« Closing the Door - TTG | Main | SpaceX Falcon 9 Rocket Nails Its Barge Landing - TTG »

08 April 2016


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


"I just read the "Deep State" wiki. The idea is of a state within a state. Nothing like that exists in the US."

I think there's a lot that goes on within the administration that the public never gets to know about, and I also think there are corrupt groups that are able to keep their true purposes secret.

Whether you want to call that "deep state" or just common or garden criminal enterprise is a bit arguable. I think Bill and Hillary are crooks.

If you listen to Karen Kwiatkowski on the Tom Woods Show you can hear about some of the stuff that went on just recently with the neocons deliberately misleading the US citizens with regard to Middle Eastern wars.


Also, follow the link to earlier Karen Kwiatkowski episode 606. Worth the time listening.

By the way, I'd love to hear a turcopolier interview with Tom Woods about the poison gas attacks in Iraq and other things.



Then what or who "deep-sixed" POTUS Kennedy?



Oswald. pl



There is no "state within a state." there is only consensus and stupidity. pl

Trey N


Trey N

The Taliban had eradicated the poppy fields in Afghanistan when they were in power. It appears that the "War on Terror" trumps the "War on Drugs."

Illegal drugs are one of the top sources of income for the major intelligence agencies in the world. Does anyone seriously think the CIA is willingly going to give up its present stranglehold on the major source of heroin in the world??

Jag Pop


Russian Challenge or Phantom Menace? - The Borg Strikes Back Against A Hall of Mirrors


Aye, there's the rub, what?

When NATO wants to expand, as it did dramatically under Clinton, then the will of the people toward self-determination is sacrosanct. During the Clinton years, a person in an Eastern European country needed only to murmur "NATO" in their sleep, and envoys would show up paving the way for membership.

In this research paper for NATO, Alexander Golts and Heidi Reisinger advise us - after trotting out that trope that Putin told Bush Ukraine was not even a state, which he never said and which has never been substantiated - that "NATO was not hunting for new members, but found them knocking at its door."


Does that mean they must be admitted? Of course not - you have to be invited, by unanimous consent, and your addition to the NATO rosary must contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area. Says so in Article 10 of the North Atlantic Treaty.


Adding some of these states, including the Baltics, was not a vote by all the NATO states, but a decision of the US Senate, which on April 30th, 1998, voted 80 to 19 to ratify Bill Clinton's decision to enlarge NATO.

But when Crimea expresses its desire to return to the Russian Federation - something the west has never argued was not genuine, although it blathers a lot about referendums at the point of a Kalashnikov and so forth, it has never attempted to argue the people of Crimea were coerced and knows very well they are majority ethnic Russian - well, then, suddenly the will of the people does not matter any more. Then, it's an annexation - Russia stole it.

It is no wonder Russia is so nervous of the west. It is schizo, and its leaders are reliably unreliable.

different clue

Bill Herschel,

If we destroy the poppy fields in Afghanistan, the industry will return to sourcing poppy from the Golden Triangle, or from Mexico, or from many other places where poppy can be grown. A half-a-trillion-dollar-per-year industry is not going to let itself go extinct by virtue of one source of supply being bombed when any one of a dozen other once-and-future sources of supply can be turned back to.

If one wants to reduce heroin use, one should focus on the user-base themselves. De-addict them from the heroin, if that is possible. Excercise better control of overuse of prescription opioids whose users become addicted and then turn to heroin because it is cheaper than the prescription opioids. We might also study what they have done in Great Britain and Portugal which is to register heroin addicts as such and allow them to go to well-defended or at least defensible addiction-management fortresses where they are given their single daily dose of heroin one day at a time by the watchful addict-management/ addict-containment personnel. This allows the registered addicts to do a few useful hours of some kind of work each day. It also removes their desperate pain-of-withdrawal incentive to commit high-take crime to pay for high priced heroin on the illegal heroin market. ( I assume the emergence of any illegal heroin market for addicts who don't want to register and accept having their addiction managed and contained by the addict-management/containment personnel is very firmly prevented from emerging in Britain or Portugal. If I am wrong about that, then Britain and Portugal risk having the same old uncontrolled heroin-use problem with its uncontrolled crime-for-money-for-heroin problem cropping up all over again. And if that is happening, we need to know about that).

