. I know socialism is a problematic term, too, but at least it is now claimed by the right people.
Truth First , January 13, 2017 at 6:23 pmRMDC: Do you think "Progressive" can be brought back to its original meaning, or given a better one, despite people falsely claiming to be progressive? Sanders' term might be incorporated into that. It would be nice to deny the fakers the use of it.
Bill Cash , January 12, 2017 at 12:08 pm"we'll never see democracy again."
Humm? When did we last see that "democracy" thing? Reply
Anna , January 12, 2017 at 9:56 pmTrump could end all this by releasing his tax returns but he won't do it. I believe the intelligence community had fears that once inaugurated, Trump would squash the whole thing. The Russian connection is the only theory that connects all the dots. I'm waiting t see what happens with Assange. Will he suddenly be able to go to Sweden?
As far as Trump's behavior, don't forget he was accused of raping a 13 year old girl but the woman had to withdraw the suit because her life was threatened.Furtive , January 12, 2017 at 11:48 pmWhy is your post such a strong reminder of Pizzagate? Reply
Wm. Boyce , January 12, 2017 at 12:14 pmWont make any difference what t he does. He's an outsider. There's no escape except trying & convicting the traitors running obama. Reply
Patricia Victour , January 12, 2017 at 12:22 pmVery interesting column. I guess Mr. Trump is getting a lesson in who really runs things around here. Reply
Wm. Boyce , January 12, 2017 at 12:52 pmUnless Trump killed a prostitute on film, how could whatever is on the alleged video be any worse than the pussy-grabbing debacle and all the other accusations of sexual predation? I don't think you can embarrass Trump. He would just brush it off, and his base would probably think he was a super stud.
Zachary Smith , January 12, 2017 at 12:59 pmOh, I don't know, they could well have much worse stuff to leak, given Mr. Trump's complete lack of control of his desires.
col from oz , January 12, 2017 at 7:49 pmI collected a lot of "stuff" on Trump from the internet in the past year, and was surprised to see virtually none of it used against him. My best guess is that Hillary & Co. didn't think it was necessary against their carefully selected "easiest" opponent. That "stuff" is still available, and might well be used to buttress wilder and unverifiable claims.
Gregory Herr , January 12, 2017 at 8:48 pmYesterday on anther site i wrote how Hillary was complicit in a very serious charge.
Please watch video titles, where is Eric braverman on you tube . I have watched some and most of the material gives you the reality of what is occurring. A example is this. A fact is Gaddafi wanted to have some kind of gold backed Dina money policy. Fact. So Libya had a lot of gold maybe hundreds of tons. Where is it now. Did the "invaders' get it with their usual cut out Libyan man?
In the spirit of trying to make a better world i put this up, it seems political unbiased however it shows the Clinton as they are?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vam6qxfQrgA
day 70
dave , January 12, 2017 at 3:24 pm"For over four decades, Gaddafi promoted economic democracy and used the nationalized oil wealth to sustain progressive social welfare programs for all Libyans. Under Gaddafi's rule, Libyans enjoyed not only free health-care and free education, but also free electricity and interest-free loans."
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/10/20/libya-from-africas-wealthiest-democracy-under-gaddafi-to-terrorist-haven-after-us-intervention/"Libya's Qadhafi (African Union 2009 Chair) conceived and financed a plan to unify the sovereign States of Africa with one gold currency (United States of Africa). In 2004, a pan-African Parliament (53 nations) laid plans for the African Economic Community – with a single gold currency by 2023.
"African oil-producing nations were planning to abandon the petro-dollar, and demand gold payment for oil/gas Qaddafi had done more than organize an African monetary coup. He had demonstrated that financial independence could be achieved. His greatest infrastructure project, the Great Man-made River, was turning arid regions into a breadbasket for Libya; and the $33 billion project was being funded interest-free without foreign debt, through Libya's own state-owned bank.
That could explain why this critical piece of infrastructure was destroyed in 2011. NATO not only bombed the pipeline but finished off the project by bombing the factory producing the pipes necessary to repair it."Gregory Herr , January 12, 2017 at 8:58 pmSpeaking of "leaks", isn't the specific accusation in this case that Trump paid a prostitute to "take a leak" on the bed where he believed the Obamas had spent the night? (So I guess it was the prostitute that had "worse stuff to leak"!)
Anna , January 12, 2017 at 9:56 pmAnd while no one at Trump's press conference mentioned the specifics, Trump stated, "Does anyone really believe that story? I'm also very much of a germaphobe, by the way, believe me."
Gregory Herr , January 12, 2017 at 11:04 pmCheck Chan4
Furtive , January 12, 2017 at 11:48 pmAnna, do you mean the British television programme?
backwardsevolution , January 12, 2017 at 12:36 pmWhat? Dim wit. Reply
Zachary Smith , January 12, 2017 at 12:54 pmThe Saker writes in "The Neocon's Declaration of War Against Trump":
"After several rather lame false starts, the Neocons have now taken a step which can only be called a declaration of war against Donald Trump. [ ] All of the above further confirms to me what I have been saying over the past weeks: if Trump ever makes it into the White House (I write 'if' because I think that the Neocons are perfectly capable of assassinating him), his first priority should be to ruthlessly crack down as hard as he legally can against those in the US "deep state" (which very much includes the media) who have now declared war on him. I am sorry to say that, but it will be either him or them – one of the parties here will be crushed. [ ]
As I predicted it before the election, the USA are about to enter the worst crisis in their history. We are entering extraordinarily dangerous times. If the danger of a thermonuclear war between Russia and the USA had dramatically receded with the election of Trump, the Neocon total war on Trump put the United States at very grave risk, including civil war (should the Neocon controlled Congress impeach Trump I believe that uprisings will spontaneously happen, especially in the South, and especially in Florida and Texas). At the risk of sounding over the top, I will say that what is happening now is putting the very existence of the United States in danger almost regardless of what Trump will personally do. Whatever we may think of Trump as a person and about his potential as a President, what is certain is that millions of American patriots have voted for him to "clear the swamp", give the boot to the Washington-based plutocracy and restore what they see as fundamental American values. If the Neocons now manage to stage a coup d'etat against Trump, I predict that these millions of Americans will turn to violence to protect what they see as their way of life
If a coup is staged against Trump and some wannabe President à la Hillary or McCain gives the order to the National Guard or even the US Army to put down a local insurrection, we could see what we saw in Russia in 1991: a categorical refusal of the security services to shoot at their own people. That is the biggest and ultimate danger for the Neocons: the risk that if they give the order to crack down on the population the police, security and military services might simply refuse to take action. If that could happen in the "KGB-controlled country" (to use a Cold War cliché) this can also happen in the USA."
Brad Owen , January 12, 2017 at 3:44 pmIf a coup is staged against Trump and some wannabe President à la Hillary or McCain gives the order to the National Guard or even the US Army to put down a local insurrection, we could see what we saw in Russia in 1991: a categorical refusal of the security services to shoot at their own people.
At Kent State the National Guard was quite willing to shoot "their own people". The increasingly militarized Police of the US have been getting lots of practice shooting at "their own people". I suspect that's why a great many of them joined up in the first place. Finally, carefully chosen drone operators thousands or tens of thousands of miles away won't have the slightest problem slaughtering evildoers. That's what they do all the time in their regular jobs.
Bill Bodden , January 12, 2017 at 10:14 pmDon't forget veterans, millions of them. When THEY stepped up to the North Dakota pipeline, security forces backed off. Backwards' described scenario could be our "1991" moment to break free and break the Deep State, and reinstating Glass-Steagall would break their Imperial paymasters in The City and The Street. A new World could suddenly come about, faster than even the USSR/Warsaw Pact disappeared. Reply
Peter Loeb , January 13, 2017 at 8:23 amAt Kent State the National Guard was quite willing to shoot "their own people". The increasingly militarized Police of the US have been getting lots of practice shooting at "their own people".
Police departments all over the U.S. and other nations have a long history of acting as goon squads and occasional firing squads for their local establishments. Lots of examples in labor histories. Reply
Oleg , January 13, 2017 at 2:53 amKILLING OUR OWN PEOPLE .
Special thanks to Zachary Smith.
In the US it's called "heroism", patriotism" and the rest. But if we are
inconvenienced to kill our own people, we can kill other peoples'
people. Gigantic weapons deals to Saudi Arabia and Israel
are proof of that.By the way, did anyone happen to notice in the NDAA (Defense Authorization
Act) the increase of funds to rebels in another country whose goal is to
defeat the Syrian Government?-Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA
PS For those who object to our killing our own people in the US join
Black Lives Matter. ReplyZachary Smith , January 12, 2017 at 12:37 pmAt the very least, the US should get rid of this prolonged waiting period between the elections and actual assuming power by the president-elect. It was meant to facilitate the orderly transition of power, but as we see now it is serving just the opposite goals. I cannot believe Obama is so keen on hurting Trump he is ready to badly hurt his own country as well. Reply
Joe Tedesky , January 12, 2017 at 1:41 pmWhether this move was meant to soften up Trump
The motive I see is to "soften" him up for his impeachment. Given Trump's temperament, it could be a winning strategy for the people who prefer President Pence. In my barely informed opinion, that would include a majority of both parties in both houses of the US congress.
Realist , January 12, 2017 at 4:27 pmRead section 4 of the 25th amendment .
"Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President."
I'm wondering if we are seeing the beginnings of a President Pence. Although Donald Trump may give one some consternation to his being a qualified person to sit in the Oval Office, Mike Pence may bring down the house with his religious leanings inside of his political philosophy. Either way we Americans are in for a most interesting time of it in our country's brief history. We should all probably prepare ourselves for the worst, and hope that the best will happen.
Zachary wasn't Mike Pense your governor, or do I have you in the wrong state?
Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 9:16 amFascinating and disturbing at the same time. That section was surely MEANT to apply to the president's health and physical capacity to do the job. However, a declaration by the VP (supported only by a simple majority of the cabinet or the congress) "that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office" can be based in an insurrection, a coup, or simply the erosion of political capital. Gerald Ford could have argued that Richard Nixon no longer had the support to govern (which is what Nixon himself conceded as the basis for his resignation). It basically gives the VP and whatever insurgents he can muster the ability to quickly overthrow the sitting president without the inconvenience of an impeachment and trial in the Senate. It could be the Maidan without the messy blood all over the pavement. How wonderful.
Very resourceful of you in looking that up, Joe. I would never have imagined the seeds for a coup existed right in the constitution.
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 10:53 amI have a saying: For the people in law-enforcement, law is a fringe benefit. Those who control law always use it as a tool. Have you ever heard of a coup which was not based on some law, even if it was the one written post-festum by the coup plotters? In other words, a coup is never difficult to justify by the winners.
I have no doubt that the coup that Joe describes is possible. But the issue for the coup plotters has always been: what happens with all the Trump voters after such a coup, the millions of them? Will they sit and just watch the destruction of their social contract?
To some extent such US coup dilemma is not dissimilar to the nuclear war dilemma: easy to start, difficult to finish.
Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 11:20 amKIza, nice to hear from you it's been awhile.
Read this link. Trump got 26.8% of the total citizenry to vote for him. In all honesty I haven't seen any polls on how the American populace shakes out on these controversies such as this most recent fake news story, but I would imagine that a clever beat down campaign would be able to soften the blowback .but then again I agree with you to some extent, that by pushing Trump out of office this would have to have some kind of consequence that would not be pretty.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/01/12/bringing-trump-nation-down-to-size/
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 12:56 pmJoe, in general I am trying to highlight that it is one thing to bamboozle sheeple with a talk of democracy (which does not exist) and another to openly crush even this reassuring lie. I just cannot see the end game of a US coup and Trump is but a minor obstacle if they want to start it.
Therefore, they really want to make a Trump a lame and controllable President, not to take over. Maintaining a reassuring lie of democracy is a much more sophisticated and efficient control mechanism than direct control. I may we wrong but I do believe that Trump is just being house trained/broken by TPTB in front of our eyes.
You write: I have not seen any polls how American populace shakes out on these controversies.
My reading of the online beat is that the Trump voters are not swayed, whilst the Clinton voters use the "controversy" as confirmation that they were right all along about Trump. But then Clinton voters would receive a confirmation even from an oily rag thrown in their direction. In other words, a mountain shook and a mouse was born – almost no change at all on either side.Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 8:19 pmKIza your comparing Trump's attackers to how the MH17 story was spun is right on.
http://journal-neo.org/2017/01/11/trump-and-mh17-just-one-step-too-far/
Trump is an easy target since his nature is certainly different than that of the usual norm of our politico class who are cookie cutter politicians on the whole. I'm disappointed by how people such as Michael Moore are going out of their way attacking Trump, while they completely ignore how corrupt and dishonest the Clinton's are.
