The Metamorphosis of the Deep State
The Military Intelligence Complex Has Been Redefined as Career Bureaucrats Doing Their Patriotic Duty
Edward Curtin
Image source here.
It gets funny, this shallow analysis of the deep state that is currently big news. There’s something ghoulish about it, perfectly timed for Halloween and masked jokers. What was once ridiculed by the CIA and its attendant lackeys in the media as the paranoia of “conspiracy theorists” is now openly admitted in reverent tones of patriotic fervor. But with a twisted twist.
The “Deep State” has been redefined as career bureaucrats doing their patriotic duty
It was two years ago, early in the Trump administration, when The New Yorker and Salon, among many others, were asserting in no uncertain terms that there was no deep state in the United States, and so Trump had nothing to fear from that quarter since it was a figment of his paranoia.
Kit Knightly, writing in the Off-Guardian, brilliantly demolished this spurious propaganda at the time in a must read reminder of how tricksters play their games.
The corporate mass-media has recently discovered a “deep state” that they claim to be not some evil group of assassins who work for the super-rich owners of the country and murder their own president (JFK) and other unpatriotic dissidents (Malcom X, MLK, RK, among others) and undermine democracy home and abroad, but are now said to be just fine upstanding American citizens who work within the government bureaucracies and are patriotic believers in democracy intent on doing the right thing.
This redefinition has been in the works for a few years, and it shouldn’t be a surprise that this tricky treat was being prepared for our consumption a few years ago by The Council on Foreign Relations.
In its September/October 2017 edition of its journal Foreign Affairs, Jon D. Michaels, in “Trump and the Deep State: The Government Strikes Back,” writes:
Furious at what they consider treachery by internal saboteurs, the president and his surrogates have responded by borrowing a bit of political science jargon, claiming to be victims of the “deep state,” a conspiracy of powerful, unelected bureaucrats secretly pursuing their own agenda.
The concept of a deep state is valuable in its original context, the study of developing countries such as Egypt, Pakistan, and Turkey, where shadowy elites in the military and government ministries have been known to countermand or simply defy democratic directives. Yet it has little relevance to the United States, where governmental power structures are almost entirely transparent, egalitarian, and rule-bound.
The White House is correct to perceive widespread resistance inside the government to many of its endeavors. But the same way the administration’s media problems come not from “fake news” but simply from news, so its bureaucratic problems come not from an insidious, undemocratic “deep state” but simply from the state—the large, complex hive of people and procedures that constitute the U.S. federal government.
Notice how in these comical passages about U.S. government transparency and egalitarianism, Michaels slyly and falsely attributes to Trump the very definition – “unelected bureaucrats” – that in the next paragraph he claims to be the real deep state, which is just the state power structures.
Pseudo-innocence conquers all here as there is no mention of the Democratic party, Russiagate, etc., and all the machinations led by the intelligence services and Democratic forces to oust Trump from the day he was elected.
State power structures just move so quickly, as anyone knows who has studied the speed with which bureaucracies operate. Ask Max Weber.
Drip by drip over the past few years, this “state bureaucracy” meme has been introduced by the mainstream media propagandists as they have gradually revealed that the government deep-staters are just doing their patriotic duty in trying openly to oust an elected president.
Many writers have commented on the recent New York Times article, “Trump’s War on the ‘Deep State’ Turns Against Him” asserting that the Times has finally admitted to the existence of the deep state, which is true as far as it goes, which is not too far. But in this game of deceptive revelations – going shallower to go deeper – what is missing is a focus on the linguistic mind control involved in the changed definition.
Well, I don’t know about you guys, but I’m convinced.
In a recent article by Robert W. Merry, whose intentions I am not questioning – “New York Times Confirms: It’s Trump Versus the Deep State” – originally published at The American Conservative and widely reprinted, the lead-in to the article proper reads:
Even the Gray Lady admits the president is up against a powerful bureaucracy that wants him sunk.”
So the “powerful bureaucracy” redefinition, this immovable force of government bureaucrats, is slipped into public consciousness as what the deep state supposedly is. Gone are CIA conspirators and evil doers. In their place we find career civil servants doing their patriotic duty.
Then there is The New York Times’ columnist James Stewart who, appearing on the Today Show recently, where he was promoting his new book, told Savannah Guthrie that:
Well, you meet these characters in my book, and the fact is, in a sense, he’s [Trump] right. There is a deep state…there is a bureaucracy in our country who has pledged to respect the Constitution, respect the rule of law. They do not work for the President. They work for the American people.
And, as Comey told me in my book, ‘thank goodness for that,’ because they are protecting the Constitution and the people when individuals – we don’t have a monarch, we don’t have a dictator – they restrain them from crossing the boundaries of law.
What Trump calls the deep state in the United States is protecting the American people and protecting the Constitution. It’s a positive thing in this sense.
So again we are told that the deep-state bureaucracy is defending the Constitution and protecting the American people, as James Comey told Stewart, “in my book, ‘thank goodness for that,’” as he put it so eloquently.
These guys talk in books, of course, not person to person, but that is the level not just of English grammar and general stupidity, but of the brazen bullshit these guys are capable of.
This new and shallow deep state definition has buried the old meaning of the deep state as evil conspirators carrying out coup d’états, assassinations, and massive media propaganda campaigns at home and abroad, and who, by implication and direct declaration, never existed in the good old U.S.A. but only in countries such as Egypt, Turkey, and Pakistan where shadowy elites killed and deposed leaders and opponents in an endless series of coup d’états.
No mention in Foreign Affairs, of course, of the American support for the ruthless leaders of these countries who have always been our dear allies when they obey our every order and serve as our servile proxies in murder and mayhem.
Even Edward Snowden, the courageous whistleblower in exile in Russia, in a recent interview with Joe Rogan, repeats this nonsense when he says the deep state is just “career government officials” who want to keep their jobs and who outlast presidents. From his own experience, he should know better. Much better.
Interestingly, he suggests that he does when he tells Rogan that “every president since Kennedy” has been successfully “feared up” by the intelligence agencies so they will do their bidding.
He doesn’t need to add that JFK, for fearlessly refusing the bait, was shot in the head in broad daylight to send a message to those who would follow.
Linguistic mind-control is insidious like the slow drip of a water faucet. After a while you don’t hear it and just go about your business, even as your mind, like a rotting rubber washer, keeps disintegrating under propaganda’s endless reiterations.
To think that the deep state is government employees just doing their patriotic duty is plain idiocy and plainer propaganda.
It is a trick, not the treat it is made to seem.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
I’m old enough (barely) to remember the kerfuffle caused by Peter Wright’s Spycatcher and his confirmation of “deep state” efforts to undermine Wilson’s govt. I’m not sure what the term used for this shadow group of career civil servants but the first time I heard the words “deep state” were in reference to the relationship between Tansu Çiller, the Turkish military and intelligence apparatus and the idea Çiller was a democratically elected and independent candidate (she wasn’t particularly on the Kurdish issue). I’d also heard the tem used to describe Pakistan under its various attempts escape military dictatorship. Perhaps we should all just accept that we resemble the chaotic 1990s Pakistan or Turkey.
My question to Ed Curtain is has there been a state since the Treaty of Westphalia that hasn’t had a “deep state” ? I’m curious to know. And if we are to do away with the alphabet soup of agencies that have coopted the business and media elites, how could any country practice statecraft or protect itself from those seeking to be injurious to it ? Is there a country that does not have an intelligence agency ? I can’t seem to find out.
I’m not convinced that Trump intends dismantling the “deep state” because his confrontational approach has not served him one iota. He also wouldn’t have hired the Boltons, Flynns and Pompeos et al of this world. Even the theory that he wishes to “expose” them threatens his own long term business interests (globalisation of brand Trump with casinos, exclusive hotels and resorts etc). I think he’s driven much more by his personal animosity towards getting even with his perceived enemies (quite a few throughout the USG structure) than been on the side of the “common man”.
So: I got caught between two stools: making a specific set of claims on one page and not sufficiently transferring the references from one forum to another. And I got bogged down on the other forum defending the claims: and have not yet responded here. It takes time to find references: by which time the forum has moved on. So long in fact, no one will probable read this now.
So, who looked at both forums? And who followed the references? Because Ed Curtin never did. Which is about the fourth or fifth time without actually engaging in what I have claimed and referenced. Which is closer to the truth than anything else being belligerently defended.
I have made a very specific set of claims over the last few years or so. Specific: and adequately resourced in the primary historic record. My stance is anti-war; anti-nuclear; and anti-genocide. Which is a better definition of peace than the distorted version contained in the counterfactual mythmaking that I have tried to expose. I furthermore claim: there is no need to even argue if you check the record. None. But no one does. The legend lives on. So, for probably the last time …
Curtin gives a page number in Douglass (page 66): please refer to it. It says JFK succumbed to Cold War pressure and approved CIA plans for sabotage and harassment on Cuba on June 19, 1963. Mark that date.
Now refer to the DNSA ‘Operation Mongoose’ archive (link posted on both forums): Document 23 – dated January 28, 1963 …on the phase out of Operation Mongoose. Raids continued after that – such as those approved in June – but they were not strictly Operation Mongoose. A minor point: but one a meticulous historical record should make clear?
Now refer to Document 24: “Details on the L-66 Raid on Caibarien,” March 28, 1963. Which details the Lambda-66 attack on the Soviet freighter Baku. What is not mentioned is the capture by British authorities of some of the group on Anguilla (see NSA briefing document for more details).
Now we can assess Document 25 – to which Douglass/Curtin is referring in context. JFK was not “responding to Cold War pressure”. He and the committee were dissociating themselves from an ongoing series of raids that had got out of hand. Culminating in the attack on Soviet freighters (Lgov and Baku) and the capture of some of the operatives. He wanted only authorised raids after that. That he wanted only covert actions – that is plausible deniability – is important context to which I will return. It is enough for now to show that the cited paragraph appears to be re-contextualised.
Douglass repeats the claim that JFK was adhering to his non-invasion pledge to Khrushchev. I am now quoting directly from the preface of the National Security Archive’s (NSA’s) ‘Cuban Missile Crisis (CMC) 1962′ – page [xviii]: “The recently declassified Kennedy-Khrushchev correspondence, published here, reveals that no such US commitment was made.” JFK never actually fully committed to the non-invasion pact. For the correspondence: you will have to buy the book. It is an important shift in context to claim that he did. Especially as this becomes an assumptive building block for further claims.
Much is made of the Kennedy-Khrushchev correspondence: in ascertaining JFK’s bona fides for a turning to peace conversion from Cold Warrior. However: JFK did not even write the letters. They were written by committee. If you do not know who Sheldon M Stern is: he was a historian at the Kennedy Library from 1977 to 1999. So he should know. More important context for Douglass’ further assumptive claims.
https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/7982
This was the page Curtin used to refute my claims. Based on? A paragraph of half-truths? The NSA archive was published in 1992 and the Mongoose documents in 1989: long before Douglass (my copy is dated 2008). A definitive account and product of meticulous scholarship should maybe have made these points implicitly clear? Should it not?
Now to my more specific claims. Please refer to page 96-98 in Douglass: where Operation Northwoods is referenced. Much is made of the unacceptable nature of the contents presented. If you read it: he is obviously setting up the Brothers versus the JCOS/CIA ‘Unspeakable’ narrative he intends to build on. He repeats the non-invasion pledge myth. These are perhaps the key sentences:
“They thought it was Kennedy, not themselves, who had gone off the deep end. The future of the country was in their hands. For the CIA and the Joint Chiefs, the question was: How could Kennedys surrender to the communists be stopped in time to save America?”
Due to the “terrorist” Northwoods document and the sacking of Lemnitzer? This is presented as some sort of sea change with ominous consequences. As a ideological struggle with the national security state. It was not. It was business as usual. I specifically posted the link to a meeting on September 6, 1962 (ie after the Northwoods document was rejected): showing RFK – who effectively ran Operation Mongoose – in which crop sabotage by chemical or biological means was discussed. The open question is: who were the terrorists …and who were the Unspeakable? If you read the full nuanced accounts: it is hard to tell. There was no separate National Security state operating outside the command structure of the Kennedy regime. That is a fabrication that has no basis in fact.