But if Britain and Portugal have not had a re-emergence of unregulated outlaw heroin use by non-registered addicts, then Britain and Portugal have succeeded in making heroin unhip, uncool and ungroovy . . . a dingy gray drug for dingy gray losers. And if they have succeeded there, perhaps we could succeed at that here, and remove our heroin addicts from being a source of revenue for the heroin-industrial complex and the International Money-Center Money-Laundry banks which launder the many billions of dollars made by keeping heroin illegal, expensive and fashionable.

different clue

Trey N,

If one can remember the exact URL at which that article was found, one can go to The Wayback Machine/ Internet Archive and type in that exact URL and find the attached article. But one has to have the exact URL because the people running The Wayback Machine/ Internet Archive do not have an index of word-based titles. They only have URLs. So you can't find anything there by title. That is a total weakness of The Wayback Machine.
It would be like having a library card catalog with zero book titles or author names . . . but rather ONLY having Dewey Decimal numbers. And telling you that you can find the book you want if you know the Dewey Decimal Number. And then wishing you luck.

Of course Zbiggie-poo Burrzezinski(sp?) and his acolytes have done all they can from the "realist" end to foster the same eternal hatred for Russia. Their contribution to the problem also merits notice and analysis.

Old Microbiologist

I think that is an over simplification. There is, as always, rivalry going on within the government with factions supporting different goals. The CIA doesn't necessarily have the same plans or goals as the State Department of DoD for that matter. Within Congress we have internally separate agencies operating using separate budgets which is why McCain can run around the world acting like a Republican Secretary of State yet under a Democratic administration. He often is pushing forwards goals and plans opposite of the administration. Even within agencies we can see factions fighting among each other for dominance. The problem is all of this is happening simultaneously and all are actively competing for money, influence, and dominance. When there is an administration change there is a resultant turnover of political appointees and the chaos that follows. The power grabs are amazing to watch, especially as the newly minted and woefully inexperienced new appointees arrive with their own agendas. Add in the influence peddling and corruption by corporations and lobbyists which only compound the problem. Put it all together and yes, it is like a leaderless Borg system.

Old Microbiologist

Not formally perhaps. The neo-con agenda as written by Kagan and Wolfowitz still seems to be the game plan. It doesn't seem to matter who is in control but that agenda is still on track more or less with periodic foibles. This is why keeping someone like Nuland is dangerous. She often speaks exactly 180 degrees from Kerry who is her boss yet she is supported by Obama over Kerry. It makes our government look schizophrenic. Kind of like "White man speaks with forked tongue" which I suppose gives Obama plausible deniability. Yet, Kerry continues to perform and hasn't resigned which I would have done the first time he didn't support me. Therefore I conclude it was deliberate and coordinated. Her husband, Robert Kagan has enthusiastically endorsed Clinton which means she is a closet neo-con acting like an Obama R2P Democrat. Having a majority in Congress doesn't seem to change anything. So maybe it isn't a Deep State but really a single party masquerading as a two party system?


Hi! Long time reader, first time poster!

That's true, that a lot of Western Jews has absolutely visceral Russophobia as their main drive. And placing all the blame squarely on "Russians" and "Russia" (no matter of what time period) without learning facts and instead playing the eternal victim is so much fun - and produces a hefty gesheft in the process.

Let me explain how this concept of "Hurr-durr! Russia (always) pogroms the Jews!" is wrong in just 4 maps.