I wouldn't go so far as to predict that Trump supporters won't rebel against his impeachment, but there again I believe the Trump supporters would be out numbered due to an over aggressive media who could sway the majority into believing we must get Trump out of office. Any other method other than impeachment is to horrible to even contemplate, so let's hope that all of our concerns turn to ashes, and that for the good or bad of it that Trump finishes out his first term in good health.
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 11:14 amYes, Joe, those 26.8% of citizenry who voted for Trump are built into 75-76% of citizenry who do not believe in the MSM any more and in the John Brennan's two kitchen sinks, that is, his two top secret but leakable kompromat dossiers on Trump – the first one apparently from an MI6 agent and the second one promoted by the BBC (source unknown yet).
But this is not about Clintons any more, this is about the owners of the Clintons training/braking Trump to be like the Clintons. If they cannot have a Clinton as a President, they want to have a President as Clinton. If kompromat does not work, maybe a billet will, their patience is limited.
Always enjoyable to exchange thoughts with you Joe.
Zachary Smith , January 12, 2017 at 5:23 pmRealist, considering how our country's founders were a bunch of slave owners declaring how all men are created equally well need I say more?
Words are just words, that is until lawyers interpret these legal words into a reality, which doesn't always fit into our own personal definition of a certain word usage. You and I deal with this stuff all the time. Whether it be a traffic ticket, or an ordinance summons, we read one thing, and the judge administers another thing. Prisons are filled with people who swear with, 'yeah but' explanations which give these prisoners no relief what so ever so I do think these crafty legislators could pull a fast one, and install Mike Pence into the White House. Let's you and I hope that I'm the one out in left field with my 25th amendment comment, and that we won't end up with a Christian whack job as our president. Reply
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 12:36 pmYeah, Pence was elected Governor of Indiana. But despite this state being one of the most conservative in the nation, Pence was too "nutty" and "far-right" for Mississippi North, and would have surely been defeated. Now the man is one heartbeat/one impeachment conviction from becoming President of the United States.
Quote: "From his denial of climate change to his belief in creationism, Pence is the most hard-right radical to ever appear on a national ticket. Just this week a federal court had to block his atrocious bill barring Syrian refugees from his state because his reasoning that Syrians scare him is discriminatory."
Quote: "it is a literal truth, Mr. Speaker, to say that I am in Congress today because of Rush Limbaugh, and not because of some tangential impact on my career or his effect on the national debate; but because in fact after my first run for Congress in 1988, it was the new national voice emerging in 1989 across the heartland of Indiana of one Rush Hudson Limbaugh, III, that captured my imagination.""
It's a fact we are very, very close to having a Rush 'druggie' Limpaugh clone as President. In my opinion, Pence is Trump's worst mistake up till now. If they can't have Hillary, for the neocons and neo-liberals and the Christian End-Timers there remains Worse-Than-Hillary Mike Pence.
Trump is a Trojan horse for a cabal of vicious zealots who have long craved an extremist Christian theocracy, and Pence is one of its most prized warriors. With Republican control of the House and Senate and the prospect of dramatically and decisively tilting the balance of the Supreme Court to the far right, the incoming administration will have a real shot at bringing the fire and brimstone of the second coming to Washington.
"The enemy, to them, is secularism. They want a God-led government. That's the only legitimate government," contends Jeff Sharlet, author of two books on the radical religious right, including "The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power." "So when they speak of business, they're speaking not of something separate from God, but they're speaking of what, in Mike Pence's circles, would be called biblical capitalism, the idea that this economic system is God-ordained."
Realist , January 13, 2017 at 3:13 pmZachary I looked forward to your reply, since you always have references to your level headed comments .so thanks for getting back to me.
In my world I don't even like bringing up the word God, or religion, since I believe a government should be governed in a truly secular way. Who I pray to, and who I pay taxes to, are two completely different things. My devotion to God is a very private matter, and I don't need some politician interpreting God's greatness to me in anyway. So with that if Mike Pense wants to preach the gospel to me, then he should resign from public office and become a full fledged preacher and even then I will not go to his mean spirited church. Amen.
Bill Bodden , January 12, 2017 at 10:16 pmWhat a troubling coincidence that Hulu is releasing its production of "the Handmaid's Tale" by Margaret Atwood this April, which tells the story of the United States government being taken over by extreme Christian fundamentalists and the consequences, especially to women and religious dissenters. Read the book by Atwood and you'll see where Isis/Daesh got many of their ideas on punishment and control of the masses. The Spanish Inquisition was six hundred years ago, but its urges lie just beneath the veneer of our civilised modern world. Human nature hasn't changed, only technology has. I thought this country was in danger of playing out the novel during Dubya's administration, as 9-11 was exactly the kind of pretext for such a takeover in the book's plot narrative and the Islamic world was portrayed as the great global adversary just as many Americans believe in the real world. Trump has never struck me as a religious man, certainly not a zealot, but Pence, with a little help from the Deep State, he could bring this disturbing novel to life.
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 12:53 amI'm wondering if we are seeing the beginnings of a President Pence.
A very plausible and ominous possibility.
Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 9:57 amSeriously Bill even taking into consideration how some like Glenn Beck along with Rick Santelli ridiculed an early President Obama back in 2009, I can't recall a more hostile media such as the likes of how this current day corporate media is going after Trump. True, that Donald Trump by just being Donald Trump can be an outrageous person with his words and actions, but still I just can't get over the 24/7 media coverage, and how most of it isn't good coverage at that. This leaves me to wonder if we all are not being setup for something big.
With Trump's winning streak putting away a whole herd of Republican primary candidates, and how he sent 'low energy Jeb' packing, and then to go on and beat Hillary by his winning the Electoral vote, he has had a great run. Now Donald Trump is battling not only the CIA/FBI/NSA, but he is also bumping up against the congressional establishment. You know that McCain and Graham hate him, but you can only bet that there is yet much more to come.
I'm sorry, but I don't sense there is much good to come with all of this. Thanks for the reply.
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 1:06 pmJoe, I wonder if people missed the crazy similarity of the media campaign on the Trump "report" and the one on MH17 ?
It appears that the TPTB have decided that if they generate enough media screaming, the lack of proof does not matter any more.
Thus, I have become a strong proponent of the theory that whatever TPTB use outside, it is only a practice for what they will use (more productively) inside. Drones anyone?
Gregory Herr , January 13, 2017 at 2:44 pmKIza read my comment above, it pertains to what you brought up here.
Pablo Diablo , January 12, 2017 at 12:42 pmWeaponized drones anyone?
Mike Flores , January 12, 2017 at 1:24 pmAll this turmoil and a dysfunctional Congress insures that nothing will change. The 1% loves the status quo and will do anything to preserve it. Simply a smokescreen to keep US from dealing with the corporate stranglehold on our government.
An Empire in decline. ReplyBill , January 12, 2017 at 1:37 pmWhile others laugh and make jokes, those of us who study Intel know that what just happened with the leaked report was that the CIA has involved itself in U.S. politics, which it is forbidden to do. How did the alliance between the Democratic Party and CIA begin? President Truman had allowed 200 Nazi Intel agents to come into the U.S. – including the men who created the blueprint for the holocaust. Fearing Joe McCarthy would discover this, the CIA faked an Intel report and has spent decades ever since lying about Joe. They actually confessed that his 2 lists were correct, so they had to fool him with a fake dossier right before the Army hearings to shake his confidence. Just search CIA AND THE POND and you will find on their website STUDIES IN INTELLIGENCE in the last third of the article a full confession of framing Joe. This Facebook photo album THE REAL JOSEPH McCARTHY is packed with forbidden information and can be viewed with this link by anyone whether they are on FB or not. The alliance between the Democratic Party and CIA began by hiding the people responsible for the holocaust. ( We should keep in mind Truman was KKK and forbade the bombing of the train tracks to the death camps. The reason soldiers were not prepared for the camps was that none had been told about them. Truman did not want our troops wasting time on them). Interesting to note that absolutely no one has ever done an article or book on the impact of the beliefs of the KKK on the 5 Democrats who were Presidents and Klansmen in the 20th century. That would reveal the true nature of the Democratic Party.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10153995222685986.1073741929.695490985&type=1&l=6dd1544b9d ReplyFurtive , January 12, 2017 at 11:58 pmYou don't mention President Obama, but it certainly seems likely that he's involved with this. Who told Brennan and Clapper to go on TV to hype the intelligence reports and bad-mouth the next President?
And were the leakers within the agencies acting on their own, or were they given orders from above? There's a conspiracy going on and it's not my imagination.
Does the behavior rise to the level of treason or espionage?
Michael Morrissey , January 12, 2017 at 1:46 pmObama is a deadhead it is Brennan who instructs him. But who instructs Brennan? Reply
Lois Gagnon , January 13, 2017 at 11:04 amAs I have just learned from another reader's comment on another article, David Spring has augmented his earlier article to an 85-page expose. Seems it was both a leak and a hack, but in neither case by "the Russians."
I hope Ray McGovern and especially Wm Binney (and some Trump guy) read this and tell us what they think!
Realist , January 14, 2017 at 3:42 amI read it last night. Very much worth the couple of hours it took. Reply
Oleg , January 12, 2017 at 2:47 pmWell, that's THE comprehensive treatment in a nutshell. Everything documented chronologically. Nothing important left out. Everything explained clearly and concisely. As organised as possible and argued like a philosopher rather than a lawyer. The man has exceptional writing skills as well as incredible computer knowledge. I'd like to see him question Clapper on the witness stand. I hope that President Trump puts the Justice Department on this case to do a thorough investigation, including potential indictments of spooks that perjured themselves and/or engaged in partisan activities during the election and its ugly aftermath. Reply
Bill Bodden , January 12, 2017 at 10:22 pmI am really surprised to no end. Why are you in the US so keen on destroying any credibility of your government? I do not really know what would happen in the US but in Russia there would be riots. Any leader in Russia can govern only until he/she is trusted. Think Tsar Nicholas II, Gorbachev I hope it will not get to this and some sanity will prevail in your country.
Bill Bodden , January 12, 2017 at 11:12 pmWhy are you in the US so keen on destroying any credibility of your government?
What credibility? Oleg, if you check the graphic at the top of the right sidebar on this page you will see a reference to "I. F. Stone" who was one of this nation's great journalists of the 20th Century. He is noted for a dictum that says, "All governments lie." All governments certainly include the U.S. government. You can get plenty of examples of lies with a little effort.
Oleg , January 13, 2017 at 3:02 amLies out of government agencies and elected politicians are not the only problem. Hypocrisy is another and has been part of American governance since the writing of the Declaration of Independence by slave owners who said that all men are created equal with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Now hypocrisy is rampant with politicians decrying alleged Russian intervention is U.S. elections with the claim that it is wrong for any nation to interfere in the elections of another nation. There is no nation on the planet that interferes in the governments of other nations than the United States. Reply
Abe , January 12, 2017 at 3:01 pmWell, I certainly agree, but a government can still be largely trusted even if they resort to some petty lies. As we all do too sometimes. But this this is not a petty thing, this is an intentional attack on the whole institution of elections and democracy when they try to impeach the elected President because some part of the establishment, not the people, dislike him. This has a potential to really get very dangerous, and having any kind of uprisings (as was also mentioned by other commenters above) in a country like the US is extremely dangerous for the whole world. Reply
Adam , January 13, 2017 at 3:11 amAnyone in Washington seeking a golden shower from a couple of Russian prostitutes just has to hop on one of those all-expenses-paid AIPAC junkets to Israel.
It's truly amazing how streams of urine help elevate one's anxiety about Iran's nuclear energy program.
Abe , January 12, 2017 at 3:25 pmBest comment, Abe! Reply
Abe , January 12, 2017 at 4:54 pmAmerican journalist and activist Chris Hedges noted a key purpose of the declassified report "Russia's Influence Campaign Targeting the 2016 US Presidential Election" from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI):
"to justify the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization beyond Germany, a violation of the promise Ronald Reagan made to the Soviet Union's Mikhail Gorbachev after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Expanding NATO in Eastern Europe opened up an arms market for the war industry. It made those businesses billions of dollars. New NATO members must buy Western arms that can be integrated into the NATO arsenal. These sales, which are bleeding the strained budgets of countries such as Poland, are predicated on potential hostilities with Russia. If Russia is not a threat, the arms sales plummet. War is a racket."