So if anyone accesses the full DNSA digital archive on Mongoose: they can see the full range of documents and assess whether Douglass has produced a full and frank account – of meticulous scholarship – of the covert operations against Cuba? I think not. And the selective retelling sets up for a narrative construction of a national security state independent of the Kennedys command operation. And for an alternative virtual historiography of the Cuban Missile Crisis (CMC) …invented in part by underplaying the significance of the covert anti-communist, anti-Castro Mongoose operations. One that does not fit the historicity. In fact: it is closer to mythology.
Indeed: Northwoods was only rejected because it was overt. Here I can directly quote Douglass: he has JFK saying he could see no circumstances “that would justify and make desirable the use of American forces for overt military action”. Covert and therefore plausibly deniable actions were his preferred where his modus operandi, it seems? Which continued unabated after Northwoods was rejected. And which were continued after the CMC – for which they were a major contributory driver …in contravention of the so called Kennedy-Khrushchev non-invasion pact. Having risked and narrowly avoided nuclear exchange: the anti-communist Cold War obsession continued to risk it all again. For what: ideological hubris? The anti-communism was the primary ideology of the national security state the Kennedys commanded. There were no separate pro- and anti-ideological stances. There were differences and confrontations – but that is a quite a quantum leap from an imaginary Brothers versus the Rest simplistic binary narrative construction. A long way.
But this covert action plan fooled no one. I am now referring back to the preface of the NSA CMC 1962 Document Reader. Both the Soviets and Cubans had infiltrated the Mongoose groups …and learned of the plan to invade – in October 1962 …the very month of the CMC. The Mongoose operations were non-trivial and a major reason for the CMC. Along with the placement of the near-obsolete Jupiter missiles in Turkey. The Cubans and Soviets really believed the invasion was imminent: and where prepared to defend themselves …with nuclear weapons.
The Mongoose provocations were not run behind anyone’s back, as some say. The Kennedys were in full operational command. They were the commanders-in-chief of the national security state. In fact: it was a ‘command operation’ run by the Brothers: on their own authority and as their highest priority – getting rid of Castro by any covert means necessary. And relentlessly pushing for results from their anti-Castro obsession nearly precipitated the ‘final failure’. Compare and contrast with the Douglass version: who very much plays down the importance of Mongoose and only selectively admits to it. And tries to divert the responsibility to the JCOS/CIA national security state for the “terrorist” Northwoods document. The JCOS/CIA were not in command though: RFK effectively was (Lansdale answered to him). And he was under the direct authority of his brother. He did not “regress” or succumb to Cold War pressure on June 19, 1963. They were running the covert operations throughout their ‘thousand days’ of their regime as a primary focus of their foreign policy. And it nearly precipitated a nuclear exchange – as the NSA CMC and Mongoose archives and ExComm tapes clearly show. These archives have been available since 1989. So how could they be largely overlooked by such a masterful and scholarly account?
So you are probably bored out of your skull -I am – because cross-referencing is no fun. It is very time consuming to establish fact. But if Douglass’ version of Mongoose is selective. His version of the CMC is downright deceptive. For Talbot: you will have to refer to Stern’s specific refutation by Stern I posted on the other forum (I do not have a copy to hand). For Douglass: I have already posted several archives worth of material on the other forum: and previously over the years.
Specifically: Douglass blends Stern’s “Averting the Final Failure” and a version of RFK/Sorenson’s “Thirteen Days” in a wholly deceptive narrative construction. Largely based on RFK’s hagiographic memoirs: that were self-admittedly edited by Sorenson to conceal the secret nature of the so-called ‘missile swap’. One that is easily exposed by reading Stern. Especially the so-called ‘Trollope Ploy’ that Douglass presents as fact. It was a myth (see link above). The basic construction is the same as Talbot’s “The Brothers” …which has them pitted against the JCOS/CIA national security state and militant civilian advisers. This is simply not true. RFK was the chief invasion hawk who wanted to “sink the Maine or something”. A direct echo of Northwoods. So: who were the Unspeakable?
You have to read the actual transcripts: because opinions varied from day to day. There is no clear black and white narrative – just shades of Unspeakable grey. If you bear in mind that they are primarily trying to save political face over some superannuated missiles – that were about to be replaced by Polaris; and that the Soviet deployment in Cuba did not upset the military balance – it was a political posturing exercise to remove an insignificant threat to the US …as discussed at length on the ExComm tapes (and summed up in Sorenson’s memo: “It is generally agreed, that these missiles, even when fully operational, do not significantly alter the balance of power” [Sorenson: quoted in Stern’s ‘Averting the Final Failure’]). And it was their own covert action plan had a significant causal effect on precipitating the Crisis. Not so much averting the final failure as manifesting it through abject incompetence and the ideological politics of hubris?
And if the Brothers were not alone against the Unspeakable – but part of them – then what happens to the Douglass/Talbot fictional meta-narrative? The mood changed so often: it would challenge anyone to create a definitive narrative – without distortion and creating a virtual historiography. So why do we not just let the verbatim ExComm tapes speak for themselves? Why is there a need at all for a contrived conspiracy theory involving the national security state? There was no Brothers versus anyone. There was no factional national security state protagonists: not when RFK was a chief hawk. And the military coup that the JCOS were supposedly planning was a figment of RFK’s deluded imagination. And now yours, if you choose to uncritically believe this invention.
Indeed: throughout the CMC – JFK often held two contra-distinct positions – over the Cuban invasion, for instance. Early on, when he instigated Mongoose – he thought that military intervention would be needed to complete it. He also said we will not invade: though he never actually ratified that non-invasion agreement. He also asked under what circumstances they would invade. He also went ahead with a full scale invasion practice and had a substantial force on full readiness (as detailed on the other forum) into November. My point being: how do you make a binary reductionist narrative out of that? You cannot. Douglass and Talbot over-simplify to the point of obfuscation: cherrypicking events to fit their narrative construction.
For instance: on October 26 the ExComm tapes reveal that JFK really changed his mind toward invasion and set the State Department to proceed with a crash program to establish a civil government in Cuba post-invasion and occupation. Planning “Post-Castro Cuba is the most complex landscape” acknowledged Bundy. With a “more effective use of the Mongoose organisation”. No one put him up to this. And no one was forcing his hand. Douglass and Talbot do not include such nuance in their simplex narrative construction. Because it would not fit their Kennedys v the Unspeakable fabrication.
How does this show JFK “questioning and resisting the mounting pressure to bomb Cuba coming from the Joint Chiefs and the Executive Committee (ExComm) of the National Security Council?” It does not. They made it up. If anyone actually reads the document archives: the fictive narrative dissolves. And if you read Stern: you might well – ask as I have done – ask how you get the Brothers v the Unspeakable narrative from the transcripts of the ExComm tapes. You can’t. Not without rewriting history.
Perhaps the most egregious invention was the imaginary military coup. The Generals the Brothers could not hold back for much longer. Is there any historical validity for this outside of RFK’s hagiographic imagination? What Khrushchev remembers no doubt came from that source. Can anyone actually establish this hypothetical truth-claim without relying on RFK’s auto-revisionist memoirs? Because, otherwise, that is a monstrous invention and egregious perversion of fact to support a theory of a contra-distinct national security state. If this is made up, as I firmly believe it is – will Curtin or Douglass recant?
So much for attacking my historical stance – which at least referenced the primary historical record – this appears to me to be pure fantasy. Repeating claims based largely on RFK’s edited narcissistic memory is not history. It is something quite different. And if you have to invent virtual contra-distinct factions – the Brothers versus the Unspeakable national security state – and then invent an imaginary coup d’etat to support your theory …what does that say about your theory?
Some of you seem to want to trivialise that the Brothers brought the world to the brink in a petty and inconsequential risking of everything to save purely political face. For their allies this meant “Annihilation without representation” as De Gaulle put it. To remind you: the “quarantine” – in reality a blockade – was an illegal act of war made acceptable by legal sleight and change of name. “Our legal problem was that their action wasn’t illegal” said a State Dept advisor. Dropping ‘practice depth charges’ on the B-59 was another act of war which could have had unintended consequences. As the B-59 had a 15 kiloton nuclear torpedo. All risked for ideological face-saving?
And despite the fictional rhetoric of military coups against them: it was actually RFK who pushed relentlessly for invasion. He was the chief hawk of the Unspeakable; if you like. If he had had his way: the Soviets already had their warheads and the local commanders were capable of firing with no senior authorisation. Had that occurred: “SAC (Strategic Air Command) forces were on a DEFCON (Defense condition) 2 posture, the highest level of US force readiness short of a decision to go to war. By October 24, 1962, SAC had 1,436 bombers, 145 missiles, and about 2,900 nuclear weapons ready for striking Soviet targets.”
If RFK had his way: we would not have had this conversation. Narcissistic psychosexual infants like the Brothers should not be anywhere near nuclear weapons. No one should.
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu//nsa/cuba_mis_cri/dobbs/sac.htm
Which is what makes the so-called ‘blinksmanship’ of nuclear ‘might-is right’ so utterly reprehensible in a contemporaneous setting. Why are we presenting the myths of the past as historical fact when they were not? The prevailing statecraft employed in the imaginary ‘Thirteen Days’ version of history is that you bluff until the counterparty blinks. Whilst having a full invasion force and SAC on a war footing – permanently ready for a nuclear strike. Is that the version of historical inadequacies we should favour? What if the counterparty does not blink? What does modern Game Theory say about MAD?
This is not for me. Especially when it requires a monstrous perversion of fact and invented military coups to keep the fantasy alive. The lesson of history is that we will not be that lucky again. During the CMC the Brothers were the national security state. RFK was the chief invasion hawk. This is quite clear from the ExComm tapes. Transcripts of which Douglass actually relies on – but cherrypicks. So how can he rewrite history by perverting the actual primary record?
That is my issue with the Curtin/Douglass/Talbot national security state conspiracy theory. The JCOS/CIA were not acting outwith the command structure. The records show that. Records that Douglass had access to but only selectively represents to create a narrative construction and an egregiously fantasy military coup. So at the very least: the hypothesis of a military coup has to be properly substantiated – beyond RFK’s hagiographic memoirs. If this cannot be done – as I believe it cannot – then the book has to be pulped. Along with Thirteen Days.
And maybe then we can truly assess the CMC in the light of American ‘blinksmanship’, bravado, bluff, and ideological perversion of the truth. And if it finally dawns on people just how close we actually came in 1962: we might agree that blinksmanship is not the best form of diplomacy? Boys and toys do not mix. The Brothers were the national security state that precipitated the CMC though ideological obsession. Let’s stop pretending that they were anything other than a clear and present threat to humanity. Annihilation without representation is the order of the national security state. A state the Brothers were commanders of – not opposed to. And if you have to invent a military coup to make your point: is your point even valid? Not if it cannot be substantiated outside the imagination of RFK. It is just another unsubstantiated conspiracy theory: defended by nothing other than bravado, bluff, and ideological perversion of the facts. The imaginary Kennedys live on. Have a good fantasy life.
Who needs propaganda? When we make it up for ourselves?
BigB – I think your desire to mythbust drives you to draw conclusions way in excess of your data. You have cited nothing that actually refutes the Curtin/Douglass interpretation. You just join the dots differently. There’s simply nothing that allows the certitude you want to find.
But then you become plain silly:
Seriously? If the recent history of the US presidency and wider geopolitics teaches us anything it’s the tokenism of our alleged democracies. Trump’s tenure, as Nixon’s before him, lays bare the real power structures and how easily the POTUS can be circumvented, isolated, manipulated and scapegoated by what is now called the Deep State.
If he does as he’s told he’s allowed his illusions of omnipotence, but if he goes off script – well it’s open season on him.
They don’t shoot presidents these days it seems, but the fact remains the same Deep State that destroyed Nixon & is currently baiting Trump blew JFK’s head apart in a public execution.
As a warning to the others it seems to have worked very well, but exactly why it was done matters far less than the fact and what it tells us about where power truly lies.
Good to see one of the Off-Guardian guiding team posting personal opinion identifiably BTL (as well as ATL) instead as a being behind the green curtain (or the behind impenetrable haze of expensive backroom cigar smoke) as overlord “Admin”.
