Trump versus The Deep State

[uzn]

I think it is becoming more and more obvious that there is a covert war Happening between the Trump Administration and some Intelligence Agencies aka "the Deep State". There are many Threads here about Trump, but None with this conflict at the Center.
The Deep State is completely controlling the Mainstream Media (MSM). And is using their Media Fronts to wage war with the Trump Administration. Thats easy nowadays since all (95%) big mediaoutlets are controlled by 6 Companies. See this Chart:
http://www.dailyinfographic.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/media-infographic.jpg
download:
http://www.dailyinfographic.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/media-infographic.jpg

Taken from the Article:
The Illusion of Choice
It seems like in today’s world there are fewer and fewer people making choices for the greater good. What I mean to say is that everything in our world seems to be able to be consolidated. The media of course is no exception to this trend with only 6 major companies dictating about 90% of the media we have access to. In less than 30 years the number of companies providing us with our media has dropped from 50 to just 6. The six companies consisting of GE, New-corp, Disney, Viacom, Time Warner, and CBS. If your wondering who owns the major networks its CBS of course, GE owns NBC, News-corp owns fox, and Disney owns ABC.
A reason for concern is the gross misrepresentation have so few companies controlling so much causes. According to today’s infogaphic Media Consolidaiton: The Illusion of Choice there is one media executive to every 850,000 subscribers. It’s kind of like representative government except you don’t get to choose who represents you and there is no better option.
If the free market had truly decided who was the winner and loser I would have no problem with there just being six companies running our media. However the path to success for these companies was not so honorable. Some of these companies even though they’re some of the most profitable in the world don’t even end up paying taxes. Crazy how the average citizen who probably only makes enough to get by has to pay more proportionately than one of these powerhouses.

Source:
http://www.dailyinfographic.com/the-illusion-of-choice-infographic


US-led regime change…in the US? CIA ousting tactics are finding their way back home:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZDsqgadwMs

other really good Threads about Trump and the covert war:
Transition into Trump:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?90590-Transition-into-Trump

Fake News and the War on Freedom and Truth:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?94731-Fake-News-and-the-War-on-Freedom-and-Truth

[Honesty]

..........

[uzn]

Trump is Aware of the Deep State trying everything to wage war on him. Since he sees himself as a representative of all american People here was his answer:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/832708293516632065?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Since it is becoming more and more obvious to the General american Public that the Mainstream Media seems to have a hidden Agenda the trust in the MSM is crumbling more and more. A new Poll is stating that only 30 percent still trust the Mainstream media (MSM):

Poll: Mainstream media continues to lose the public's trust
WASHINGTON (Sinclair Broadcast Group) -- While many mainstream media outlets have cried foul over Donald Trump targeting outlets as "failing" or peddling "fake news," that sentiment is largely shared by a majority of Americans.
In its annual confidence poll, Gallup found that Americans' trust in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" reached its lowest level in polling history, with only 32 percent saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. Trust in the establishment media did not begin with the contentious 2016 election and Donald Trump taking the stage, but after a steady decline over the past 20 years, it took its deepest dive yet, led by Republicans deep distrust of mass media.
On the campaign trail, Trump maintained a combative relationship with the press, but received roaring applause from his supporters when he referred to the "dishonest media," and sniped at the anchors, pundits, reporters and editorial boards who he said were treating him "very unfairly."
In order to skirt the criticism and the tough questions, Trump took advantage of Twitter, the most effective tools he has used to circumvent the media and communicate directly with his base.
In one of his first stops after taking office, Trump addressed intelligence professionals at CIA headquarters, using the occasion to address his "running war with the media." He received laughter and applause when referring to the press as "among the most dishonest human beings on earth."
Only a week earlier, Trump shut out CNN's Jim Acosta to the delight of his supporters, denying a question to the mainstay of cable news during his first press conference after winning the election.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twTQ2kLwzps

Source (with lots of Charts and way more text):
http://wjla.com/news/nation-world/main-stream-media-continue-to-lose-the-publics-trust

[uzn]

Here in Europe the big Mediaoutlets are mostly just barking the same negative stuff that their American Counterparts are polluting the Airwaves with. But there are actually People supporting him in America, thats unheard here in the rest of the World:

Trump supporters cheer his combative stance with the media
CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) — Critics of President Donald Trump saw in his news conference a combative, thin-skinned chief executive who continues to blame the media for the controversies roiling his administration.
His supporters saw something else: A champion of Middle America who is taking on the establishment and making good on his campaign promises to put the country first.
The Associated Press contacted Trump supporters across the country to see how they viewed a Thursday news conference in which the president said his administration was running like "a fine-tuned machine" despite the resignation of his top national security adviser, a court setback on his immigration order, a defeat for his nominee as labor secretary and reports of internal divisions.

Here are views of some of those supporters:
___
Richelle Kirk of Logan, West Virginia, watched some of Trump's news conference on Thursday and didn't see any head-scratching comments from the president.
"I back him 100 percent," said the 42-year-old stay-at-home mom. "You either love it or get out, is my opinion."
During Barack Obama's presidency, her husband was laid off from his coal-mining job, a loss they blamed on Obama's environmental policies. She said they lost a home and "everything we owned."
After West Virginia voters resoundingly rejected Obama during his 2012 re-election, "we didn't show our hind ends when Obama was re-elected," Kirk said. So she believes people shouldn't overreact to Trump, either.
She particularly agreed with the president when he took credit for an optimistic business climate and a rising stock market, saying Trump is beginning to fulfill his campaign promise to put people back to work.
Reporters, she said, "need to leave him alone. He's just doing what he said he's going to do."
___
Kevin Felty of Norfolk, Virginia, said it was the "most impressive presidential press conference" of his life.
"Largely because it was so unorthodox," said Felty, 48, who works as a surgical assistant and sells life insurance. "It was hyper adversarial between the president and the press. And yet he was able to control the questioning and the tone and the mood in the room."
Felty said the media needs to move on regarding Russia and former national security adviser Michael Flynn.
"There was nothing illegal that General Flynn had done at that time," Felty said. "What he did do is make a mistake in not being accurate with the vice president."
He also said he believes Trump is trustworthy as president.
"He doesn't need the media to chide him to make the right decisions," Felty said. "It's something he's been doing well for decades."
___
Regina Lenoir of Picayune, Mississippi, enjoyed watching Trump's news conference and said the president "looked more relaxed."
Lenoir, 69, said she was most interested in the president's comments about the alleged leaks that led to the resignation of Michael Flynn as national security adviser.
"We don't know the conversation that happened between him and (Vice President Mike) Pence. Only they know. But the news media gets out there (and) says such and such with no corroboration," she said. "I'm sick of them making up stories. You know, we're intelligent people. We can make up our own mind on whether they're telling the truth."
She agreed with Trump's take on how the media has covered his administration and campaign, saying those covering his administration are good reporters but biased.
She said if people gave Trump a chance, "he might just surprise everyone.
"He wasn't my first choice, but he is my president," Lenoir said. "I think he handled the news conference very well."
___
Joseph Gatlin of Virginia Beach, Virginia, said he did not watch the news conference but heard about the question a Jewish reporter asked Trump about a rise in anti-Semitic incidents around the country.
Trump told the reporter to sit down and said it was not a simple or fair question before describing himself as "the least anti-Semitic person you've ever seen in your entire life."
Gatlin, who is Jewish and who was born in Israel, said the media needs to move on from "asking the same question."
"He's not a racist. He doesn't believe in racism," said Gatlin, who owns a flooring company. "He's not anti-Semitic at all."
Gatlin pointed to the number of Jewish people in Trump's inner circle, including his son-in-law and White House adviser, Jared Kushner. He said the media instead should be asking Trump about terrorism and the economy.
"I think that it's become ridiculous," Gatlin said. "He wants the serious questions. He wants people to ask him questions that people care about. You can't mention racism in every speech. They're looking at the wrong things."
___
Scott Hiltgen, a 66-year-old office furniture sales broker from River Falls, Wisconsin, said he was glad to see the president push back against the media. He said reporters have no proof Trump or anyone around him did anything wrong.
"They're trying to make up a story that Trump worked with the Russians to rig the election," he said. "Now they're trying to make a big deal out of (former national security adviser) Mike Flynn. He was doing what he was supposed to do. He was talking to his counterparts. He was talking to the Russians. He got fired because he lied to (Vice President Mike) Pence. There's no story there. The left media is so excited. They think they took this guy down. No, he made a mistake. He just lied."
Hiltgen said he remains squarely behind the billionaire president because he has done what he said he would do on the campaign trail.
"He's accomplished more in, whatever, three weeks, regarding the stuff he talked about," Hiltgen said. "That's what people voted for. I can't believe there's actually a politician doing what he says he would do. That never happens."
___
Associated Press writers Ben Finley in Norfolk, Virginia; Chevel Johnson in New Orleans; and Todd Richmond in Madison, Wisconsin, contributed to this report.

Source:
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/f6fa3a4a09874532b9e610535ae463e9/trump-supporters-cheer-his-combative-stance-media

[uzn]

There is an Article in a big german Newspaper (Der Tagesspiegel) already questioning if there will be an open war between the Trump Administration and the Deep State:
Droht in den USA ein Krieg zwischen der Regierung und dem "tiefen Staat"?
The Article (in german):
http://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/pressekonferenz-von-donald-trump-droht-in-den-usa-ein-krieg-zwischen-der-regierung-und-dem-tiefen-staat/19407558.html

Lets compare how the Press is treating Donald Trump and how the Press treated the last President Obama. All the war crimes and crimes against humanity of Obama where treated as nothing happened, and now every word of Trump is laid on a golden scale ? Just a Little selection of Uncool Things and Crimes of Mr. (I should go to Jail for that) Obama:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-j6JrbQsmOQw/U-7XGLU1TFI/AAAAAAAAGRw/LstzqM4Wz4c/s1600/mlk.i.have.a.dream.obama.i.have.a.drone.05.gif

Sent 3,500 U.S. troops and tanks to Russia's doorstep in one of his final decisions as president.
Obama ordered ten times more drone strikes than Bush.
In 2016 alone Obama dropped 26,171 bombs (an average of 72 bombs every day).
Put boots on the ground in Syria , despite 16 times saying "no boots on the ground".
Despite campaign pledges, planned a $1 trillion progam to add more nuclear weapons to the US arsenal in the next 30 years.
Dropped bombs in 7 Muslim countries; and then bragged about it .
Said, “I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being.”
Bragged about his use of drones  - I'm "really good at killing people".
Deported a modern-record 2 million immigrants.
Signed the Monsanto Protection Act into law.
Started a new war in Iraq .
Initiated, and personally oversees a 'Secret Kill List'.
Pushed for war on Syria while siding with al-Qaeda .
Backed neo-Nazis in Ukraine.
Supported Israel's wars and occupation of Palestine.
Deployed Special Ops to 134 countries - compared to 60 under Bush.
Did a TV commercial promoting "clean coal".
Drastically escalated the  NSA spying program .
Signed the NDAA into law - making it legal to assassinate Americans w/o charge or trial.
Given Bush absolute immunity for everything.
Pushed for a TPP Trade Pact .
Started a new war on terror - this one on ISIS .
Signed more executive memoranda than any other president in history.
Transferred more than $100 billion in arms sales to Saudi Arabia, more than any other administration in history.
Signed an agreement for 7 military bases in Colombia .
Opened a military base in Chile.
Touted nuclear power , even after the disaster in Japan.
Opened up deepwater oil drilling, even after the BP disaster.
Mandated the Insider Threat Program which orders federal employees to report suspicious actions of their colleagues.
Defended body scans and pat-downs at airports.
Signed the Patriot Act extension into law.
Launched 20,000 Airstrikes in his first term.
Continued Bush's rendition program.
Said the U.S. is the "one indispensable nation" in the world.
Waged war on Libya without congressional approval.
Started a covert, drone war in Yemen.
Escalated the proxy war in  Somalia.
Escalated the CIA drone war in Pakistan.
Sharply escalated the war in Afghanistan.
Repealed the Propaganda ban, making it legal to spread government propaganda via news outlets.
Assassinated 4 US citizens with drone strikes.

For a more complete List of Obama Legacy to the World (about 20 pages) :
Obama Fact Sheet
https://www.stpete4peace.org/obama-fact-sheet

[uzn]

Since the Deep State wants to put some blame on Russia for having lost the Election with their Favorite Criminal Killary Clinton. Here a good Article about the long history of the U.S. interfering with elections elsewhere:

https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2016/10/AP_7402221159-1024x681.jpg
U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger shakes hands with Chilean Foreign Minister Ismale Huerta Diaz during break in the Latin Foreign Ministers Conference in Mexico City, Feb. 22, 1974

One of the more alarming narratives of the 2016 U.S. election campaign is that of the Kremlin's apparent meddling. Last week, the United States formally accused the Russian government of stealing and disclosing emails from the Democratic National Committee and the individual accounts of prominent Washington insiders.
The hacks, in part leaked by WikiLeaks, have led to loud declarations that Moscow is eager for the victory of Republican nominee Donald Trump, whose rhetoric has unsettled Washington's traditional European allies and even thrown the future of NATO — Russia's bête noire — into doubt.
Leading Russian officials have balked at the Obama administration's claim. In an interview with CNN on Wednesday, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov dismissed the suggestion of interference as “ridiculous,” though he said it was “flattering” that Washington would point the finger at Moscow. At a time of pronounced regional tensions in the Middle East and elsewhere, there's no love lost between Kremlin officials and their American counterparts.
Today's WorldView
What's most important from where the world meets Washington
Sign up
To be sure, there's a much larger context behind today's bluster. As my colleague Andrew Roth notes, whatever their government's alleged actions in 2016, Russia's leaders enjoy casting aspersions on the American democratic process. And, in recent years, they have also bristled at perceived U.S. meddling in the politics of countries on Russia's borders, most notably in Ukraine.
While the days of its worst behavior are long behind it, the United States does have a well-documented history of interfering and sometimes interrupting the workings of democracies elsewhere. It has occupied and intervened militarily in a whole swath of countries in the Caribbean and Latin America and fomented coups against democratically elected populists.
The most infamous episodes include the ousting of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953 — whose government was replaced by an authoritarian monarchy favorable to Washington — the removal and assassination of Congolese leader Patrice Lumumba in 1961, and the violent toppling of socialist Chilean President Salvador Allende, whose government was swept aside in 1973 by a military coup led by the ruthless Gen. Augusto Pinochet.

For decades, these actions were considered imperatives of the Cold War, part of a global struggle against the Soviet Union and its supposed leftist proxies. Its key participants included scheming diplomats like John Foster Dulles and Henry Kissinger, who advocated aggressive, covert policies to stanch the supposedly expanding threat of communism. Sometimes that agenda also explicitly converged with the interests of U.S. business: In 1954, Washington unseated Guatemala's left-wing president, Jacobo Arbenz, who had had the temerity to challenge the vast control of the United Fruit Co., a U.S. corporation, with agrarian laws that would be fairer to Guatemalan farmers. The CIA went on to install and back a series of right-wing dictatorships that brutalized the impoverished nation for almost half a century.
A young Che Guevara, who happened to be traveling through Guatemala in 1954, was deeply affected by Arbenz's overthrow. He later wrote to his mother that the events prompted him to leave “the path of reason” and would ground his conviction in the need for radical revolution over gradual political reform.
Aside from its instigation of coups and alliances with right-wing juntas, Washington sought to more subtly influence elections in all corners of the world. And so did Moscow. Political scientist Dov Levin calculates that the “two powers intervened in 117 elections around the world from 1946 to 2000 — an average of once in every nine competitive elections.”
In the late 1940s, the newly established CIA cut its teeth in Western Europe, pushing back against some of the continent's most influential leftist parties and labor unions. In 1948, the United States propped up Italy's centrist Christian Democrats and helped ensure their electoral victory against a leftist coalition, anchored by one of the most powerful communist parties in Europe. CIA operatives gave millions of dollars to their Italian allies and helped orchestrate what was then an unprecedented, clandestine propaganda campaign: This included forging documents to besmirch communist leaders via fabricated sex scandals, starting a mass letter-writing campaign from Italian Americans to their compatriots, and spreading hysteria about a Russian takeover and the undermining of the Catholic Church.
“We had bags of money that we delivered to selected politicians, to defray their political expenses, their campaign expenses, for posters, for pamphlets,” recounted F. Mark Wyatt, the CIA officer who handled the mission and later participated in more than 2½ decades of direct support to the Christian Democrats.
This template spread everywhere: CIA operative Edward G. Lansdale, notorious for his efforts to bring down the North Vietnamese government, is said to have run the successful 1953 campaign of Philippines President Ramon Magsaysay. Japan's center-right Liberal Democratic Party was backed with secret American funds through the 1950s and the 1960s. The U.S. government and American oil corporations helped Christian parties in Lebanon win crucial elections in 1957 with briefcases full of cash.
In Chile, the United States prevented Allende from winning an election in 1964. “A total of nearly four million dollars was spent on some fifteen covert action projects, ranging from organizing slum dwellers to passing funds to political parties,” detailed a Senate inquiry in the mid-1970s that started to expose the role of the CIA in overseas elections. When it couldn't defeat Allende at the ballot box in 1970, Washington decided to remove him anyway.
“I don’t see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people,” Kissinger is said to have quipped. Pinochet's regime presided over years of torture, disappearances and targeted assassinations. (In a recent op-ed, Chilean-American novelist Ariel Dorfman called on Hillary Clinton to repudiate Kissinger if she wins the presidential election.)
After the end of the Cold War, the United States has largely brought its covert actions into the open with organizations like the more benign National Endowment for Democracy, which seeks to bolster civil society and democratic institutions around the world through grants and other assistance. Still, U.S. critics see the American hand in a range of more recent elections, from Honduras to Venezuela to Ukraine.
Meanwhile, the threat of foreign meddling in U.S. elections is not restricted to fears of Russian plots. In the late 1990s, the specter of illicit Chinese funds dominated concerns about Democratic campaign financing. But some observers cautioned others not to be too indignant.