The Real Purpose of the U.S. Government's Report on Alleged Hacking by Russia
By Chris Hedges
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_real_purpose_of_the_us_governments_report_on_alleged_hacking_by_russijfl , January 12, 2017 at 3:26 pmIsraeli arms sales to Europe more than doubled from $724 million in 2014 to $1.63 billion in 2015. http://jfjfp.com/?p=83806
Israel is the leading arms exporter in the world per capita (2014), and ranks 11th among the top 20 exporters of military equipment and systems (2011-15).
75-80% of Israeli military exports are generated by just three companies - the state-owned Rafael and Israel Aerospace Industries and the publicly traded Elbit Systems.
The largest categories of Israeli military exports are upgrading aircraft and aerospace systems (14%), radar and electronic systems (12%), drones (11%), and intelligence and information systems (10%).
In 2015, the Russian government described Israel's delivery of lethal weapons to Ukraine as "counterproductive". There is a close arms trade and production co-operation between Israel and Poland. Israeli companies have invested in building arms manufacturing facilities in Poland. Reply
F. G. Sanford , January 12, 2017 at 3:41 pmHowever, in this case, it is not even known whether the Russians have any dirt on Trump.
If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.
- said to have been said by redhat richelieu
what is known is that the nsa/cia/fbi have all the dirt on everyone, and that they use it on the leaders of the eu, for instance.
if the only thing that comes out of this filthy little exercise is the death of the nsa/cia/fbi – superpower america's superstazi – by executive fiat it will have been worth trump's election.
it's either that or another dead president. with pence playing lbj. Reply
Abe , January 12, 2017 at 4:14 pmFunny how these "leaks" work, isn't it? If there really were an "insider" able to provide insight on the deepest, darkest secrets that had been gathered by Russian intelligence, why would any responsible intelligence agency completely destroy that asset only to expose a mundane fetish like "golden showers"? But don't anybody dare leak "The Torture Report". Don't even consider leaking information about war crimes, election fraud, financial crimes, murder, state corruption or state sponsorship of terrorism.
Just my opinion, but here's how it really went. The "hack" scenario is a diversion from the "leak" scenario. The "deep state" didn't really want Hillary. While she may superficially represent their interests, the Clinton machine is too knowledgeable, too experienced and too selfish and self-centered to predictably execute their programs. The Clintons have plenty of dirt on them. But they had enough dirt on her to compromise her electability. They don't want Trump either, but they can manufacture or dig up enough dirt to compromise his Presidency. Their first choice was Jeb Bush. Their second choice is Mike Pence.
The DNC stuff was leaked by an insider, and the Podesta stuff was hacked by the NSA. The only plausible alternative points to hacking attempts by the neo-Nazi Ukrainian hacking outfit "RuH8", not the Russians.
A bunch of recent articles seek to analyze Barack Obama's legacy, personality and motivations. That's all superfluous. The "real deal" has been well documented. His grandparents were CIA His mother was CIA His first job after law school was with Banking international Corporation, a CIA "front company". He was groomed and thoroughly vetted.
Nobody wants to hear the truth or look at real evidence. The circumstantial – though well documented – evidence connecting Ted Cruz's father to the anti-Castro Cubans, the CIA and Lee Harvey Oswald is actually much more plausible and substantial than the evidence for "Russian hacking" of the election, yet the general public has no problem dismissing that as a "conspiracy theory".
Between the two, Trump was perceived – mistakenly – as the lesser threat to the "deep state". Just a guess, but we may be about to see all hell break loose.
It's about time some journalists and researchers started naming names and making lists. The "New McCarthyism" uses lists to good advantage. It creates the perception of a vast subversive network dedicated to destroying our "democracy". Until some names are named and fingers pointed, the "deep state" and its intelligence community enforcement arm will continue to control the "democracy" we don't really have. Blackmail is just one of their methods, and it's far from the worst.
Abe , January 12, 2017 at 10:17 pmFunny how these "streams," er, "leaks" work:
Oleg , January 13, 2017 at 4:42 amBuzzfeed's "explosive and unverified" golden shower (guess that's not highlighter on the documents):
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984/Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.pdfAbe , January 13, 2017 at 1:00 pmAnd someone has been paying for this crap? If anything, this report exposes its authors much more than anybody else. Reply
F. G. Sanford , January 13, 2017 at 6:37 pmThe "authors" dominate a post-truth regime that demands popular attention to and participation in its discursive games.
Are you not entertained?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsqJFIJ5lLs ReplyAbe , January 12, 2017 at 10:24 pmMy favorite quotes from the "Company Intelligence Report":
"However, he and his inner circle have accepted a regular flow " (Is this a pun?)
"PUTIN angry with senior officials who "overpromised" on TRUMP and further heads likely to roll as result. Foreign minister LAVROV may be next" (What Putin is going to make him change the sheets in Trump's hotel room?)
" TRUMP has paid bribes and engaged in sexual activities there but key witnesses silenced and evidence hard to obtain" (Were the "key" witnesses the same ones that claim Putin shot down MH-17?)
I think they dug up the script writers from "The Man from Uncle" and put them back to work. This sounds like a Quinn Martin Production straight out of a Hollywood "B Movie". Reply
Abe , January 12, 2017 at 5:09 pmFirst Draft coalition "partner" BuzzFeed is leading the charge to make fake news, hybrid war propaganda, and hoaxes "more shareable and more social"
https://firstdraftnews.com/buzzfeed-wants-use-social-media-might-take-hoaxers/ Reply
Abe , January 12, 2017 at 5:17 pmFunny how that "leak" worked:
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb565-Was-U.S.-Nuclear-Weapons-Fuel-Diverted-to-Israel/
"OK, but I doubt advisability of getting into this (redacted)." – FBI Director J. Edgard Hoover Reply
Gregory Kruse , January 12, 2017 at 8:37 pmFunny how that other "leak" worked:
backwardsevolution , January 13, 2017 at 1:44 amFG, I'm not gay, but I always scroll down to find your comment. You are always looking into the big picture, not the big illusion.
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 1:07 pmGregory – I agree. His comments are always very good. Reply
F. G. Sanford , January 13, 2017 at 6:41 pmMe three.
Jessica K , January 12, 2017 at 4:34 pmThanks to all – sometimes I wonder if it's worth putting in my two cents. We're probably a statistically insignificant group of readers on the world's stage, but I like to think at least it's worth a try. Reply
LJ , January 12, 2017 at 4:36 pmWe must organize beyond cyberspace as this is a coup in action. CIA is greatest meddler of all nations, coups and assassinations well documented. DC is the Aegean stable that must be cleaned, a truly Herculean task and We the People have to get organized because this planet is imperiled. Agree with Dan that whole sordid mess is beyond a swamp, a stinking pit and pitchforks are necessary! Reply
Bernie , January 12, 2017 at 5:09 pmIt's more doublethink logic from the Intelligence heads. It would require a tremendous leap of faith for anyone with a brain to think that Russia/Putin/Lavrov would use this info, if it existed at all, in public manner. To do so wouldn't help them achieve a goal and it would only hurt Russia .. The tape would never become public even if it existed. That means this rumor is clearly slander and was aimed at some political end. . Where is the smoking gun?, sorry. By the way , Putin is friends with Bertoloscini , Sarkozy and other notorious womanizers and is known to like women himself. This is not something he would do. He is not a mobster. This is puerile and it is coming from the Democrats although the word is that George Bush initially hired the guy, the former MI5 spy, who wrote the dossier/smear piece on Trump in the first place. . Hoover would have kept it in shop and tried to leverage Trump himself. Reply
Abe , January 12, 2017 at 6:32 pmThere's an article at ABC News today about US tanks rolling into Poland. This reminds me of Nazis rolling into Austria in 1938 and then Poland on Sept 1, 1941 to start WWII. "American soldiers rolled into Poland on Thursday, fulfilling a dream some Poles have had since the fall of communism in 1989 to have U.S. troops on their soil as a deterrent against Russia. Some people waved and held up American flags as U.S. troops in tanks and other vehicles crossed into southwestern Poland from Germany and headed toward the town of Zagan, where they will be based. "
Mark West , January 12, 2017 at 5:36 pmLike Poland, Ukraine is eager to express its devotion to the Reich, er, its "Euro-Atlantic aspirations".
If only for the sake of NATO "cooperation" and "capacity building", Poland and Ukraine have much to forgive and forget:
Of course, reports of Russian "euphoria" remain "unconfirmed". Reply
Wendi , January 12, 2017 at 5:52 pmAbsurd. Who is this "they" everyone is talking about? How many are/is this 'they'? 5, 10 20? Who is in control of 'they'? Who's in charge? The political elite? Do they have a club and do they meet for bridge every Tuesday? Do they have a secret handshake? Are they all really Mason's?
This conspiracy holds no credibility because 'they' is just an 'idea'. That is all. Until someone can give names of those who are responsible and running this political elite then its all storybook conjecture. We should be more concerned with the obvious psychological dementia affecting the president elect. He was a total looney tune in that press conference.
Mark West , January 12, 2017 at 7:09 pmHere are the names.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/meet-the-80-people-who-are-as-rich-as-half-the-world/
Dr. Ibrahim Soudy , January 12, 2017 at 6:14 pmWhat you are saying with this list then, Wendi, it is not the political elites, intelligence agencies or career politicians whoTrump continuously rails against as the cause for the end of the American Empire. It is the financial hierarchies that Trump so desperately wants to be a part of. Putin is obviously at the top of this list and Trump sees him as a way to become a player in this club. That makes sense to me. Reply
Sam F , January 13, 2017 at 7:29 am"THEY" are the people who control the MONEY. They are referred to as the BANKERS. Those are a mafia that runs the political circus BEHIND the scene. The parties and elections are a diversion to keep the idiots busy arguing with each other like the crazy fans of sports teams. The BANKERS always make sure that the "idiots" are choosing between alternatives that ultimately BOW to the BANKERS. Read for example the following:
– "All the President's Bankers" by Naomi Prins.
– "Memoirs" by David Rockefeller.
– "The Crisis of Democracy" a publication of the Tri-Lateral Commission on their website.
-Here's How Goldman Sachs Became the Overlord of the Trump Administration
http://wallstreetonparade.com/-Goldman, Wall Street and Financial Terrorism | The Inline image 2
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-whetten/goldman-wall-street-and-f_b.. .
Jun 19, 2010 · The most disturbing aspect of the recent Goldman Sachs lawsuit isn't just the legal violations involved Goldman, Wall Street and Financial Terrorism.-Goldman Sachs Are Financial Terrorists | FacebookInline image 1
http://www.facebook.com/Stop.Goldman
Goldman Sachs Are Financial Terrorists. 95,662 likes · 6,188 talking about this. Get the Honest truth on the economy, this page sponsors no organizationThose will give you a good start ..Good Luck. Reply
Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 9:49 amPerhaps you do not mean the ridicule you suggest. The effects of economic aristocracy and political conspiracy are of course not "storybook conjecture" but the combined deductions of experienced observers. That would become conjecture only if specific persons were accused, which is seldom done without evidence.
The demand for detailed evidence of an old-fashioned conspiracy to effect societal trends is not valid. It becomes propaganda when used to attack the means by which we all deduce that events are driven by cabals, or loose organizations of interested parties. While we are occasionally surprised by the detailed evidence that emerges long after events, even that is incomplete and not very relevant.
The means of ridicule shows its invalidity. There is no reason to speculate upon clubs, meetings, or handshakes, as there is no need for such specific or antiquated organization. No modern organization works that way, no one has suggested that, and no one here has reasoned from such nonsense, but rather from well documented effects of cabals. So I hope that you merely overstated a wish for more evidence.
Howard Mettee , January 12, 2017 at 6:27 pmBravo. Reply
Thurgle , January 12, 2017 at 6:44 pmRobert, Could it not be true that the real losers in the neocon push to extend the American dominion might actually be the intelligence services? They have become so politicized in domestic politics since the Iraq War build up (a la Rice, Chaney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Powell) that they figure they can shape American public opinion to support any war, no matter how "unthreatening" the enemy (say Russia) might actually be. Originally they were basically "fact collectors" (objective) – at first from around the world, but since 9/11's Patriot Act, at home also. Then, they became "interpreters and analyzers of motives" which takes a bit of a weed-gee board (subjective!) on the part of the "experienced eye". When whatever these very effective (and appreciated) fact collectors opine suddenly becomes gospel in their "estimates" (interpretation), we have lost the ability to even influence the fate of our nation. Is this the country I grew up in? Or, has it been this way since we were led so effectively to support World War I? Take care, HM Reply
BlackPete , January 12, 2017 at 7:46 pmThe NYT skirts around the issue of who paid the huge sums for the research that produced the story of Trump's alleged sexcapades in Moscow. They never say the funders are unknown, but instead use devices like the passive tense to avoid saying. But it would be very interesting to know who signed the checks. Apparently, there was a Republican funder during the primaries who stopped payment when Trump prevailed, whereupon Fusion found a Clinton backer to write their checks. It would be very interesting to know who these funders were and why the MSM seems so keen to avoid saying. Reply
Mark West , January 12, 2017 at 8:01 pmWhen it comes to cavorting with prostitutes JFK was the undisputed champion. Given the high regard JFK is held in in some circles maybe Trump's alleged misbehaviour is a positive sign. Also, now that Trump's behaviour has been made public isn't the Russian threat to expose him now worthless and their alleged hold/influence gone?