Catte:
With all due respect: Have you read Stern or the NSA archives? There was no discernible difference in ideology between the Kennedys and the JCS/CIA national security ‘Deep State’. JFK was a Cold Warrior to his dying day – something Douglass even states. JFK’s entire foreign policy – Berlin, Cuba, and Vietnam – was driven by an anti-communism v free enterprise capitalism ideology. If anyone cares to check: they will find no discernible difference between the Kennedy’s and the Unspeakable. None at all.
To make a difference their has to be a contra-factual narrative construction. Which is a clear blend of fact and fiction. Fact and fiction that can only be discerned if you actually cross-reference. It took me three days to write that comment – checking every fact. If you follow the step by step analysis: you can see clear light between what happened and the contrafactual virtual overlay. If the work is so masterful and scholarly: this should not happen.
The fact that Douglass repeats RFK’s claim of a coup is an egregious fabrication. There was no coup. RFK rewrote history to make himself appear in a better light. Sorenson edited his memoirs to conceal the truth. Thirteen Days should be read as the campaign manifesto it was intended to be. To repeat its claims as historical fact is a clear deception. Particularly if you also have Stern’s ExComm transcripts on hand. The two totally contradict each other: mainly because RFK was lying. To repeat his lies as history makes history a lie.
There was no coup. The other source was ‘Khrushchev Remembers’. Suffice to say he did not remember very well. He also rewrote history to better project the persona he wanted to be. In fact, none of the memoirs – of Schlesinger or McNamara for instance – bear much scrutiny. So is the politics of ego-managed perception verbatim historic fact?
Not when you have the ExComm tapes to compare to. If you blend the primary record with unreliable memoirs: what do you get? Apart from nothing but narrative construction: you get factions in the command structure that can be labeled the national security state. Against which the Brothers were idologically contra-distinct and thus fatally pitted. This is pure hokum. For which the fictional coup stands in clear testament.
There is a case for Occam’s Razor. If you rely on the bare facts there is no need to introduce a complex pluralist invented narrative. Especially one that is contra-factual. I’m focusing on the fictional military coup: but the entire narrative is riddled with errors. They are not really errors though: not when the facts were available. There is nothing more than an invented conspiracy theory to solve a conspiracy theory. Based on RFK’s own imagination: at least for the CMC episode. The Vietnam episode is at least as bad. But that is a whole other book to consider.
So I stand by my statement. As adequately sourced in archives that supersede the unreliable memoirs of the actual protagonists: who had more incentive to save face than be historically accurate. I would like to remind you that much of which I have come to rely has only come to light since the ’90s. Perhaps we should construct our history from the full range of what is now known? Rather than fabricate from the distorted memories of the previous generation?
To be clear: Douglass had all the information to hand – and still chose to validate RFK’s hagiographic lies. To create a national security state. If this cannot be substantiated outside of RFK and Khrushchev’s imaginations – and it can’t – perhaps we should re-assess what the ‘Deep State’ actually is?
We are in danger of creating an entity that does not actually exist. The ‘Deep State’ as a permanent ‘time-independent’ fixed subsatiantialist entity does not exist. Consider the Trump v the Deep State narrative. It has validity as a metaphor, for sure. But if we apply counter-factual analysis: what if Clinton had got in? It was clear from Steve Pieczenik and Roger Stone that a Trump ‘Deep State’ is an entity too. So in the hypothetical Hillary versus the Deep State: is the Deep State quantitatively and qualitatively the same?
The national security state or Deep State is what Weber called an ‘ideal type’. An abstract analytical concept that shifts in definition with time and context. It does not remain the same. The tokenism of todays democracies is never in doubt. But that is just the state. It has been a longterm statist project to depoliticise us. But that is another debate.
The state is never a monolithic structure. By the very nature of politics: there are always sectarian and factional infighting. But these patterns vary with time. See if you can find any discernible ideological difference between the Kennedy’s and the so-called mythical ‘national security state’ or Deep State. I cannot. But – by Occam’s Razor – I can arrive at the same set of conclusions without inventing a permanent Deep State …other than as a metaphoric abstract analytical heuristic. Everything can just as easily – more factually and thus more accurately – be explained as intra-state. A state that the Kennedy’s were driving with their Cold War obsessions that nearly got us all killed.
If we did contemporise the actions of the Kennedy national security state: how would it stand our modern appraisals? Even planning an invasion or indulging in proxy wars is a crime against the peace and a crime against humanity – as per the London Agreement 1945 – that the US was at that point still a signatory too. Which makes the anti-Castro regime change operations an overt act of aggression. The illegal intervention in Vietnam was a flagrant breach of the Geneva Accords. As such: it amounted to an invasion of a sovereign nation state: which is an act of aggression and an act of war – including chemical warfare. What occurred there was nothing less than ethnic cleansing and a slow genocide – ongoing to this very day. The Cuban blockade was an undeclared act of war: as actually discussed by the ExComm committee of the NSC and State Department legal teams. The legal loophole they found – based on some esoteric legal bullshit – is little more than a sticking plaster.
You get the drift. These were all concerted national security state illegal interventions and acts of war that would be rightly condemned today. If we look at their statist actions over their thousand days: I cannot discern what is national security state and what is not. None of this gets adequate attention when we obsess about conspiracy theories and invented coups. Can I also please remind you that JFK oversaw the largest expansion of the nuclear armed national security state since WW2? Which he boasted about until his very last day (a version of this speech was actually delivered on the morning of that fateful day):
Turning to peace? Going against the national security state? Or statist Cold Warrior to the end?
https://www.jfklibrary.org/archives/other-resources/john-f-kennedy-speeches/dallas-tx-trade-mart-undelivered-19631122
I find the Curtin/Douglass/Talbot Brothers versus the national security or Deep State conspiracy theory substantially false. And when I actually cross-check references I find decontextualised half-truths at best …outright fabrication at worst. As detailed above and on many other forums. Which I have more than adequately resourced and highlighted over time.
They were thoroughly ideological anti-communist statists murdered by the state. For reasons unknown …and probably now unknowable. As unsatisfactory as this maybe: that is the fact. There are thousands of conspiracy theories. The Curtin/Douglass/Talbot conspiracy theory has gained an enormous amount of currency: insofar as it is taken for granted alternative fact. Until you cross-reference the sources. Which it has become apparent: hardly anyone does.
I rest my case. All I wanted was a re-appraisal. I foolishly thought that others would be as interested in fact as I am. The sanctity of facts? The invented imaginary Kennedys did not exist in history. They do now. If you want: I will right this all up with exacting references: to be published around the annual Feast of Ascension to Camelot on the 22nd? Though I am not actually convinced it will do anything other invoke a display of animosity rather than anyone rushing out to by Stern or refer to the DNSA archives (which are actually linked to on this and the previous forum).
Of course it matters that they were publicly executed. But an invented mythology does nothing to explain why. We do not know why. Inventing yet another conspiracy theory does nothing to solve the mystery. If you assess their thousand days with the same standards we apply today: I feel I have substantially shown that they were as much the Unspeakable as the invented supposedly contra-distinct Unspeakable. RFK was the chief Cuban invasion hawk and JFK equivocated nobly. He may have been the elder statesman: but the whole goddamned state was rotten. They were planning for regime change even as their regime change operations were on the point of nuclear holocaust. Some statesman.
The focus is all wrong. The ‘diplomacy’ and statesmanship they supposedly showed getting themselves out of their foreign policy catalogue of regime change and war crimes has totally overshadowed the state criminality they displayed getting themselves into world threatening situations based on Cold War ideology. They risked the entire future of the planet for a political face saving solution to a minimal threat to national security. They only avoided declaring war on Cuba by legal jargon – ‘quarantine’ is a euphemism for embargo which is a crime against the peace. The extension of the economic embargo Eisenhower put in place to include food and medicines is perhaps comparable to the Iraq, Iran, or Venezuelan sanctions? Economic sanctions and embargoes mean war. Driven by the narcissism and imaginary ethics of capitalism v communism.
Of which the Bothers were a major driving political force: not an ideological alternative. This peace they were supposedly turning to: what was it? Where the largest nuclear armed force on the planet dictated the conditions of life for everyone? Bathed in the sunlight of liberty; private property; free enterprise; and globalised trade? How has that peace been working out for everyone in the years since 1963?
Perhaps it is time we re-appraise the set of values we use to make meaningful sense of events? What would a true set of peaceful and humanitarian set of values look like if applied to the thousand days? Pretty much what I have been trying to apply myself, I would imagine?
I forgot to add: Kennedy’s peace equals Pax Americana.
Interesting partial mis-statement of Ockham & successors coupled with a fully correct application of its intent. You should chum up with flaxgirl. She’ll put you homogeneously wrong tout de suite.
So Eisenhower’s farewell address in a television broadcast on January 17, 1961 was Bullshit? No Military-Industrial complex?
https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=90&page=transcript
Or was he hinting that his successor JFK was leading that complex?
“the Brothers” … BigB very consistently keeps out the other Big Brothers (not the Blues Brothers): CIA co-creator and director Allen Dulles and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, the drivers behind the Bay of Pigs that scared Castro into the arms of the USSR. Does anyone believe JFK in his first 3 months could have set that up? Trump could barely rearrange the chairs in the Oval office in his maiden months. The Dulles brothers had gained experience in coups in Iran and Guatemala. Those Brothers were The national security state: the proof is in the bullets they shot and the ones the Kennedys got.
c.f. Bill Hicks…
Large hunks of BTL have been disappeared from here…
Are you trying (once again) to imply the comments are being censored? They aren’t, just like the last dozen times you played this game. Explain or we’ll treat this latest attempt as spam.
I don’t play games. I positively dislike games. And I have never either implied, or even hinted or claimed or stated that the Off-Guardian censors or delays comments (apart from a few stated exceptions like multiple links in the same post, to which I have never even referred). On the contrary, I have posted two (2) mentions that comments seem to have ‘disappeared’ (with no implications of censorship whatsoever), one of which (in an environmental thread about the consciousness of trees) I almost immediately retracted (with a detailed explanation) when I realized, courtesy of another poster named–from memory–Jean, that I was mistaken. So, presumably, you are confusing me with somebody else.
On the subject of somebody elses: whenever I have noticed one of the relatively frequent claims by others that BTL posts here are censored, I have usually responded briefly (perhaps as many as a dozen times) that, apart from the aforementioned pre-stated exceptions, they are not. Admittedly those assurances have been based more on blind trust than technical insight into the processes of posting to the web, which–short of hacking–are generally opaque to those on the outside, so perhaps should not have been posted. But if wishes were horses then beggars would ride.
But to address the ‘content’ of your abusive mini-rant directly: the “large hunks” of comments to which I refer include an extended conversation between ‘binra’ and others. (Even) I could be mistaken in that I am looking for them under the wrong article and they were actually posted under another article that appeared no more than a day or two later or earlier. However, I think not: I think they have disappeared or have been disappeared. In the latter case then either by a very unusual technical glitch, probably disk-based, which may or may not relate to your current, already self-reported inexplicabilities, or you have been hacked.
There is an acid test re the occurence (or not) itself, though determining the cause would probably require “further investigation”.
Normally I would invest some time checking that out for myself before posting, but on this occasion, Sir, I will leave that to the superior resources of Your Holinesses, as if there is a search function that enables searches on individual commenter’s past posts or the content thereof, I have not found it, so this time round I have restricted my forensic efforts to clearing my browser cache and rebooting my device. However, if you can find the following block-quoted text with ordinary, poster-available tools within the scope indicated above and short of doing a disk-level search then I am wrong (again) and I will apologise; otherwise it’s up to you to wash your mouth out with soap and revise your pre-accusation checklist.
Finally, as a matter of fact, I did return to this subject yesterday anyway (I forget when: as an advanced geriatric I wake and sleep at increasingly irregular hours, rather like a teething infant testing the stamina of its parents–standard second childhood stuff). I posted the results of an initial investigation that are currently in your system awaiting “moderation” (you know, ‘moderation‘–see ‘checklist’ above) because of the multiple links it contains. The problematical link is highlighted, the others are for format comparison. Perhaps you would like to fish it out and consider its contents?
I hate to write it, but suspect a troll here….
WTF does that mean? That you can find the passage I blockquoted in this BTL or in a BTL a couple of days on either side of it and, if so, where while I now can’t; that I didn’t cut and paste it into a text editor to compose a reply offline before posting it; that you haven’t bothered to ‘fact check’ before sounding off; or something else altogether?