“If the Chinese indeed tried to influence the election here . . . the United States is only getting a taste of its own medicine,” Peter Kornbluh, director of the National Security Archive, which is affiliated with George Washington University, said in a 1997 interview with the New York Times. “China has done little more than emulate a long pattern of U.S. manipulation, bribery and covert operations to influence the political trajectory of countless countries around the world.”



Source:
Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/10/13/the-long-history-of-the-u-s-interfering-with-elections-elsewhere/?utm_term=.afadab8b154f

For more Regime Changes by the US see here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change#Post-World_War_II

And since I am already posting about Regime Changes, here is the official casualty Count by these illegal wars:
US Has Killed More Than 20 Million People in 37 “Victim Nations” Since World War II
The list is to long to copy/paste here so a link have to do:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-has-killed-more-than-20-million-people-in-37-victim-nations-since-world-war-ii/5492051

[uzn]

Important for this Thread:
Great Post by turiya: The Stakes for Trump and All of Us — by Paul Craig Roberts
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?95893-Trump-The-Great-American-Reset&p=1135420&viewfull=1#post1135420


San Francisco Chronicle:
Washington’s coup fever heats up
by David Talbot

In case you turned off your computer and TV and crawled under the blankets all last week — and, really, who can blame you? — here’s a quick recap of the news. Leaking like an old waterbed, the national security establishment claimed its first big casualty, national security adviser Michael Flynn. President Trump struck back by reaching new levels of weirdness at his Thursday news conference, telling the media pack that they were “hateful” and “dishonest”… but, hey, “it’s a great honor to be with you.”
The “least racist man you’ll ever meet” then went on to ask an African American reporter to set up a meeting for him with the Congressional Black Caucus, because, well, she’s black.

He then totally lost it with a reporter for an Orthodox Jewish publication, ordering him to “sit down” and “be quiet,” and saying that he was “repulsed” by his question about the recent rise of anti-Semitic incidents. Apparently Trump — who, if you haven’t noticed, can be just a tad thin-skinned — thought the yarmulke-wearing reporter was accusing him of vandalizing temples and Jewish community centers. “I’m the least anti-Semitic person that you’ve ever seen in your entire life,” Trump berated the utterly bewildered reporter, who had just fawningly prefaced his question by praising the president’s credentials as a “zayde,” the grandfather of Jewish children.

Trump’s news conference antics only fed the growing public perception that we are being led, or misled, by a mad king. Meanwhile, the war in Washington grew so heated that Julian Assange tweeted about “the amazing battle for dominance between the elected US govt & the IC (intelligence community.)”

Twitterdom is ringing with lunatic effusions, and not all of them are coming from the president himself.
The hubbub for a coup — on the left and right — grows louder by the day. William Kristol, a leader of the neoconservative anti-Trump pack, is among those who has tweeted his secret longing to be saved by Big Brother: “Obviously strongly prefer normal democratic and constitutional politics. But if it comes to it, prefer the deep state to the Trump state.”
If it comes to it. … At least one spook, a former NSA analyst named John Schindler, thinks we’re at that point now. Schindler let loose a disturbing war cry last week, tweeting, “Now we go nuclear. IC war going to new levels.”

Schindler’s crowd is convinced Trump’s fate is sealed. “He will die in jail,” Schindler was told by a “senior IC friend.” Weirdly, Schindler — who thinks Trump has sold out the country to the Russians — is the national security correspondent for the New York Observer, the newspaper owned by Trump son-in-law and close adviser Jared Kushner. Maybe Trump is not such a beloved zayde in the Kushner household.

Even the New York Times, which in the past has dismissed all discussion of deep state plotting against U.S. democracy as the paranoid ravings of the conspiracy set, ran a long, sober feature on Friday exploring whether the United States is following the tumultuous path of countries like Egypt, Turkey and Pakistan and “seeing the rise of its own deep state.”

The truth is that the deep state — powerful officials in the national security world and their Wall Street and corporate allies — have long had a contentious history with American democracy. The FBI, including high official Mark Felt (a.k.a. “Deep Throat”), and the CIA played key roles in the Watergate intrigue that finally brought down Richard Nixon. William Casey, President Ronald Reagan’s spymaster, helped engineer the October Surprise during the 1980 presidential campaign that sabotaged the Iran hostage release and ensured Jimmy Carter’s defeat. Some historians and investigators (including me) argue that CIA legend Allen Dulles played a central role in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and the crime’s cover-up.

Democracy is an exquisitely fragile enterprise, “a delicate eggshell in the rough-and-tumble of history,” as I wrote in my book, “The Devil’s Chessboard.” Rule by the people must always contend with rule by elites who are much more organized, financed, ruthless and armed.

What’s odd about these increasingly odd times is that many engaged citizens, including progressives, are eagerly hoping for the overthrow of our elected government, if we can rid ourselves of the dangerously unhinged Trump. But a coup would mean the coup de grace for American democracy. Yes, the mad king would be gone. In the process, however, we’d be empowering the most militaristic, secretive and sinister elements of our society.

I agree that saving America means bringing down Trump. But it’s a revived democracy that must be his downfall — a newly invigorated media, judicial system and citizenry — not the dark maneuvers of spies and generals.

As a journalist, I have no problem receiving Trump-damaging leaks from the deep state, if these leaks are thoroughly vetted and substantiated. That’s often the only way to find glimpses of the truth in secretive democracies like ours. “There is a crack, a crack in everything — that’s how the light gets in,” as Leonard Cohen sang.

But there’s a big difference between taking advantage of the cracks in the national security establishment to shed light on the dark operations of power, and celebrating the deep state as our savior. That’s what some liberal commentators — like Tim Weiner, a former New York Times reporter and author of books about the CIA and FBI — were doing last week, going on the cable shows and getting all gooey about the strongmen in the shadows who will supposedly protect us.

Weiner got so carried away at one point on “The Rachel Maddow Show” that he called the FBI’s Machiavellian director, James Comey, and Sen. John McCain — a man who has never seen a war he didn’t like — the only heroic watchmen standing in the way of the Trump abyss.
Wrong.

My fellow Americans — we’re democracy’s last line of defense.

Source:
http://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Washington-s-coup-fever-heats-up-10942988.php

[Rocky_Shorz]

I have a confession, last night I looked up Gate's home in Washington, and asked God for a little rumble if he was involved in the pandemic hitting China...

Seattle was hit by a 4.2. 😞

[Chester]

Someone certainly took some time out of their day to design this infographic.

Indeed they did...

...and note, this infographic seems to have been created 5 or 6 years ago an in some parts is using data that is about 15 years old yet it seems the picture the graphic paints is quite accurate today.

Yet when I think about the time someone put into creating this infographic, I realize that if we took the time each and every human being has put into creating the reality this infographic points to and we line that up linearly then I can imagine that the amount of time put into creating the infographic is about the size of a grain of sand and I can imagine that the time put in by each and every human being that has played a role in creating the data is equal or greater to the size of the milky way galaxy.

So what blows me away is all the time all the various human beings have put in to creating this data such that someone might become inspired to create the infographic so that we might become more aware of the massiveness of and the impact of the deep state on not just us folks here in the US but the entire globe and probably beyond...

...imagine all that time put in to manifesting all this "deep state" activity?

THAT is truly mind blowing... at least to this reader/poster.

[Justplain]

Although its all fine and good to point out that Trump is waging a war with the deep state, i believe this is all for show.

I agree with the above posts that the usa continually interfers with the affairs of sovereign states illegally and immorally, and then whines when someone even thinks about doing the same to them. I also agree that Obama was promoting the same agenda as bush jr., clinton, bush sr. and the reagan administrations. The foreign policy approach of this program is clearly outlined in 'confessions of an economic hit man'. The domestic component of this program is widely recognized as the nwo agenda of destroying the middle class, fracturing the nuclear family, making the public dependent on debillitating and addictive drugs (the illegal ones furnished by the cia), making the public malnurished with gmo food and the public dependent on the nanny state. Obama did nothing but promoted this agenda.

Now trump may appear to be battling these bad guys, and it is noteworthy that he repealed tpp. However, other than battling with the msm, which the public doesnt trust anymore anyway, he has done little to unseat the deep state/ptb. For instance, the commerce secretary wants to further deregulate the banks, basically back to where they were before the 2008 lehman failure caused bailouts, which will only likely result in another major failure (glass-steagal needs to be restored). Secondly, trump's admim is talking about further cutting taxes to corporations (and likely the rich), which is a failed policy since tax cuts did not create jobs in the usa historically. Trump is also repealing epa measures and stepping up police state activities in the guise of immigration law enforcement.

Trump is not following up on his election promise to extract american foreign bases and stop the usa being the world's policeman (in their egotistical fantasy anyway). Instead, he has escalated tensions with iran and china. He's even reconsidering his relationship with russia.

Trump is NOT questioning the role of the federal reserve system, he is NOT questioning the monsanto protection legislation, he is NOT trying to declassify black ops projects (where the deep state hides), he is NOT closing foreign bases, he is NOT attempting to shut down the nsa snooping programs, he is NOT trying to dismantle cia programs that interfer with foreign countries or the american msm. He is NOT looking to breakup the media oligopy mentioned in posts above. He is NOT attempting to dismantle the cia drug running business, he is NOT re-opening the 9/11 investigation, Etc, etc.

The real, likely intention of this media campaign against trump is to prep the american public for the next usa federal election when tptb will promote another fake liberator candidate, likely thru the democrats. Another obama style 'i am an outsider who can really promote change in washington' type. Like obama, this candidate will likely be a cia recruit from an early age who will just further promote the nwo agenda.

If trump really tried to change things, he wouldnt live long. He is highly vulnerable bring surrounded by deep state intelligence personnel all the time. I really dont see much hope for the usa in the current situation. Only a miracle could change the situation, i believe.

In the meantime, the best we common folk can do is cleanup our own acts and be as independent from this big government/nanny state/msm/fascist economy as we can. Then when it someday collapses we'll be well prepared for a more independent lifestyle that follows.

[conk]

N2yTkqwg-cE Senator Kucinich is warning us about The Deep State's drive to create or refresh a cold war with Russia.

[Helene West]

Per post#10 -
"....Trump is not following up on his election promise to extract american foreign bases and stop the usa being the world's policeman (in their egotistical fantasy anyway)...."

"...Trump is NOT questioning the role of the federal reserve system, he is NOT questioning the monsanto protection legislation, he is NOT trying to declassify black ops projects (where the deep state hides), he is NOT closing foreign bases, he is NOT attempting to shut down the nsa snooping programs, he is NOT trying to dismantle cia programs that interfer with foreign countries or the american msm. He is NOT looking to breakup the media oligopy mentioned in posts above. He is NOT attempting to dismantle the cia drug running business, he is NOT re-opening the 9/11 investigation, Etc, etc...."


I guess the above criticisms apparently meant to be fulfilled IN ONE MONTH OF OFFICE are normal and reasonable, right?

I'm sure you held the same incredible critiques, if any at all, to the unamerican, biracial (oops I forgot one is black coming from the birth canal of a white female), globalist implant to HIS first month of the presidency...LOL The chances of you having done so are slim since millions in the western world turned into cowardly, obsequious, no-integrity butt kissers overnight. If white, terrified of being called racist, if black terrified of being called traitors....

CALLING ALL COWARDS
CALLING ALL COWARDS
YOU'LL CAN COME OUT NOW. YOU'LL ARE SAFE NOW...
It's a white guy (gentile that is, if he was jewish we'd be under further taboos), so you'll are safe.
No one will call you racist, no one will call you traitor. You'll are safe to sharpen your phony self-righteous knives.

Silence for 8 years during the gender bending, hetero family hating, wall street loving, drone murdering, constitution hating, lying globalist insert, so thank goodness there is now Safety and Freedom throughout the land to overcompensate for cowardice of the last 8 years and torture a white guy, with at least some balls, out of office.

Ted Cruz was on the money in his interview today with Brett Baier when after being shown a vid of a black dem racist and the white sycophants in the audience applauding for the impeachment of the president, said the dems have lost their minds with rage and they are not even angry at the repubs! Their hate is for the american citizens who voted for trump. I felt Cruz was actually toning it down. There is a witch-hunt going on and it's not just for trump...

[KiwiElf]

I guess the above criticisms apparently meant to be fulfilled IN ONE MONTH OF OFFICE are normal and reasonable, right?

Think that line needs to be in BOLD :):highfive:

[Helene West]

UZN - you gave us a lot in this thread as it's an emotional topic.
I especially didn't know: "Obama ordered ten times more drone strikes than Bush.
In 2016 alone Obama dropped 26,171 bombs (an average of 72 bombs every day)."

Wow. it just accentuates the dem and left hypocrisy even more...
We are living in mind-blowing times...

[A Voice from the Mountains]

The “least racist man you’ll ever meet” then went on to ask an African American reporter to set up a meeting for him with the Congressional Black Caucus, because, well, she’s black.

This is the kind of junk reporting that makes us hate the media so much.

The woman had just asked Trump about meeting with the Black Caucus. So when Trump asked if she could set it up for him, was it because of the question she just asked? No, it was 100% only because the woman is black and nothing at all to do with the question she had just asked. Of course. And then these asshats turn around and act stupefied when Trump calls them dishonest and fake and the enemy.

[mgray]

I believe it's safe to say that President Trump is quite overwhelmed by what he is up against. His campaign rhetoric has been neutralized by the deep state or permanent government.

It appears even by his actions and lack of tweets recently that he sees no change comes quickly or without a cost.

His ideas have not changed, but the mechanism for enacting them has changed. Trump as CEO said something and it was so. Now his directives are met with opposition, so he has to change.

Kicking out the opposition media will not work. Communicating with the people directly will. Whether that is twitter or TrumpTV is a whole nother can of worms.

[white wizard]

Trump represents the gradual awakening in America. He has been in office for a month and basically turned Washington upside down. No president has ever called out the media like he has and it's creating a narrative to where people are starting to question everything. He calls politicians liars and crooks and has said he is going to weed out corruption in Washington and call the news media out on there bs. I watched one of his recent speeches where he actually makes fun of just how biased and controlled the news is. No one is talking about what is gonna happen when he starts upping the steaks and really starts trying to push his campaign promise of putting the power back in people's hands. I think if Le Pen gets elected in France it's gonna be a big sign that globalization and the nwo criminals are in some serious trouble. Trumps chief advisor even called them out In the cpac conference. We got 3 years and 11 months left minimum for his presidency and some big changed are coming grab your popcorn.

[uzn]

Now lets look at why the deep State aka "Intelligence Apparatus" want to get rid of Trump. One strange coincidence was that one day after Trump signed an "Executive Order" that was about fighting Drug smuggeling, Human Trafficing and international Criminal organisations. The Leaks about Flynn surfaced. By the way these "Leaks" have never been found, it seems the Agencys dont want to find themselves. Anyway the "Executive Order" was basically about the main Entertainments the Agencies had for the last 50 Years.

Here is the Executive Order:

Presidential Executive Order on Enforcing Federal Law with Respect to Transnational Criminal Organizations and Preventing International Trafficking

ENFORCING FEDERAL LAW WITH RESPECT TO TRANSNATIONAL CRIMINAL ORGANIZATIONS AND PREVENTING INTERNATIONAL TRAFFICKING
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1.  Purpose.  Transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations, including transnational drug cartels, have spread throughout the Nation, threatening the safety of the United States and its citizens.  These organizations derive revenue through widespread illegal conduct, including acts of violence and abuse that exhibit a wanton disregard for human life.  They, for example, have been known to commit brutal murders, rapes, and other barbaric acts.
These groups are drivers of crime, corruption, violence, and misery.  In particular, the trafficking by cartels of controlled substances has triggered a resurgence in deadly drug abuse and a corresponding rise in violent crime related to drugs.  Likewise, the trafficking and smuggling of human beings by transnational criminal groups risks creating a humanitarian crisis.  These crimes, along with many others, are enriching and empowering these organizations to the detriment of the American people.
A comprehensive and decisive approach is required to dismantle these organized crime syndicates and restore safety for the American people.
Sec. 2.  Policy.  It shall be the policy of the executive branch to:
(a)  strengthen enforcement of Federal law in order to thwart transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations, including criminal gangs, cartels, racketeering organizations, and other groups engaged in illicit activities that present a threat to public safety and national security and that are related to, for example: 
(i)    the illegal smuggling and trafficking of humans, drugs or other substances, wildlife, and weapons;
(ii)   corruption, cybercrime, fraud, financial crimes, and intellectual-property theft; or
(iii)  the illegal concealment or transfer of proceeds derived from such illicit activities.
(b)  ensure that Federal law enforcement agencies give a high priority and devote sufficient resources to efforts to identify, interdict, disrupt, and dismantle transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations, including through the investigation, apprehension, and prosecution of members of such organizations, the extradition of members of such organizations to face justice in the United States and, where appropriate and to the extent permitted by law, the swift removal from the United States of foreign nationals who are members of such organizations;
(c)  maximize the extent to which all Federal agencies share information and coordinate with Federal law enforcement agencies, as permitted by law, in order to identify, interdict, and dismantle transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations;
(d)  enhance cooperation with foreign counterparts against transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations, including, where appropriate and permitted by law, through sharing of intelligence and law enforcement information and through increased security sector assistance to foreign partners by the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security; 
(e)  develop strategies, under the guidance of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security, to maximize coordination among agencies -- such as through the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF), Special Operations Division, the OCDETF Fusion Center, and the International Organized Crime Intelligence and Operations Center -- to counter the crimes described in subsection (a) of this section, consistent with applicable Federal law; and
(f)  pursue and support additional efforts to prevent the operational success of transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations within and beyond the United States, to include prosecution of ancillary criminal offenses, such as immigration fraud and visa fraud, and the seizure of the implements of such organizations and forfeiture of the proceeds of their criminal activity.
Sec. 3.  Implementation.  In furtherance of the policy set forth in section 2 of this order, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, or their designees, shall co-chair and direct the existing interagency Threat Mitigation Working Group (TMWG), which shall:
(a)  work to support and improve the coordination of Federal agencies' efforts to identify, interdict, investigate, prosecute, and dismantle transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations within and beyond the United States;
(b)  work to improve Federal agencies' provision, collection, reporting, and sharing of, and access to, data relevant to Federal efforts against transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations;
(c)  work to increase intelligence and law enforcement information sharing with foreign partners battling transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations, and to enhance international operational capabilities and cooperation;
(d)  assess Federal agencies' allocation of monetary and personnel resources for identifying, interdicting, and dismantling transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations, as well as any resources that should be redirected toward these efforts;
(e)  identify Federal agencies' practices, any absence of practices, and funding needs that might hinder Federal efforts to effectively combat transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations;
(f)  review relevant Federal laws to determine existing ways in which to identify, interdict, and disrupt the activity of transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations, and ascertain which statutory authorities, including provisions under the Immigration and Nationality Act, could be better enforced or amended to prevent foreign members of these organizations or their associates from obtaining entry into the United States and from exploiting the United States immigration system;
(g)  in the interest of transparency and public safety, and in compliance with all applicable law, including the Privacy Act, issue reports at least once per quarter detailing convictions in the United States relating to transnational criminal organizations and their subsidiaries;
(h)  to the extent deemed useful by the Co-Chairs, and in their discretion, identify methods for Federal agencies to coordinate, as permitted by law, with State, tribal, and local governments and law enforcement agencies, foreign law enforcement partners, public-health organizations, and non-governmental organizations in order to aid in the identification, interdiction, and dismantling of transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations;
(i)  to the extent deemed useful by the Co-Chairs, and in their discretion, consult with the Office of National Drug Control Policy in implementing this order; and
(j)  within 120 days of the date of this order, submit to the President a report on transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations, including the extent of penetration of such organizations into the United States, and issue additional reports annually thereafter to describe the progress made in combating these criminal organizations, along with any recommended actions for dismantling them.
Sec. 4.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
DONALD J. TRUMP
THE WHITE HOUSE,
    February 9, 2017

Source:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/09/presidential-executive-order-enforcing-federal-law-respect-transnational


Some say because of that Flynn was shot down. Or it was just a coincidence ;)

[uzn]

Flynn just got the Ministry of Finance to Sanction against Money Laundering and Drug Trafficing in Venezuela. And we know who´s involved in that. It starts with Deep and Ends with State.