Anna , January 12, 2017 at 10:03 pmIts not about the hookers. That's useless drivel. It's about the potential of illegal financial dealings with Russia prior to the election. Just show the damn tax returns. What the hell is he afraid of? What could possibly go wrong?
col from oz , January 12, 2017 at 10:25 pmAre you keen on asking Clintons to reveal their financial dealings with Saudis, the sponsors of 9/11?
How about the Kagans' clan being currently "supported" financially by Qatari?
And this is much more interesting than tax return: "The NYT skirts around the issue of who paid the huge sums for the research that produced the story of Trump's alleged sexcapades in Moscow. They never say the funders are unknown, but instead use devices like the passive tense to avoid saying. But it would be very interesting to know who signed the checks. Apparently, there was a Republican funder during the primaries who stopped payment when Trump prevailed, whereupon Fusion found a Clinton backer to write their checks. It would be very interesting to know who these funders were and why the MSM seems so keen to avoid saying."akech , January 12, 2017 at 8:07 pmI read it was Rubio commissioned the dirt.
Look at day 69 of eric braverman.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwKhbsASDhI ReplyJohn , January 12, 2017 at 8:40 pmIs this the face of the "DEEP STATE"?
It is controlling, deceptive, organized, bloody and does not give a "rat ass" about the needs of any other human being on earth who does not belong to it!
It neither tolerates opposing views from anybody who does not belong to its members nor allows the outsiders to organize . It is determined to be the lens through which everybody under its control see the rest of the world; any conclusion drawn by the besieged population, based on what it is forced to see, must conform to the "DEEP STATE" norms; otherwise, you are in deep trouble. The POTUS or the Congress must toe lines dictated by the members of this organization, (the Deep State). We are observing that no effort is being spared to see to it that President-Elect toes the "DEEP STATE" line; it is deep and scary indeed! Reply
Abe , January 12, 2017 at 9:54 pmRussia is the half naked female in the magic show The real slight of hand is the relationship with the American oligarch and china .wow !!! . talking about messing with the bottom line some of you big brain folks will get this in 4 ..3 2 ..lol Reply
CitizenOne , January 12, 2017 at 9:55 pmWhat I Learned From the Intelligence Report on "Russian Hacking"
By James Corbett
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ecxu7EStgs ReplyJurgen , January 12, 2017 at 10:01 pmThere is little doubt that the obvious blackmail will never be covered in that light by main stream media. To those of us who are historians or are natural skeptics or have actually lived through those times, this is all fairly obvious. They are trying to put Donald Trump in a corner so he can be controlled.
I suspect that is why Trump retained Steve Bannon for. Not just a house racist but someone who can get down and dirty on those that dish up dirt on Trump. We'll have to see if it works. Headlines: "Donald unleashes TwitterBomb on CIA". But he'll have to go on the internet since the CIA owns the press in the USA.
He has two choices. Listen to the CIA and do their bidding which is the requirement to start WWIII with Russia or resist and be smeared in the press. It's an uphill battle too. Unlike Silvio Berlusconi or Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump does not actually own the press. That will make it especially hard to do.
This thing is shaping up to be a geopolitical oil war. Rex and the Russians vs the Saudi/CIA Team USA.
All I can say is fine America. Don't give a damn about privacy. Don't give a damn about anything. But one of these days this massive spying ring gathering every shred of any and all traces of your life and filing them away forever cannot be good. It will most certainly not end well.
When AI has us all pinned up against a wall threatening to out all of us if we do not do exactly what it wants then what will we do?
We need some privacy laws. Also we need to throw the main stream media out with the trash. It is pure evil. Back in the day, the press wouldn't run the stories about MLKs extramarital affairs it recorded secretly. The press demanded to know the source of the B.S. and the FBI did not want to tip their hand so the Mexican standoff led to the suicide letter which said "if you accept the Nobel Prize, we will shame you and ruin you and you should consider preserving you legacy by killing yourself instead. At least the MSM had some ethical standards and smelled a rat and refused to run the stories. Imagine that. If MLK was alive today we and we still had segregation, people and the media would fight to keep it! MLK would be a portrayed in the press as a philandering bad guy. A sexual predator. The Civil Rights movement would end in a quagmire of gossip surrounding its leader.
The Republicans have certainly had their fun with it too making Monica Lewinsky describe to a court the distinctive features of the president's privates. I bet they were rolling in the aisles when that happened. Now it's their turn. Will they defend Trump or will they hope that perhaps Mike Pence would make a better leader.
All this tawdry B.S. really gets old fast. I could care less what people do in private as long as nobody gets hurt.
One person abroad when asked what they thought about Bill Clinton's circumstances replied they were confused since after all we were not electing the Pope. Amen. I feel the same way about Trump. It's all B.S.
The problem is America can't remember what happened yesterday. We are collectively like terminal Alzheimer patients. Two seconds after we see something, we forget it and are completely susceptible to B.S.in two seconds after we forgot what just happened which ignores the facts which occurred a mere two seconds earlier but we are none the wiser since we can't remember what happened more than two seconds ago. That means there are a lot of opportunities each day to fool us.
What ever happened to the story about James Comey influencing the election? We just forgot it. What ever happened to all of the other historically "likely suspects" thought to have been likely suspects in vote rigging schemes. They are all absent and not presented as possible influencers of the election by our CIA owned press. Instead we are presented with a fake narrative filled with salacious gossip and naughty bits designed to turn public opinion into a weapon for further increases in militarization and military spending while preserving foreign relationships which benefit wealthy investors.
We need to wake up and start taking some strong medicine to ward off the Alzheimer disease that is affecting us in order to put the daily snow job presented by the MSM and the CIA into perspective. That perspective would include what just happened two seconds ago.
Unfortunately, that is not likely to happen since the medication would have to include administering it to the MSM too.
The ability of the MSM to erase our collective memory and present us with a new fake narrative on any given day should ring alarm bells that we are obviously vulnerable to being fooled.
We are being fooled. Every day. Time to start taking the meds. Reply
Anna , January 12, 2017 at 10:05 pmThis is no "deep state" this is rather in-plain-sight US Government at work.
Trivial task:
1) Create a dense smoke screen by broadcasting on every single TV channel non-stop anti-Russian and anti-Trump*** hysteria (they know it can't go wrong – they know Trump would try to reply to every single fake thus making their task easier and the picture even more colorful)
2) Behind that smoke screen ship few thousands of US troops and tanks over to Poland and to those parasitic micro quasi-states in Baltic and by doing that de-facto lay foundation for 4-5 new military bases,
which (yet another NATO expansion) otherwise would not be approved and likely axed by Trump. But now it went through s-m-o-u-ht-ly, like a butter. Highest class of the old Shell Game. Where CIA, FBI and other spook shops are used as shills and the population of the US are total losers (everyone's taxes will be used to pay for that yet another NATO expansion).
3) Behind the same smoke screen Obamacare has just been demolished late last night, congrats 20 million of poor folks!*** Just wait till grainy videos surface showing some naked figures – one of them would be vaguely resembling Trump.
That'd be no hard task for talented movie makers from either PSYOP or/and PAG (just remember their masterpieces featuring Jessica Lynch and other ones featuring fat "Osama bin Laden"-looking dude).Note: Authorization to create and finance state Propaganda apparatus, S.2943, was quietly passed late Friday night Dec.23 behind the smoke screen of the same anti-Russian and anti-Trump hysteria, thus what we are seeing now is perfectly lawful – propaganda machine at full throttle, who said bureaucracy is slow(?)
Gregory Herr , January 12, 2017 at 11:17 pmis not it nice that Obama is leaving office while being decorated with salacious fake stories which he is promoting Petty and dishonest in everything.
Franz Rock , January 12, 2017 at 10:11 pmI tried to watch his good riddance speech last night, but couldn't get through the half of it. For relief I turned to this video:
Oleg , January 13, 2017 at 3:27 amAs a non-citicen one has to wonder about the mind boggling machination the US politic is capable of.
After WW2 the European countries looked upon the USA as the beacon of democratic values.
How bitter for the young generation to find, bit by bit, that behind the American facade lurked a system
of smoke and mirrors. As ruthless as the very system they replaced in Europe. Slowly sugarcoating
their deep aims of domination. Under words like freedom,liberty and equality there is the underlying
unbelievable lust for money and with it power. From a human point of view, and the thinking person,
the politics and aims of the United States of America is an abomination for all the worlds people.Brad Owen , January 13, 2017 at 5:08 amI certainly agree with you, but also I am really saddened that this pattern is far from being unique and repeats itself all over and over again. The power corrupts, and it is true for states as well as for people. But the US are indeed a sad champion in hypocrisy. Their predecessors were not as skilled in hiding their true intentions behind the screen of freedom and all other very attractive values. This makes it especially hard to accept. Reply
Brad Owen , January 13, 2017 at 5:44 amYou've fingered the wrong culprits, or rather indicted fellow victims. It's the same bloody, titled ruling class and their managerial elites in business and banking from old-line European/British families who've been playing their Imperial games and still are. THEY created the late 19th century Synachist Movement for Empire (SME) that gave birth to Fascism and its' feverish twin NAZIism,really just movements to update the workings of the old-fashioned European Empires. It's also the Cecil Rhodes/Milner RoundTable Group that dove-tailed with SME machinations to update old Empires, campaigning strenuously, through their managerial elites on Wall Street, to recapture their "rogue colony" USA and bring it into the British version of Empire. Right at the moment of FDR's death (may have been assassination), the tables were turned on us, with Churchill leading stupid Truman around by the nose speaking of iron curtains and Red Scares and Cold Wars. FDR's intelligence community was taken over by Anglophile RoundTable allies in the post-war 40s. Having helped win the battles, we lost the War to the fascist/NAZI SME and RoundTable groups who never received so much as a scratch from all the bombs and bullets. Have you seen the show Hunting Hitler? WWII never ended, the methods of fighting just changed.
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 1:13 pmP.S. Not only did WWII never end, just a change in fighting methods, BUT the SME/RoundTable Groups managed to get the two most powerful allies turned against each other: USSR and USA, so that we, together, couldn't focus on the REAL enemy; SME/RoundTable group of elites (which would have happened under FDR in post-war. He would have been President until January 1949 if he hadn't died/been killed, Stalin told FDRs son that "that Churchill gang killed him" been trying to do the same to Stalin) and THIS is why Trumps' Russophilia is such a grave and real threat to our Establishment.
John P , January 14, 2017 at 9:55 pmBrad you hit the nail on the head with your comments here .bravo! Reply
Brad Owen , January 15, 2017 at 6:47 amWhere on earth did you get this fable. Roosevelt had polio and needed a wheelchair, he was a heavy smoker, had high blood pressure, angina followed by congestive heart failure all finalized by a stoke. He had been weakening over a long period. This is all before the days of polonium the USSR uses to kill its foes today.
Russia wasn't following the agreements drawn up in Yalta and fair free elections were not provided in Poland and many Poles who fought for the allies in the war felt betrayed. The Soviets went their own way, so were we to tell the Poles, tough.
Allied convoys, mainly British, at great cost in ships and men, supplied the Russians with war supplies. They faced U-boats and heavily armed German battle-cruisers in freezing arctic waters. After the war Germany got assistance in rebuilding, but the British were held to paying off debts for US build liberty ships used to replace ships lost on the Atlantic convoys. I had an uncle who's ship was sunk and very luckily, after much time in a life boat, was picked up. Many Americans sat back and watched until Pearl Harbour. The British had warned the Americans some time before, that they had lost contact with one of the Japanese fleets they were following, and you can guess the consequences.
Britain saw what was coming when Germany attacked Poland and declared war on Germany. We didn't have much. My father was almost killed assisting surgeon in a Liverpool hospital and luckily had to leave to go out in an ambulance. When he came back the OR was gone. Bombed out. Luckily on another occasion, the day staff had been told to stay on duty with the night staff and the nursing residence was flattened. We had rationing until 1950, and had to grow food in our small back garden, sprouts, peas, cabbage. We had 6 chickens and a rooster, a source of much needed nutrition from eggs. I remember my mother weeping terribly after telling the police she had lost her ration books. As a young lad I went on a search and eventually found them in the folds of a chair. You may never have had to live through something like that.