1) The map of the Pale of Settlement in Czarist Russia (red line):


That's was the place where the Jews were allowed to settle (duh!) in large numbers while still practising their faith. As seen in this map, showing the % of Jewish population in various parts of the Pale:


2) And this is the map of pogroms in 1871-1906:


The article in Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Jewish_pogroms_in_the_Russian_Empire) admits, that " and it was within [the "Pale of Settlement"] that the pogroms largely took place." Article also mentions, that first pogrom to take place out of the Pale of Swttlement (in Nizhniy Novgorod) happened only in 1905 - during the time of the First Russian Revolution

3) Finally, this is the modern map of Eastern Europe:


So I ask you - how all of this is Russia's/Russian's fault?

P.S. Hope my post won't be eaten by a spam-filter.

Kyle Pearson

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization has already forged a defacto economic alliance between Russia, Central Asia (including Pakistan), and Iran. India has publicly expressed interest in joining it.

The South China Sea imbroglio has been entirely concocted and provoked by the US. 95% of the ocean traffic that travels through that region is headed to or from Chinese ports. Japanese boats tend to travel around it. The entire affair was provoked first by Hillary Clinton's declaration at the ASEAN conference that the US has "national interests" in "keeping the sea lanes open," signing a mutual-defense pact with Vietnam and the Philippines, and then a year later referring to the South China Sea as the "West Philippines' Sea."

It's little wonder, then, that the Chinese took this as an overt threat by the US to enforce Chinese military submission in the region. Prior to Clinton's aggressive moves, the region was peaceful, and there was little to no conflict in the area. There were occasional flare-ups, yes, but China was not moving to aggressively assert dominance in the region, but was instead - as is typical for China - working on a state-by-state basis to negotiate peaceful relations, all with the full knowledge that those countries who depend on the US navy for protection were diplomatically collaborating on all elements of every individual agreement via ASEAN, and with US promises of support to enforce any agreements that were concluded.

As Sec. of State, Clinton changed all of that with what amounted to overt threats of US intervention if China did not submit, diplomatically and militarily, to US dominance there. Considering the economic importance of the area, and China's refusal to allow US/uk Big Oil access to the region, it's little surprise what the Chinese response was to these provocations.

The South China Sea is, by any rational estimation, today firmly within the Chinese sphere of influence, and with the exception of the Warlord Era / Revolutionary Era, has been within the Chinese sphere of influence for at least four centuries. The current spate of Chinese annexations within the S. China Sea did not begin until well after Obama announced his intention to "pivot to Asia": again, in the years leading up to this moment - when the White House and Dept. of State started making overt diplomatic threats (and encouraging the Philippines and Vietnam, for example, to provoke conflict there) - China was moving forward slowly, diplomatically, and without any direct military intervention. So this current situation was entirely provoked by what is so-often called the "Children's Crusade" of "the Borg."

It seems pretty clear to me that the inclusion of Russia in this laundry-list of up-and-coming superpowers is a nod to its role in the SCO, and its developing role in supporting and assisting Iranian and Chinese military defense against attacks on those countries.

>>>Is this merely a case of nostalgia for the good old days when the USSR was so convenient as an easy justification for budgets?

Yes. It should not be a surprise, either: the entire 2d wave of the Red Scare was underwritten by the China Lobby, which was financed in good part with money of the Chiang (Jiang) and Soong families (i.e. - the KMT nobility who fled to Taiwan). These were the same people who attacked Gen's. Marshall and Stilwell as "communists," who led the purge of the old-guard "China Hands" from the Dept. of State during the 50s, who literally created Reagan's, McCarthy's, and Nixon's political careers, and the group where Bush Sr, Cheney, and Rumsfeld (among many others) got their political start.

The China Lobby is also the model on which AIPAC was built, i suspect (but have not had any opportunity to research) largely using Kissinger's influence. Certainly, during the 50s, there were many, many Jewish-American right-wing Zionists who were intimately involved in the day-to-day practical operations of the China Lobby, whether in the media, in the legal arena, or in back-room political organizing.

>>>Is this a juvenile case of schoolyard territorial rivalry?