DeepState loses its cover as charity while the dead cat got bounced in the commons about the Russian interference report. This other report by the Scottish Charity people on the Institute of Statecraft and Integrity Initiative whooshs past unnoticed in Parliament.
https://www.oscr.org.uk/media/3771/2019-10-31-statecraft-s33-report-pdf.pdf
luckily MoonofAlabama is on it. Check it.
Not a charity. Unusually salaried employees. Now de registered as charity and gone private. A massive can of worms and dovetails with the blowback from across the pond.
Never mind the msm, why didn’t Thornberry mention it today – an open goal deliberately missed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1225&v=ZDEVAZ345mg –Dave Ellis on EU Defence Union.
Edward is quite correct in delineating the evolving MSM propaganda about the so-called ‘Deep State’, from their initial denial of its existence to them now painting it as a ‘loyal bureaucracy’ doing its patriotic duty in trying to ‘correct’ an ‘errant’ president. Humphrey Appleby and Bernard Woolley and so on. Luckily for the MSM, the term’s use in the more esoteric foreign policy wonk journals as a label for the repressive or murderous behaviours of states the US regime doesn’t much like didn’t reach popular usage.
As horrible as he is, Trump has indirectly exposed to all and sundry many of the ways the US state apparatus operates; and also the interests of the ruling class, if rather too crassly direct and overtly for its tastes. Consequently, Trump has unleashed Bonapartist and repressive elements inside the state apparatus against himself while he unleashes them also against the populace, which reflects a division within the ruling class. Trump is akin to a ‘terrorist event’ that states, without exception, use as a pretext to increase their repressive powers against the ruled. The clumsiness in all this is such a testament to the degeneration and decay of statecraft within the US state apparatus, and elsewhere too, that it’s been so utterly incapable of disguising it. They appear not to have any Humphrey Applebys, so they make up for it by an admixture of repression and loathsome hubris, aided and abetted by a compliant corporate media.
The ruling class may be terrified of Trump revealing too much about them, but they still suffer him since he does their bidding. Trump may not command support from the secret-police or foreign policy wings of their state, dominated it appears by the Democrats who have always been warmongers, but he still commands it from the military brass and the Pentagon, which appears more Republican leaning.
The rulers fear something more than Trump though (besides being expropriated): the truth spreading to the populace, particularly the working class who potentially could instantly choke off the bourgeoisie’s profits. The corporate media aren’t helping so well though, since they’re increasingly exposing themselves by their overt cravenness and stupidity, by assuming a forever-credulous audience that will believe any old incoherent narrative they manufacture or faithfully reproduce. The cohort of younger, <45 years say, increasingly refuse to swallow much of their tripe.
The emerging Fifth Estate of internet journalism is exposing many of the behaviours of the rulers and their state in ways that the corporate media never has and never will. This knowledge is beginning to seep dangerously into popular discourse and consciousness, and likely it will reach a 'tipping point'. Trump's election was the reaction of despair without much knowledge, the next incumbent may emerge from the same or deeper despair but with better knowledge — to little satisfaction, however.
Another Republicrat president of different political complexion won't change things very much, but that may be another step in the political education of the population, especially if Sanders is elected and likely exposed as ineffectual as Trump is against the 'Deep State'. The 50% who wisely choose not to vote in presidential elections might increase substantially by 2024. Hopefully before then, there may be tumultuous events that will render the fraud of bourgeois 'democracy' an irrelevance. One can only hope.
The corporate media's acknowledgement and misrepresentation of the 'Deep State', along with its silence and support for the same Deep State's attempts to intimidate (eg, Max Blumenthal) and repress (eg, Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning) sources of factual information, are their own latest responses to this situation. All the while they faithfully push the anti-Russia and anti-China Cold War 2.0 to regiment and intimidate the population, to criminalise dissent outside their narrowing Overton window.
The 'Deep State', as now used in popular parlance, is really the state's secret intelligence 'community', its secret police and their helpers — the key elements of the state's repressive core: the military, cops, courts and prisons that physically prop up the ruling class and defend their property system. But it needs to be made clear that despite its Bonapartist appetites, there's still a ruling class behind the 'Deep State' that's somewhat divided on Trump, but not on what to do about its rule being exposed and held to account. They and Trump are as one on that.
It also needs to be made clear that unless the whole bourgeois state is replaced by a workers state, nothing much will change — the downhill political, social and economic slide will only continue and likely speed toward a major crisis. The only way that capitalism has delivered itself from such impasses is imperialist war.
Oh look luke harding is co-aurthoring an article on bobo and putin!
The games they play!
Pathetic.
Nobody ever seriously doubted the existence of the Deep State, no matter how convenient some people found it to dismiss this as a conspiracy theory on a par with denying the moon landings.
One of the few saving graces of Trump is that reptilian figures like Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Strzok, and their ilk, and middle ranking military figures, have been forced to step out of the shadows, and say, “Yes, we are the Deep State, the unelected Spooks and the Snoops and the Hack Bureaucrats. We decide foreign policy, not the elected president and his administration. We claim a right of veto over government policy. We will bring down any president who crosses us. We will use the same methods internally that are employed abroad, subversion, corrupt and politicised prosecutions and smear campaigns, to achieve our ends. We will lie, cheat, and steal to get what we want. And you should be grateful that we do so.”
The liberal Left and the MSM have been so unhinged by Trump Derangement Syndrome that they have been willing to act as cheerleaders in a treasonous conspiracy to stage a coup and overthrow the government. There was an active operation by the spooks and the dirty cops to steal the election, and when this failed, to sabotage and bring down the elected government. Spies were placed in the White House. Evidence was fabricated. Government officials were framed and convicted on bogus charges, in collusion with foreign governments (the UK and Ukraine, not Russia.) All of this coordinated with a protracted witch hunt by a MSM that had long since forfeited all integrity and abandoned any pretence of balance or objectivity.
Whatever you think of Trump, the implications are staggering. Unless those responsible are held fully accountable and subjected to exemplary punishment, then this state of affairs will have been normalised and set the pattern for all future administrations. Elections, and the executive and judiciary, could simply be dispensed with and replaced by the US siloviki.
This would merely formalise the existing situation. What is still the largest economy and the most powerful country on the planet openly recognised as an authoritarian police state, a banana republic without the bananas. A sort of Super El Salvador. With nobody able even to pretend otherwise.
You could argue realistically that this has always been the case. But perhaps we owe Trump a vote of thanks for at least taking off the mask and the thin veneer of democratic legitimacy, and exposing the ugly reality for all the world to see.
a conspiracy theory on a par with denying the moon landings
Everything else turned out to be a lie, why should we assume that one isn’t?
https://www.aulis.com/moonbase2017.htm
You make a valid point. We can’t take anything at face value.
Nice article EC, that makes two in a row though O-G!
My parting of the way with the Groaniad came on their article (beliw) in 2018. The narrative has been setup ever since they feared the lies might come back to bite them in their rears. The Groan didn’t say why they barred me when I made my comments there – maybe they didn’t like me mentioning their Cadwalladr and our DS controlling board SCL, in the same sentence.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/22/leaks-trump-deep-state-fbi-cia-michael-flynn
‘Adapted from the essay Paradoxes of the Deep State by Jack Goldsmith’
‘.Goldsmith is Henry L Shattuck professor of law at Harvard University and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.’
The Dreyfusian scale of injustice against Flynn is about to be revealed. Hence the ‘friendly DS as protectors of the little people rather than gangster thugs of the rich’.
Just as the Cabinet Office, Bobo and Dom hide the Grieve report in Russian (prob not Putin but the thieving oligarch) influence in the TORY party.
First task of the new Speaker to intervene immediately.
It’s difficult to feel any sympathy for Trump or his appointees like Flynn who have been framed, when you consider what they have been up to in Syria, Iran, Venezuela, Palestine, and so many other places for the past three years. Any injustice they have experienced, however reprehensible, is as nothing compared to the death and misery they have inflicted on so many others.
But there are wider issues at stake than the fate of Trump and the chancers, grifters, spivs, criminals, con men, swindlers, halfwits and superannuated generals surrounding him. All the institutions of the state have been perverted, hopelessly compromised and delegitimised. The legislature, judiciary, MSM, Intelligence, law enforcement. And the damage cannot be limited to a single president or administration. When a system loses legitimacy, it is liable to collapse rapidly without warning.
And we see the same system of Government By Hoax in the UK. The non stop smears to discredit Corbyn. Skripal. The Syria Gas Hoaxes, orchestrated from the UK. This mendacity will take years for its full effects to become apparent.
Agree with most of that except – potus didn’t go in on Syria like Hillary campaigned she would with a no fly zone and in same airspace that the Russians are based in. He hasn’t escalated a war with Iran, or in Ukraine , or indeed North Korea. Yes there is DS neo-con crap all across Africa from Yemen to the DRC. He probably doesn’t even know where because it is so covert and privatised – until something goes wrong and actual US troops die.
Venezuela is another fine example with the DS trying to run a Cuban style insurrection and installing a puppet – remember random Guydo giving a one week deadline to Maduro to step down!
All the billionaire backers with THEIR appointees have failed – Trump has kept his side of the deal and seems to have given them enough rope to hang themselves without ever persuing the neocon cfr Imperialist agenda that he was never part off – he seems oddly careful about not getting his hands bloody. Refreshing in the otherwise blood thirsty presidents – including the saintly Obama – whose legacy is now a bummer! The Nobel people should retrieve that peace prize – they can’t expect anyone to believe that he deserved it.
Ah….. deep state, just another word for the tribe, the top of the scam chain, whom have the means and the cash to bribe anyone, anywhere, anytime, sprinkle with some cash, shining new toys and safeguard their childrens education and future, for the political whores to their children and whom on earth can fight that.
I dont bother to dive deep but confinds my self to the present.
And somehow, this pisses me off a bit, do we have people whom by some obscure reason have to drag some of the few, and I mean from an basket of 7 billion people there are few, the number is so low its not even defined as statistical noice, that infact did something, where as I my self have stayed on an distance have had to go out and say something, despite whatever they may be or their motives, witch is as far I know f…. irrelevant, since I adress the effect, to the cause they where, and yet we have people whom have to somehow drag that down to their moronic level, while I after all this years try to point on what they acctualy did/do.
Take Max the Bloom, treated like shit, slammed to the wall by the police, whom used fake acusations/false charges to have an reason, because of been on the spot when the insane Banana republics foot soldiers attacked the Venezuelan ambasy, this, f….. is what I mean with the difference between saying drivel on the net and doing something, of all of the so called freedom fighters that man, despite the well pissers arguments about making Him to be something else, since He isnt that into the JQ, I would skake that mans hands and prise the fact He put His ass in the front line, MoFo, the difference between a MAN and a wimping whining Pussy.
And the MSM wrote of course, nothing.
And instead of talking DS I would point onto what makes the DS able to do what they do, regarding this and other events, from wars, invasions to color revolutions, wtich are everywhere as we speak, this what I mean above goes to others whom have been scorned for not saying somethings, or pointing into directions witch even I know is nessecery, like ISISrael, but the fact is, like Assagne, do have layed out papers, but the critics probably havent bothered to seach for that, usually this f….. never do, but jumps straight down to the coment fields to throw as much manure they can but is also for an old timers as me exposing them selfs, for been what they are, ignorant f….tards.
This list, f…… could be widened out to be about thousands of humans from the fighters of Tribal rights in the insanely rotten Central american nations whom is killed by the thousands, to western disidents we rearly speak about, they are plenty, but one thing do they all have in comon, the western prestitutes and whorespondents are dead silent, the cause can be from Oil to Vaccines, like the Polio scandal nobody talks about.
The MSM, and totalian states, well, I have writen exlusivly about the west, and dragged my homeland Norway into this equation just to show you that the western uh….. free press is an mostros lie, never exsisted and so far, not going to die, but have just manitained their monopoly on what is the truth/facts, from science to poltics, and anyone, anywhere, anytime that dont confirm to that, is attacked, with their full arsenal of ad homeniems to downright faking whatever they need to fake/falsify to have a reason for attacking, and never give any oposition any kind of room to counter whatever the MSM spews out of shit against anyone whom isnt sucking to the propaganda, like AGW to the so called nationalists.