And if you think America is any better than others, read "What is America?" by Ronald Wright. Learn about the Trail of Tears and traders knowingly giving natives blankets used by whites with small-pox.David F., N.A. , January 12, 2017 at 10:18 pmYou relate the manufactured cover story, thanks to the anglophile Intel community that took over in post-war forties, and did their typical change of the narration, much like they do today with the phony crap about Russian aggression. This kind of sh!t has been going on since the revolution, as the wealthy and powerful Imperial Tories never left and never relented. I got this"fable" from EIR and Tarpley.net. It makes more sense to me than the current fable we call history. Check it out for yourself, it amounts to mountains of articles and essays. It took me years to piece it all together and relay it adequately in brief paragraphs. Choose to believe there is no over-arching Imperial ruling class inimical to the interests of commoners if you want. I refuse to be blind to it anymore.
Furtive , January 12, 2017 at 11:36 pmWhat if the intelligence community wasn't choosing between HRC and Trump, but, in stead, between HRC and Pence. So no matter who won, wouldn't this hedged election mean business as usual?
Sorry, HRC, but for this downward neoliberal/fascist spiral thingy to work, you lesser-of-2-evil conservaDems are just going to have to learn to share with the equally-corrupt conservatives. See ya in 4 (or maybe 8 (naw, 4)).
Hail to the de facto Chief. da dada da dada dada dada da. Reply
Carl Rising-Moore , January 13, 2017 at 2:38 amYou forgot to declare who is the drag queen in this matter?
Let's warn these evil psychopaths that a JFK OUTCOME IS OFF LIMITS.
That is the inference of your article.By the way, Trump NEVER READ THE REPORT PRIVATELY. THERE WAS AN ORAL PRESENTATION, & CLAPPER & Brennan took the CLASSIFIED documents back with them. Trump never read the 2 pg libel nor was it discussed in the presentation.
John P , January 12, 2017 at 11:43 pmThis is also reminiscent of Hoover and JFK. When JFK attended Hoover's office, he was handed the President's file. JFK read some of the file while Hoover waited. When JFK stood up to leave, Hoover told the President that the file remains with him. No wonder JFK and Bobby hated this dangerous psychopath. Reply
Carl Rising-Moore , January 13, 2017 at 2:28 amIt's all slime, Americans let their political system fall into the trap of big money (lobbying system and PACs) and neo-liberalism. I have no faith that Trump has the capabilities to be a good president. His dialogue is simple, his temper easily aroused as are his feelings of hurt. He shows little historical knowledge or political skills and speaks in a petty childish way. Who is going to pay for the southern border wall ?! What is going to replace Obama's medical care programs, more big business institutions ?! To me it looks like the Palestinians are on the Titanic run by captain Trump and his son-in law, and only minutes to go. What real in depth policies has Trump ever stated ?! Look out because Trump has a habit of passing on the bills be it cash, broken promises or a road you never thought he would take.
And yes we need a calming down and discussion between the US, Russia and China, but I don't see any hope in the line of folks Trump has chosen or Clinton. To me, Trump is like passenger on an aircraft in which the pilot has expired and he is relying on others to tell him what to do because he has no idea or understanding.
I think this and a world where jobs have been taken by microprocessors and robots, is a very dangerous place and we don't need a blind narcissist leading the way. Sadly Bernie Sanders got burnt on the stake. ReplyJoe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 1:16 pmAt times like this I miss the wise words of the late Chalmers Johnson. Chalmers was not encouraged by the possibility of America stepping back from her efforts to control the entire world. He felt the deep state was too committed to America's Full Spectrum Dominance. Is this the sloppy end to the legacy of the Sole Super Power? Or, is this just the middle of the play before curtain call?
When Russia came to the aid of Syria, I believed that we were entering the Multipolar World Order. Hopefully that is still possible but better sooner than later before we enter the No World Order of endless chaos. Does the American deep state really want to play Russian Roulette with live nucs?John P , January 15, 2017 at 7:01 pmI wish Chalmers Johnson were still with us, and able to comment on our current events good of you to bring his name up. Reply
Dieter Heymann , January 16, 2017 at 2:23 pmI'm sorry Brad. With your EIR's reference, the first story I saw concerned Obama-care connected to some Nazi policies. Next they claim global warming is fake. The US was the only western nation without a national health program. People die because they haven't the money to pay for drugs or health care. The health of a labourer is more important to them that a rich bloke sitting at a desk. And excuse me but back in the late 60s I studied astronomy besides my major, another science, and even then learned that both CO2 and methane each trap the sun's energy and cause temperatures to rise. That was long before global warming came to peoples attention. Sorry, your story is pure fiction.
Also, Trump hasn't a clue what he's talking about as far as global warming is concerned. Take a look at the temperatures in the far north. They have been warmer than ever while we down here are having huge cycles of heat and cold and are experiencing the fury that those changes can induce.
John P , January 16, 2017 at 4:13 pmAs a scientist you ought to know that CO2 and methane do not trap the sun's energy but absorb upward IR radiation from Earth part of which they radiate back towards Earth's surface part out into space. The blanket I use on my bed at night does not trap the heat generated by me either. If it did it might catch fire?
John P , January 16, 2017 at 4:33 pmDieter I was just trying to make it simple, not write an article for Nature. The point being so many people don't believe that we are altering the earths climate through burning fossil fuels. We take down our forests, and plants are a big reason we are here as they take in carbon dioxide, utilize the suns energy through photosynthesis and create organic compounds thus setting the stage for further developments. There is so much irrationality out there brought on by job losses through technology, and this creates huge divisions within society and that can lead to awful consequences as history has shown.
I not sure some would understand the true science behind it. The subject was a reliance on a web site that promoted climate change denial and a mentioned link between Obamacare and Nazism. Is that a firm foundation of reliance ?Jamie , January 16, 2017 at 1:54 pmJust to clarify, I said astronomy wasn't my major, it was microbiology and medical sciences. I had an interest in star gazing and following the planets. Reply
Many liberals fail to understand that Hillary was the chosen candidate of the deep-state and international finance capital. Unlike the unwashed masses - these forces don't care if politician has a 'D' or 'R' next to their name. It is how well they will serve capital.
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2017 | consortiumnews.com
Exclusive: President-elect Trump is fending off a U.S. intelligence leak of unproven allegations that he cavorted with Russian prostitutes, but the darker story might be the CIA's intervention in U.S. politics, reports Robert Parry.
The decision by the U.S. intelligence community to include in an official report some unverified and salacious accusations against President-elect Donald Trump resembles a tactic out of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover's playbook on government-style blackmail: I have some very derogatory information about you that I'd sure hate to see end up in the press.
Legendary FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover
In this case, as leaders of the U.S. intelligence community were pressing Trump to accept their assessment that the Russian government had tried to bolster Trump's campaign by stealing and leaking actual emails harmful to Hillary Clinton's campaign, Trump was confronted with this classified "appendix" describing claims about him cavorting with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel room.
Supposedly, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan included the unproven allegations in the report under the rationale that the Russian government might have videotaped Trump's misbehavior and thus could use it to blackmail him. But the U.S. intelligence community also had reasons to want to threaten Trump who has been critical of its performance and who has expressed doubts about its analysis of the Russian "hacking."
After the briefing last Friday, Trump and his incoming administration did shift their position, accepting the intelligence community's assessment that the Russian government hacked the emails of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton's campaign chief John Podesta. But I'm told Trump saw no evidence that Russia then leaked the material to WikiLeaks and has avoided making that concession.
Still, Trump's change in tone was noted by the mainstream media and was treated as an admission that he was abandoning his earlier skepticism. In other words, he was finally getting onboard the intelligence community's Russia-did-it bandwagon. Now, however, we know that Trump simultaneously had been confronted with the possibility that the unproven stories about him engaging in unorthodox sex acts with prostitutes could be released, embarrassing him barely a week before his inauguration.
The classified report, with the explosive appendix, was also given to President Obama and the so-called "Gang of Eight," bipartisan senior members of Congress responsible for oversight of the intelligence community, which increased chances that the Trump accusations would be leaked to the press, which indeed did happen.
Circulating Rumors
The stories about Russian intelligence supposedly filming Trump in a high-end Moscow hotel with prostitutes have been circulating around Washington for months. I was briefed about them by a Hillary Clinton associate who was clearly hopeful that the accusations would be released before the election and thus further damage Trump's chances. But the alleged video never seemed to surface and the claims had all the earmarks of a campaign dirty trick.
However, now the tales of illicit frolic have been elevated to another level. They have been inserted into an official U.S. intelligence report, the details of which were leaked first to CNN and then to other mainstream U.S. news media outlets.
Trump has denounced the story as "fake news" and it is certainly true that the juicy details – reportedly assembled by a former British MI-6 spy named Christopher Steele – have yet to check out. But the placement of the rumors in a U.S. government document gave the mainstream media an excuse to publicize the material.
It's also allowed the media to again trot out the Russian word "kompromat" as if the Russians invented the game of assembling derogatory information about someone and then using it to discredit or blackmail the person.
In American history, legendary FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was infamous for using his agency to develop negative information on a political figure and then letting the person know that the FBI had the dirt and certainly would not want it to become public – if only the person would do what the FBI wanted, whether that was to reappoint Hoover to another term or to boost the FBI's budget or – in the infamous case of civil rights leader Martin Luther King – perhaps to commit suicide.
However, in this case, it is not even known whether the Russians have any dirt on Trump. It could just be rumors concocted in the middle of a hard-fought campaign, first among Republicans battling Trump for the nomination (this opposition research was reportedly initiated by backers of Sen. Marco Rubio in the GOP race) before being picked up by Clinton supporters for use in the general election.
Still, perhaps the more troubling issue is whether the U.S. intelligence community has entered a new phase of politicization in which its leadership feels that it has the responsibility to weed out "unfit" contenders for the presidency. During the general election campaign, a well-placed intelligence source told me that the intelligence community disdained both Clinton and Trump and hoped to discredit both of them with the hope that a more "acceptable" person could move into the White House for the next four years.
Hurting Both Candidates
Though I was skeptical of that information, it did turn out that FBI Director James Comey, one of the top officials in the intelligence community, badly damaged Clinton's campaign by deeming her handling of her emails as Secretary of State "extremely careless" but deciding not to prosecute her – and then in the last week of the campaign briefly reopening and then re-closing the investigation.
Then, after the election, President Obama's CIA began leaking allegations that Russian President Vladimir Putin had orchestrated the hacking of Democratic emails and provided them to WikiLeaks to reveal how the DNC undermined Sen. Bernie Sanders's campaign and what Clinton had told Wall Street bigwigs in paid speeches that she had sought to keep secret from the American people.
The intelligence community's assessment set the stage for what could have been a revolt by the Electoral College in which enough Trump delegates could have refused to vote for him to send the election into the House of Representatives, where the states would choose the President from one of the top three vote-getters in the Electoral College. The third-place finisher turned out to be former Secretary of State Colin Powell who got four votes from Clinton delegates in Washington State. But the Electoral College ploy failed when Trump's delegates proved overwhelmingly faithful to the GOP candidate.
Now, we are seeing what looks like a new phase in this "stop (or damage) Trump" strategy, the inclusion of anti-Trump dirt in an official intelligence report that was then leaked to the major media.
Whether this move was meant to soften up Trump or whether the intelligence community genuinely thought that the accusations might be true and deserved inclusion in a report on alleged Russian interference in U.S. politics or whether it was some combination of the two, we are witnessing a historic moment when the U.S. intelligence community has deployed its extraordinary powers within the domain of U.S. politics. J. Edgar Hoover would be proud.
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com ).
Bryan Hemming , January 12, 2017 at 11:06 am
Jean-David , January 12, 2017 at 11:22 amExcuse the mixed metaphors, but this looks like another entirely predictable nail in the coffin of US democracy, as the chickens come home to roost. For some time it has been quite obvious the CIA has been pulling strings from behind the scenes to make whatever puppet occupies the White House dance to its tune. But it won't end there. Only when the CIA climbs completely out of the coffin can the epic finale between the CIA, FBI and NSA begin.
The big question is as to how long the people of states like Texas and Florida stand by in the wings as the theater catches fire.
There are moments in history when it seems almost the entire population of a nation has been struck with deafness and blindess. This maybe one such moment for the United States as a political elite begins the process of tearing the Union apart.