Treasury Sanctions Prominent Venezuelan Drug Trafficker Tareck El Aissami and His Primary Frontman Samark Lopez Bello
2/13/2017
Action Targets International Network of 13 Companies That Facilitate
Illicit Money Movements and Offshore Asset Holdings
WASHINGTON—Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated Venezuelan national Tareck Zaidan El Aissami Maddah (El Aissami) as a Specially Designated Narcotics Trafficker pursuant to the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (Kingpin Act) for playing a significant role in international narcotics trafficking.  El Aissami is the Executive Vice President of Venezuela.  El Aissami's primary frontman, Venezuelan national Samark Jose Lopez Bello (Lopez Bello), was also designated for providing material assistance, financial support, or goods or services in support of the international narcotics trafficking activities of, and acting for or on behalf of, El Aissami.  OFAC further designated or identified as blocked property 13 companies owned or controlled by Lopez Bello or other designated parties that comprise an international network spanning the British Virgin Islands, Panama, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Venezuela.    
As a result of today's action, U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions or otherwise dealing with these individuals and entities, and any assets the individuals and entities may have under U.S. jurisdiction are frozen.
"OFAC's action today is the culmination of a multi-year investigation under the Kingpin Act to target significant narcotics traffickers in Venezuela and demonstrates that power and influence do not protect those who engage in these illicit activities," said John E. Smith, Acting Director of OFAC.  "This case highlights our continued focus on narcotics traffickers and those who help launder their illicit proceeds through the United States.  Denying a safe haven for illicit assets in the United States and protecting the U.S. financial system from abuse remain top priorities of the Treasury Department."
El Aissami was appointed Executive Vice President of Venezuela in January 2017.  He previously served as Governor of Venezuela's Aragua state from 2012 to 2017, as well as Venezuela's Minister of Interior and Justice starting in 2008.  He facilitated shipments of narcotics from Venezuela, to include control over planes that leave from a Venezuelan air base, as well as control of drug routes through the ports in Venezuela.  In his previous positions, he oversaw or partially owned narcotics shipments of over 1,000 kilograms from Venezuela on multiple occasions, including those with the final destinations of Mexico and the United States. 
He also facilitated, coordinated, and protected other narcotics traffickers operating in Venezuela.  Specifically, El Aissami received payment for the facilitation of drug shipments belonging to Venezuelan drug kingpin Walid Makled Garcia.  El Aissami also is linked to coordinating drug shipments to Los Zetas, a violent Mexican drug cartel, as well as providing protection to Colombian drug lord Daniel Barrera Barrera and Venezuelan drug trafficker Hermagoras Gonzalez Polanco.  Los Zetas, Daniel Barrera Barrera, and Hermagoras Gonzalez Polanco were previously named as Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers by the President or the Secretary of the Treasury under the Kingpin Act in April 2009, March 2010, and May 2008, respectively. 
Lopez Bello is a key frontman for El Aissami and in that capacity launders drug proceeds.  Lopez Bello is used by El Aissami to purchase certain assets.  He also handles business arrangements and financial matters for El Aissami, generating significant profits as a result of illegal activity benefiting El Aissami. 
Lopez Bello oversees an international network of petroleum, distribution, engineering, telecommunications, and asset holding companies:  Alfa One, C.A. (Venezuela), Grupo Sahect, C.A. (Venezuela), MFAA Holdings Limited (British Virgin Islands), Profit Corporation, C.A. (Venezuela), Servicios Tecnologicios Industriales, C.A. (Venezuela), SMT Tecnologia, C.A. (Venezuela), and Yakima Trading Corporation (Panama).  Another entity, Yakima Oil Trading, LLP (United Kingdom), is owned, controlled, or directed by, or acting for or on behalf of, Yakima Trading Corporation (Panama).  Profit Corporation, C.A. and SMT Tecnologia, C.A. have Venezuelan government contracts.  Between 2009 and 2010, Grupo Sahect C.A. provided storage and transportation services for the Venezuelan government agency Productora y Distribuidora de Alimentos, S.A. (PDVAL). 
Five U.S. companies owned or controlled by Lopez Bello and/or MFAA Holdings Limited have also been blocked as part of today's action.  These entities are the following limited liability companies registered in Florida:  1425 Brickell Ave 63-F LLC; 1425 Brickell Avenue Unit 46B, LLC; 1425 Brickell Avenue 64E, LLC; Agusta Grand I LLC; and 200G PSA Holdings LLC.  Additionally, a U.S.-registered aircraft with the tail number N200VR has been identified as blocked property owned or controlled by 200G PSA Holdings LLC.
As a result of today's action, significant real property and other assets in the Miami, Florida area tied to Lopez Bello have been blocked.
Since June 2000, more than 2,000 entities and individuals have been named pursuant to the Kingpin Act for their role in international narcotics trafficking.  Penalties for violations of the Kingpin Act range from civil penalties of up to $1,437,153 per violation to more severe criminal penalties.  Criminal penalties for corporate officers may include up to 30 years in prison and fines of up to $5 million.  Criminal fines for corporations may reach $10 million.  Other individuals could face up to 10 years in prison and fines pursuant to Title 18 of the United States Code for criminal violations of the Kingpin Act.

Source:
https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/as0005.aspx?src=ilaw

Well that was it for Flynn. Oh wait the Press told us that he had to resign because he made a Telefon call. Yeah right...

[lunaflare]

The real, likely intention of this media campaign against trump is to prep the american public for the next usa federal election when tptb will promote another fake liberator candidate, likely thru the democrats. Another obama style 'i am an outsider who can really promote change in washington' type. Like obama, this candidate will likely be a cia recruit from an early age who will just further promote the nwo agenda.

Agreed, a likely intention, justplain...

Predictably the Oscar ceremony was full of Trump bashing and racial slurs (against Trump being white and therefore racist, of course).
This gross double standard of unbridled verbal slandering is now expected and deemed acceptable.
These thought forms are polluting our world

The Stars of Hollywood, with their flush bank accounts, so willingly feed the media-machine

[uzn]

Just a small sidenote to the last post:
The Guy who got General Fylnn onto the Venezuela Thing was his assistant Robin Towley. Next Thing that happened Robin Towley got his security clearance denied by the CIA. And had to leave the White House Staff. Surprise surprise.

See Link:
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/mike-flynn-nsa-aide-trump-234923

Here is a good Article that asks the right Questions:

Did Trump’s New Anti-Drug Policy Prompt the CIA to Move Against Him?

By Mark H. Gaffney
February 23, 2017 "Information Clearing House" -  In recent days, we have witnessed the disturbing spectacle of open warfare between the newly elected president and the intelligence community. Former congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) described the situation as “unprecedented. Whether you are for Trump or against Trump,” Kucinich told FOX News, “the White House is under attack from elements inside the intelligence community, which are trying to elevate tensions between Russia and the US.” Kucinich continued: “At the bottom of that is money, an agenda for someone to cash in on conflict between the US and Russia.”
Kucinich was spot on. The military industrial complex and their media pawns clearly do not want improved relations with Russia and are using their considerable power to prevent it, for the reason cited. Untold billions in military contracts are at stake. War and the preparations for war are extremely profitable; at any rate, for a privileged few.
During the last few days, Trump and his inner circle made statements about Crimea indicating the immense pressure had the intended effect. Trump appears to have backed away from improved relations with Russia, at least for the present. Other writers have commented at length about this, so I won’t discuss it further here, except to point out that the pressure shows no sign of relenting, and may even be increasing. A former NSA official, John Schindler, told Raw Story that “Now we [the intelligence community] will go nuclear. He [Trump] will die in jail…”
It’s as if, having smelled blood in the water the intelligence community is circling for the kill. But given that Trump has been made to recant on Russia, the question is why? What is going on? The answer is that the sharp dispute over US policy vis a vis Russia is not the only point of contention. Other issues are also at play. A tell-tale clue in this regard was the timing of the felonious leak that led to the resignation of General Mike Flynn for misleading Vice President Pence about his conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The leak reportedly occurred on the evening of Thursday February 9th, a few hours after Trump signed three new executive orders, which FOX News first reported at 4 p.m. Although the source of the leak has not been disclosed, I suspect the CIA for reasons that I will now explain.
In my opinion, the timing was no coincidence. As we ought to know from long experience, there are few coincidences in the world of intelligence. Therefore, it behooves us to examine Trump’s latest executive orders which so far have attracted scant attention.
A new anti-drug policy
The orders that Trump signed on February 9th, just before the leak occurred, are about reducing crime in America. The first would create a presidential task force to develop strategies toward this end.[1] A second more detailed order would “strengthen enforcement of Federal law….to thwart transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations, including criminal gangs, cartels, racketeering organizations and other groups engaged in….the illegal smuggling and trafficking of humans, drugs, or other substances…” [my italics].[2]
I was amazed when I first read this. Trump’s executive orders would launch a new war on drugs! Evidently, president Trump idealistically (or naively) has decided to accomplish what no president before him was able (or willing) to do, namely, eradicate the double scourge of drug and human trafficking which have destroyed so many young lives. Certainly it is a goal worthy of our support. However, there is a hitch, namely, the collision of such a policy with the status quo. This needs clarification: If Trump’s new anti-drug-trafficking policy is carried out it will place drug enforcement agencies in direct opposition to CIA officers who for many years have “managed” the flow of cocaine and heroin into the United States. In fact, “dismantling the transnational criminal organizations” responsible for the drug trade will ultimately require nothing less than the dismantling of the CIA itself. The wording of Trump’s executive orders leaves no doubt about his intent. The president is not proposing half measures.
Officials at the CIA no doubt grasped the significance of this at a glance, and concluded correctly that the president himself, every bit as much as his new executive orders, must henceforth be viewed as a threat to the Agency’s power and covert prerogatives. The scary part, from the CIA standpoint, is that Trump really means it. This is in sharp contrast with Ronald Reagan, whose 1980s-era war on drugs was nothing but a charade. One can well imagine the brief but intense moment of panic at Langley when CIA officials first learned about the orders. Their signing by Trump created an immediate compelling reason for the CIA to move against the president, and to do so without delay. This, very likely, explains the classified leak on February 9th about Gen. Flynn.
I do not mean to suggest that CIA officers themselves smuggle drugs into the US. The actual smuggling is almost always done by professional traffickers who are treated as national security assets because they also provide various kinds of support for covert CIA operations. In return, the “blessed” traffickers are allowed to ply their illicit trade without interference from US Customs, the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), even local police. The CIA oversees the trade which is largely about market share, and also receives a cut of the action, which it uses to fund black-budget operations. Competitors who refuse to cooperate are fair game, and are periodically rounded up and prosecuted to show that the government is seriously waging the war on drugs. Of course, despite the occasional high profile arrests and convictions, somehow the drugs are always readily available on the street. The supply seldom fails, an inconvenient truth never mentioned by the media nor acknowledged by government officials.
Abroad, the CIA’s control system is more complex, as in the case of Mexico where the CIA often plays one cartel off against another to destabilize the country and prevent the emergence of a strong central government. Keeping Mexico perennially weak (and violent) evidently serves the foreign policy objectives of empire.[3]
Despite the American public’s sorry state of denial, complacency and/or apathy on the drug trade issue, the evidence for the US government’s criminal involvement is voluminous and incontrovertible.[4] The sordid history is a long one, and dates back decades before the CIA was created to the 1920s, when the US supported Chinese nationalist leader Chiang Kai-shek, who maintained his army with profits from the opium trade. I refer the reader to the notes.
Trump’s new policy of eradicating human and sex trafficking would likewise require US law enforcement to investigate shady contractors like Dyncorp, which, although a private company, is for all practical purposes a CIA subsidiary. Dyncorp’s longstanding involvement in human trafficking dates back at least to the 1990s war in Bosnia.[5] Obviously, a real investigation would be extremely embarrassing. Over the years, Dyncorp has received billions in Defense Department contracts, which is serious money but small potatoes compared with the hundreds of billions in laundered drug money that annually lubricates the bottom line of the too-big-to-fail US banks. No one knows the actual figure, but reputable sources estimate the total at between $300-500 billion.[6]
At war with the CIA
It would be hard to overestimate the present-day importance of this laundered drug money to the big banks, most of which are seriously over-leveraged. According to the UN Office of Drugs and Crime, the liquidity provided by an estimated $352 billion in laundered drug profits in 2008 saved a number of large banks from collapse as result of the 2007 financial meltdown.[7] Incidentally, this is also why, 16 years after the 9/11 attacks, the US military is still deployed in Afghanistan. Our troops are there because that is where the poppies are grown, the feedstock for the global heroin trade. This is the reason for the longest war in US history. The plain truth is that our troops are not defending freedom and democracy, but the bottom line of the too-big-to-fail banks.
And all of this would be seriously disrupted if Trump’s new anti-drug-trafficking policy is implemented. Needless to say, Wall Street and the US intelligence community (which are one and the same) will do everything in their power to prevent this from happening; and the CIA, which is the operational arm of the banksters who rule the United States, will undoubtedly serve as the enforcer.

Donald Trump’s strong position against drug and human trafficking has placed him in the cross-hairs. Is he aware of the powerful forces arrayed against him? It is by no means clear that he fully understands the CIA’s role in the drug trade, or why his executive orders have stirred up such a hornet’s nest. For Trump’s sake, I hope he understands; because, henceforth, his only chance to survive is to go on the offensive, and to actually become the unlikely American hero that he obviously aspires to be. How? By effecting a top-down revolution in the interests of the American people. But time is short and the critical path to success is extremely narrow, with little margin for error. Can Trump outmaneuver the CIA even as it plots his downfall? Can he rise above himself?
A second American revolution
Here are a few of the steps (in no particular order) that Trump should immediately take to regain the initiative, set his enemies back on their heels, and buy the time that is desperately needed to jump-start the second American revolution:
Empower the FBI. Trump should instruct Attorney General Sessions to clear out the dead wood at the Department of Justice. FBI Director James Comey and his deputy Andrew McCabe have a history of blocking and/or slow-footing investigations. They must go. Their replacements should be drawn from within the agency, ambitious young men with hunger in their eyes and fire in the belly. Unleash the idealistic young investigators!
Release the 650,000 emails. I am referring to the mother lode found on former congressman Anthony Weiner’s server. We are very lucky this electronic paper trail exists! Last November, NYPD chief detective Robert K. Boyce, who has seen the emails, told the press they contain evidence linking Hillary Clinton and her associates to money laundering, child exploitation, sex crimes with minors, perjury, pay to play, obstruction of justice and other crimes.[8] Apparently, the key piece of evidence is a list of secret donors to the Clinton Foundation. Everything we have learned to date indicates the foundation was a private investors’ club for the purpose of overthrowing and looting third world nations. All Trump needs to do is to let the sun shine in, then step aside and allow the system to serve up the impartial wrath of justice. And woe to the guilty!
Audit the Fed. Trump supporters should move quickly to guide legislation through Congress requiring an audit of the Federal Reserve. Given a Republican majority in both houses, the bill should pass easily. If the Fed refuses to admit auditors (and it will), Trump should send in US marshals and nationalize the bank. A subsequent honest audit will expose the Fed’s many crimes against the American people. A reorganized and possibly renamed Fed should be made to serve Main Street, not Wall Street.
Get control at the CIA and NSA. This is critical. Trump’s newly appointed directors must take a firm hand in identifying and prosecuting leakers in both agencies while supporting whistleblowers who have exposed illegal activities. Trump should also give the order to fire all neoconservatives, and their ilk. Ultimately, Trump will need to dismantle the CIA and the most objectionable parts of the NSA surveillance regime.
Break up the media conglomerates. Paul Craig Roberts has suggested that Trump use anti-trust law to accomplish this and I agree. The US corporate media has long since abandoned its original function, which is to inform the citizenry, and unfortunately has become an instrument for fake news and propaganda. Press diversity must be restored.
The above short list is only a start, and is by no means complete. There are undoubtedly other steps that Trump should also take.
Finally, I need to say that as a long-time radical Leftie I am very displeased that so many liberals and progressives have allied with the globalists and the Deep State to destroy what remains of our precious democracy. Liberals and progressives need to wake up. Trump’s enemies are also our enemies. If the CIA succeeds in bringing him down, Trump’s replacement will be much worse. I have always opposed US presidents when they were wrong and supported them when they were right. The same principle should hold with Trump. Oppose him when he’s wrong, but support him when he’s right. We can and must do both, at the same time.
Many people have underestimated Donald Trump. Be assured, no one at CIA headquarters is underestimating him any longer. Although Trump has serious issues, he also has the potential to achieve great things, in part, because he thinks big and is capable of bold action. If Trump acts decisively in the coming days to restore our country, we should rally to his defense. If he falters, Trump will be remembered as just another failed wannabe.