Norway, I guess people think Norway is an free country, well, hehe, thats like saying UssA is an free country, of course, as long you speak what they want us to speak, say what they say, echoing whatever nonsense the MSM can muster, then you are free, but the moment you Dont do that, things/reality changes, and why on earth do some morons then drags in China and NK, I dont bother to know, but for me, Norway is the last Stalinistic shithole on this earth, like the rest of the European mainland run by scums and crucks, traitores and pety corrupt cleptoCrauts.
In Norwat as we speak we have another case going on about people whom have been injuried or otherwise depending on well fare, where the system is been exposed and is corrupt all the way, from legilslatores to the High cort, everybody, every single instance is corrupted, and then we have departements and their leaders, lied, faked and obscure facts, for decades, but the effect was that a lot of ordinary people, was arrested and forced to pay back wellfare, even when they had obvious reasons since many where demaged for life, etc, its hughe, and the corruption even more massive, and the arrogance, despite the obvious ignorance is biblical in scale, in little Norway.
Then we have the Invasion of the so called refugees, etc, and a police witch like in Sweden is lying about everything, politices to oblivion, fakes stats since a lot of this crimes is not even reported and then use the so called official stats to claim there is NO rise in crimes, noooo, only Neo-nazis claims that, like the do in Sweden, where bombing is so comon they dont write about them anymore, the system is so thruout rotten its unbelivable, its finaly stating to dawn for even the ordinary Mountain monkey, aka Norwegian that something is stinking rotten in the state and anyone whom tries to do something about it, is hunted down, by the MSM to whom they control, the polticians and they instruct the law, and we are sliding downward to be an full blown banana republic, in Sweden its much worse.
Non of us, at least I have never stated anything else than do something about the class of scumbags that makes all this posible, the f…. polticians, never have I agitated attacking ordinary Muslims as some have, witch in Norway have manifested into orgs as SIAN whom wants to burn the Noble Quran in public, why, I dont know, but I guess they, as most of the well pissers havent or dont bother to actually read what it say, but depends on what others write and say the book contains, and so on, but why do we have them here in the first place, because of our Polticians, they have made it possible by imperialism, where I dont bother to dive deep into it since I require an km more speace to write the causes, but Africa is been and stil is, an play ground for the western capitalistic facism, etc, to wars, resources stolen, corrupton made epidemic, etc, and some blame that on Blacks while I have defended Africans as long I have had the opertunity to do so, but stil I am scorn for been a Nationalst, Hell yeah, I am, but I dont blame people whom could do anything about that, but focusing on whom is doing this and why, and the hyprocasy of the insane stupid and corrupt left, whom have been an instrument for destroying Africa, etc.
But to the Norwegian cause, what happened just two days ago, the freak show we call MSM and what the Norwegian Police did, and their claims about why.
Yeah, this, is one of the reasons for me staying Annon, because of the reasons, whom is behind all the wars of interventions, they fueling of extemism like Wahabism/Takfirs, whom is lying about economu, an insane belife in the MMT whom is nothing but an scam, whom is destroying europa from within, to attacking anyone with narratives that have nothing to do with why people like me is fighting them with the few means I do have, freedom of expresion, witch is under attack this days, just look at nations in europa, look to Sweden, Finland, Denmark, etc to Netherland and Beliga, etc, it happens by and for an reason, they are driving us to oblivion, and that is done by an force that have grown lately and is now in the open, attacking freedom of seach, with obscure reason they invent fo quell anyone whom is oposing the present agenda.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=foHY9EkzTXA
The arrest of G. Johnson in Norway.
And yes, I knew and stil say Breivik was an FF, to make Natinalism to be an hate object, since anyone whom states anything similare by claiming they are doing this for their land and people is an BreViking as I cal the Friends of ISISrael, people like Brevik and the Quran buring uh…. “rightwinged” my ass people, whom, despite claiming been nationalists have no problems with ISISrael attacking Palestina.
And I am also an full blown Skolt-sami, one of the few, and we are not even aknowledged as an Minority since we are Finns and white.
I have had the police at least 2 times in my home, one time 100% certain, ask my usual Pet doc, since some of them used an electro shock gun on my cat, yeah, manly, huh, but I am clean, and they know it so I havent had them here since.
SO, bitches, start with the present, then we can unravel the past.
Norway is an nation of run by f…. sewage rats and is rotten to thir bone marrow, corrupt as any full blown banana republic and treats their own like shit.
Have an nice day, and never forget this I hate well pissers, one thing is an enemy, at least they are in the open, but well pissers are the top of the scumbag list of mine.
May you assh…. rott in hell.
peace
Think how much less conflict and misery there would be in the world without this tribe.
The Deep State was first identified and satirized in a UK TV show back in the 1970s called “Yes, Minister”. The general plot line was that the good intentions, off the wall ideas and general incompetence of a minister in HM government was frustrated by an ingrained and deeply conservative civil service. You can see episodes of it on youTube and some of the material — especially that relating to the UK’s relations with the Common Market (EU as it then was) — is as relevant today as it was back then. (This series wasn’t a figment of a scriptwriter’s imagination; one of the writers was a relative of someone then serving in the government so there’s more than a vague ring of truth to the stories.)
We didn’t call it the Deep State at the time because it was “us”, it was the way things always had been, and it did have a built-in stabilizing effect on government. Its frustrating to those who want change, but then not all change is good. Currently those in the US who are complaining about the Deep State are only complaining because it won’t just up and work for them, its thousands and thousands of people who have sworn to defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. (This subtlety is lost on Donald Trump.) It does carry a danger, though — anyone who controls that consensus, who can identify ‘them’ to ‘us’, has an awesomely powerful machine to control.
Yes Minister was a brilliant satire – but I wouldn’t rely on it too much as an indicator as to the true manoeuvrings of state. It was, after all, Thatcher’s favourite programme – although admittedly that may have been one of these things she was advised to say to make her look as if she was in touch with the great unwashed. YM relied on a cutesy image of the minster – later prime minster – Jim Hacker who was portrayed as an innocent totally befuddled by the machinations going on around him. Of course you could see this as artistic license to introduce the audience to the political environment. Bu I don’t know if the various bureaucratic bumbling in YM would actually conform to “The Deep State”. No doubt it’s a complex issue involving different levels of disclosure. And I would guess that there is more definite planning the further up you go – although I reject the Ickean notion of a conspiracy totally in control.
The reason why people in the States and here are now complaining about this Deep State is entirely due to the fact that the expression has now passed into common usage thanks to the internet. Therefore it has to be addressed and, of course, diffused.
The Civil Service shouldn’t be confused with the DS even if the top CS’s are DS.
Don’t forget ‘A very British coup’ …. now if only Corbyn had the nous and balls of Ray McAnallys portrayal.
I assume all alleged whistleblowers (especially alleged ex-CIA agents) to be intelligence assets unless proven otherwise.
His lack of callout on 9/11 is a clear indicator as every insider and his dog would know that 9/11 was a massive Full-Scale Exercise pushed out as a real event where the only major realities of the day were destruction of and damage to buildings. If Brian Williams and David Restuccio knew it was all staged apart from the buildings, then certainly Edward Snowden and his dad knew. https://youtu.be/i5b719rVpds?t=224
In his book, he oh-so-shockingly reveals that his dad told him, “They bombed the Pentagon.” Woo-hoo!
And the Department of Justice suing him over Permanent Record? … That’s just a ruse to raise the book sales.
Only recently I have been listening to archived episodes of radio broadcaster Dave Emory on spitfirelist.com. His specialization is the history and spread of fascism since the end of World War 2 and he happens to be one of Snowden’s fiercest critics, derogatorily calling him ‘Eddie the Friendly Spook’ and stating plainly his opinion that Snowden is an agent and distraction. From the episodes I’ve listened to so far, it seems Mr. Emory’s suspicions also extend to Glenn Greenwald, Julian Assange, and Pierre Omidyar, as well.
If his past journalism wasn’t so spot on, I’d think Mr. Emory was taken by conspiracies, but the more I think about it, he’s probably correct about Snowden, too. Anyway, check out his For The Record archive in the link- the Snowden coverage starts around episode 753.
I wouldn’t be in the least surprised about Greenwald, I’m only vaguely familiar with Omidyar’s name so wouldn’t have a clue about him but Julian Assange definitely isn’t and the clear evidence is in his state of health – I know Julian’s father quite well which doesn’t necessarily mean a whole lot (I’m sure agents have family members fooled and so on but his state of health definitely proves it in my book plus everything I’ve read about him does not suggest that he is even if he doesn’t recognise 9/11 – that’s simply an aberration and perhaps intelligence assets such as Chelsea Manning persuaded him that 9/11 wasn’t an inside conspiracy. The Collateral Murder video is a fake.
https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/wikileaks-controlled-opposition.html
Since when are tainted NSA, FBI or CIA officers not career government officials? False dichotomy detected. They are not the only group of a Deep State; there is the private branch with the easy money access- like some Rockefellers or Soros. Politicians for hire are the third group.
They rent themselves Western or Islamic mercenaries if needed for “plausible” deniability. They hire themselves to Big money from USA, KSA, Qatar or whomever of the 1%.
Their loyalty is to the dollar and their cabal, not to their entire nation.
Forgot the presstitutes on no.4.
The Council on Foreign Relations & their deep state operatives throughout all areas of government are professionally bound to eviscerate The Duck and his leeching parasitic progeny from the public trough
pronto, and before they single-handedly destroy what tiny shards of organic economic activity still exist in this deflationary environment.
Screw the right-of-center pundits & punditry that seems to think government & the Democrats don’t have ample excuse to frag the motherfucker off the board of directors to a corporation that typically fires the motherfuckers outright when they fucking lose the economy to recession and its dictates for shit-for-brains presidents like Richard ‘tricky dick’ Nixon & The Donald Duck.
Bureaucracy is fully entitled to destroy recessionary presidents that can’t deliver growth in post-Greenspan deflationary headwinds. We don’t give a rat’s arse if the right-of-center punditry is crying foul & screaming bloody murder with the fucking hair on fire as they wave their collectively goofy arms gesticulating hysteria en masse for the tabloids & rags that purport to be edifying.
Who gives a rat’s arse if The Duck is sent packing when he can’t fellate Deutsche Bank enough to get their losing fucking stock back up a few pennies more before this whole charade implodes due to not enough bluster on the part of the bellowing bellicose buffoon of belligerence?
Fuck that, man.
The Duck deserves obscurity & excommunication forthwith, your honour.
Send him to the gallows!
MOU
The only problem with that is that this is not a one off.
Every subsequent president from now on with face the same fate.
No president will complete a term in office.
They will be removed by highly dubious means.
Any improbable sex allegation, third hand rumour, unsubstantiated malicious gossip, or organised smear campaign will suffice.
A crudely forged Indonesian birth certificate in the case of another Obama.
The way to get rid of Trump is to defeat him at the next election. Not by charging down every rabbit hole they can find.
That game is up now as the “Democrats” are about to find out in November 2020.
Of course one thing The New York Times and its fellow MSM travellers will never admit to is their own absorption or subsumption into the Deep State. Given its own history of CIA infiltration into its operations, the NYT’s protest that the Deep State amounts to nothing more than diligent and conscientious public servants carrying out their patriotic duties in trying to rein in a supposedly deranged President is the kind of fake wide-eyed ingenuity that makes even Bambi look streetwise and world-weary.
Curtin’s article and the similar article that Bernhard H posted at his Moon of Alabama blog exposing the NYT’s running interference for its masters demonstrate the depths to which that newspaper and the MSM have sunk, that they would arrogantly think that the public can be fobbed off with such infantile explanations about the Deep State that they themselves are part of.
Absolutely. The New York Times allegedly issued a FOIA request to the city of New York to release the “oral histories” of first responders recorded shortly after 9/11. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/12/nyregion/city-to-release-thousands-oforal-histories-of-911-today.html
This was propaganda targeted to truthers to make it seem as though the authorities were trying to hide controlled demolition when, in fact, their truther-targeted propaganda campaign was all about focusing truthers on controlled demolition:
— They mixed it with the lie of real death and injury using disinformation agents such as Bob McIlvaine to keep truthers hamstrung in getting out the truth that 9/11 was, essentially, a massive Full-Scale Exercise and
— Diverted truthers from the faked plane crashes which leads to the realisation that 265 of the alleged 3,000 deaths didn’t happen and thus invalidates that number right off the bat. Faked plane crashes also eliminates immediately any possibility that the buildings didn’t come down by a controlled means and certainly the last thing the perps wanted was a dearth of material to keep everyone distracted with.