Bill Bodden , January 12, 2017 at 2:05 pmDon't mix your metaphors before they are hatched. ;-) Reply
Common Tater , January 12, 2017 at 4:59 pmThere are moments in history when it seems almost the entire population of a nation has been struck with deafness and blindess. This maybe one such moment for the United States as a political elite begins the process of tearing the Union apart.
The United States has been accused of decadence for decades by Americans and non-Americans without much concern being shown by anyone not in a certain minority. The great tragedy of a decadent way of life is its durability.
In 1961 William Lederer's book, "A Nation of Sheep" revealed the abuse of American power and the ignorance of the American people regarding this misrule. Nothing much has changed since then except the names of the aggressors and their primary geographic areas of intended domination. The mass of people are essentially clueless and content to believe whatever lies and salacious tales are told them from the nation's Towers of Babel. This is in line with human history that shows people of authoritarian dispositions tend to be more aggressive and dominant in politics and commerce and the masses accept their lot as long as they get enough crumbs from establishment's plate..
(The title of the book was also an insult to sheep, but that is another story.)
Jack Flanigan , January 14, 2017 at 1:47 amThe saying goes, "power corrupts," but i believe that it is the corrupt who seek power to begin with.
Most people are content to live and let live, to live by the golden rule, mind their own and reciprocate kindness etc., etc.
Then there are those who get a thrill from exercising control over others. Those are the ones who shoot straight to the top.Curious , January 12, 2017 at 6:09 pmAn interesting and clear observation. As an australian I note our system is dominated by two major parties (and I mean dominated) similar to the US. The two parties are vehicles for ambitious and corrupt individuals to fast track political careers. The power rests in these organizations and attracts the corrupt like bees to honey. Reply
Curious , January 12, 2017 at 6:32 pmBill, regarding your sense of human history I might add that for many centuries people couldn't read, except for the aristocracy and the religious sects mostly. The reformation produced a 100 year war and literacy was at an all time low in Luthers time but something motivated them to fight for such a long time, and it wasn't information nor intellect.
Where has our literacy gone which would prevent a repeat of endless war and violence these days? Oh yes, corporate controlled media hiring people who are certain to have no critical thinking skills, no moral rudder, nor worldly experience to shed the scales from their eyes. We are almost in pre-Gutenberg times of short attention spans and 140 character 'news truths' covering the landscape of the ignorant. One can only hope the Tower of the oligarchs Babel has rapidly decaying clay feet. We certainly know how to reduce cultures more ancient than ours to ashes without so much as a second thought regarding the sanctity of life. Where are all the pro-lifers now? Oh yeh, that's only in the womb, and after the umbilical cord is cut they are fair game for destruction. The US values we rave about will really hurt when other cultures treat us as they have been treated.
Curious , January 12, 2017 at 6:34 pmOr better yet, we are in Gutenberg times where the "type" is set by the big players and the papers around the country keep the same type and only add ink. It's their only function now at the national level to inhibit discourse, excluding this site of course. Reply
Wendi , January 12, 2017 at 5:41 pmOr better yet, we are in times of the early press machines, where the "type" is set by the big players and the papers around the country keep the same type and only add ink. It's their only function now at the national level, meant to inhibit discourse and ideas. (excluding this site of course) Reply
Bill Bodden , January 12, 2017 at 10:04 pmIn its Hoover relation, this article reprises the passage in The Craft of Intelligence, by Allen Dulles, (1965, if memory serves; alas, that book's text seems unavailable on the internet).
It describes the power struggle involved post-FDR, during-HST 1946-48, at the institution of the CIA (The Agency was not legislatively enacted, only instituted through Executive Order.)
Hoover opposed the creation of an intelligence collection that would compete with the FBI's monopoly of spies snoops and snitches.The compromise settlement set the FBI with domestic coverage and the CIA with international haunts for its spooks.
Come the the present day, they still have turf wars in power rivalry for budget money.
However, in effect, after the budget shuffle the two legions merge their 'assets' - making each one double its real size. They join in advocating for (the oxymoronic) 'authoritarian morality,' gaining both the unlawfulness funded in the Judiciary with same unlawfulness, (or, being 'outlaw,' 'above the law'), funded by the Executive.You can depend that they employ the same techniques. Coercion, extortion, blackmail, assassination, torture, defamation, slander and Press Release aspersion. The polity is hung pendant on those strings the outlaws pull. Or, 'hanged' pendant.
As Hoover, so Clapper et al.
Trump seems to have reconsided, maybe recanted, his defiance of 'intelligence' after he has seen some truth in it regarding things he knows he did in places he knows he was. He knows he dare not let the public see him through the cyclopian 'eye' of the intelligentia illumination.
_____
My wit sez, Lo! That explains his undocumented wife - he heard about Russian mail-order brides and flew off to visit the showroom. And brought back some capital equipment, manufactured in foreign lands.Joe Lauria , January 14, 2017 at 9:08 amThe Craft of Intelligence, by Allen Dulles, (1965, if memory serves; alas, that book's text seems unavailable on the internet)
Try alibris or abebooks dot coms. They have copies.
Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 8:34 amThere's a Kindle edition available. Reply
Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 11:39 amGood comment Bryan, but I wonder if we should pay attention at all to this decline of everything, not only of democracy. Yet, I wish to highlight two humorous comments which best characterise the situation.
The first one was a title I saw on Russia-Insider website: "Trump watch out! John Brennan throws even a kitchen sink at Trump in desperation."
The other was a comment by a zero-hedge reader: "Trump could have had sex with a goat in a Moscow hotel room and be videod as much as I care if he only delivers on his election promises. I voted based on his policy promises, not on his sexual preferences."
The sexual smear is so 20th century, the same as the CIA – obsolete.
rosemerry , January 13, 2017 at 5:10 pmTo continue on the humorous side, the vile RT has one on the Pornhub reporting a huge increase in searches for "Golden Showers". Perhaps the kiddies are adding a new term to their vocabularies.
https://www.rt.com/viral/373545-pornhub-golden-showers-trump/ Reply
W. R. Knight , January 12, 2017 at 11:06 amIt seems that Trump supporters are many and varied, and very loyal. To pretend that all these shenanigans were needed to help elect him against such a faulty candidate as Hillary is pathetic in the extreme. The terrible results, when we see how the new Administration is being gently helped by the Senate including Democrats, will be bad for us all if their warlike statements lead to facts. However, Obama's sending of 2800 tanks and 4000 troops to help Germany(!) and Poland against "Russian aggression" right now, plus Hillary's promises, do not give a hopeful alternative scenario for the "land of the free" or peace on earth. Reply
J. D. , January 12, 2017 at 1:35 pmThe saddest part of this entire debacle is that the intelligence agencies, as well as main stream media, the president and most members of Congress have destroyed their own credibility. Lacking credibility, they cannot be believed; and when they cannot be believed, they cannot be trusted; and a government that cannot be trusted is doomed.
Anna , January 12, 2017 at 9:52 pmTrump proved more feisty than expected at his first press conference as President-Elect, hitting back at both Buzzfeed ('You're fake news" and CNN ("you're organization is terrible") And went on to say that "If Putin likes Donald Trump, guess what, folks? That's called an asset, not a liability," describing the urgency of cooperation in defeating terrorism. Lost in the shuffle however was the source of the lies - British intelligence agencies.In fact, the NYTimes reported Jan. 6 that the official report released last week by the US intelligence agencies, which accused Putin of subverting the U.S. election, also came from British intelligence, which "raised an alarm that Moscow had hacked into the Democratic National Committee's computer servers, and alerted their American counterparts.Talk about foreign interference.
Furtive , January 12, 2017 at 11:40 pmfriends of Israel in action in the UK Reply
Steve Abbott , January 12, 2017 at 2:15 pmA 4 chan blogger wrote it as a hoax Reply
Godfree Roberts , January 13, 2017 at 4:55 amGet with the program! We are supposed to believe that all we have heard from and about the CIA in this century was pure and innocent incompetence, and should therefore continue to put all of our faith in their motives and methods. Reply
Dan Kuhn , January 12, 2017 at 11:08 amDo you know which major government is the most trusted by its citizens?
The Edelman Corporation does. They've been doing 'government trust' surveys for decades. Check it out. http://www.slideshare.net/EdelmanAPAC/2016-edelman-trust-barometer-china-english .
Hint: China ReplyZnam Svashta , January 12, 2017 at 11:22 amThe entire sordid mess needs to be dismantled brick by brick and rebuilt from the ground up. Washington should be razed to the ground. It is beyond rescuing. it is beyond saving. It is rotten from the foundations to the pinicle of the obilisk. The American People should declare war on Washington DC and invade the place and clean house. Bring the Guillotine along with them and the baskets for the heads.
The stench is overwhelming. It needs to be cleaned up. No it needs to be wiped from the face of the earth. One of the founding fathers said that periodically, the tree of democracy had to be watered with blood. That time has arrived. Reply
Lin Cleveland , January 12, 2017 at 11:50 amGeorge Orwell predicted our current mess in his classic, "1984". Interestingly, that was the year that the neocons took over the Pentagon's Office of Risk Assessment, the State Department, and the whore-house American media. Reply
floyd gardner , January 12, 2017 at 2:02 pmWhat's going on here? I think Julian Assange may be on to something. ( my bold )
"Hillary Clinton's election would have been a consolidation of power in the existing ruling class of the United States. Donald Trump is not a D.C. insider , he is part of the wealthy ruling elite of the United States, and he is gathering around him a spectrum of other rich people and several idiosyncratic personalities. They do not by themselves form an existing structure, so it is a weak structure which is displacing and destabilizing the pre-existing central power network within D.C. It is a new patronage structure which will evolve rapidly, but at the moment its looseness means there are opportunities for change in the United States: change for the worse and change for the better."–Julian Assange
Jessejean , January 12, 2017 at 2:10 pmThanks, Lin [for your 'bold.' Assange and Snowden are two voices "in the wilderness" always worth listening to. Reply
D5-5 , January 12, 2017 at 4:50 pmBrilliant– as always. No matter how vilified JA is and no matter how much he's lied about, he still is a force for reason and subversion, both of which we desparately need. Thanks for the quote. Reply
floyd gardner , January 12, 2017 at 9:36 pmCurious to me in the two-pronged attack on Trump (a. demonizing to delegitimize and replace with Pence coming from the political establishment; b. hysterical fear of Trump coming from left wing journalism sources including left-oriented alternative news sites) is why the hysteria in the left continues so virulently. Assange's comment, to me, is balanced and sober. We don't know what will happen out of Trump and his collection of "idiosyncratic personalities," we don't know what will turn out "change for the worse and change for the better," and all the fear-mongering from people like Robert Reich, appearing regularly in Truthdig, is entirely speculative. I then question–would these same people on the left, that I once thought to be colleagues, prefer Hillary Clinton and "consolidation of power in the existing ruling class"? This fracturing in what I had thought was an intelligent left opposition is disturbing.
Mark West , January 12, 2017 at 5:10 pmAs an "old leftie" myself, I'd have to agree with Paul Craig Roberts that there IS no left anymore. It was co-opted and bought by Big Money. Maybe we need to forget about "left" and "right" and operate according to our own minds rather tha taking our cues from apologists for the establishment like Robert Reich. But it sounds like you're already doing that. Reply
Anna , January 12, 2017 at 9:54 pmChange that will undoubtedly benefit the privileged in a big way.
I don't give a crap about if Trump had prostitutes. That's between he and his wife. What I do care about is if there are Trump financial threads to Russia and if his team had illegal meetings with Moscow before the election. There are too many questions that need to be answered.
Why does Trump continue to dote on Putin? He's a vicious killer who has no qualms of eliminating his opponents. Those are facts.
Why won't he release his tax returns? It could only mean he is hiding something.
What benefit does the world intelligence community gain in smearing a president elect? Is it financial? idealogical? Power? Are they not tied and beholdened more to the entrenched financial hierarchies then to the ever changing political landscape?
What advantage did this operative from British intelligence gain from compiling this info? Money, fame, a 2nd home in Portugal?
How does anyone watching that press conference not come away with the chilly realization that our president-elect is psychologically impaired? My god you don't have to be a trained psychologist to see the guy has some serious mental health issues.
JayHobeSound , January 13, 2017 at 4:10 am"He's a vicious killer " – this is a music for the Kagans' clan Reply
Godfree Roberts , January 13, 2017 at 4:59 am"What advantage did this operative from British intelligence gain from compiling this info?"
Reportedly he asked his neighbours to feed his cats and he went into hiding. Bizarre.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article126129709.html Reply
Truth First , January 13, 2017 at 6:20 pm'Why does Trump continue to dote on Putin? He's a vicious killer who has no qualms of eliminating his opponents. Those are facts.'