Source:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46518.htm

References
[1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/09/presidential-executive-order-task-force-crime-reduction-and-public
[2] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/09/presidential-executive-order-enforcing-federal-law-respect-transnational
[3] Chris Arsenault, “Mexican official: CIA ‘manages’ drug trade”, Aljazeera, July 24, 2012, posted at http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/07/2012721152715628181.html
[4] Alfred W. McCoy, The Politics of Heroin (Chicago: Lawrence Hill, 2003 revised edition); Doug Valentine, The CIA as Organized Crime (Atlanta: Clarity Press, 2017) see especially chapters 12-14; Peter Dale Scott, Cocaine Politics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991).
[5] Kathryn Bolkovac, The Whistleblower (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011). Also: don’t miss the movie with the same name based on the book starring Rachel Weisz.
[6] Raymond W. Baker, “The Biggest Loophole in the Free Market System,” Washington
Quarterly, Autumn 1999, p. 29, posted at (see p. 1061) http://frwebgate.access.
gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=106_senate_hearings&docid=f:61699.pdf. Also see The CIA as Organized Crime, p. 214.
[7] Rajeev Syal, “Drug money saved banks in global crisis, claims UN advisor”, the Guardian, December 12, 2009.
[8] http://truepundit.com/breaking-bombshell-nypd-blows-whistle-on-new-hillary-emails-money-laundering-sex-crimes-with-children-child-exploitation-pay-to-play-perjury/

[uzn]

Both General Flynn and his Assistant Robin Towley stepped heavily on the Foot of the Deep State and their covert operations. Both were taken down.

That the CIA is and has been playing a Mayor Role in Drug Trafficking is no Secret Nowadays. And always remember the Agencies own the media they are their Fronts, they have Agents at the highest Positions in the Mainstream Media. Controlling the Masses via the Media is one of their most important Tasks, besides Drug trafficing. The second biggest Business on the Planet is Drugs, right after Energy (Oil and Electricity). Think of it, every big City Needs several Drugs in the scale of Tons every Day. That is just possible on an industrial scale.

Theres a good Article for you on that:

Deep History and the Global Drug Connection, Part 1

To many, the anecdote described below will sound far-fetched, and  logical minds may suspect that the Vietnam vet in the story created the “incident” himself.
But as those who lived through that period may remember, representatives of the covert side of government did far worse — and often. Infiltration, intimidation, framing, and more were all part of the arsenal against the “disloyal.” No method was deemed too severe.
Today, we may find ourselves in a comparable period. Incidents covered by WhoWhatWhy such as the fiery death of journalist Michael Hastings and the open statements that Edward Snowden should be assassinated remind us to take nothing for granted. (To see our stories on these threats, please go here here, here, here, here, and here.)
The essay below is by the father of “Deep Politics” analysis, Peter Dale Scott. It reminds us that, too often, it is not the wild-sounding that is the fiction — but the constant assurances that everything is a-ok, that our society operates on fundamental decency, and that we need to stay focused on the small things and leave the big problems to others.
Below, Scott describes that phenomenon as “a great conspiracy/of organized denial.”
Seeking to reverse this organized denial, Scott, in the book introduction that follows, posits — based on his decades of research — powerful connections between militarism, vast illegal drug operations, and America’s intelligence agencies. Sound far-fetched? So does much of history itself.
This is Part 1 of a multi-part series. Please go here to see Part 2.
Excerpt from American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan ( Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2014), Introduction. Deep History and the Global Drug Connection:
Two Researchers Encounter a Deep Event
.
If by terrorism we mean “the use of violence to intimidate,” then in September 1971 the historian Alfred McCoy and I witnessed a minor California terrorist incident. A Vietnam veteran of Special Forces living in East Palo Alto who had seen opium loaded onto the CIA’s Air America airplanes in Asia agreed on my telephone to be interviewed by the two of us. But when we arrived at his house the next morning, he had changed his mind. Motioning to us not to speak, he led us back down his front-door steps to his sports car, an MG. Overnight someone had warned him not to talk to us by burning a large hole in its steel door, with what he said could only have been a sophisticated implosion device, of the sort used by his old unit.(1)
One might think that such a vivid and incongruous event could hardly be forgotten, especially since it had clearly been generated by knowledge of what had been spoken on my telephone. But in fact for more than a decade, I totally suppressed my memory of it, even through the first two years of a determined poetic search to recover just such suppressed memories.(2)
And so, as I rightly suspected, had Alfred McCoy. In the preface to the 2003 edition of his monumental classic, The Politics of Heroin, he writes in prose about his own bizarre suppression of the same facts:
I landed in San Francisco for a stay with poet and Berkeley professor Peter Dale Scott. He put me in touch with an ex-Green Beret, just back from covert operations in Laos, who told me, over the phone, of seeing CIA aircraft loading opium.
He agreed to be interviewed on the record. The next morning, we knocked at his door in an East Palo Alto apartment complex. We never got inside. He was visibly upset, saying he “had gotten the message.” What happened? “Follow me,” he said, leading us across the parking lot to his MG sports car. He pointed at something on the passenger door and named a chemical explosive that could melt a hole in sheet metal. It was, he said, a signal to shut up. I looked but cannot recall seeing.  [Ed. Apparently this refers to the “something on the passenger door.”]  The next day, I flew to Los Angeles, visited my mother, and then flew on to Saigon, forgetting the incident.(3)
As I began to recall this episode in a different millennium, the incident itself seemed less surprising. The nation was then in turmoil, and even nonviolent antiwar protesters like myself were subject to ongoing surveillance.
Much worse things were happening. In San Diego, “Vigilantes led by an FBI informant wrecked [an antiwar] paper’s printing equipment, firebombed the car of one staffer, and nearly shot to death another.”(4)
In Chicago in the same period, “The army’s 113th Military Intelligence Group… provided money, tear-gas bombs, MACE, and electronic surveillance equipment to the Legion of Justice thugs whom the Chicago Red Squad turned loose on local anti-war groups.”(5)
The crimes I have just recalled, in Palo Alto, San Diego, and Chicago, are examples of what I first conceptualized as deep state violence and would now call deep force violence (violence from an unexplained or unauthorized source). There are many varieties of this deep non–state-sanctioned violence as so conceived.
In most cases illegal violence is an assignment handed off by an established agency to organized groups outside the law. There are also cases of proxy violence when the delegation of violence is not to nonstate actors but to agencies of other governments.
Finally, there are cases in which the violence reinforces the de facto power structure of the country without directly involving the CIA or other established official agencies at all. Such violence may be affirmatively sanctioned by members of the established power structure.
Or it may be passively sanctioned by failure to punish those responsible. Unprosecuted lynchings were the de facto enforcement of illegally segregated Jim Crow society in the American South.
Land grabs in the American West were achieved with press-encouraged violence against Native Americans, many of them nonviolent, who originally lived there.(6)
This cultural tolerance of violence and murder spilled over into other aspects of American life, notably union busting. In the 1914 “Ludlow massacre,” during a mineworkers strike against the Rockefeller-owned Colorado Fuel and Iron Company, only one member of the strikebreakers was convicted, and he was given only a light reprimand.(7)

Peter Dale Scott

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVZfiCe_1U0

Most of us (including myself) don’t like to dwell on such disturbing practices inside America, which is why McCoy and I both repressed what happened in East Palo Alto. But they persist, in America and throughout the world. And one reason they persist is precisely because of our reluctance to think about them.
Elsewhere I have written of civilization as “a great conspiracy/of organized denial.”(8) I mean by this the creation of a partly illusory mental space in which unpleasant facts, such as that all Western empires have been established through major atrocities, are conveniently suppressed.(9)
I say this as one who believes passionately in civilization and fears that by excessive denial our own civilization is indeed becoming threatened.
There are social and political consequences of failing to acknowledge and deal with forces of violence at work in America and the ways in which they frequently collaborate with police and intelligence agencies that are mandated to protect the American public. The fact that we suppress such discordant details of violence probably contributes to our individual mental health. But this suppression leads to a collective politics that is increasingly unreal and ineffective, as major abuses cease altogether to be addressed.
In discussing sanctioned criminality and violence, I hope to restore one such area of suppressed memory. But the writing of this book has led me to understand my experience in Palo Alto—and indeed all such sanctioned violence—as examples of what I now call deep events: events that are systematically ignored, suppressed, or falsified in public (and even internal) government, military, and intelligence documents as well as in the mainstream media and public consciousness.
Underlying them is frequently the involvement of deep forces linked either to the drug traffic or to agencies of surveillance (or to both together) whose activities are extremely difficult to discern or document.
A clearly defined deep event will combine both internal features—evidence, such as a discernible cover-up, that aspects are being suppressed—and external features—an ongoing and perhaps irresoluble controversy as to what happened. Some deep events—the 1968 assassinations, the Tonkin Gulf incidents, and 9/11—clearly have both features. Others do not. For example, the 1898 sinking of the USS Maine in Havana Harbor continues to spark debate and investigations, even though the case that it was a false-flag operation is usually presented without any persuasive evidence.(10)
In my experience, deep events are better understood collectively than in isolation. When looked at together, they constitute a larger pattern, that of deep history. For some years, beginning before 9/11, I have noted that from time to time America’s recorded or archival history has been disrupted by deep events such as the John F. Kennedy assassination. These events are attributed publicly to marginal and unthreatening agents—like Lee Harvey Oswald. But cumulatively, the historical succession of deep events—such as Dallas, Watergate, and 9/11—has impacted more and more profoundly on America’s political situation.
More specifically, as I shall argue, America’s major foreign wars are typically preceded by deep events like the Tonkin Gulf incidents, 9/11, or the 2001 anthrax attacks. This suggests that what I call the war machine in Washington (including but not restricted to elements in the Pentagon and the CIA) may have been behind them.
After completing the later chapters of this book, I have come to state this conclusion more forcefully. Since 1959, most of America’s foreign wars have been wars 1) induced preemptively by the U.S. war machine and/or 2) disguised as responses to unprovoked enemy aggression, with disguises repeatedly engineered by deception deep events, involving in some way elements of the global drug connection.
Also, since completing this book, I have an even clearer picture of America’s overall responsibility for the huge increases in global drug trafficking since World War II. This is exemplified by the more than doubling of Afghan opium drug production since the United States invaded that country in 2001. But the U.S. responsibility for the present dominant role of Afghanistan in the global heroin traffic has merely replicated what had happened earlier in Burma, Thailand, and Laos between the late 1940s and the 1970s. These countries also only became factors in the international drug traffic as a result of CIA assistance (after the French, in the case of Laos) to what would otherwise have been only local traffickers.
This book goes back in time to the late 1940s and 1950s and the murky circumstances under which the CIA began to facilitate drug trafficking in South and Southeast Asia, culminating in Afghanistan. Writing it has enabled me to have further thoughts about the Palo Alto incident and particularly the importance of its date—September 1971. As we shall see, this was a time of a major change in the U.S. relationship to the Southeast Asian drug traffic. In June 1971, Nixon had declared a War of Drugs, and Laos in that same September, under instructions from the U.S. embassy, had just made opium trafficking illegal.
After two decades of CIA assistance to drug-trafficking warlords in Burma and Laos, elements in the CIA were now beginning to leak significant if partial stories about this situation to papers like The New York Times. (11)  Al McCoy, my fellow witness in Palo Alto, had himself just been briefed in Washington about the politics of heroin by CIA veterans like Edward Lansdale and Lucien Conein.(12)
A little earlier, a researcher on the University of California campus, with whom I — as I then thought — had initiated contact, advised me to look into the record of hitherto unknown details such as the career of Paul Helliwell and the CIA proprietary Sea Supply, Inc. It developed that he too was a CIA veteran.
I now suspect — as I did not at the time — that I was being fed leads by my source as part of a larger scenario. Was the CIA project of disclosure being opposed in Palo Alto by another deep force determined to stop it? Or were the two apparent deep forces really one, working in Palo Alto to set limits to a predefined limited hangout? I still do not know, but writing this book has helped me to better understand the relevant historical developments in 1971 (see chapter 6).
In earlier versions of this book, I attributed the sanctioned violence of the Palo Alto incident, like the Letelier assassination I discuss next, to the CIA’s global drug connection. But that statement does not solve a mystery: it opens one up. As a matter of description, it sounds more precise than terms I have
used in earlier books: “the dark quadrant” from which parapolitical events emerge or “the unrecognized Force X operating in the world,” which I suggested might help explain 9/11.(13)  But the precision is misleading: in this book I am indeed attempting to denote and describe a deep force, or forces, that I
do not fully understand.
This mystery underlies, for example, the careers of men like Willis Bird and Paul Helliwell or of institutions like the Bank of Credit and Commerce International that were of use to both the CIA and the international drug trade. And I shall argue that if we do not focus more on this neglected aspect of the U.S. war machine, we shall never come to grips with the forces behind the ill-starred U.S. involvement in Afghanistan.

Source:
http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/04/04/deep-history-global-drug-connection-part-1/


http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/05/12/deep-history-global-drug-connection-part-4-enter-al-qaeda/


References

1. He attached great importance to the fact that, while much of the steel door was burned away, the wooden floor of the car was barely charred.

2. I narrated this recovered memory first in my poem Coming to Jakarta (New York: New Directions, 1989), 147–48, and then a second time a decade later in Minding the Darkness (New York: New Directions, 2000), 138.

3. Alfred W. McCoy,The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Traffic (Chicago: Lawrence Hill Books/Chicago Review Press, 2003), xii, quoting Scott,Coming to Jakarta, 147–48. I believe that when I first checked with McCoy about this in 1990, his memory ended with our descending the stairs from the veteran’s home “to see something.”

4. David E. Kaplan, “Spying on the San Diego Street Journal (and other Americans),”U.S. News & World Report, January 9, 2006, “Among the Street Journal’s reporters was a young Lowell Bergman, whose later exploits as a 60 Minutes TV producer would be portrayed by Al Pacino in the movie The Insider. ‘We were targets along with a lot of other people,’ recalls Bergman. ‘By 1971 we’d all left town.’”

5. George O’Toole, The Private Sector (New York: Norton, 1978), 145, quoted in Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 269. America in the 1960s and 1970s was engulfed in mass violence.The government’s resort to it in proxy operations was not wholly gratuitous; like many of the groups it targeted, it sincerely believed that revolution here was imminent or had already begun. But the two incidents I have just described, against nonviolent antiwar groups, must be described as surplus violence, inviting and perhaps even designed to provoke a violent response. At some point, elements of the antiwar Students for a Democratic Society did eventually—as the so-called Weathermen—resort to bombs themselves. A full history of the antiwar movement will have to assess the extent to which gratuitous government violence was a factor in leading to the Weathermen’s formation.

6. “Those investigating American Indian history and U.S. history more generally have failed to reckon with the violence upon which the continent was built” (Ned Blackhawk,Violence over the Land: Indians and Empires in the Early American West [Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006], 3)

7. Graham Adams, Age of Industrial Violence 1910–1915: The Activities and Findings of the United States Commission on Industrial Relations (New York: Columbia University Press, 1971).

8. Scott, Minding the Darkness, 137.

9. I suspect in fact that most readers will be tempted to reject and forget my anecdote of the bombed car door as something that simply “doesn’t compute” with their own observations of America.

10. Although this is a topic too broad for this book, I would suggest that three sorts of deep events, most of them still hotly debated, date further back in U.S. history than those associated with the postwar global drug connection: 1) provocations and/or deceptions leading to war, such as the sinking of the ocean liner Lusitania in 1915, which was instrumental in bringing America into World War I; 2) intrigues inducing policy change, as when a Supreme Court decision in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company (1886) was converted (by a court reporter who happened to be a former railroad president) into a “ruling” that corporations are persons protected by the Fourteenth Amendment (see Thom Hartmann, Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights [New York: Rodale Books, 2002]); and 3) plots for leadership change, such as the alleged murder by arsenic of President Zachary Taylor in 1850 (see Michael Parenti, History as Mystery [San Francisco: City Light Books,1999], 304), the Lincoln assassination, or General Smedley Butler and the so-called Business Plot of 1935.

11. E.g., The New York Times, June 6, 1971; McCoy, The Politics of Heroin, 286–87.

12. Among the CIA veterans interviewed by McCoy at this time were Edward Lansdale (June 17, 1971, Alexandria, Virginia), Lucien Conein (June 18, 1971, McLean,Virginia), Bernard Yoh (June 15, 1971, Washington, D.C.), and William Young (September 8 and 14, 1971, Chiangmai).

13. Peter Dale Scott, Crime and Cover-Up: The CIA, the Mafia, and the Dallas-Watergate Connection (Palo Alto, CA: Ramparts Press, 1977), 46–49; Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007), 179.