This is similar to the alleged FOIA request by Reuters, reported by the NY Times, for the faked Collateral Murder video. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/middleeast/06baghdad.html
Edward Heath – a well-known pedo – sold out the UK to the EU back in the 1970s. Everything since has been totally corrupt…
In support of the clip above, there is this one, :-https://www.veteranstoday.com/2019/11/03/retired-scotland-yard-detective-outs-child-care-home-pedophilia-sex-trafficking/
My experiences, the Scott Inquiry, the British Legal System
By Gerald Reaveley James
I am reminded of the very appropriate quote from Edmund Burke (1729-97) “It is necessary only for the good man to do nothing for evil to triumph.”
I am most grateful to Dr Badsha for inviting me and honoured to make this address at this Conference of the Environmental Law Centre.
The Astra case and my case reflect much that has been to the fore in recent years in not only scandals around arms companies like Astra, Matrix Churchill, Ordtec, Forgemasters, Walter Somers, Ferranti and other companies like Polly Peck, BCCI and Maxwell but also in the Scott Inquiry, the BSE Inquiry and the Lloyds of London affair and other scandals. The underlying problem is secret unaccountable government which bypasses Parliament and how the law is administered in the UK, gives aid and succour to such a state of affairs. The most common device is the concealment of evidence and manipulation of cases. There is a tendency when challenged for those in authority to talk of conspiracy theories. My experience is that those who do so are usually part of the conspiracy.
My company Astra gave rise to much of the circumstances which created the Scott Inquiry, the Supergun revelations (we reported it first), the Aitken affair, the murder of Gerald Bull in Brussels in March 1990 and much else.
Background note:
My name is Gerald Reaveley James. Until March 1990 and between 1980 and 1990 I was chairman of Astra Holdings PLC (“Astra”) which became a leading ammunition and weapons manufacturer. By the late 1980’s Astra had factories in the United States (9), Canada (2), Belgium (5), United Kingdom (5) and administrative headquarters in Washington Dc, Brussels and London and employed 4,000 personnel. The story of Astra is too long to recount here but a summary is contained in my book, “In the Public Interest” published by Little Brown UK hardback 1995, Warner paperback 1996, London. Astra became involved in covert weapons and ammunitions operations organised by MI5 and MI6 and the CIA, the MOD, DOD, FCO and the State Department and the DTI. To such an extent was Astra involved with its pricipal subsidiaries, Walters, Accudyne, Kilgore USA PRB Belgium, BMARC UK; in the covert trade manipulations of Foreign Policy. In 1989/90, following a reappraisal of Foreign Policy in the light of the demise of the Cold War and changing circumstances in the Middle East, where it became apparent the US, UK and EEC had transferred Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical weapons technology as well as conventional weapons to countries like Iran and Iraq, and the discovery Pakistan had the atomic bomb, the whole covert network was reorganised. This involved the collapsing of companies like Astra, Ferranti/ISC, Polly Peck, BCCI, Maxwell Group etc and the prosecution of lesser fry Companies and their directors – companies like Matrix Churchill, BNJ, Ordtec, Euromac, SRC, Forgemasters, Walter Somers are examples. The directors of Astra were to a large extent ignorant of the full range of covert activities carried out in their name but aware of some of these activities and the likely destination of their goods. As however all operations were sanctioned by the DTI, MOD, FCO, and in the US by the DOD and the State Department and in Belgium by the Belgian Government, not too many questions were raised initially. However, in late 1988 and 1989 it became clear to me as Chairmen that the clandestine operations far exceeded anything remotely sanctioned by the full Board and I set out to investigate in depth. I became aware that certain plants were used to secretly store and ship goods; that monies were being transferred to other operations without book records or board approval in secret commission payments; that our paper work and parallel bank accounts were being used to process arms shipments from major UK defence companies like British Aerospace, Royal Ordnance, GEC Marconi, Thorn EMI etc. A leading British Defence Journalist wrote a report which was largely kept secret which indicated £100m was stolen from the Export Credit Guarantee Department (“ECGD”) in a fictitious subcontract for propellant which BMARC, an Astra subsidiary, had secretly obtained in 1998 from Royal Ordnance.
I also became concerned about payments to and business with MI6/CIA front company Allivane which had occurred between 1983 and 1988 via Astra. Is also became clear that all our main operations were involved in covert operations in the USA Belgium and the UK, and that Astra, when it acquired these companies, had inherited a hard core of MI6, MI5, DIA agents who operated behind the back of the original directors and who treated them as “useful idiots”. All our main companies were involved with Space Research Corporation (“SRC”) and the late Dr Gerald Bull who was behind the Supergun and other secret projects which Astra companies were also involved in. In 1989 I realised we had a hugely dangerous individual on our main Board and the BMARC Board who was an MI6 agent. This individual, Stepahnus Adolphus Kock had high level political connections to Thatcher, Hesletine, Younger, Hanley, etc as well as MI5 and MI6 connections. It is now clear to me that he was involved in the murder of Dr Gerald Bull in Brussels on 22nd march 1990 and Jonathan Moyle in Santiago, Chile on 31st March 1990. BMARC was the only company outside the Atomic Weapons research Establishment and Government Arms depots with the capability to store nuclear bombs like Redbeard and WE177.
By early 1990 my probing had become a major problem and a plot was hatched to remove me as Chairman shortly before the Supergun and other revelations and Bull’s murder. A new dummy board ld in reality by Kock with two MI6/MI5 stooges ran the company into the ground over the next two years. In order to explain away the destruction of the company with a £350m order book and a market capitalisation of £120m desperate attempts were made to find evidence of malpractice by the original directors. Gumbley, my Managing Director, who had been with Bull until an hour before he was shot had discussed with Bull suing UK Government and senior civil servants using Bull’s extensive knowledge of high level corruption and illegal operations. It had been agreed I would return with Gumbley to agree with lawyers how to proceed a week later. I had discussed such matters with Bull some six months previous but no further action had been taken. Gumbley was immediately framed up for corrupting an MOD official and jailed for 9 months and after desperately trying to find something on me and failing, Kock and MI6/MI5 decided to institute through Peter Lilley and the DTI a DTI Inquiry. Lilley was Secretary of state at the DTI at the time.
The DTI Inquiry lasted three years and cost £2.5m plus (as much as the Scott Inquiry). The announcement of the Inquiry and the misleading press statements issued by the DTI and Government ensured the downfall of Astra. Crooks and MI5, MI6, agents or informers were put in chare of Astra – Kock, Roy Barber FCA and Tony McCann. Barber and McCann whose managerial and industrial competence and experience were negligible paid themselves £330,000 and £280,000 pa respectively. Barber took £100,000 in the first month. Barber’s annual payment was more than I received in salary and expenses as Chairman over ten years while I built the company. PRB was sold off immediately for £3m to avoid embarrassing revelations. MI5, MI6 and MOD police and Customs launched 17 raids on Astra premises in order to steal any sales and other documentation incriminating Government. No new orders were obtained in spite of the Gulf War and the company ran on the £350m order book we had left for two years, before it was put into receivership on 2nd February 1992 on the eve of me giving evidence to the House of Commons Trade and Industry Select Committee re Supergun, Project Babylon and arms to Iraq (and Iran etc). Press coverage was hue and adverse. This facilitated, as clearly city interests like Banks and Astra’s main shareholders 3i, Prudential and Clerical and medical cooperated with Government for their own interest and purposes against the interests of smaller shareholders ( a parallel with Lloyds techniques). Kock had a cover as a consultant in Midland Bank’s secret arms department, Midland and Industrial Trade Services (”MITS”). This was staffed by ex service officers, MI5, MI6, agents and intelligence affiliated bankers. Midland with the Bank of Boston were Astra’s main bankers and dominated by MI6 CIA agents. Kock was also said to be head of Group 13, the Government’s assassination and dirty tricks squad according to Richard John Rainey Unwin, a close associate of Knock himself who was a contract MI6 agent and Consultant to Astra. Kock and Unwin, with Martin Laing Construction, negotiated the £2bn Malaysian defence deal before George Younger, the Defence Secretary even knew of it.
The MOD police arrested several of my colleagues, framed Grumbley up. I was subjected to harassment, burglaries; I was arrested by Customs, investigated by the Inland Revenue, subjected to surveillance, threats, bugging, telephone tapping (all documented), a DTI Inquiry which lasted 3 years and a DTI prosecution which lasted 4 years. In addition I had to give copious evidence to the Scott Inquiry over 4 years, 2 DTI Select Committees, Foreign Affairs Select Committee, Defence Select Committee, Public Accounts Select Committee, Public Services Select committee, Police (SOI), a huge law suit in the United States (Dooley case). My family suffered considerably, my two eldest sons army careers suffered, my youngest son’s education because of adverse publicity, my brother was killed in an accident never satisfactory explained which could have been intended for me.
In the course of my own experiences I took considerable note and interest in parallel cases like Matrix Churchill, Ordtec, Euromac, Atlantic Commercial, BNJ, SRC, Forgemasters, Walter Somers, Polly Peck, Foxley Ferranti/ISC, BCCI, Maxwell etc. All these cases and others and the Astra case involved the gross abuse of power by Government and its agencies and servants, concealment of key evidence, intimidation, threats, false and selective prosecutions, manipulation of evidence, perversion of the course of justice. It has also been clearly demonstrated that there is no separation of powers within the United Kingdom. Key legal appointments like Lord Chancellor and attorney General, Solicitor General are wholly political. It has also been clearly demonstrated that Parliament has no control of knowledge of events and that a vast apparatus of permanent unelected Government exists. This permanent Government consists of senior civil servants, intelligence and security officers, key figures in certain city and financial institutions (including Lloyds of London), key industrialists and directors of major monopolistic companies, senior politicians. The Lord Chancellors Office which is responsible for the appointment of Judges, Clerks of the House of Commons select Committees and approval of Chairmen of such committees and the approval of the Queen’s Counsel, holds a total control of the legal administrative framework and has strong connections to the security and intelligence services. The last Clerk to the Crown in Chancery was Sir Thomas Legg, KCB QC who had strong links to the intelligence and security establishment and who was responsible for allocating Judges to controversial trials of a political nature where the “national interest” and “national security” (those much abused phrases) were involved, ie the Ponting Case. Legg’s successor will have a similar role. Sir Thomas was duly wheeled out to keep the lid on the Sandline Inquiry re the strange events surrounding the FCO, Sierra Leone and real foreign policy as opposed to the sham variety discussed at Westminster. He has been wheeled out again to keep the lid on an inquiry regarding the corruption in the hugely expensive building of new MP’s offices opposite Big Ben. The companies involved in this case are Alvis, formerly United Scientific Holdings and its Germany partner in the installation of a £35m contract for copper cladding. United Scientific Holdings is the company where ex Chief of defence Procurement and ex Lord Mayor Sir Peter, now Lord Levene was Managing director (later a Director of N.M. Rothschild) was Chairman. An American competitor alleges irregularities and corruption as it offered to do the work for a much lower price.
The real framework which secretly controls our lives is little understood or studies even by those who work within its musty and murky depths. It has only recently emerged that Appeal Court Judges are secretly briefed making appearances before such luminaries a sham and a joke. The public can thank Mr Geoffrey Scriven for these revelations. Lloyds names can hardly have realised that legislation was secretly framed to prevent wrong doers being sued. (Times Magazine Article 21/2/00).