Facts? I'm pretty familiar with Putin's career and I've seen nothing to suggest that Putin is a killer at all.
Can you provide links to evidence? Not just links to other people making assertions without evidence, please. Replystinky rafsanjani , January 16, 2017 at 9:36 am"Why does Trump continue to dote on Putin? He's a vicious killer who has no qualms of eliminating his opponents. Those are facts."
You talking about Trump or Putin? In any case has Russia or Putin killed as many people as America or Obama. The "facts" say no, not even close. ReplyJames van Oosterom , January 16, 2017 at 11:45 amvicious killer? since when is that a bad thing? jinkies, obama of nobel fame
sends missiles and drones around the planet, bombing and killing for fun and
profit. why, he even orders the assassination of citizens of his own country,
without trial even. meanwhile, putin has, umm look! a squirrel!Andreas Wirsén , January 12, 2017 at 11:54 amNobody said it was a bad thing. You're inferring things. Stick to squirrels . Ah yes, the door . Reply
floyd gardner , January 12, 2017 at 2:08 pmA "new phase" in Intelligence meddling with presidential candidates, yes – but only in how openly they stand behind it as the source. Campaigns to scandalize unwanted primary challengers have been alleged before. Senator Gary Hart, for one, has said in interviews he believes he was caught in a honey trap, which cost him his candidacy.
LongGoneJohn , January 12, 2017 at 12:04 pmGary Hart, a potentially strong contender, was also [like Trump] not up to Deep State's standards in Russophobia. Reply
floyd gardner , January 12, 2017 at 2:12 pmDidn't Trump just acknowledge that attacks on cyber US infrastructure including the DNC takes place, in a general way? That is what his statement read and to me that does not sound like "Trump acknowledges Russian DNC hack" at all.
So is it me, or ?
Michael Morrissey , January 12, 2017 at 12:05 pmNo, LGJ, it's not just you who can read through MSMB[ullsh t.] Reply
Zachary Smith , January 12, 2017 at 1:07 pmIf Trump & Co. accept "the intelligence community's assessment that the Russian government hacked the emails," they are only saying that, as is common knowledge, everybody hacks everybody. This is not, as Parry says, an acceptance of the intelligence "assessment" that Putin or Russian hackers released the emails, or even got them. Assange and Murray have said unequivocally that the source was inside the DNC, which means it cannot have been the Russians.
Jessejean , January 12, 2017 at 2:18 pmAssange and Murray have said unequivocally that the source was inside the DNC, which means it cannot have been the Russians.
Assange and Murray might be right, and they might not. There is a term being tossed around – "cutout". Just because an intermediary claims to be a DNC leaker doesn't mean he actually was such.
Under the circumstances I just don't care. Now if the Russians or Chinese or Ugandans or anybody else had done more than facilitate the release of true information useful to voters, I'd be agitated myself. Not that I'd expect anybody else to be. US votes have been hacked ever since the no-verify touchscreen devices were first introduced, and nobody in authority has given a hoot about it.
Sam F , January 13, 2017 at 6:52 amZachary–you are so right. It drives me crazy that Bush got away with stealing the voting system and all the Damn Dems care about is using it themselves. And now it drives me crazy that the Clintonistas took down Bernie and are getting away with it. With that cat's paw Obusha hanging around to "work" on rebuilding the DNC, we'll never see democracy again.
RMDC , January 13, 2017 at 9:28 amWe must indeed Dump the Dems. We need a progressive party.
There is a strong progressive majority everywhere which is being deliberately fragmented by the Dems. In the US, Clinton supporters must unify not only with the critics of Dem warmongering for Israel and KSA, but also with the Trumpers who want economic security in a rapacious oligarchic state. Clinton supporters will have to admit their mistake and abandon the Dems as a scam of oligarchy serving only as a backstop for the Repubs.
The solution is for a third party to align moderate progressives (national health care, no wars of choice, income security) with parts of the traditional right (fundamentalists, flag-wavers, make America great) leaving out only the extreme right (wars, discrimination, big business imperialism), use individual funding, and rely upon broad platform appeal to marginalize the Dems as the third party.
Sam F , January 13, 2017 at 2:20 pmSam F. I agree with you but you have to stop using the term "progressive." The Clinton faction of the demo party owns that term. It arose with John Podesta's Center for American Progress. Podesta is the ideologue of contemporary progressivism. It has nothing to do with the Progressive movement of the early 20th century.
The right term is Sander's term: Democratic Socialism. I know socialism is a problematic term, too, but at least it is now claimed by the right people.
Truth First , January 13, 2017 at 6:23 pmRMDC: Do you think "Progressive" can be brought back to its original meaning, or given a better one, despite people falsely claiming to be progressive? Sanders' term might be incorporated into that. It would be nice to deny the fakers the use of it.
Bill Cash , January 12, 2017 at 12:08 pm"we'll never see democracy again."
Humm? When did we last see that "democracy" thing? Reply
Anna , January 12, 2017 at 9:56 pmTrump could end all this by releasing his tax returns but he won't do it. I believe the intelligence community had fears that once inaugurated, Trump would squash the whole thing. The Russian connection is the only theory that connects all the dots. I'm waiting t see what happens with Assange. Will he suddenly be able to go to Sweden?
As far as Trump's behavior, don't forget he was accused of raping a 13 year old girl but the woman had to withdraw the suit because her life was threatened.Furtive , January 12, 2017 at 11:48 pmWhy is your post such a strong reminder of Pizzagate? Reply
Wm. Boyce , January 12, 2017 at 12:14 pmWont make any difference what t he does. He's an outsider. There's no escape except trying & convicting the traitors running obama. Reply
Patricia Victour , January 12, 2017 at 12:22 pmVery interesting column. I guess Mr. Trump is getting a lesson in who really runs things around here. Reply
Wm. Boyce , January 12, 2017 at 12:52 pmUnless Trump killed a prostitute on film, how could whatever is on the alleged video be any worse than the pussy-grabbing debacle and all the other accusations of sexual predation? I don't think you can embarrass Trump. He would just brush it off, and his base would probably think he was a super stud.
Zachary Smith , January 12, 2017 at 12:59 pmOh, I don't know, they could well have much worse stuff to leak, given Mr. Trump's complete lack of control of his desires.
col from oz , January 12, 2017 at 7:49 pmI collected a lot of "stuff" on Trump from the internet in the past year, and was surprised to see virtually none of it used against him. My best guess is that Hillary & Co. didn't think it was necessary against their carefully selected "easiest" opponent. That "stuff" is still available, and might well be used to buttress wilder and unverifiable claims.
Gregory Herr , January 12, 2017 at 8:48 pmYesterday on anther site i wrote how Hillary was complicit in a very serious charge.
Please watch video titles, where is Eric braverman on you tube . I have watched some and most of the material gives you the reality of what is occurring. A example is this. A fact is Gaddafi wanted to have some kind of gold backed Dina money policy. Fact. So Libya had a lot of gold maybe hundreds of tons. Where is it now. Did the "invaders' get it with their usual cut out Libyan man?
In the spirit of trying to make a better world i put this up, it seems political unbiased however it shows the Clinton as they are?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vam6qxfQrgA
day 70
dave , January 12, 2017 at 3:24 pm"For over four decades, Gaddafi promoted economic democracy and used the nationalized oil wealth to sustain progressive social welfare programs for all Libyans. Under Gaddafi's rule, Libyans enjoyed not only free health-care and free education, but also free electricity and interest-free loans."
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/10/20/libya-from-africas-wealthiest-democracy-under-gaddafi-to-terrorist-haven-after-us-intervention/"Libya's Qadhafi (African Union 2009 Chair) conceived and financed a plan to unify the sovereign States of Africa with one gold currency (United States of Africa). In 2004, a pan-African Parliament (53 nations) laid plans for the African Economic Community – with a single gold currency by 2023.
"African oil-producing nations were planning to abandon the petro-dollar, and demand gold payment for oil/gas Qaddafi had done more than organize an African monetary coup. He had demonstrated that financial independence could be achieved. His greatest infrastructure project, the Great Man-made River, was turning arid regions into a breadbasket for Libya; and the $33 billion project was being funded interest-free without foreign debt, through Libya's own state-owned bank.
That could explain why this critical piece of infrastructure was destroyed in 2011. NATO not only bombed the pipeline but finished off the project by bombing the factory producing the pipes necessary to repair it."Gregory Herr , January 12, 2017 at 8:58 pmSpeaking of "leaks", isn't the specific accusation in this case that Trump paid a prostitute to "take a leak" on the bed where he believed the Obamas had spent the night? (So I guess it was the prostitute that had "worse stuff to leak"!)
Anna , January 12, 2017 at 9:56 pmAnd while no one at Trump's press conference mentioned the specifics, Trump stated, "Does anyone really believe that story? I'm also very much of a germaphobe, by the way, believe me."
Gregory Herr , January 12, 2017 at 11:04 pmCheck Chan4
Furtive , January 12, 2017 at 11:48 pmAnna, do you mean the British television programme?
backwardsevolution , January 12, 2017 at 12:36 pmWhat? Dim wit. Reply
Zachary Smith , January 12, 2017 at 12:54 pmThe Saker writes in "The Neocon's Declaration of War Against Trump":
"After several rather lame false starts, the Neocons have now taken a step which can only be called a declaration of war against Donald Trump. [ ] All of the above further confirms to me what I have been saying over the past weeks: if Trump ever makes it into the White House (I write 'if' because I think that the Neocons are perfectly capable of assassinating him), his first priority should be to ruthlessly crack down as hard as he legally can against those in the US "deep state" (which very much includes the media) who have now declared war on him. I am sorry to say that, but it will be either him or them – one of the parties here will be crushed. [ ]
As I predicted it before the election, the USA are about to enter the worst crisis in their history. We are entering extraordinarily dangerous times. If the danger of a thermonuclear war between Russia and the USA had dramatically receded with the election of Trump, the Neocon total war on Trump put the United States at very grave risk, including civil war (should the Neocon controlled Congress impeach Trump I believe that uprisings will spontaneously happen, especially in the South, and especially in Florida and Texas). At the risk of sounding over the top, I will say that what is happening now is putting the very existence of the United States in danger almost regardless of what Trump will personally do. Whatever we may think of Trump as a person and about his potential as a President, what is certain is that millions of American patriots have voted for him to "clear the swamp", give the boot to the Washington-based plutocracy and restore what they see as fundamental American values. If the Neocons now manage to stage a coup d'etat against Trump, I predict that these millions of Americans will turn to violence to protect what they see as their way of life
If a coup is staged against Trump and some wannabe President à la Hillary or McCain gives the order to the National Guard or even the US Army to put down a local insurrection, we could see what we saw in Russia in 1991: a categorical refusal of the security services to shoot at their own people. That is the biggest and ultimate danger for the Neocons: the risk that if they give the order to crack down on the population the police, security and military services might simply refuse to take action. If that could happen in the "KGB-controlled country" (to use a Cold War cliché) this can also happen in the USA."
Brad Owen , January 12, 2017 at 3:44 pmIf a coup is staged against Trump and some wannabe President à la Hillary or McCain gives the order to the National Guard or even the US Army to put down a local insurrection, we could see what we saw in Russia in 1991: a categorical refusal of the security services to shoot at their own people.
At Kent State the National Guard was quite willing to shoot "their own people". The increasingly militarized Police of the US have been getting lots of practice shooting at "their own people". I suspect that's why a great many of them joined up in the first place. Finally, carefully chosen drone operators thousands or tens of thousands of miles away won't have the slightest problem slaughtering evildoers. That's what they do all the time in their regular jobs.
Bill Bodden , January 12, 2017 at 10:14 pmDon't forget veterans, millions of them. When THEY stepped up to the North Dakota pipeline, security forces backed off. Backwards' described scenario could be our "1991" moment to break free and break the Deep State, and reinstating Glass-Steagall would break their Imperial paymasters in The City and The Street. A new World could suddenly come about, faster than even the USSR/Warsaw Pact disappeared. Reply
Peter Loeb , January 13, 2017 at 8:23 amAt Kent State the National Guard was quite willing to shoot "their own people". The increasingly militarized Police of the US have been getting lots of practice shooting at "their own people".
Police departments all over the U.S. and other nations have a long history of acting as goon squads and occasional firing squads for their local establishments. Lots of examples in labor histories. Reply
Oleg , January 13, 2017 at 2:53 amKILLING OUR OWN PEOPLE .
Special thanks to Zachary Smith.