[uzn]

Part 2

He Told You So: President Eisenhower’s Military-Industrial Complex Speech
55 Years Later, Ike’s Scary Warning Looms Larger Than Ever

Today is the 55th anniversary of a remarkable event: an American president, a former general no less, speaking to the nation about how the country was being held hostage by an undemocratic alliance he called the “military-industrial complex.”
That’s a theme you hear regularly here at WhoWhatWhy. We not only explore the continued (and increasing) domination of this country by these elements, we also look at how the corporate media discourages us from even talking about it.
It’s well worth watching Ike’s bold talk. So here it is:
.
Military Industrial Complex Speech

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg-jvHynP9Y

On January 18, 2011 the Newseum hosted a panel discussion on the historic and contemporary relevance of President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s famous Farewell Address.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNL2StZNjmM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l46uaYk-OpA

Some Articles what happened since Ike spoke his farwell:
http://whowhatwhy.org/2011/12/13/the-military-and-those-strange-threats-to-obama/
http://whowhatwhy.org/2015/11/25/did-the-pentagon-retaliate-against-an-officer-who-questioned-afghanistan-waste/
http://whowhatwhy.org/2010/03/10/what-obama-is-up-against/
http://whowhatwhy.org/2012/08/10/tvwho-gen-wesley-clark-shocker-on-911-policy-coup/
http://whowhatwhy.org/2012/09/24/who-exclusive-gen-wesley-clark-on-oil-war-and-activism/
http://whowhatwhy.org/2012/09/10/the-real-reason-for-the-afghan-war/
http://whowhatwhy.org/2011/08/31/now-that-were-celebrating-qaddafis-end-can-we-get-a-little-truth/
http://whowhatwhy.org/2013/09/30/mind-the-credibility-gap-syria-and-the-history-of-us-war-disinformation/
http://whowhatwhy.org/2015/04/04/where-in-afghanistan-did-35-billion-go/
http://whowhatwhy.org/2010/10/18/woodward-update/

Source:
http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/01/17/he-told-us-so-president-eisenhowers-military-industrial-complex-speech/

[uzn]

Part 3:

Deep History and the Global Drug Connection, Part 3: A Deadly Bureaucracy

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/Opium_poppies_in_Helmand_-a.jpg
US Marines checking out their Poppie Field

Introduction by Russ Baker:
More musings from Peter Dale Scott, the “father of Deep State analysis.” It’s heady and sometimes difficult material, but no one has gone as deeply as he has in trying to understand the nature of power in America, and ties between the state, the Underworld, and the criminal elements of the wealthy, or the Overworld.
In Part 3, we learn of the covert — but benign-sounding — government Office of Policy Coordination (OPC), which formally institutionalized off-the-books financing of criminal activities. Its purpose was to engage in “subversion against hostile states.” But it went further than that. Much further.
Excerpt from:
American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/074255595X

Deep Events and Illegally Sanctioned Violence
Max Weber defined the successful modern state as something that “successfully upholds a claim on the monopoly of the legitimate use of violence [Gewaltmonopol] in the enforcement of its order.” (26)
It is against this illusory ideal, subscribed to by most political scientists, that many states have recently been judged to be weak states (if the monopoly is successfully challenged) or failed states (if its claim can no longer be sustained).
My own thinking is that Weber’s definition falsely invests the public state with a structural coherence that in fact it does not possess, never has possessed, and possesses even less as democracy develops. Even in America, one of the more successful states, there has always been a negative space in which overworld, corporate power, and privately organized violence all have access to and utilize each other, and rules are enforced by powers that do not derive from the public state.
Perhaps the most striking example of such non-state rule was the city of Chicago after World War II. A 1962 murder conviction, after an FBI investigation ordered by Attorney General Robert Kennedy, marked the first Chicago conviction in an organized crime slaying since 1934—a period of almost three decades marked by about a thousand unsolved murders. (27)
Several major “legitimate” fortunes of national scope, had their origins in Chicago mob-based corruption, and the mob’s domination of Chicago City Hall created a climate of selective nonenforcement in which the best-connected private capitalists thrived.
One of the first acts of the newly created National Security Council in 1947 was to launder “over $10 million in captured Axis funds to influence the [Italian] election [of 1948].” (28) This use of off-the-books financing for criminal activities was institutionalized in 1948 with the creation of a covert Office of Policy Coordination (OPC), whose charge was to engage in “subversion against hostile states.” (29)
As a consequence, the CIA’s Directorate of Operations, which in 1952 absorbed the OPC, has become accustomed to the routine  breaking of foreign laws on a daily basis. According to a congressional staff study [1996],
“A safe estimate is that several hundred times every day (easily 100,000 times a year) operations officers engage in highly illegal activities (according to foreign law) that not only risk political embarrassment to the United States but also endanger the freedom if not lives of the participating foreign nations and, more than occasionally, of the clandestine officer himself.” (30)
OPC enlisted drug traffickers in Europe as allies in defending the states of Western Europe from the risks of a communist or Russian takeover. In Southeast Asia it did more than just make alliances with drug traffickers; through Operation Paper (see the following discussion), it armed and assisted its drug proxies to build up and control an expanded international opium and heroin traffic.
We shall see that OPC’s purposes in doing so were not (as in Europe) essentially defensive; in the absence of other reliable allies, it used drug financing to help develop an offensive anti-communist force that became largely responsible, in 1959, for the relaunching of war in Indochina.
We are still dealing today with the problem of the OPC-assisted drug traffic, now largely relocated from Southeast Asia to Afghanistan. This book will show how the U.S. use of drug proxies in Asia, combined with the absorption in 1952 of OPC into the U.S. bureaucracy, helped convert the traditional U.S. defense establishment in Europe into something different in Asia, an offensive American war machine. (31)
OPC in its inception was completely dominated by New York Social Register members of the Wall Street overworld, like its director Frank Wisner. But both the state and its relations to deep forces have evolved considerably since the 1940s. The CIA in particular was partially bureaucratized and subjected to a measure of bureaucratic oversight by Congress. This was followed by the creation of new institutions designed specifically to escape accountability to Congress.
The most concrete example is the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) created under the Pentagon in 1980, which appears to play a similar role. In Iran, for example, JSOC appears to have made contact with at least two resistance groups that are also involved in drug trafficking. (32)
Today perhaps the most notorious emblem of nonaccountable deep power (if not the most important) is Blackwater, now officially renamed Xe Services.(33)  After CIA Director Leon Panetta announced in June 2009 that he had cancelled the CIA’s assassination program, The Nation reported that Blackwater
was continuing to assassinate in a nonaccountable program with JSOC:
At a covert forward operating base run by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, members of an elite division of Blackwater are at the center of a secret program in which they plan targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives, “snatch and grabs” of high-value targets and other sensitive action inside and outside Pakistan, an investigation by The Nation has found. (34)
We shall discuss Blackwater later. What I wish to point out now is how antithetical is the background of Blackwater’s owner, Erik Prince, to the old wealth establishment figures of OPC in 1948. Prince is a new-wealth capitalist from the Midwest, the bulk of whose fortune comes from his contracts with the war machine he is part of. His father, Edgar Prince, was a leading member (and his mother president) of the Dallas-based Council for National Policy, a far-right nationalist group expressly created to counter the internationalist policies of New York’s Council on Foreign Relations.
The shift from OPC to Blackwater epitomizes the shift in America over a half century from a civilian-based economy to a war-based economy, from internationalism to nationalism, from a defense establishment to an offense establishment. The key to that shift can be seen in the troubled politics of the 1970s, the result of which was the perpetuation of the war machine enlarged by the Vietnam War.
Operation Condor was part of that troubled 1970s history. As we shall see, it was CIA-sponsored and, in assassinating Letelier, was able to extend its operations into Washington, the seat of American government.

References

26. Max Weber, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization (New York: Free Press, 1964), 154.

27. Ovid Demaris, Captive City (New York: Pocket Books, 1970), 34–35.

28. Amy B. Zegart, Flawed by Design: The Evolution of the CIA, JCS, and NSC (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1999), 189, citing Christopher Andrew, For the President’s EyesOnly (New York: HarperCollins, 1995), 172.

29. Thomas Etzold and John Gaddis, Containment: Documents on American Policy and Strategy 1945–1950 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1978), 125.

30. U.S. Congress, House, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, IC 21: The Intelligence Committee in the 21st Century (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1996), 205, quoted by John Kelly, “Crimes and Silence: the CIA’s Criminal Acts and the Media’s Silence,” in Kristina Borjesson, Into the Buzzsaw: Leading Journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press (New York: Prometheus Books, 2002), 311.

31. OPC’s rollback efforts in the Ukraine and Albania were by contrast ill-supported failures.

32. Seymour M. Hersh, “Preparing the Battlefield,” New Yorker, July 7, 2008, http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh; Syed Saleem Shahzad, “Where Pakistan’s Militants Go to Ground,” Asia Times, October 23, 2009, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KJ23Df03.html. Hersh writes that JSOC’s “strategy of using ethnic minorities to undermine Iran is flawed.” In later chapters I shall similarly criticize the CIA’s use of Hmong in Laos and Tajiks in Afghanistan. JSOC was also involved in the chasing down of Colombian drug kingpin Pablo Escobar, a feat achieved with the assistance of Colombia’s Cali Cartel.

33. Adam Ciralsky, “Tycoon, Contractor, Soldier, Spy,” Vanity Fair, January 2010, http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2010/01/blackwater-201001.

34. Jeremy Scahill, “The Secret US War in Pakistan,” The Nation, November 23, 2009, http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091207/scahill.

Source:
http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/04/12/deep-history-global-drug-connection-part-3-deadly-bureaucracy/

[uzn]

Part 4:

Deep History and the Global Drug Connection, Part 4: Enter al-Qaeda

https://reaganlibrary.archives.gov/archives/photographs/large/c12820-32.jpg
President Reagan meeting with Afghan Freedom Fighters in 1983, they have a different Name now, can you guess ;)

Professor Peter Dale Scott sees what the rest of us miss. His decades-long investigation of the connections between the hugely lucrative and unstoppable global drug trade and the national security apparatus is unparalleled. The details are also highly complex and a challenge to absorb. Nevertheless, they demand our attention.
In this excerpt from his new book, Scott focuses on the troubling relationship between Ronald Reagan’s CIA director, William Casey, and BCCI, a still-mysterious “outlaw bank” with tentacles everywhere, and extensive ties to the drug economy.
Excerpt from:
American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan ( Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2014)

Creating an International Islamist Army: Casey, BCCI, and the Creation of al-Qaeda
The other most significant case in which the CIA became a front for sanctioned violence was CIA Director William Casey’s use of the CIA in the 1980s to promote his own plans for Afghanistan. Casey’s Afghan initiatives aroused the concern of the CIA’s professional operatives and analysts, including his deputy directors, Bobby Ray Inman and John McMahon.(35) But this did not deter Casey from making high-level decisions about the Afghan campaign outside regular channels when meeting in secret with foreigners.
One man Casey dealt with in this fashion was Agha Hasan Abedi, a close adviser to General Zia of Pakistan and, more important, the head of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI):
Abedi helped arrange Casey’s sojourns in Islamabad and met with the CIA director during visits to Washington. Typically, Abedi would stay in a hotel and Casey would go to his suite. The two men, who met intermittently over a three-year period, would spend hours talking about the war in Afghanistan, the Iran-Contra arms trades, Pakistani politics, and the situation in the Persian Gulf. (36)
Members of Senator John Kerry’s staff, who investigated this relationship, concluded that Casey in his dealings with Abedi may have been acting not as CIA director but as an adviser to President Reagan, so that his actions were“undocumented, fully deniable, and effectively irretrievable.” (37) (Casey’s dealings with BCCI may not have been at arm’s length: the weapons pipeline to Afghanistan allegedly involved funding through a BCCI affiliate in Oman, in which Casey’s close friend and business associate Bruce Rappaport had a financial interest. (38)
Unquestionably BCCI offered Casey an opportunity to conduct off-the-books operations, such as the Iran-Contra arms deal, in which BCCI was intimately involved. But the largest of these operations by far was the support to the Afghan mujahideen resistance against the Soviet invaders, where once again BCCI played a major role. Casey repeatedly held similar meetings with General Zia in Pakistan — arranged by Abedi (39) — and with Saudi intelligence chiefs Kamal Adham and Prince Turki al-Faisal (both BCCI shareholders).
As a result of such conclaves, Prince Turki distributed more than $1 billion in cash to Afghan guerrillas, which was matched by another billion from the CIA. “When the Saudis provided the funding, the administration was able to bypass Congress.” (40) Meanwhile “BCCI handled transfers of funds through its Pakistani branches and acted as a collection agency for war matériel and even for the mujahideens’ pack animals”: (41)
To access the CIA money was relatively easy. Bags of dollar bills were flown into Pakistan and handed over to Lieutenant General Akhtar Abdur Rahman, the ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence] director. Rahman banked the cash in ISI accounts held by the National Bank of Pakistan, the Pakistan-controlled Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) and the Bank of Oman (one-third owned by the BCCI).(42)
Yet there is not a word about BCCI in Ghost Wars, Steve Coll’s otherwise definitive history of the CIA’s campaign in Afghanistan. Similarly there is no mention of BCCI in Coll’s excellent book The Bin Ladens, even though he provides an extended description of how Prince Turki arranged for “transfers of government cash to Pakistan.” (43)

https://media.defense.gov/2004/Jan/20/2000595135/670/394/0/020903-O-9999R-021.JPG
Tons of drugs and billions of dollars were moved around the world

Casey’s involvement with BCCI was not just a backdoor operation with a bank; it was a multi-billion-dollar backdoor operation with a criminal bank accused, even by its own insiders, of:
Global involvement with drug shipments, smuggled gold, stolen military secrets, assassinations, bribery, extortion, covert intelligence operations, and weapons deals. These were the province of a Karachi-based cadre of bank operatives, paramilitary units, spies, and enforcers who handled BCCI’s darkest operations around the globe and trafficked in bribery and corruption. (44)
There were huge and lasting historical consequences from Casey’s apparently unilateral decision to work with BCCI. One was that BCCI’s drug clients in Pakistan and Afghanistan, notably Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, emerged in the 1980s, with protection from General Zia, as dominant figures in an expanded Afghan heroin drug traffic that continues to afflict the world. (45) (According to McCoy, BCCI “played a critical role in facilitating the movement of Pakistani heroin money that reached $4 billion by 1989, more than the country’s legal exports.”(46)
A second consequence was that many of the CIA funds intended for the Afghan mujahideen were instead siphoned off by ISI and redirected to Khan Research Laboratories (KRL) for the successful development of Pakistan’s atomic bomb. “Although the European intelligence community frequently warned of fraudulent activities between BCCI, the BCCI Foundation and KRL, the Reagan administration continually denied there was a problem.”(47)
In turn the head of the labs, Abdul Qadeer Khan, “created a vast network that has spread nuclear know-how to North Korea, Iran and Libya.”(48) In 2008 the Swiss government allegedly seized and destroyed, from the computers of just one network member, nuclear bomb blueprints and manuals on how to manufacture weapons-grade uranium for warheads, but investigators feared that these might nonetheless still be circulating on the international black market. (49)
A third consequence was that Casey could help build up the foreign legion of so-called Arab Afghans in Afghanistan, even though the CIA hierarchy in Langley rightly “thought this unwise.” (50) It was this foreign legion which in 1988 redefined itself as al-Qaeda.(51)
Such can be the consequences of ill-considered covert operations conceived by very small cabals!
US Responsibility for the Flood of Heroin in the World
.
Here is yet another fact that is so alien to our normal view of reality that I myself find it hard to keep in mind: US backdoor covert foreign policy has been the largest single cause of the illicit drugs flooding the world today.
It is worth contemplating for a moment the legacy of CIA-supported drug proxies in just two areas — the Golden Triangle and the Golden Crescent. In 2003, according to the United Nations, these two areas accounted for 91 percent of the area devoted to illicit opium production and 95 percent of the estimated product in metric tons. [Add in Colombia and Mexico, two other countries where the CIA has worked with drug traffickers, and the four areas accounted for 96.6 percent of the growing area and 97.8 percent of the estimated product.(52)]
The CIA’s covert operations were not the sole cause for this flood of opium and heroin. But the de facto protection conferred on sectors of the opium trade by CIA involvement is clearly a major historical factor for the world crime scourge today.
When the CIA airline CAT began its covert flights to Burma in the 1950s, the area produced about 80 tons of opium a year. In ten years’ time, production had perhaps quadrupled, and at one point during the Vietnam War the output from the Golden Triangle reached 1,200 tons a year. By 1971, there were also at least seven heroin labs in the region, one of which, close to the CIA base at Ban Houei Sai in Laos, produced an estimated 3.6 tons of heroin a year. (53)
Afghan opium production has been even more responsive to US operations in the area. It soared from 200 metric tons in 1980, the first full year of US support for the drug-trafficking mujahideen Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, to 1,980 metric tons in 1991, when both the United States and the Soviet Union agreed to terminate their aid. (54)  After 1979 Afghan opium and heroin entered the world market significantly for the first time and rose from roughly 0 to 60 percent of US consumption by 1980. (55) In Pakistan there were hardly any drug addicts in 1979; the number had risen to over 800,000 by 1992. (56)
In 2000-2001, the Taliban virtually eliminated opium production in their area of Afghanistan. Thus total production for 2001 was 185 metric tons. Nearly all of this was from the northeastern corner controlled by the drug trafficking Northern Alliance, which in that year became America’s ally in its invasion.
Once again production soared after the US invasion in 2001, in part because the United States recruited former drug traffickers as supporting assets in its assault. From 3,400 metric tons in 2002, it climbed steadily until “in 2007 Afghanistan produced an extraordinary 8,200 tons of opium (34 percent more than in 2006), becoming practically the exclusive supplier of the world’s deadliest drug (93 percent of the global opiates market).” (57)
References
.

35. Steve Coll, Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001 (New York: Penguin, 2004), 90; cf. Prados, Safe for Democracy, 489.

36. Peter Truell and Larry Gurwin, False Profits: The Inside Story of BCCI, the World’s Most Corrupt Financial Empire (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1992), 133.

37. Truell and Gurwin, False Profits, 133n.

38. US Congress, Senate, The BCCI Affair, a Report to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations from Senator John Kerry, Chairman, and from Senator Hank Brown,Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Operations, December 1992, 102nd Cong., 2nd sess., Senate Report No. 102-140, “BCCI, the CIA, and Foreign Intelligence,” 320, http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1992_rpt/ bcci/11intel.htm; Alan A. Block and Constance A. Weaver, All Is Clouded by Desire: Global Banking, Money Laundering, and International Organized Crime (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2004), 27–33, 83–85; Wall Street Journal, October 23, 1991; Scott, The Road to 9/11,95, 108, 325.