The other area which is little understood is the Crown. To many the Crown represents the Royal family but we now have a Constitutional Monarchy. The Crown in its constitutional sense is the last home of secret government. Much is done in the name of the Crown which is without the permission or knowledge of the Monarch. Token gestures are made by sending her despatch boxes of “selected” information. The Crown is represented by the Monarch but does not represent the on secret and major issues. The armed forces (the last bastion of institutional integrity) swear their allegiance to the Monarch not to Parliament as do Judges and the Intelligence and security services – the latter are totally unaccountable as is the Lord Chancellors’ office which controls Courts and Judges. The Lord Chancellor is unelected as is the Attorney General who although chosen from the ranks of MPs is not elected, like the Solicitor General. The Attorney General holds sway over the Crown Prosecution service, serious Fraud Office, HM Customs (as revealed by the Scott Inquiry) and the Police in respect of sanctioning cases. The Law Officers, the Attorney General and the Solicitor General are the Chief Legal Advisors (assisted by the Solicitor General) has overall responsibility for the work of the Law Officer’s Departments:
ie The Treasury Solicitors Department
Crown Prosecution Service
Serious Fraud Office
Legal Secretariat to the Law Officers
All the duties of the above departments (and HM Customs) are ultimately supervised by the Attorney General.
The Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland is also responsible to the Attorney General for the performance of his functions. There are also additional responsibilities with regard to civil and criminal law.
The other area which is key to overall secret control outside Parliament is the Privy Council. It is important to note that all main members of the Cabinet become members of the Privy Council as do leaders and sometimes the deputy leaders of the opposition parties.
The Privy Council oath which all members take means they cannot freely discuss any matter they are informed of or told of “Under Privy Council terms”. This means that the Cabinet and opposition leaders cannot discuss freely in Parliament or elsewhere any matter told to them on “Privy Council terms”. This means in practice that the key MPs cannot discharge their democratic duties. It is in effect a gagging system like Public Interest Immunity Certificates dispensed by Judges on application of Government and its agencies. All senior Judges and Appeal Judges are Privy Councillors as is the Lord Chancellor, The Attorney and Solicitor General and other invited and key persons. This secret unelected body has a wide range of powers. On the surface other permanent secretaries, sometimes the Cabinet Secretary and certain members of the established aristocracy are Privy Councillors. The appointment is for life and Jonathon Aitken is one of the few members to resign.
It should also be remembered Aitken was a Chairman of the Pinay Circle comprised of senior intelligence officers and world leaders who hold secret meeting around the world.
It is widely and erroneously assumed the Cabinet is the Executive of the elected Government whereas in our unwritten ill defined constitution it is in reality the executive arm of the Privy Council.
The Privy Council is responsible for the arrangements leading to the making of Royal Proclamations and Orders in Council for certain formalities connected with Ministerial Changes: for considering application for the grant or amendment of Royal Charters, for the security and approval of by laws and statutes of Chartered Institutions, of the governing instruments of universities and colleges, for the appointment of High Sheriffs and many Crown and Privy Council Nominees for governing bodies.
Under the relevant Acts, the office of the Privy Council is responsible for the approval of certain regulations and rules made by the governing bodies of the medical and certain allied professions.
The President of the Council has responsibility for the working of the Privy Council. A leader of the House of Commons he or she is responsible for supervising the Government’s legislative programme. He or she allegedly upholds the right and privileges of the House as a whole and in its capacity it falls to him or her to move motions relating to the procedure of the House. In January 1994 the Privy Council assumed responsibility for the newly formed Central Drugs Coordination Unit. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is the highest Court of Appeal for the Commonwealth except the United Kingdom and those countries which had abolished appeals to it. It still can confirm death sentences in certain territories and in the UK hears ecclesiastical cases and appeals against disciplinary decisions by disciplinary bodies of the medical professions and certain allied bodies. Its more secret and sinister workings are little known and in theory it is the advisory body to the monarch. It appears that the bulk of elected politicians do not penetrate its inner recesses yet can be influenced by it.
The Privy Council allied with the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) and the Cabinet and Cabinet Intelligence Unit which is the real control over the security and intelligence services are part of the secret permanent unaccountable Government.
We have seen from the arms to Iran, Iraq affairs, the Sandline affair and other scandals that politicians and Parliament have little or no control and are more like players in a pantomime put on for the general public and gullible public.
The roots of this sinister power are rooted in history, particularly that of the usurping Tudors. The Privy Council and secret services have developed since then and it is wrong to regard MI5 and MI6 as the sole such bodies. As Douglas Hurd told a Commons Select Committee regarding nuclear proliferation they are but two tributaries of the main stream of intelligence. The communication and eavesdropping unit GCHQ works extensively with the intelligence and security services and with those of other countries including the intelligence services and National Security Agency of USA and with the Services of Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Each regularly circumvents domestic laws for the benefit of the others under programmes like “echelon” and agreements between UK and USA. Politicians and civil servants and other leading figures who get out of line can be surveyed or bugged and then threatened, blackmailed, framed up or worse.
Secrecy breeds corruption, secrecy is power, information is power particularly confidential information. There is no accountability and the calibre of MP deteriorates with each Parliament. The young politician with no experience outside is naïve and powerless and many now have a blind loyalty to their party. Ironically the hereditary peers of the House of Lords provided one of the last vestiges of honesty and independence now largely destroyed by self-important and self-deluding figures like Blair and Baroness Jay.
This the background against which decisions affairs like Lloyds of London have been handled and decided.
Secrecy has breed corruption and lack of accountability. Judicial Inquiries are cosmetic and carried out by the Judiciary who are key tools of the “cover up” and the status quo. (ie the Scott Inquiry). London is a key world money laundering centre (£500 billion per annum). Damage to Lloyds’ credibility will damage London and its position as a money or financial centre.
Much of the Uk’s traditional industry is gone. To deal with Lloyds from the point of view of justice, will rock the boat and damage the so called national interest. Privileged persons in politics and the judiciary etc have been protected and the rest do not matter. The policy is to protect Lloyds and cover up. The same arrogant and self serving attitude was evident in the arms trade and the related drugs trade. Those on the inside are only interested in concealment, cover up, and their own on going benefits protected by secrecy and privilege. Justice does not count. The scandals involving political parties, large companies, the intelligence and security services, and corruption in Germany (Kohl), France (Mitterand/Dumas,etc) Italy (Craxi) are pale shadows of what has gone on in the UK. We have what the late Roberto Clavi of Banco Amnrosiano in Italy as described “potere occulto” –secret power.
Ironically the main threat to this secret power is the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) Article 6 which overturns Uk legal decisions regularly and has already caused the sacking of deputy Judges, and Magistrates in Scotland while threatening Scottish Judges. Scotland under devolution adopted ECHR in 1999 and England did so in October 2000, although the Lord Chief Justice (Bingham) already recommended as a result of the Kebbilen case that the ECHR should be recognised in England before this.
It is significant that the Home Secretary Shaw is proposing the abolition of juries and magistrates in many and perhaps eventually all cases. This will put further power in the hands of secret and unaccountable Government and corrupt Judges. The ramifications are extremely sinister and serious. Already the rules of evidence have been perverted in favour of secret an unaccountable Government who routinely conceal evidence and pervert the course of justice.
It has never been more vital for people to challenge the views of politicians and opinion formers. We live in an age where much if not most of the media is controlled. The legal mechanism and Judges and the court system need to be beyond reproach. Sadly they are not and the chronicle of abuse and manipulation of cases is appalling. Judges are not independent in most government related cases and are no different to salaried and pensioned civil servants. The independence of the Judiciary is an allusion fostered by the Judiciary. Too often a Judicial Inquiry is a system for cover up and concealment. Too often the courts are influenced by political considerations as in the Scott Inquiry and the recent Lloyds of London case. Perhaps with pressure this can be changed.
We do not want a society dominated by lawyers, accountants and monopoly commercial Interests with the courts administered by Judges who follow directions.
Thank you very much.
Very good.
the discovery Pakistan had the atomic bomb ??
Pakistan got the design plus fuel for a few flown in from Deng China by planes. They (A.Q. Khan) stole more technology from Urenco in Holland. The CIA knew this but let them continue as reward for staging the Taliban against the USSR and assisting petrol station KSA through out. Khan & Paki generals proliferated towards North Korea, Libya, Irak and Iran, NOT the West. Some in the West “only” did the chemical proliferation – the poor man’s” WMD.
That many UK and US courts are compromised is clear to most observers.
Israel was given its huge illegal nuclear arsenal by France, Britain and the US. It was given a nuclear reactor by France, heavy water from Britain, and stole (was allowed to steal) nuclear fuel and nuclear triggers from the US. Kennedy tried to stop the genocidal Zionist Regime from acquiring WMD (and we all know what happened to him.)
So in your (self?) hate you dump JFK’s assassination on the Mossad’s plate instead of on the CIA’s? These Zionists are getting more and more Almighty: run the US, Russia, the UK etc. Maybe they are really “Choosen” 😀
Wow, not all alpha and gamma students can cross that old bridge with you as some can’t handle too many inconvenient facts over a fatwa.
Ruth, thankyou very much. A few points to add:-
The 5 eyes are actually 5+1 eyes – it is relevant.
The only judicial inquiry that i have witnessed to be transparent is Leveson’s – the DS effectively shelved that, so far.
Peter Lilley – didn’t go to spend more time with his family – he seems to have been given the main task of ballot box stuffing in the UK. So effectively used in the two referendums this decade and having a major deployment of election stealing in the coming general election.
The DS dies not live by democracy – it just pretends to. It is feeling threatened for the first time since they moved on Wilson in the 70’s.
It is vital that there is maximum voter registration and turnout and FULL audit trail for postal votes.
Brilliant comment, reads as how to hide a government from view. I always knew that if people wanted to change economic and foreign policy, they would have to disassemble the security services. How naive, it’s obvious there is a whole other level hidden in plain sight from the privy council, law makers, judges, bankers, industrialists, military, media and civil servants, while the majority of MPs are red herrings and only exist to legitimise the long con.
I’d forgotten about the super-gun affair, someone tried to tell me there are no conspiracies, just people doing what they believe is right….what nonsense.
There’s also a hidden economy, the sources which come from organised crime, organised, I believe, by the intelligence services and covered up HMRC and the courts, crimes such as VAT and excise fraud, stripping Russia of assets.
Snowden is an actor playing a role. In his latest missive, he says the US government should do more to prosecute the perpetrators of the events on 9/11/2001. As if the US government is innocent and not a major actor. Same with the people who want the Saudi connections to be investigated. Misdirection.
As for Trump, one somewhat positive thing is that he has admitted publicly that the USA is in Syria to secure/steal the oil. It’s always been about Oil, Petrodollar, and Opium. No POTUS has ever been that truthful about the real motives behind USA military interventions. No exporting Democracy. No Freedom. No subjugation of Evil to allow Good to triumph.
Trump is just a bit cruder and less polished than his predecessor, the Magic Negro.
There is no real substantive difference.
Trump is even more under the thumb of his Zionist masters.
All that is happening is that the system is breaking down and competing factions, like rival Mafia clans or drug gangs, are fighting over the spoils.
The outcome is of no importance whatsoever to the man in the street – like the outcome of the December election in the UK.
It’s only a question of who gets to fill a vacancy of quisling stooge serving Zionist and globalist interests (though some sad people entertain delusions that Labour and Jezza can make some kind of difference.)
The system no longer works for the vast majority of people throughout the world, and this can no longer be covered up. All the pillars of the state, the elites, the political system, the financial institutions, the MSM, the secret police, the spooks and snoops, have lost all legitimacy and all credibility.
They have lost control and will not recover it. No matter how much censorship and snooping and intimidation they resort to. This is a losing strategy.
Even people who aren’t very bright realise there isn’t anything in it for them any more.
Hence Trump, Brexit, and the breakdown of the established order and revolts from below in countries across the planet. Chile, Ecuador, Haiti, Pakistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Germany, France, Italy, to name but a few. Whatever other option is on offer, it cannot be worse than what we have now.
People realise the current shit show has nothing to offer them. But the system is more likely to collapse through popular chronic apathy and indifference than through active revolt. They will simply withdraw from involvement in the system into private life, as happened in the GDR and USSR.
It’s THE major actor – all the other nations involved – and I’m sure so very many were at some level or another (including Australia – as if Howard didn’t know) – are of secondary importance. It was under the auspices of the US government and they need to be targeted first. As you say about KSA (and which equally applies to all other nations including Israel), “misdirection”. But it pays to bear in mind that 9/11 was, essentially, a Full-Scale Anti-Terrorist Exercise pushed out as a real event. Death and injury were staged and this dramatically changes the complexion of the event.