In the US it's called "heroism", patriotism" and the rest. But if we are
inconvenienced to kill our own people, we can kill other peoples'
people. Gigantic weapons deals to Saudi Arabia and Israel
are proof of that.By the way, did anyone happen to notice in the NDAA (Defense Authorization
Act) the increase of funds to rebels in another country whose goal is to
defeat the Syrian Government?-Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA
PS For those who object to our killing our own people in the US join
Black Lives Matter. ReplyZachary Smith , January 12, 2017 at 12:37 pmAt the very least, the US should get rid of this prolonged waiting period between the elections and actual assuming power by the president-elect. It was meant to facilitate the orderly transition of power, but as we see now it is serving just the opposite goals. I cannot believe Obama is so keen on hurting Trump he is ready to badly hurt his own country as well. Reply
Joe Tedesky , January 12, 2017 at 1:41 pmWhether this move was meant to soften up Trump
The motive I see is to "soften" him up for his impeachment. Given Trump's temperament, it could be a winning strategy for the people who prefer President Pence. In my barely informed opinion, that would include a majority of both parties in both houses of the US congress.
Realist , January 12, 2017 at 4:27 pmRead section 4 of the 25th amendment .
"Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President."
I'm wondering if we are seeing the beginnings of a President Pence. Although Donald Trump may give one some consternation to his being a qualified person to sit in the Oval Office, Mike Pence may bring down the house with his religious leanings inside of his political philosophy. Either way we Americans are in for a most interesting time of it in our country's brief history. We should all probably prepare ourselves for the worst, and hope that the best will happen.
Zachary wasn't Mike Pense your governor, or do I have you in the wrong state?
Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 9:16 amFascinating and disturbing at the same time. That section was surely MEANT to apply to the president's health and physical capacity to do the job. However, a declaration by the VP (supported only by a simple majority of the cabinet or the congress) "that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office" can be based in an insurrection, a coup, or simply the erosion of political capital. Gerald Ford could have argued that Richard Nixon no longer had the support to govern (which is what Nixon himself conceded as the basis for his resignation). It basically gives the VP and whatever insurgents he can muster the ability to quickly overthrow the sitting president without the inconvenience of an impeachment and trial in the Senate. It could be the Maidan without the messy blood all over the pavement. How wonderful.
Very resourceful of you in looking that up, Joe. I would never have imagined the seeds for a coup existed right in the constitution.
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 10:53 amI have a saying: For the people in law-enforcement, law is a fringe benefit. Those who control law always use it as a tool. Have you ever heard of a coup which was not based on some law, even if it was the one written post-festum by the coup plotters? In other words, a coup is never difficult to justify by the winners.
I have no doubt that the coup that Joe describes is possible. But the issue for the coup plotters has always been: what happens with all the Trump voters after such a coup, the millions of them? Will they sit and just watch the destruction of their social contract?
To some extent such US coup dilemma is not dissimilar to the nuclear war dilemma: easy to start, difficult to finish.
Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 11:20 amKIza, nice to hear from you it's been awhile.
Read this link. Trump got 26.8% of the total citizenry to vote for him. In all honesty I haven't seen any polls on how the American populace shakes out on these controversies such as this most recent fake news story, but I would imagine that a clever beat down campaign would be able to soften the blowback .but then again I agree with you to some extent, that by pushing Trump out of office this would have to have some kind of consequence that would not be pretty.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/01/12/bringing-trump-nation-down-to-size/
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 12:56 pmJoe, in general I am trying to highlight that it is one thing to bamboozle sheeple with a talk of democracy (which does not exist) and another to openly crush even this reassuring lie. I just cannot see the end game of a US coup and Trump is but a minor obstacle if they want to start it.
Therefore, they really want to make a Trump a lame and controllable President, not to take over. Maintaining a reassuring lie of democracy is a much more sophisticated and efficient control mechanism than direct control. I may we wrong but I do believe that Trump is just being house trained/broken by TPTB in front of our eyes.
You write: I have not seen any polls how American populace shakes out on these controversies.
My reading of the online beat is that the Trump voters are not swayed, whilst the Clinton voters use the "controversy" as confirmation that they were right all along about Trump. But then Clinton voters would receive a confirmation even from an oily rag thrown in their direction. In other words, a mountain shook and a mouse was born – almost no change at all on either side.Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 8:19 pmKIza your comparing Trump's attackers to how the MH17 story was spun is right on.
http://journal-neo.org/2017/01/11/trump-and-mh17-just-one-step-too-far/
Trump is an easy target since his nature is certainly different than that of the usual norm of our politico class who are cookie cutter politicians on the whole. I'm disappointed by how people such as Michael Moore are going out of their way attacking Trump, while they completely ignore how corrupt and dishonest the Clinton's are.
I wouldn't go so far as to predict that Trump supporters won't rebel against his impeachment, but there again I believe the Trump supporters would be out numbered due to an over aggressive media who could sway the majority into believing we must get Trump out of office. Any other method other than impeachment is to horrible to even contemplate, so let's hope that all of our concerns turn to ashes, and that for the good or bad of it that Trump finishes out his first term in good health.
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 11:14 amYes, Joe, those 26.8% of citizenry who voted for Trump are built into 75-76% of citizenry who do not believe in the MSM any more and in the John Brennan's two kitchen sinks, that is, his two top secret but leakable kompromat dossiers on Trump – the first one apparently from an MI6 agent and the second one promoted by the BBC (source unknown yet).
But this is not about Clintons any more, this is about the owners of the Clintons training/braking Trump to be like the Clintons. If they cannot have a Clinton as a President, they want to have a President as Clinton. If kompromat does not work, maybe a billet will, their patience is limited.
Always enjoyable to exchange thoughts with you Joe.
Zachary Smith , January 12, 2017 at 5:23 pmRealist, considering how our country's founders were a bunch of slave owners declaring how all men are created equally well need I say more?
Words are just words, that is until lawyers interpret these legal words into a reality, which doesn't always fit into our own personal definition of a certain word usage. You and I deal with this stuff all the time. Whether it be a traffic ticket, or an ordinance summons, we read one thing, and the judge administers another thing. Prisons are filled with people who swear with, 'yeah but' explanations which give these prisoners no relief what so ever so I do think these crafty legislators could pull a fast one, and install Mike Pence into the White House. Let's you and I hope that I'm the one out in left field with my 25th amendment comment, and that we won't end up with a Christian whack job as our president. Reply
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 12:36 pmYeah, Pence was elected Governor of Indiana. But despite this state being one of the most conservative in the nation, Pence was too "nutty" and "far-right" for Mississippi North, and would have surely been defeated. Now the man is one heartbeat/one impeachment conviction from becoming President of the United States.
Quote: "From his denial of climate change to his belief in creationism, Pence is the most hard-right radical to ever appear on a national ticket. Just this week a federal court had to block his atrocious bill barring Syrian refugees from his state because his reasoning that Syrians scare him is discriminatory."
Quote: "it is a literal truth, Mr. Speaker, to say that I am in Congress today because of Rush Limbaugh, and not because of some tangential impact on my career or his effect on the national debate; but because in fact after my first run for Congress in 1988, it was the new national voice emerging in 1989 across the heartland of Indiana of one Rush Hudson Limbaugh, III, that captured my imagination.""
It's a fact we are very, very close to having a Rush 'druggie' Limpaugh clone as President. In my opinion, Pence is Trump's worst mistake up till now. If they can't have Hillary, for the neocons and neo-liberals and the Christian End-Timers there remains Worse-Than-Hillary Mike Pence.
Trump is a Trojan horse for a cabal of vicious zealots who have long craved an extremist Christian theocracy, and Pence is one of its most prized warriors. With Republican control of the House and Senate and the prospect of dramatically and decisively tilting the balance of the Supreme Court to the far right, the incoming administration will have a real shot at bringing the fire and brimstone of the second coming to Washington.
"The enemy, to them, is secularism. They want a God-led government. That's the only legitimate government," contends Jeff Sharlet, author of two books on the radical religious right, including "The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power." "So when they speak of business, they're speaking not of something separate from God, but they're speaking of what, in Mike Pence's circles, would be called biblical capitalism, the idea that this economic system is God-ordained."
Realist , January 13, 2017 at 3:13 pmZachary I looked forward to your reply, since you always have references to your level headed comments .so thanks for getting back to me.
In my world I don't even like bringing up the word God, or religion, since I believe a government should be governed in a truly secular way. Who I pray to, and who I pay taxes to, are two completely different things. My devotion to God is a very private matter, and I don't need some politician interpreting God's greatness to me in anyway. So with that if Mike Pense wants to preach the gospel to me, then he should resign from public office and become a full fledged preacher and even then I will not go to his mean spirited church. Amen.
Bill Bodden , January 12, 2017 at 10:16 pmWhat a troubling coincidence that Hulu is releasing its production of "the Handmaid's Tale" by Margaret Atwood this April, which tells the story of the United States government being taken over by extreme Christian fundamentalists and the consequences, especially to women and religious dissenters. Read the book by Atwood and you'll see where Isis/Daesh got many of their ideas on punishment and control of the masses. The Spanish Inquisition was six hundred years ago, but its urges lie just beneath the veneer of our civilised modern world. Human nature hasn't changed, only technology has. I thought this country was in danger of playing out the novel during Dubya's administration, as 9-11 was exactly the kind of pretext for such a takeover in the book's plot narrative and the Islamic world was portrayed as the great global adversary just as many Americans believe in the real world. Trump has never struck me as a religious man, certainly not a zealot, but Pence, with a little help from the Deep State, he could bring this disturbing novel to life.
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 12:53 amI'm wondering if we are seeing the beginnings of a President Pence.
A very plausible and ominous possibility.
Kiza , January 13, 2017 at 9:57 amSeriously Bill even taking into consideration how some like Glenn Beck along with Rick Santelli ridiculed an early President Obama back in 2009, I can't recall a more hostile media such as the likes of how this current day corporate media is going after Trump. True, that Donald Trump by just being Donald Trump can be an outrageous person with his words and actions, but still I just can't get over the 24/7 media coverage, and how most of it isn't good coverage at that. This leaves me to wonder if we all are not being setup for something big.
With Trump's winning streak putting away a whole herd of Republican primary candidates, and how he sent 'low energy Jeb' packing, and then to go on and beat Hillary by his winning the Electoral vote, he has had a great run. Now Donald Trump is battling not only the CIA/FBI/NSA, but he is also bumping up against the congressional establishment. You know that McCain and Graham hate him, but you can only bet that there is yet much more to come.
I'm sorry, but I don't sense there is much good to come with all of this. Thanks for the reply.
Joe Tedesky , January 13, 2017 at 1:06 pmJoe, I wonder if people missed the crazy similarity of the media campaign on the Trump "report" and the one on MH17 ?
It appears that the TPTB have decided that if they generate enough media screaming, the lack of proof does not matter any more.
Thus, I have become a strong proponent of the theory that whatever TPTB use outside, it is only a practice for what they will use (more productively) inside. Drones anyone?
Gregory Herr , January 13, 2017 at 2:44 pmKIza read my comment above, it pertains to what you brought up here.
Pablo Diablo , January 12, 2017 at 12:42 pmWeaponized drones anyone?
Mike Flores , January 12, 2017 at 1:24 pmAll this turmoil and a dysfunctional Congress insures that nothing will change. The 1% loves the status quo and will do anything to preserve it. Simply a smokescreen to keep US from dealing with the corporate stranglehold on our government.
An Empire in decline. ReplyWhile others laugh and make jokes, those of us who study Intel know that what just happened with the leaked report was that the CIA has involved itself in U.S. politics, which it is forbidden to do. How did the alliance between the Democratic Party and CIA begin? President Truman had allowed 200 Nazi Intel agents to come into the U.S. – including the men who created the blueprint for the holocaust. Fearing Joe McCarthy would discover this, the CIA faked an Intel report and has spent decades ever since lying about Joe. They actually confessed that his 2 lists were correct, so they had to fool him with a fake dossier right before the Army hearings to shake his confidence. Just search CIA AND THE POND and you will find on their website STUDIES IN INTELLIGENCE in the last third of the article a full confession of framing Joe. This Facebook photo album THE REAL JOSEPH McCARTHY is packed with forbidden information and can be viewed with this link by anyone whether they are on FB or not. The alliance between the Democratic Party and CIA began by hiding the people responsible for the holocaust. ( We should keep in mind Truman was KKK and forbade the bombing of the train tracks to the death camps. The reason soldiers were not prepared for the camps was that none had been told about them. Truman did not want our troops wasting time on them). Interesting to note that absolutely no one has ever done an article or book on the impact of the beliefs of the KKK on the 5 Democrats who were Presidents and Klansmen in the 20th century. That would reveal the true nature of the Democratic Party.