39. In 1978, when the United States terminated economic assistance to Pakistan because of its nuclear program, Abedi had come to Zia’s rescue with emergency loans from BCCI (Truell and Gurwin, False Profits, 80–81).

40. Truell and Gurwin, False Profits, 153.

41. Truell and Gurwin, False Profits, 133.

42. Adrian Levy and Catherine Scott-Clark, Deception: Pakistan, the United States, and the Secret Trade in Nuclear Weapons (New York: Walker and Co., 2007), 125.

43. Steve Coll, The Bin Ladens: An Arabian Family in the American Century (New York: Penguin, 2008) 249.

44.Jonathan Beaty and S. C. Gwynne, The Outlaw Bank: A Wild Ride into the Secret Heart of BCCI (New York: Random House, 1993), 66. Those interested in BCCI should also read the defense of the bank by Abid Ullah Jan, From BCCI to ISI: The Saga of Entrapment Continues (Ottawa: Pragmatic Publications, 2006).

45. Beaty and Gwynne, The Outlaw Bank, 48–50; McCoy, The Politics of Heroin, 479–80. Fazle Haq was the governor of Pakistan’s North-West Frontier province; at the same time he was also an important CIA contact and supporter of the Afghan mujahideen, some of whom—it was no secret—were supporting themselves by major opium and heroin trafficking through the North-West Frontier province. By 1982, Fazle Haq would be listed by Interpol as an international narcotics trafficker. However, after lengthy correspondence with Fazle Haq’s son, I am persuaded that there are no known grounds to accuse Fazle Haq of having profited personally from the drug traffic. See “Clarification from Peter Dale Scott re Fazle Haq,” 911Truth.org, http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20090223165146219.

46. M. Emdad-ul Haq, Drugs in South Asia: From the Opium Trade to the Present Day (New York: Palgrave, 2000), 204–5, quoted in McCoy, The Politics of Heroin,480.

47. Levy and Scott-Clark, Deception, 128.

48. Washington Post, November 11, 2007, B01.

49. Guardian, May 31, 2008, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/may/31/nuclear.internationalcrime. According to David Albright, a former UN weapons inspector in Washington, the network member, Urs Tinner, was recruited by the CIA from 1999 to 2000 and “was on the CIA payroll for a very large sum of money.”

50. Ahmed Rashid, Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia(New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001), 129 (Casey); Prados, Safe for Democracy, 489 (Langley).

51. Lawrence Wright, The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 (New York: Knopf, 2006), 131–34.

52. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, World Drug Report, 2004, http://www.unodc.org/pdf/WDR_2004/Chap3_opium.pdf.

53. McCoy, The Politics of Heroin, 162, 191, 286–87. McCoy’s estimate of the Kuomintang’s impact on expanding production is extremely conservative. According to Bertil Lintner, the foremost authority on the Shan states of Burma, “The annual production increased from a mere 30 tons at the time of independence [1945] to 600 tons in the mid-1950s” (Bertil Lintner, “Heroin and Highland Insurgency,” in Alfred W. McCoy and Alan A. Block, War on Drugs: Studies in the Failure of US NarcoticsPolicy [Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992], 288). Furthermore, the Kuomintang’s exploitation of the Shan states led thousands of hill tribesmen to flee to northernThailand, where opium production also increased.

54. State Customs Committee of Azerbaijan, “Opium Production in Afghanistan (1980–2005),” http://www.az-customs.net/en/hq15.htm.

55. McCoy, The Politics of Heroin, 464.

56. Beaty and Gwynne, The Outlaw Bank, 295.

57. Council on Foreign Relations, “Afghanistan Opium Survey, 2007,” August 2007 http://www.cfr.org/publication/14099/afghanistan_opium_survey_2007.html.

Source:
http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/05/12/deep-history-global-drug-connection-part-4-enter-al-qaeda/

[uzn]

Part 5:

Deep History and the Global Drug Connection, Part 5: CIA In Latin America

http://whowhatwhy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/image01-3.jpg

Introduction by Russ Baker:
Professor Peter Dale Scott sees what the rest of us miss. His decades-long investigation of the connections between the hugely lucrative and unstoppable global drug trade and the national security apparatus is unparalleled. The details are also highly complex and a challenge to absorb. Nevertheless, they demand our attention.
In this final excerpt from his new book, Scott focuses on CIA drug ties into Latin America, and finishes off with the argument that in choosing to tolerate and even work with the drug underworld, the national security state also ends up harming….national security.
Excerpt from:
American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan ( Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2014)

US Responsibility for the Flood of Heroin in the World

Here is yet another fact that is so alien to our normal view of reality that I myself find it hard to keep in mind: US backdoor covert foreign policy has been the largest single cause of the illicit drugs flooding the world today.
It is worth contemplating for a moment the legacy of CIA-supported drug proxies in just two areas — the Golden Triangle and the Golden Crescent. In 2003, according to the United Nations, these two areas accounted for 91 percent of the area devoted to illicit opium production and 95 percent of the estimated product in metric tons. [Add in Colombia and Mexico, two other countries where the CIA has worked with drug traffickers, and the four areas accounted for 96.6 percent of the growing area and 97.8 percent of the estimated product.(52)]
The CIA’s covert operations were not the sole cause for this flood of opium and heroin. But the de facto protection conferred on sectors of the opium trade by CIA involvement is clearly a major historical factor for the world crime scourge today.
When the CIA airline CAT began its covert flights to Burma in the 1950s, the area produced about 80 tons of opium a year. In ten years’ time, production had perhaps quadrupled, and at one point during the Vietnam War the output from the Golden Triangle reached 1,200 tons a year. By 1971, there were also at least seven heroin labs in the region, one of which, close to the CIA base at Ban Houei Sai in Laos, produced an estimated 3.6 tons of heroin a year. (53)
Afghan opium production has been even more responsive to US operations in the area. It soared from 200 metric tons in 1980, the first full year of US support for the drug-trafficking mujahideen Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, to 1,980 metric tons in 1991, when both the United States and the Soviet Union agreed to terminate their aid. (54)  After 1979 Afghan opium and heroin entered the world market significantly for the first time and rose from roughly 0 to 60 percent of US consumption by 1980. (55) In Pakistan there were hardly any drug addicts in 1979; the number had risen to over 800,000 by 1992. (56)
In 2000-2001, the Taliban virtually eliminated opium production in their area of Afghanistan. Thus total production for 2001 was 185 metric tons. Nearly all of this was from the northeastern corner controlled by the drug trafficking Northern Alliance, which in that year became America’s ally in its invasion.
Once again production soared after the US invasion in 2001, in part because the United States recruited former drug traffickers as supporting assets in its assault. From 3,400 metric tons in 2002, it climbed steadily until “in 2007 Afghanistan produced an extraordinary 8,200 tons of opium (34 percent more than in 2006), becoming practically the exclusive supplier of the world’s deadliest drug (93 percent of the global opiates market).” (57)
The conspicuous (and rarely acknowledged) fact that backdoor aspects of US policies have been a major causal factor in today’s drug flows does not of course mean that the United States has control over the situations it has produced. What it does indicate is that repeatedly, as a Brookings Institution expert wrote of the US Afghan intervention of 1979–1980, “drug control evidently became subordinated to larger strategic goals.” (58)
Congress has done nothing to alter these priorities and is not likely to do so soon.The CIA shares responsibility not only for the increase in global drug production but also for significant smuggling into the United States. This was demonstrated by two indictments by the US Department of Justice in the mid-1990s. In March 1997, Michel-Joseph François, the CIA-backed police chief in Haiti, was indicted in Miami for having helped to smuggle 33 tons of Colombian cocaine and heroin into the United States. The
Haitian National Intelligence Service (SIN), which the CIA helped to create,was also a target of the Justice Department investigation that led to the indictment.(59)
http://whowhatwhy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/image02-2.jpg
A few months earlier, General Ramon Guillén Davila, chief of a CIA-created anti-drug unit in Venezuela, was indicted in Miami for smuggling a ton of cocaine into the United States. According to the New York Times,
“The CIA, over the objections of the Drug Enforcement Administration,approved the shipment of at least one ton of pure cocaine to Miami International Airport as a way of gathering information about the Colombian drug Cartels.”
Time magazine reported that a single shipment amounted to 998 pounds, following earlier ones “totaling nearly 2,000 pounds.” (60) Mike Wallace confirmed that “the CIA-national guard undercover operation quickly accumulated this cocaine, over a ton-and-a-half that was smuggled from Colombia into Venezuela.” (61) According to the Wall Street Journal, the total amount of drugs smuggled by General Guillén may have been more than 22 tons. (62)
But the United States never asked for Guillén’s extradition from Venezuela to stand trial, and in 2007, when he was arrested in Venezuela for plotting to assassinate President Hugo Chavez, his indictment was still sealed in Miami. (63) Meanwhile, CIA officer Mark McFarlin, whom Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA) Chief Bonner had also wished to indict, was never indicted at all; he merely resigned. (64)
François and Guillén were part of an interconnected network of CIA-protected drug-trafficking intelligence networks south of the US border, including the SIN of Vladimiro Montesinos in Peru, the G-2 of Manuel Noriega in Panama, the G-2 of Leonidas Torres Arias in Honduras, and, perhaps above all, the DFS of Miguel Nazar Haro and Fernando Gutiérrez Barrios in Mexico.(65) But the Guillén case transcends all the others, both in size and also because in this case, as former DEA Chief Robert Bonner explained on 60 Minutes, the CIA clearly broke the law:
[MIKE] WALLACE [voiceover]: Until last month, Judge Robert Bonner was the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, the DEA. And Judge Bonner explained to us that only the head of the DEA is authorized to approve the transportation of any illegal narcotics, like cocaine, into this country, even if the CIA is bringing it in. Judge BONNER: Let me put it this way, Mike. If this has not been approved by DEA or an appropriate law-enforcement authority in the United States, then it’s illegal. It’s called drug trafficking. It’s called drug smuggling. WALLACE: So what you’re saying, in effect, is the CIA broke the law; simple as that. Judge BONNER: I don’t think there’s any other way you can rationalize around it, assuming, as I think we can, that there was some knowledge on the part of CIA. At least some participation in approving or condoning this to be done. (Footage of Wallace and Bonner; the CIA seal) WALLACE: (Voiceover) Judge Bonner says he came to that conclusion after a two-year secret investigation conducted by the DEA’s Office of Professional Responsibility, in cooperation with the CIA’s own inspector general. (66)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI-TpXS0Nds
According to Time, “The stated purpose of the scheme was to help one of the Venezuelan general’s agents win the confidence of Colombia’s drug lords,” specifically the Medellin cartel. (67) But by facilitating multi-ton shipments, the CIA was becoming part of the Colombian drug scene (just as, we shall see, it became in the 1950s an integral part of the Burma–Laos–Thailand drug scene). As I wrote in Drugs, Oil, and War,
The CIA can (and does) point to its role in the arrest or elimination of a number of major Colombian traffickers. These arrests have not diminished the actual flow of cocaine into the United States, which on the contrary reached a new high in 2000. But they have institutionalized the relationship of law enforcement to rival cartels and visibly contributed to the increase of urban cartel violence. The true purpose of most of these campaigns, like the current Plan Colombia, has not been the hopeless ideal of eradication. It has been to alter market share: to target specific enemies and thus ensure that the drug traffic remains under the control of those traffickers who are allies of the Colombian state security apparatus and/or the CIA. This confirms the judgment of Senate investigator Jack Blum a decade ago, that America, instead of battling a narcotics conspiracy, has “in a subtle way… become part of that conspiracy.” (68)
The fact that the CIA, two decades ago, became involved in facilitating massive shipments of cocaine impels us to consider the recent allegation by a Russian general that “drugs are often transported out of Afghanistan on American planes.” (69) We will consider this question at the end of this book.

Sanctioned Violence, Off-the-Books Violence, and the Global Drug Connection

As I argued in The Road to 9/11, the compelling conclusion one draws from anecdotes such as the Guillén Davila story is that secrecy in American decision making, although sometimes necessary for protecting our security, has grown to become a significant threat to American security.
America does not lack experts who can see a proper course in dealing with the rest of the world. But
we suffer from a hierarchy of secrecy that ensures that these experts can and will be overridden by small cabals with much more restricted, foolish, and often dangerous objectives. This deferral of public power has created what some have called (following Madison), an imperium in imperio. (70)
I hope in this book to persuade readers to set aside their doubts and consider that, for sixty years, backdoor covert operations – and in particular the drug–security relationship – have had a powerful influence on the evolution of America’s posture in relation to the rest of the world. And if this narrative is at all persuasive, one has to ask also whether the catastrophe of 9/11 was also, to some extent, the product of a drug–security relationship.
There are in this country today those who argue vocally that, in a war against terror, one should not be looking critically at the methods and alliances selected by our security establishment. I hope to make the case that these alliances have done more to create the crisis we are now in than to resolve it.
But the main purpose of this book is not just to criticize or to shock but to seek a better history for this country, one that is less contaminated by the twin forces of sanctioned violence and drugs. I have already indicated that civilization and denial are closely related, and in fact the style of each helps to determine the style of the other — a matter I shall return to in my conclusion.
I wish to present three propositions to which both left and right should be able to agree: first, that our country today is seriously afflicted by our security institutions to the extent that our constitutional government is altered and indeed threatened; second, that these relationships are associated with episodes of sanctioned violence, violence that will not be resolved by the normal processes of law enforcement; and, third, that there will be no progress in dealing with this affliction and threat until these interactions are publicly exposed and debated.
By the end of this book, we shall be looking at what I have hitherto called sanctioned violence in the light of what I call the global drug connection: a connection and milieu that in fact involves far more than merely the global drug traffic. I hope to present the global drug connection as a form of hitherto sanctioned off-the-books governance exploited by Washington.
The evidence in the following chapters will, it is hoped, strengthen this disturbing hypothesis. I will finally argue that involvement of US intelligence operators and agencies in the global drug traffic and in other international criminal networks is a factor that deserves greater attention in the emerging debate over the US presence in Afghanistan.
References
 .

52. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, World Drug Report, 2004, http://www.unodc.org/pdf/WDR_2004/Chap3_opium.pdf.

53. McCoy, The Politics of Heroin, 162, 191, 286–87. McCoy’s estimate of the Kuomintang’s impact on expanding production is extremely conservative. According to Bertil Lintner, the foremost authority on the Shan states of Burma, “The annual production increased from a mere 30 tons at the time of independence [1945] to 600 tons in the mid-1950s” (Bertil Lintner, “Heroin and Highland Insurgency,” in Alfred W. McCoy and Alan A. Block, War on Drugs: Studies in the Failure of US Narcotics Policy [Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992], 288). Furthermore, the Kuomintang’s exploitation of the Shan states led thousands of hill tribesmen to flee to northern Thailand, where opium production also increased.

54. State Customs Committee of Azerbaijan, “Opium Production in Afghanistan (1980–2005),” http://www.az-customs.net/en/hq15.htm.

55. McCoy, The Politics of Heroin, 464.

56. Beaty and Gwynne, The Outlaw Bank, 295.

57. Council on Foreign Relations, “Afghanistan Opium Survey, 2007,” August 2007 http://www.cfr.org/publication/14099/afghanistan_opium_survey_2007.html.

58. Peter Dale Scott, Drugs, Oil, and War: The United States in Afghanistan, Colombia,and Indochina (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003), 33.

59. San Francisco Chronicle, March 8, 1997, A10. Francois allegedly controlled the capital, Port-au-Prince, with a network of hirelings who profited on the side from drug trafficking.

60. Time, November 29, 1993, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,979669,00.html: “The shipments continued, however, until Guillen tried to send in 3,373 lbs. of cocaine at once. The DEA, watching closely, stopped it and pounced.” Cf. New York Times, November 23, 1996 (“one ton”).

61. CBS News Transcripts, 60 Minutes, November 21, 1993.

62. Wall Street Journal, November 22, 1996. The information about the drug activities of Guillen Davila and François had been published in the US press years before the indictments. It is probable that, had it not been for the controversy aroused by Gary Webb’s Contra-cocaine stories in the August 1996 San Jose Mercury, these two men and their networks would have been as untouchable as other kingpins in the global CIA drug connection whom we shall discuss, such as Miguel Nassar Haro in Mexico.

63. Chris Carlson, “Is the CIA Trying to Kill Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez?” Global Research, April 19, 2007

64. Douglas Valentine, The Strength of the Pack: The People, Politics and Espionage Intrigues That Shaped the DEA (Springfield, OR: TrineDay, 2009), 400; Time, November 23, 1993. McFarlin had worked with anti guerrilla forces in El Salvador in the 1980s. The CIA station chief in Venezuela, Jim Campbell, also retired.

65. Peter Dale Scott, “Washington and the Politics of Drugs,” Variant 2, no. 11 (Summer 2000): 3–6; Scott and Marshall, Cocaine Politics, vii–xiv.

66. CBS, 60 Minutes, November 21, 1993. Cf. Valentine, The Strength of the Pack, 400.

67. At the time, the CIA was plotting, successfully, to bring down Pablo Escandar,chief of the Medellín cartel, using the assistance of the drug-trafficking death squad leader Carlos Castaño, who was working for the rival Cali cartel (Scott, Drugs, Oil, and War, 88).

68. Scott, Drugs, Oil, and War, 89, citing Paul Eddy, The Cocaine Wars (New York: Norton, 1988), 342 (Blum).

69. “Afghan Drug Trafficking Brings US $50 Billion a Year,” RussiaToday, August 20, 2009, http://russiatoday.com/Top_News/2009-08-20/afghanistan-us-drug -trafficking.html. Cf. “Russian State TV Suggests USA Involved in Drug-Trafficking from Afghanistan,” RAWANews, February 18, 2008, http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2008/02/17/russian-state-tv-suggests-usa-involved-in-drug-trafficking-from-afghanistan.html.

70. David Bromwich, New York Review of Books, November 20, 2008, 33.

Source:
http://whowhatwhy.org/2017/01/09/deep-history-global-drug-connection-part-5-cia-latin-america/

After all that it should be quite obvious why the Deep State does not want Donald Trump to move against Drug Trafficing and is doing anything they can against him with the help of their controlled media outlets (Fronts).

[uzn]

Just as a little nostalgic Memory. Many here will remember "Air America". That was the Airline the CIA invented for themselves to smuggle Drugs out of Vietnam during the Vietnam War.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1c/Air_America_wings.svg
That text is from mainstreamy Wikipedia (which is frequently edited by intelligence Agencies ;)):
Air America was an American passenger and cargo airline covertly owned by the US government in 1950 as a dummy corporation for Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operations in China. The CIA did not have enough work to keep the asset afloat and the National Security Council farmed the airline out to various government entities that included the USAF, US Army, USAID and for a brief time France. Essentially, Air America was used by the US government covertly to conduct military operations, posing as a civilian air carrier, in areas the US armed forces could not go due to treaty restraints contained in the 1954 and 1962 Geneva Accords.

Allegations of drug smuggling
During the CIA's secret war in Laos, the CIA used the Meo (Hmong) population to fight Pathet Lao rebels. Because of the war against Pathet Lao rebels, the Hmong depended upon poppy cultivation for hard currency. The Plain of Jars had been captured by Pathet Lao rebels in 1964 which resulted in the Laotian Air Force not being able to land their C-47 transport aircraft on the Plain of Jars for opium transport. The Laotian Air Force had almost no light planes that could land on the dirt runways near the mountaintop poppy fields. Having no way to transport their opium, the Hmong were faced with economic ruin. Air America was the only airline available in northern Laos. "According to several unproven sources, Air America began flying opium from mountain villages north and east of the Plain of Jars to Gen Vang Pao's headquarters at Long Tieng."
Air America were alleged to have profited from transporting opium and heroin on behalf of Hmong leader Vang Pao, or of "turning a blind eye" to the Laotian military doing it. This allegation has been supported by former Laos CIA paramilitary Anthony Poshepny (aka Tony Poe), former Air America pilots, and other people involved in the war. It is portrayed in the movie Air America. However, University of Georgia historian William M. Leary, writing on behalf of Air America, claims that this was done without the airline employees' direct knowledge and that the airline did not trade in drugs. Curtis Peebles denies the allegation, citing Leary's study as evidence.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/Air_America_Pilatus_PC-6_in_flight.jpg
Air America Pilatus PC-6 in flight

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/Helio_U-10D_Air_America_Laos_1970.jpg
Helio U-10D Air America Laos 1970
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8a/Air-America--Bell-205-helicopter-at-Hmong-FSB.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Air_America_Bell_205s_on_USS_Hancock_%28CVA-19%29_in_1975.jpg
Air America Bell 205s being evacuated aboard USS Hancock, in 1975.

Their main Job was to get the Goods out of the "Golden Triangle". And to get the Drugs to the well paying western Metropols.

Lets get back to modern day Drug trafficing:
In Afganistan under the American Protection Opium Production Skyrocketed. Not only did the Americans protect the Poppie Fields, they also handled most of the logistics. Well supported by other Nato members like the Germans. Angela Merkel is definitly in the know of that is being transported via the Ramstein Airbase in German on a daily Basis.
http://1.f.ix.de/scale/geometry/700/q75/tp/imgs/89/1/9/1/3/8/6/3/480f27eaecd525f7.jpg

Afghan Opiate trafficking southern route:
Download:
http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/Studies/Afghan_opiate_trafficking_southern_route_web.pdf

Afghanistan Opium Survey 2016
Download:
https://www.unodc.org/documents/crop-monitoring/Afghanistan/AfghanistanOpiumSurvey2016_ExSum.pdf#yuiHis=1%7Cuploads%7Cdocuments%7C/crop-monitoring%7C/crop-monitoring/Afghanistan%7C/crop-monitoring/Afghanistan/AfghanistanOpiumSurvey2016_ExSum.pdf


Afghan opium production up 43 per cent: Survey

23 October 2016 - Opium production in Afghanistan rose by 43 per cent to 4,800 metric tons in 2016 compared with 2015 levels, according to the latest Afghanistan Opium Survey figures released today by the Afghan Ministry of Counter Narcotics and the UNODC. The area under opium poppy cultivation also increased to 201,000 hectares (ha) in 2016, a rise of 10 per cent compared with 183,000 ha in 2015.
In a statement timed to coincide with the survey's launch, UNODC Executive Director, Yury Fedotov, said that the new report shows a worrying reversal in efforts to combat the persistent problem of illicit drugs and their impact on development, health and security. Consequently, he urged the international community to lend their support to achieving the sustainable development goals in Afghanistan - including vital work on a peaceful and inclusive society, health, poverty, peace, and gender, among many others.
The higher production can be explained by the larger area under opium poppy cultivation, but the most important driver is the higher opium yield per hectare. The largest yield increase occurred in the Western region where the average yield grew by 37 per cent and the Southern region, with a 36 per cent rise. Since these two regions account for 84 per cent of the total opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan, the yield increases in these regions had a strong impact on the national potential opium production.
The average opium yield, meanwhile, is at 23.8 kilograms per hectare (p/ha) - 30 per cent more than in 2015 (18.3 kilograms p/ha). A total of 355 ha of poppy eradication was carried out by the provincial Governors in 2016. This represented a decrease of 91 per cent from 2015 when 3,760 hectares were eradicated. In 2016, eradication took place in 7 provinces, compared to 12 provinces in 2015.
Hilmand, with some 80,273 ha (40 per cent of the national total), remained the country's major opium poppy cultivating province. This is followed by Badghis (35,234 ha), Kandahar (20,475 ha), Uruzgan (15,503 ha), Nangarhar (14,344 ha), Farah (9,101 ha), Badakhshan (6,298 ha) and Nimroz (5,303 ha).
As noted in the Survey, opium cultivation decreased in some of the main opium poppy-growing provinces, notably Farah and Nimroz (which saw declines of 57, and 40 per cent, respectively), but climbed in the provinces of Badghis (by 184 per cent) and Badakhshan (by 55 per cent).
The southern region has the country's largest share of national opium production with 54 per cent recorded, which equals some 2,591 metric tons (MT). Afghanistan's second most important opium producing region is the Western, responsible for 24 per cent of national production (1,139 MT), followed by the eastern region with 12 per cent (571 MT). The remaining areas (north-eastern, northern and central regions) together, accounted for only 10% of opium production.
During the latest eradication campaign eight lives were lost and seven people were injured. In 2015, five lives were lost and 18 people were injured.

Source:
https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/frontpage/2016/October/afghan-opium-production-up-43-percent_-survey.html

Just think about it, 4.800 metric Tons, how do you move such quantities ?

[TargeT]

the "Deep state" has global influence.. globalist propaganda is still being used heavily

for example:

https://i.imgur.com/zmeS2vY.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/Tjmckh1.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/4J7MzIq.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/N4AxuZV.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/qeTcy4H.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/u0ANLTD.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/DBh2sdc.jpg

https://imgur.com/a/uKYFt

Seems pretty political and VERY pro globalist....

makes me suspicious.

[uzn]

Tricky Dick Nixon founded a new Agency called DEA. They should get a handle on Drugs which at that time had gotten totally out of Control. Shortly after Nixon was made to fall over Watergate the DEA started to work for the Deep State not against it anymore. From that Moment on the DEA was only allowed to catch small fish. Dennis Dale worked 30 Years for the DEA as a leading Officer and he stated: In my 30 years in the DEA it became apparent that all important Targets of my investigations where in fact working for the CIA.
See this Text for proof:

Deep Events and the CIA’s Global Drug Connection
http://www.globalresearch.ca/deep-events-and-the-cia-s-global-drug-connection/10095

We know about the Dinner Donald Trump refused to hold with the Press and so on, but thats just on the Surface. Take a look behind:
I posted an Article from the Washington Post before here in this Thread, just to Show both sides of the conflict. The Washington Post has put a new Anti-Trump Slogan in Black on top of their Online Website. It reads "Democracy dies in Darkness", so much for objective journalism. In my Eyes they just went totally overboard and are showing for everybody to see that they are remote controlled and dont care about Facts anymore.
The deranged Brain behind this Slogan is Oligarch Jeff Bezos which his friends only call "Amazon". By the way this Guy owns the Washington Post and surprise surprise was doing big Business with the CIA. He is not telling this to his dear stupid Readers. Wonder why?

Jeff Bezos Is Doing Huge Business with the CIA, While Keeping His Washington Post Readers in the Dark
Amazon has a bad history of currying favor with the U.S. government’s “national security” establishment.
By Norman Solomon / AlterNet
December 18, 2013
News media should illuminate conflicts of interest, not embody them. But the owner of the Washington Post is now doing big business with the Central Intelligence Agency, while readers of the newspaper’s CIA coverage are left in the dark.
The Post’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, is the founder and CEO of Amazon -- which recently landed a $600 million contract with the CIA. But the Post’s articles about the CIA are not disclosing that the newspaper’s sole owner is the main owner of CIA business partner Amazon.
Even for a multi-billionaire like Bezos, a $600 million contract is a big deal. That’s more than twice as much as Bezos paid to buy the Post four months ago.
And there’s likely to be plenty more where that CIA largesse came from. Amazon’s offer wasn’t the low bid, but it won the CIA contract anyway by offering advanced high-tech “cloud” infrastructure.
Bezos personally and publicly touts Amazon Web Services, and it’s evident that Amazon will be seeking more CIA contracts. Last month, Amazon issued a statement saying, “We look forward to a successful relationship with the CIA.”
As Amazon’s majority owner and the Post’s only owner, Bezos stands to gain a lot more if his newspaper does less ruffling and more soothing of CIA feathers.
Amazon has a bad history of currying favor with the U.S. government’s “national security” establishment. The media watch group FAIR pointed out what happened after WikiLeaks published State Department cables: “WikiLeaks was booted from Amazon’s webhosting service AWS. So at the height of public interest in what WikiLeaks was publishing, readers were unable to access the WikiLeaks website.”
How’s that for a commitment to the public’s right to know?
Days ago, my colleagues at RootsAction.org launched a petition that says: “The Washington Post’s coverage of the CIA should include full disclosure that the sole owner of the Post is also the main owner of Amazon -- and Amazon is now gaining huge profits directly from the CIA.” More than 15,000 people have signed the petition so far this week, with many posting comments that underscore widespread belief in journalistic principles.
While the Post functions as a powerhouse media outlet in the Nation’s Capital, it’s also a national and global entity -- read every day by millions of people who never hold its newsprint edition in their hands. Hundreds of daily papers reprint the Post’s news articles and opinion pieces, while online readership spans the world.
Propaganda largely depends on patterns of omission and repetition. If, in its coverage of the CIA, the Washington Post were willing to fully disclose the financial ties that bind its owner to the CIA, such candor would shed some light on how top-down power actually works in our society.
“The Post is unquestionably the political paper of record in the United States, and how it covers governance sets the agenda for the balance of the news media,” journalism scholar Robert W. McChesney points out. “Citizens need to know about this conflict of interest in the columns of the Post itself.”
In a statement just released by the Institute for Public Accuracy, McChesney added: “If some official enemy of the United States had a comparable situation -- say the owner of the dominant newspaper in Caracas was getting $600 million in secretive contracts from the Maduro government -- the Post itself would lead the howling chorus impaling that newspaper and that government for making a mockery of a free press. It is time for the Post to take a dose of its own medicine.”

From the Institute, we also contacted other media and intelligence analysts to ask for assessments; their comments are unlikely to ever appear in the Washington Post.
“What emerges now is what, in intelligence parlance, is called an ‘agent of influence’ owning the Post -- with a huge financial interest in playing nice with the CIA,” said former CIA official Ray McGovern. “In other words, two main players nourishing the national security state in undisguised collaboration.”
A former reporter for the Washington Post and many other news organizations, John Hanrahan, said: “It's all so basic. Readers of the Washington Post, which reports frequently on the CIA, are entitled to know -- and to be reminded on a regular basis in stories and editorials in the newspaper and online -- that the Post's new owner Jeff Bezos stands to benefit substantially from Amazon's $600 million contract with the CIA. Even with such disclosure, the public should not feel assured they are getting tough-minded reporting on the CIA. One thing is certain: Post reporters and editors are aware that Bezos, as majority owner of Amazon, has a financial stake in maintaining good relations with the CIA -- and this sends a clear message to even the hardest-nosed journalist that making the CIA look bad might not be a good career move.”
The rich and powerful blow hard against the flame of truly independent journalism. If we want the lantern carried high, we’re going to have to do it ourselves.

Norman Solomon is founding director of the Institute for Public Accuracy and co-founder of RootsAction.org. His latest book is War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.

Source:
http://www.alternet.org/media/owner-washington-post-doing-business-cia-while-keeping-his-readers-dark

[uzn]

the "Deep state" has global influence.. globalist propaganda is still being used heavily

Yeah TargeT, saw them to and they disgust me. These are Guilds here in Germany doing them, they are supposed to be funny but as everybody can see they are just used for Propaganda in the worst disgusting way. Germany is still heavily under mind controll, especially the media.

Here another Example how globalist Propaganda is pushed in the Minds of the Germans:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?94731-Fake-News-and-the-War-on-Freedom-and-Truth&p=1137295&viewfull=1#post1137295

[Chester]

Brilliant Post uzn (#27) (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?96247-Trump-versus-The-Deep-State&p=1137545&viewfull=1#post1137545)

Anyone who has the guts to dig deep into this specific "stream" within the grander "big picture" of all "under the table" 'deep state' matters should consider watching the film Sicario (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicario_(2015_film)). Yes... a Hollywood film. Yes... one risks being "programmed" by watching such "stuff."

I will paraphrase the part to which I am referring but first I must set up the scenario as to why these words were spoken. The brave yet naive FBI agent, Kate, finally connects enough dots to realize that she has been working with "the CIA" and that this same "CIA" is involved in the very drug trafficking activities she, as an FBI agent had thought all US authorities would be fighting to prevent.

When she asked astonishingly... WTF??? she was told, when the US figures out how to stop 20% of the folks in the US's insatiable desire to consume this crap..."order is the best we can hope for."

The above I have written not to try and justify (or not) these activities. I am trying to point out that this is one quite pervasive point of view which I have no doubt "good folks" involved in any form of police work, intelligence work and military work might find themselves faced with in asking and answering this question for themselves. When each and every human resource (asset) happens to find themselves at that point where they may be faced with the above suggested possibility, it will most likely happen on a case by case basis and not all at once for any significant numbers of folks in these positions at the same time. So try and imagine what you might "do" (as Kate almost did) when she was faced with an "offer she couldn't refuse" at the very end of the movie. Whether she accepted her situation or not, whether she accepted the "isness" of the bigger picture or not, the fact is that if she refused to "sign the release" she would most definitely have ended up dead.

From the perspective of those who view this from a "bigger picture" POV, if she had made the wrong choice, she would have been viewed as 'falling on her own sword' all and only because she also had responsibility for being in the position she found herself as she had 'volunteered.'

Why all these words is that I am trying to point out that who might be "the good guys" or "the bad guys" and who might be considered "justified collateral damage' is all and only in the eye of each beholder.

Note that may father's second (and last wife) had a younger brother who..."flew unarmed Cessnas over Laos" during those times. She was told that because it was viewed as illegal for the US to be involved with Laos, his mission was covert and the goal of the mission was to do "surveillance." Perhaps that was true. Perhaps I am a "Kate."

A decade or so after I was told this by my step-mother (who passed on in 1979, he son, my half brother and I were talking on the phone one day and the subject came up. Note he was in his early 20s then and had been raised by his mother's mother as both my father and my step mom (his mother) had both dies in 1979)... thus he had heard all these "family stories." When this subject came up between us, he said... "Yes, xxxx flew for Air America."

All these types of things touch many lives... mine remotely in this regard. I have a feeling xxxx may actually have not known what he may have actually been doing, but also... maybe he did. He was still a good person, did good things for his family, had a regular job as an airline pilot after he left the military.

Apologies for the rambling story... thanks uzn, Sam

[uzn]

Thanks Sam Hunter for the Filmtip, gonna see that one soon ;). And of Course, they were not all bad People. Some really brave and skilled ones too. Some also flew weapons, Food and supplys of Course. But a lot of Drugs too ;) It´s easy to put a good / bad tag on People. But most do as much good and as little evil as their current position allows, I guess. Except Senator John McCain III;)

[uzn]

House intel head: 'No evidence' of Trump campaign contact with Russia

http://thehill.com/sites/default/files/styles/thumb_small_article/public/nunesdevin_092116gn_lead.jpg

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee on Monday rejected reports that members of President Trump’s campaign team had regular contact with Russian officials.
“There is no evidence that I’ve been presented [by the intelligence community] of regular contact with anybody in the Trump campaign,” Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) told reporters.
“The way it sounds like to me is, it’s been looked into and there’s no evidence of anything there.”
Nunes's committee is investigating Russian efforts to influence U.S. presidential election, including any links between campaign officials and Moscow.
The scope of the review has been under fierce scrutiny following Trump's dismissal of former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who misled Vice President Pence about the subject of a pre-inauguration call with the Russian ambassador, which included talk of sanctions against the country.
The committee has settled on the scope of its investigation, Nunes said Monday, but has not received all of the evidence it expects from U.S. intelligence agencies. He described his inquiries to those agencies regarding Trump’s campaign associates as “initial.”
“As of right now, I don’t have any evidence of any phone calls. It doesn’t mean they don’t exist, but I don’t have that,” he reiterated. “What I’ve been told, by many folks, is that there’s nothing there — but we’re absolutely looking into it.”
Nunes also dismissed calls from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and others for Attorney General Jeff Sessions recuse himself from any FBI investigation into Trump campaign ties to Russia.
“At this point, what are we going to appoint a special prosecutor to do, exactly? Chase stories of American citizens that end up in newspaper articles?” he said, adding that if there was any evidence of serious crime, the committee would “consider” the need for an independent prosecutor.
Rather than any links between the White House and Russia, Nunes insisted, the only “serious crime” of which the committee had any evidence is a myriad of media leaks, apparently from the intelligence community.
The contents of the transcript of the wiretapped phone call between Flynn and Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyac were made public through leaks to The Washington Post earlier this month. The report revealed that Flynn had discussed U.S. sanctions on Russia in the Dec. 29 call, despite his insistence to the contrary.
Nunes on Monday said he was “very interested” in who made the decision to expose the contents of the intercepted phone call to the media.
“What laws did they use to decide to unmask Flynn’s name?” he said.
In discussing the concerns over the leak, Nunes appeared to reveal the mechanism by which the government was able to legally surveil Flynn, a U.S. citizen, something that has been speculated about since the transcripts were leaked.
Referring to the calls as “FISA-warranted communications,” Nunes said that he believed Flynn’s side of the conversation was captured inadvertently. Under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the government may retain communications by U.S. citizens that are “inadvertently” intercepted if the material contains foreign intelligence or evidence of crime.
“The good thing is about FISA and the way it works, there should be a record of who in the government knew about Gen. Flynn talking to the Russian ambassador and from there we should be able to know who’s in the realm of the possibles of who we would need to talk to,” Nunes said Monday.
The White House has repeatedly characterized the “real story” as the leaks, not Trump’s alleged connections to Russia.
The administration has sought to counter a number of unflattering media stories, and apparently asked the FBI to publicly dispute a report that agents had uncovered contact between Russian officials and the president’s campaign.
The White House also reportedly enlisted Nunes, who was a member of the executive committee of Trump’s transition team, to counter the narrative.
Nunes denied a coordinated effort by the White House to push back on the stories.
“If anything, it was the opposite,” he said. “All it was was a White House communications person passing a number and a name of a reporter over to me if I would talk to them following up what I had already told all of you in the days before that.”
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the committee's ranking member, plans to speak to reporters concerning the investigation for later Monday afternoon.

Source:
http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/321350-house-intel-head-no-evidence-of-trump-campaign-contact-with-russia


Well that means that General Flynn´s comunications where tapped without any reason !!!! Whoever did it, this will now be considered a crime.

Funny the corrupted Washington Post called their Article:
House Intelligence chairman says he hasn’t found evidence of Trump team’s ties to Russia
https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/house-intelligence-chairman-denies-evidence-of-trump-teams-ties-to-russia/2017/02/27/66495ce8-fcfd-11e6-99b4-9e613afeb09f_story.html

[MorningFox]

There is an Article in a big german Newspaper (Der Tagesspiegel) already questioning if there will be an open war between the Trump Administration and the Deep State:
Droht in den USA ein Krieg zwischen der Regierung und dem "tiefen Staat"?
The Article (in german):
http://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/pressekonferenz-von-donald-trump-droht-in-den-usa-ein-krieg-zwischen-der-regierung-und-dem-tiefen-staat/19407558.html

Lets compare how the Press is treating Donald Trump and how the Press treated the last President Obama. All the war crimes and crimes against humanity of Obama where treated as nothing happened, and now every word of Trump is laid on a golden scale ? Just a Little selection of Uncool Things and Crimes of Mr. (I should go to Jail for that) Obama:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-j6JrbQsmOQw/U-7XGLU1TFI/AAAAAAAAGRw/LstzqM4Wz4c/s1600/mlk.i.have.a.dream.obama.i.have.a.drone.05.gif

Sent 3,500 U.S. troops and tanks to Russia's doorstep in one of his final decisions as president.
Obama ordered ten times more drone strikes than Bush.
In 2016 alone Obama dropped 26,171 bombs (an average of 72 bombs every day).
Put boots on the ground in Syria , despite 16 times saying "no boots on the ground".
Despite campaign pledges, planned a $1 trillion progam to add more nuclear weapons to the US arsenal in the next 30 years.
Dropped bombs in 7 Muslim countries; and then bragged about it .
Said, “I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being.”
Bragged about his use of drones  - I'm "really good at killing people".
Deported a modern-record 2 million immigrants.
Signed the Monsanto Protection Act into law.
Started a new war in Iraq .
Initiated, and personally oversees a 'Secret Kill List'.
Pushed for war on Syria while siding with al-Qaeda .
Backed neo-Nazis in Ukraine.
Supported Israel's wars and occupation of Palestine.
Deployed Special Ops to 134 countries - compared to 60 under Bush.
Did a TV commercial promoting "clean coal".
Drastically escalated the  NSA spying program .
Signed the NDAA into law - making it legal to assassinate Americans w/o charge or trial.
Given Bush absolute immunity for everything.
Pushed for a TPP Trade Pact .
Started a new war on terror - this one on ISIS .
Signed more executive memoranda than any other president in history.
Transferred more than $100 billion in arms sales to Saudi Arabia, more than any other administration in history.
Signed an agreement for 7 military bases in Colombia .
Opened a military base in Chile.
Touted nuclear power , even after the disaster in Japan.
Opened up deepwater oil drilling, even after the BP disaster.
Mandated the Insider Threat Program which orders federal employees to report suspicious actions of their colleagues.
Defended body scans and pat-downs at airports.
Signed the Patriot Act extension into law.
Launched 20,000 Airstrikes in his first term.
Continued Bush's rendition program.
Said the U.S. is the "one indispensable nation" in the world.
Waged war on Libya without congressional approval.
Started a covert, drone war in Yemen.
Escalated the proxy war in  Somalia.
Escalated the CIA drone war in Pakistan.
Sharply escalated the war in Afghanistan.
Repealed the Propaganda ban, making it legal to spread government propaganda via news outlets.
Assassinated 4 US citizens with drone strikes.

For a more complete List of Obama Legacy to the World (about 20 pages) :
Obama Fact Sheet
https://www.stpete4peace.org/obama-fact-sheet

That's an interesting list but can I ask how exactly Obama backed neo-nazis in Ukraine?

[uzn]

That's an interesting list but can I ask how exactly Obama backed neo-nazis in Ukraine?

regarding MornigFoxes question:

The US Military and the US intelligence Agencies backed the nationals in the Ukraine with everything they got. Not Obama personally.

THE US IS SUPPORTING NEO-NAZIS IN UKRAINE

http://stpeteforpeace.org/how.can.us.be.pro.israel.support.anti-semites.ukraine.webheaderLARGE.jpg

The United States regularly claims that it has a "special relationship" with Israel.  Just one problem with this: The U.S. is supporting neo-Nazis in Ukraine.

How can the U.S. be "pro-Israel" if it is assisting and training anti-Semites? And how is it that the U.S. supports neo-Nazi extremists today even after 6 million Jews were targeted and methodically murdered by Nazis during WWII?

Support for the Azov militia comes on top of U.S. backing of the Svoboda Party, a group condemned by a 2012 European Parliament resolution as “racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic,” and Pravy Sektor, a nationalist organization that has been characterized as neo-fascist.

Pentagon officials announced that U.S. troops from the 173rd Airborne will deploy to Ukraine in March to help build the Ukrainian National Guard.  The Pentagon neglected to mention that prominent members of the Ukrainian National Guard include the Azov battalion, a leading neo-Nazi group formed in 2014.

In addition to sending U.S. troops, Washington has already sent heavy military equipment and has earmarked $19 million for Ukrainian forces.

Azov is "run by the extremist Patriot of Ukraine organization, which considers Jews and other minorities sub-human”
- BBC News, Dec. 13, 2014
Printable .pdf Flyer
Azov was founded by Andriy Biletsky, who is also head of two neo-Nazi organizations, the Patriot of Ukraine and the Social-National Assembly.

Biletsky, who was elected to the Rada (Ukraine’s parliament) in November, wrote in 2010, “The historic mission of our nation in this critical moment is to lead the white races of the world in a final crusade for their survival. A crusade against the Semite-led sub-humans.”

Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok was expelled from parliament in 2004 after giving a speech demanding that Ukrainians fight against a "Muscovite-Jewish mafia," and for praising World War II partisans who fought Jews and "other scum."
"Arming Ukrainian forces would empower a monstrous crew of fascists and outright Nazi sympathizers.”
- Glenn Greenwald, Feb. 27, 2015
In 2005 Tyahnybok demanded that Ukraine do more to halt "criminal activities" of "organized Jewry," and, even now, Svoboda openly calls for Ukrainian citizens to have their ethnicity printed onto their passports.

Tyahnybok also declared that Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk was a hero who was "fighting for truth."

Another top Svoboda member, Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn, a deputy in parliament, often quotes Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, as well as other Third Reich luminaries like Ernst Rohm and Gregor Strasser.

WHY IS THE U.S. SIDING WITH NEO-NAZIS IN UKRAINE?
"Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire," wrote former US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski in his 1997 book, The Grand Chessboard.

"However, if Moscow regains control over Ukraine, with its 52 million people and major resources as well as access to the Black Sea, Russia automatically again regains the wherewithal to become a powerful imperial state, spanning Europe and Asia," said Brzezinski, who has been labeled, "The man behind Obama’s foreign policy."

Brzezinski recently told the Senate Armed Services committee that the U.S. and its allies should send troops to the Baltic states.
Proof:
https://tresmaneras.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/maccain.jpg
Senator John McCain speaks at rally in Kiev, Dec. 2013. To McCain’s right is Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok, to his left is Senator Chris Murphy.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Y73MB8DvkME/UxBDPZqEL9I/AAAAAAAAWuc/c2ahtpZNXgI/s1600/UkraineNulanMarionetten.jpg
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, front center, poses with “the big three” Tyahnybok, left, Vitaly Klitschko, back center, and Arseniy Yatseniuk, right, in Kiev, Feb. 2014.
http://i44.tinypic.com/2ez1m3k.jpg

http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/ukraine-nazi-helmet1.jpg
Nazi symbols on helmets worn by members of Ukraine’s Azov battalion. (As filmed by a Norwegian film crew and shown on German TV)

And so on and so on .....

see also:
http://stpeteforpeace.org/ukraine-flyer/ukraine-flyer.html
http://stpeteforpeace.org/ukraine-flyer/ukraine-flyer.p2.html

[Hervé]

Want to understand the Deep State? Here is your Deep, Deep State (https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/04/13/want-to-understand-the-deep-state-here-is-your-deep-deep-state/)

by Jon Rappoport (https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/author/jonrappoport/) Apr 13 (https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/04/13/want-to-understand-the-deep-state-here-is-your-deep-deep-state/), 2017
Men behind the curtain?

Men who control the government and its policies from the outside?

Men who have immunity from prosecution?

Men who tell presidents what to do?

Men who can hide in plain sight?

Men who don’t need to be elected to public office?

Men who can laugh at their critics and call them conspiracy theorists and purveyors of fake news?

Men who can determine financial and banking policy?

Men who can set up corporate tribunals that nullify national courts?

Men who can set virtually any national policy agenda they want to?
If an honest press existed, all this would be out in the open by now.

If, as many people are now saying, the CIA and NSA and neocons are the unelected Deep State, then the people I’m talking about would be the Deep, Deep State.

Read on.

Many people think the Trilateral Commission (TC), created in 1973 by David Rockefeller, is a relic of an older time.

Think again.

Patrick Wood, author of Trilaterals Over Washington, points out there are only 87 members of the Trilateral Commission who live in America. Obama appointed eleven of them to posts in his administration.

Keep in mind that the original stated goal of the TC was to create “a new international economic order.” Knowing that you have to break eggs to make an omelet, consider how the following TC members, in key Obama posts, could have helped engender further national chaos; erase our sovereign national borders; and install binding international agreements that will envelop our economy and money in a deeper global collective: a new world order:
Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary;
James Jones, National Security Advisor;
Paul Volker, Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee;
Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence.
All Trilateralists.

In the run-up to his inauguration after the 2008 presidential election, Obama was tutored by the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

In Europe, the financially embattled nations of Greece and Italy brought in Lucas Papademos and Mario Monti as prime ministers. Both men are Trilateral members, and Monti is the former European chairman of the Trilateral Commission.

In the US, since 1973, author Wood counts eight out of 10 US Trade Representative appointments, and six out of eight World Bank presidents, as American Trilateral members.

Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote, four years before birthing the TC in 1973, with his godfather, David Rockefeller:
“[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.”
Several other noteworthy Trilateral members: George HW Bush; Bill Clinton; Dick Cheney; Al Gore. The first three men helped sink the US further into debt by fomenting wars abroad; and Gore’s cap and trade blueprint would destroy industrial economies, while vastly increasing the numbers of people in Third World countries who have no access to modern sources of energy.

Does all this offer a clue as to why the US economy has failed to recover from the Wall Street debacle of 2008, why the federal bailout was a handout to super-rich criminals, and why Obama took no actions which would have brought about an authentic recovery?

A closer look at Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s circle of economic advisers reveals the chilling Trilateral effect: Paul Volker; Alan Greenspan; E. Gerald Corrigan (director, Goldman Sachs); and Peter G Peterson (former CEO, Lehman Brothers, former chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations). These men are all Trilateral members.

How many foxes in the hen house do we need, before we realize their Trilateral agenda is controlling the direction of our economy?

The TC has no interest in building up the American economy. They want to torpedo it, as part of the end-game of creating a de facto Globalist management system for the whole planet.

Any doubt on the question of TC goals is answered by David Rockefeller himself, the founder of the TC, in his Memoirs (2003): “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Even in what many people mistakenly think of as the TC’s heyday, the 1970s, there were few who realized its overarching power.

Here is a close-up snap shot of a remarkable moment from out of the past. It’s a through-the-looking-glass secret—in the form of a conversation between a reporter, Jeremiah Novak, and two Trilateral Commission members, Karl Kaiser and Richard Cooper. The interview took place in 1978. It concerned the issue of who exactly, during President Carter’s administration, was formulating US economic and political policy.

The careless and off-hand attitude of Trilateralists Kaiser and Cooper is astonishing. It’s as if they’re saying, “What we’re revealing is already out in the open, it’s too late to do anything about it, why are you so worked up, we’ve already won…”
NOVAK (the reporter): Is it true that a private [Trilateral committee] led by Henry Owen of the US and made up of [Trilateral] representatives of the US, UK, West Germany, Japan, France and the EEC is coordinating the economic and political policies of the Trilateral countries [which would include the US]?

COOPER: Yes, they have met three times.

NOVAK: Yet, in your recent paper you state that this committee should remain informal because to formalize ‘this function might well prove offensive to some of the Trilateral and other countries which do not take part.’ Who are you afraid of?

KAISER: Many countries in Europe would resent the dominant role that West Germany plays at these [Trilateral] meetings.

COOPER: Many people still live in a world of separate nations, and they would resent such coordination [of policy].

NOVAK: But this [Trilateral] committee is essential to your whole policy. How can you keep it a secret or fail to try to get popular support [for its decisions on how Trilateral member nations will conduct their economic and political policies]?

COOPER: Well, I guess it’s the press’ job to publicize it.

NOVAK: Yes, but why doesn’t President Carter come out with it and tell the American people that [US] economic and political power is being coordinated by a [Trilateral] committee made up of Henry Owen and six others? After all, if [US] policy is being made on a multinational level, the people should know.

COOPER: President Carter and Secretary of State Vance have constantly alluded to this in their speeches.

KAISER: It just hasn’t become an issue.

SOURCE: “Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management,” ed. by Holly Sklar, 1980. South End Press, Boston. Pages 192-3.
Of course, although Kaiser and Cooper claimed everything being manipulated by the Trilateral Commission committee was already out in the open, it wasn’t.

Their interview slipped under the mainstream media radar, which is to say, it was ignored and buried. It didn’t become a scandal on the level of, say, Watergate, although its essence was far larger than Watergate.

US economic and political policy run by a committee of the Trilateral Commission—the Commission had been created in 1973 as an “informal discussion group” by David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who would become Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor.

Shortly after Carter won the presidential election, his aide, Hamilton Jordan, said that if after the inauguration, Cy Vance and Brzezinski came on board as secretary of state and national security adviser, “We’ve lost. And I’ll quit.” Lost—because both men were powerful members of the Trilateral Commission and their appointment to key positions would signal a surrender of White House control to the Commission.

Vance and Brzezinski were appointed secretary of state and national security adviser, as Jordan feared. But he didn’t quit. He became Carter’s chief of staff.

Now consider the vast propaganda efforts of the past 40 years, on so many levels, to install the idea that all nations and peoples of the world are a single Collective.

From a very high level of political and economic power, this propaganda op has had the objective of grooming the population for a planet that is one coagulated mass, run and managed by one force.

Deep State.

Trump, who squashed the Globalist TPP treaty as soon as he was inaugurated, has nevertheless appointed a significant Trilateral member to a major post. Patrick Wood writes (2/6/17):
“According to a White House press release, the first member of the Trilateral Commission has entered the Trump administration as the Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs, where he will sit on the National Security Council [as deputy director]:
“’Kenneth I. Juster will serve as Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs. He will coordinate the Administration’s international economic policy and integrate it with national security and foreign policy. He will also be the President’s representative and lead U.S. negotiator (“Sherpa”) for the annual G-7, G-20, and APEC Summits’.”
Juster’s duties will take him into the heart of high-level negotiations with foreign governments on economic policy.

Note: In this article, I’m not listing Trump appointees who are members of another Rockefeller deep-state organization, the Council on Foreign Relations. Suffice to say, the CFR is a brother of the Trilateral Commission, and, when push comes to shove, the lesser brother. And finally, Goldman Sachs, whose people Trump has surrounded himself with, is a corporate member of the CFR…

Jon Rappoport

============================================

Of course, let's not forget the research of John Coleman's Diplomacy by Deception (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/diplomacy_deception/diplomacy_deception.htm) and his "The Committee of 300 (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_sociopol_committee300.htm)"

[norman]

https://static-assets-1.truthsocial.com/tmtg:prime-ts-assets/media_attachments/files/112/360/884/736/566/092/small/7a2f0552dd0da86e.jpg