This smells like ‘deep state’ shenanigans; for those that don’t know already :- https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/10/30/brexit-the-cold-hard-truth-emerges/ -: .Doris Wornsome leading us up the garden path again.
That is something all of us should not let them get away with. Claiming that these unaccountable people are just doing their patriotic duty. The opposite is true for so many reasons.
The main reasons for me are that the warmongering policies will produce ‘ blowback. Terror attacks are one but ultimately the recklessness which they pursue this policy puts us all in danger against a nuclear armed Russia and China. The US, France and UK via the ‘deep state’ and almost the entire establishment, including the Labour opposition and media is pushing the world to the edge. This behaviour is treason. There is no closer word to describe it.
All these people, whether criminal, corrupt or ignorant should be locked up for the protection of people in the Middle East, elsewhere and every one of us.
This includes every mainstream journalist who has supported the wars in Iraq, Libya and Syria and those in the know who have not spoken out against those that do. Sites like Bellingcat and others should also be closed down for their lies as a matter of national security and to protect the interests of this country. To recognise the sheer scale of the criminality now and act upon it is the only way I fear.
I’ve just written in detail why Curtin/Douglass/Talbot’s conspiracy theory – of JFK against the Unspeakable Deep State – is a tissue of half-truth interwoven with lies and omissions. Specifically: that the Kennedy’s did not know of Operation Mongoose – which the CIA Deep State ran covertly behind their back. Which got our heroes into some tricky water around the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Which RFK/Sorenson and subsequently Douglass and Talbot et al had to completely rewrite history to maintain our heroes integrity and sanctity. That is: they made it up.
Nothing could have ever been further from the truth: but hey …let’s not spoil a good pulp fiction? The Kennedy’s ran Operation Mongoose as the highest priority of their regime. As such: they have to be considered largely responsible for the Cuban Missile Crisis: for trying to provoke a false flag excuse for a full scale invasion of Cuba. Invasion plans that were not stood down until long after the Crisis ended. In direct contravention of any agreement made. But hey ho: let’s blame the Deep State. Only who are the Deep State? And who were the Unspeakable? The Kennedy’s were certainly part of both.
In the haste to reflexively downvote: you might want to review the documentary evidence first?
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu//dc.html?doc=6434721-National-Security-Archive-Doc-15B-NSC-Memorandum
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/cuba/2019-10-03/kennedy-cuba-operation-mongoose
The first has RKF chairing an SG (A) meeting in which false flags and measures such as chemical and biological crop sabotage are openly discussed – without demur. This was after the infamous Northwoods document that so appalled the brothers in the fantasy version. The methods were not used. But others were. So if there was no Kennedy’s versus the Unspeakable Deep State is woo: isn’t there just the state …or state and para-state and factions and divisions within? For which the Deep State is not much more than a convenient metaphor: and not an definable actual structure at all?
Are we really inventing a Deep State just to oppose Trump? There are elements of the State aligned against him: but do they have a definite structure and identity? Or is there just shifting patterns of opposition with no definitive time-independent identity and structural functionalism? Are we just inventing a Deep State conspiracy to explain our own predilections and narrative biases? The Kennedy’s were part of the State until their dying days. To invent a Deep State with some sort of ulterior purpose: first you have to treat the Kennedy’s preferentially as somehow not State or anti-State. And Trump?
There is just a State which is in itself illegitimate. It is capable of murder: it does it every day. It does not necessarily have to factionalise and go deep. Elements of States have been wreaking havoc since long before the Deep State was invented. That somehow the State would have been a legitimate force for humanity by now: if only ‘X’ had lived …seems beyond naive to me. The state is authoritarian by definition. All of the state is the Deep State. Particularly now it stands opposed to humanity and very probably our viability to survive. It is Deep State insanity v humanity.
Vestigial belief in the State/Deep State nexus as a force of good is becoming increasingly delusional. The State/Deep State/corporate revolution is all but complete. The imaginary belief that AOC/Tulsi/Corbyn will somehow change the overall character of the State from capitalist to humanist can’t be anything other than crass stupidity if you are prepared to face fact. Crass stupidity backed with a fabricated historiography that the humanist turn to peace would have been when ‘X’ died. Only in the figments of a totally disorientated febrile capitalised imaginations perhaps?
So it seems we have to invent a Deep State that prevents the State acting democratically and humanistically. Along with an invented historiography that JFK would have been the first President of the natural State of Peace. Please: this is almost hallucinatory in its denial of fact: there is only one State and we agree to be its subjects. Most of us. So we invent mythic narratives of Deep State v the State of Imagination – with an invented history to go along – to try and make this work for us. Only, it is not working. And voting or imagining to legitimate the State cannot change that. So we invent the Deep State that prevented the proper working of the State. We are the Deep State in disguise. Character masking the fact that our reality is breaking down. Our narratives do not make sense without a sense of invention. Rather than take self-responsibility: we invent the enemy. The Deep State that is us in our projected paranoia. There is only one repressive/oppressive structure: and it has no meaning or structure outside of us. If we can see that: the healing has already begun.
When commentators don’t identify themselves publicly but hide behind fake names, there is an obvious problem.
I will simply reply to the statement this anonymous person made about me, James Douglass, and David Talbot. Did I or Douglass or Talbot say the JFK didn’t know about Operation Mongoose? No, it is a straw dog set up to knock down. For the context and truth of this false set-up and the National Security Archive documents, readers should go to pp.66 and following in Douglass’s JFK and the Unspeakable and pp. 95 and following in Talbot’s Brothers, among other places in these authors’ writing. I suppose the anonymous BigB believes that the bullets to the their heads the Kennedy brothers received were because they were in accord with the “State.” Is the anonymous BigB’s saying “We are the Deep State in disguise” a Freudian slip? “Projected paranoia” – a set phrase. One has to wonder.
You’re oddly hostile to BigB’s interesting analysis, as though it’s a personal attack on you.
You’re oddly fixated on someone using a pseudonym, too, as though their anonymity somehow strengthens your argument, standing, as you imply, boldly in the town square declaring yourself to the world. Strikes me as a straw man argument if ever I saw one.
If your thesis is accurate, then anonymity is a sane and sensible choice.
If BigB’s thesis is accurate, then anonymity is a sane and sensible choice.
Really, hostile? No personal attack? When this person accuses me, James Douglass, and David Talbot of lies and then begins the “analysis” by saying something that none of us ever said. Anonymity is a “sane and sensible choice” – why might that be.
Ed – your “bullshit-detector” is in fine working order I can assure you. Our anonymous “BigB’s” attacks on those who expose or oppose CIA talking points and/or Western imperialism are as predictable as, well, pretty much all MSM commentary these days on the same issues. He simply makes lame distorted critiques in line with the MSM party line while donning an “uber-woke” embarrassingly arrogant persona. Quite the shtick. You’re not alone in seeing through it.
You should really watch the recent BBC program Spotlight on the troubles a secret history to watch , one example, of the Deep State in action. Particularly poignant is the murder of the solicitor Pat Finucane by those agents of it or is that “ projected paranoia “?
You can see a system of control seeking ‘sustainability’ by any and every trick in the book or a power that threatens to overwhelm our world.
What do we give acceptance to by acting as true?
Is it true?
Is it the deep state of an unconsciousness – kept background by directing always out and away from self?
Where exactly does power lie or operate in our life, in our family or workplace and world?
Is our idea of power itself corrupted and therefore corrupting?
I feel this is so.
No one wants to lose what they have identified and invested in as real – when it is no longer supported.
Regardless the mainstreaming of narrative identity – the nature of what is not supported by reality is at war with ‘what is’ – which applies to self no less that other.
Its a false investment and no amount of incentivising can make it true.
Attend the Living.
Over at Moon of Alabama a few days ago, ‘b’ had up a post along the exact same lines as Curtin’s above: https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/10/endorsing-the-deep-state-endangers-democracy.html.
Given that Trump is in no real sense a threat to the interests of the Deep State, the significance of the current campaign against him must lie somewhere else.
Whether or not Sanders is a threat-and there are many who will hasten to deny that he is- the policies that he is putting forward most certainly constitute a challenge to neoliberalism and neoconservatism. Medicare for All, now it would seem also espoused by Sanders’ moderate challenger Warren, not only involves enormous disruption of the current means of milking of the people but also represents a reversal of those trends towards privatisation exemplified in the destruction of the NHS. To put it clearly if Medicare for All is realised in the United States, Branson et al can forget about the accelerated re-privatisation of healthcare in the UK. And France. And Canada. And in the many other places where socialised medicine is under attack.
Again, if Sanders actually means what he says about Gaza and the annual subsidy to Israel-that the money should be made conditional on an improvement of living conditions for Palestinians- that too would constitute a real challenge to the very core interests of the deep State.
The most sinister aspect of the campaign against Trump has been the open, unabashed demonstration of the arrogance and brutality of those interests- from the CIA/MI6, to the military, to the media and the Academic world, increasingly disciplined to perform its function as ideologist/apologist for the system-which are saying, in essence “The only real problems that we have with Trump are stylistic, we don’t like the look of him, we don’t like his irreverence and vulgarity. And so, just for the fun of it, we are going to smash him into pieces.
“And the moral of the story is that should anyone be considering the possibility of making a real challenge to our rights to do as we please, to loot society for the benefit of the MIC, to run a laboratory for fascism in the twenty first century in Israel, to fill the media with lies, to employ the educational system not only to misrepresent reality but to make a few bucks doing it..Should anyone seriously be considering challenging our right to assassinate whomever we please, wage perpetual wars and fill Congress with our agents. Forget it. If you think we’ve been hard on the Donald just wait until we sink our teeth into Sanders or Corbyn or anyone else daring to question our right both to rule, absolutely, and to reduce the masses into pauperism, debt peonage and early graves.”
Those ‘on the left’ enjoying the spectacle of the punishment of Trump should harbour no illusions: what is happening to him, for the minor offence of indicating a desire to withdraw forces from the middle east, is nothing compared to the reaction that the long overdue dismantling both of the arms economy and the security state will produce.
Nothing is more mistaken than for those interested in reform or change for the better to hesitate in their condemnation of the extraordinary illegality, unconstitutionality and fascistic challenge to democracy that the Deep State is currently demonstrating. The thin end of the wedge passed out of view long ago, what we are seeing now, as Max Blumenthal can attest, is the kicking down of doors in the middle of the night and arbitrary detention that we can no longer pretend is not soon going to be routine.
That after all is what Guantanamo, Rendition, Torture sites, Assassination Tuesdays and the current treatment of Julian Assange have plainly signified-the bells have been tolling for us.
Very well said.
The U.S. is FUBAR. Having looked at alternatives to this assessment, I realized, this is the only superlative for ‘Fucked Up’. No ‘Fucked Uptest’, or even ‘Most Fucked Up’ will suffice. Maybe ‘Fuckuppery’ could work, since it implies the permanance of the ‘Fucking Up’ and the institutionalization of it.
In comparison, the only adequate equal to the state of U.S. affairs ought to be a parachute with holes in it. Or an airplane running out of fuel a 30,000 ft. The Titanic might also work – but only if it has tied to the ship a number of icebergs dangling back and forth at the hull.
A band that I have always enjoyed listening to once had a song in the early 80’s. The band was ‘Fun Boy Three’ and the song they gifted the world with was “The Lunatics Have Taken Over The Asylum”
This has to be the aptest of all comparisons when it comes to the U.S.: psychopaths have taken over society. A society that has already lost most of the marbles it might have ever had. A lost cause. A no-future cesspool of corruption, deception and crimes against humanity.
If it would be a single person, one would be forgiven to spit before its feet.
“La plus belle des ruses du diable est de vous persuader qu’il n’existe pas.”
(“The devil’s finest trick is to persuade you that he does not exist.”)”
Baudelaire
POLITICAL PONEROLOGY: A Science on The Nature Of Evil Adjusted For Political Purposes
By Andrew M. Lobaczewski
There is an alternative take on this.
The devil’s finest trick is to persuade you that he is God.
Which designation best suits the God of so much of the Bible?
Vain, petty, spiteful, malicious, vengeful, glorying in death, destruction, torture, atrocities, genocide and suffering.
..this definitely not a theological argument (at least, not for me)….but just plain and simple evil as embodied in humans…..and I’m not talking about possessions or exorcisms 🙂
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wUjhRIBluGc