Hasn't it always been? Gen. Marshall (then Sec. Marshall) made it quite clear why the KMT lost the revolution in China: they were corrupt, from toe to 頭頂 ("touding", or "crown," in Chinese), and were built entirely as a cult of personality fixated upon the Generalissimo Chiang (Jiang), who was himself an inveterate coward, bully, and thief, as one would expect of some guy who clambered most of his way up the social ladder by working as an assassin for the most powerful of the Chinese Triads.

Kyle Pearson

In case anyone is in doubt about the Borg's obsession with China's growing power - or with Clinton's motivations in initiating the "pivot to Asia" - there is also this article, by Robert Kaplan, titled "The South China Sea is the Future of Conflict". This was in 2011, about 9 or 10 months after Clinton first aggressive declarations at ASEAN (couched, as always, in terms of "Human Rights", and "defense" of the "little people").

I have been watching the Neocons make aggressive declarations like this since at least 2004; i think the first time i saw it was when John Bolton declared that after the Middle East, the "next" war "would be fought with China." Bolton has since traveled to Taiwan many times, usually at the invitation of Taiwanese "independence" advocates, though also at the invitation of the more conservative KMT (which favors peaceful resolution of the Taiwan-China impasse). Unfortunately, i can no longer find the article in question (i lost my bookmarks to it, and Google has since eliminated the capacity to conduct searches based upon time-periods longer than a year ago), so i'm not certain it was Bolton, but if memory serves me correctly his was the keyboard where the article originated.

So in the context of such simmering, overt threats from core players in the Bush administration - what with Hillary's comments in 2010 falling smack in the middle of the US's first steps towards provoking "The Arab Spring" (and the war on Syria), and only 2 years after the Uighur and Tibetan uprisings just prior to the Beijing Olympics - Kaplan's own article, falling as it did just after the US intervention in Libya, it seems understandable that the Chinese military and government would read this kind of rhetoric in the worst possible light and move to take proactive steps towards defending their most valuable sea lanes from the piracy and harassment of smaller nations that have recently been encouraged by promises of military support from the US government.


Kyle Pearson

Incidentally, one of the more ironic by-products of this "pivot to Asia" strategy has been a tremendous increase in clashes between the Taiwanese and Philippines navies. These clashes have really soured relations between the two countries at a diplomatic level, and the situation is not helped by the vast number of Filipino laborers that are currently employed in Taiwan. Filipinos (and other S.E. Asian laborers - mostly, Indonesian and Thai) generally suffer deplorable working conditions here, with little-to-no legal protections. Low pay, long hours, and nearly no protections by labor laws are the norm, here. Typical work-times for an au pair here are 8 to 10 hours a day, with only one day off each month. These women are typically considered subject to commands by the children (i.e. - they are not on equal status with the parents), and are not permitted outside without accompaniment for any reason.

The conditions are similar in the factories, where workers are rarely allowed outside their dorms (two days a month is the standard, and that is often reduced to two half-days a month), and are subject to the same working hours. Pinays are well aware of these issues, and labor organizations there (which are as embattled, these days, as American labor groups were back in the late 1800s / early 1900s) have been known to protest the situation rather regularly.

So if the idea was to shore up ASEAN unity in the face of Chinese aggression, in the case of Taiwan and the Philippines, the result has been rather wide of the mark.

William R. Cumming

It is not a tortured argument to postulate that most of the U.S. effort in Afghanistan directly or indirectly supported the global drug trade in heroin IMO!


Iran would jump in to get out of U.S. dollars and they would all try to take as many countries with them as possible."

It's already the case, Iran has decided its oil exports will be paid with all money you have, except dollars.


Col. A question. Do you feel there is a coherent policy between the various US government departments involved in Syria with regards to what the ultimate outcome is that they want to achieve there? There seems to be little cohesion between the White house, State Department, CIA, and Pentagon in this regard.

Contrast the "Russian withdrawal" news conference; the President, Foreign Minister, and Minister of Defence presented, and represented, a "unity" both in the content and in the visual aspects of the conference. They reinforced each other.

Why I ask is that there is once again a situation where one US department is fighting the other. Along the Turkey /Syria border FSA affiliates and Al Nusra (Al QAeda) are being supported by Turkish artillery and US coalition airstrikes to seize ISIS held territory to prevent the US backed Kurds from taking it. Of Course the Kurds are also fighting FSA, Al Nusra, ISIS. US fighting US again.

The State Department appears to want a political settlement but arms are being shipped into Syria from European countries according to this article:


"U.S. Delivers 3,000 Tons Of Weapons And Ammo To Al-Qaeda & Co in Syria

The British military information service Janes found the transport solicitation for the shipment on the U.S. government website FedBizOps.gov. Janes writes:

The FBO has released two solicitations in recent months looking for shipping companies to transport explosive material from Eastern Europe to the Jordanian port of Aqaba on behalf of the US Navy's Military Sealift Command.
Released on 3 November 2015, the first solicitation sought a contractor to ship 81 containers of cargo that included explosive material from Constanta in Bulgaria to Aqaba.
The cargo listed in the document included AK-47 rifles, PKM general-purpose machine guns, DShK heavy machine guns, RPG-7 rocket launchers, and 9K111M Faktoria anti-tank guided weapon (ATGW) systems. The Faktoria is an improved version of the 9K111 Fagot ATGW, the primary difference being that its missile has a tandem warhead for defeating explosive reactive armour (ERA) fitted to some tanks."

It this "fog of war" or "fog of minds" wanting different outcomes?


Sounds to me like the working of cancer cells...

De-addict them from the heroin, if that is possible.

It IS possible but it is also, scary, dangerous and illegal in many places:


It is yet another psychotropic which somehow erases all withdrawal syndromes from addictions of any kind, heroin, alcohol, tobacco, you name it... WITHOUT introducing it's own addiction because the trip is really, really no fun.

And anyway, this will just bring us back to the "square one" you mentioned:

A half-a-trillion-dollar-per-year industry is not going to let itself go extinct



Yes - this. The Swiss model is IMHO the best - heroin addiction is treated as a public health issue, addicts register with the government program and receive their daily dosage from a public health nurse - the cost of the program is low, the drug cost is trivial - less than a dollar a day - and 80% of the addicts in the program are gainfully employed.

Imagine that! Instead of wasting money criminalizing addicts, the Swiss treat them like the sick people they are, provide them with maintenance dosages of an inexpensive drug, and the addicts, rather than being a drag on society, are actual taxpayers.

The "war on Drugs" approach is a failed policy - absolutely boneheaded, disrespectful of reality, and utterly wasteful of taxpayer money. It creates the corruption of a black market. And it inevitably corrupts the police. And other institutions - reputedly.

Trey N

"So maybe it isn't a Deep State but really a single party masquerading as a two party system?"

And the difference is...???

Trey N

"The "war on Drugs" approach is a failed policy - utterly wasteful of taxpayer money."

It's certainly not a "failed policy" to those who are raking in the billions of $$$ of taxpayer money!

Which explains why the war continues in spite of its obvious failure to come anywhere close to achieving its purported goals. After all, if the war did succeed in its stated aims, those DEA agents, the Wackenhut Corp and other prison employees, etc etc would all be out of jobs. And what would be the excuse for all the questionable "asset forfeitures" (blatant theft, in far too many cases) that enrich myriad law enforcement agencies?

Nope, the War on Drugs is far from being a failure to various powerful interest groups that are getting quite rich off the scam, thank you (taxpayer suckers) very much....

William Fitzgerald

Pat Lang,

How about the following as a metaphor for U.S. government?

An eight oared shell with blind and deaf oarsmen who each knows only to pull his individual oar as hard and fast as he can. And, a coxswain who can shout confused and vague commands and not much else.


The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad