« Trump Ascends to the Cherry Blossom Throne - Tyler | Main | More Alan Farrell ... »

11 November 2016


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


Trump has an interview in the WSJ on Syria and I/P;

"Mr. Trump suggested a shift away from what he said was the current Obama administration policy of attempting to find moderate Syrian opposition groups to support in the civil war there. “I’ve had an opposite view of many people regarding Syria,” he said.

He suggested a sharper focus on fighting Islamic State, or ISIS, in Syria, rather than on ousting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“My attitude was you’re fighting Syria, Syria is fighting ISIS, and you have to get rid of ISIS. Russia is now totally aligned with Syria, and now you have Iran, which is becoming powerful, because of us, is aligned with Syria. … Now we’re backing rebels against Syria, and we have no idea who these people are.”

If the U.S. attacks Mr. Assad, Mr. Trump said, “we end up fighting Russia, fighting Syria.”

On a different foreign hot spot, the Israel-Palestine situation, which Mr. Trump called “the war that never ends,” he said he hoped to help craft a resolution between them.

“That’s the ultimate deal,” Mr. Trump said. “As a deal maker, I’d like to do…the deal that can’t be made. And do it for humanity’s sake.”"



I really, really would like to believe that Obamanists were actually selling this policy change to the Ruskis, not givn't for free...


Since Trump's election the GBP has risen sharply, at least most in our government do seem to realise what a God send Trump's victory is to us as we negotiate Brexit. For Presdient Trump's first foray abroad I suggest he goes Britain and Ireland, the Visegrad countries and then Russia. He will get a good reception. I wouldn't bother with Hollande and Merkel, they are lame ducks anyway.


thanks to Degringolade at top of thread for Regency President(s).

also am guessing something of an Imperial Palace syndrome sets in once they take office and become cocooned in all those layers of security and the narratives of the official epistemologists aka reality makers aka advisors.


some thoughts about the "peaceful demonstrators"/rioters Maidan?
1. Will it come out that they were put together by a Soros dominated organization? Even recruited off Craig's List?

2. What's missing here is a foreign ambassador, such as Vicky Nuland or Ford, handing out cookies or praising the demonstrators?

3. Also missing is CIA hires sniping from rooftops at police and demonstrators to egg on and sharpen the conflict.

4. Is Only reason the US government has never been overthrown is that there is no American Embassy in Wash, DC?

for historical reference, there has been one coup d'etat on American soil

not advocating the following, b/ just for historical reference. Another time, place, a young Napoleon cleared the streets of Paris w/ a whiff of grapeshot.



As I have defined it, the Borg is what Obama calls the Foreign Policy Establishment. This is the commentariat, academy concerned with foreign policy, foreign policy focused media, think tanks. All of these form a coherent body of group think motivated internationalists who are very influenced by neocon and R2P thinking. Deep State is a term from Turkish politics denoting a conspiracy of opinion makers that extends to school teachers, military officers, police, business men, etc. The concept is that these conspirators form a separate and parallel establishment of government. There is nothing like that in the US. pl


pl, it appears there are multiple definitions of "deep state."

There is a very good book by former Republican Mike Lofgren called "The Deep State: The Fall of the Constitution and the Rise of a Shadow Government" https://www.amazon.com/Deep-State-Constitution-Shadow-Government/dp/0525428348/

One of the reviewers at Amazon shared their understanding of the term "deep state" after reading the book...

"In a nutshell, the Deep State as Lofgren describes it is a combination of elected and appointed members of the legislative and executive branches; and corporate insiders, especially the military-industrial complex, Wall Street, and Silicon Valley. Together, fueled by enormous amounts of money, they effectively control the country, regardless of which party is in power or the wishes of the electorate. Lofgren believes the ‘Deep State’ in its current form began with the Manhattan Project during WW II."

Some info on Lofgren here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Lofgren

Not quite the definition of the Borg you use, but when I was reading the book I loosely equated the Borg with the Deep State.

Lofgren does not discuss any sort of parallel gov't in his use of the term deep state. He seems to use 'deep' to mean something like "extending far down from the top or surface" (from Dictionary.com). Lofgren is quite concerned about the revolving door between corporations and gov't positions (and think tanks), and how that effects the direction of the gov't.

From what I read, Bill Moyers encouraged Lofgren to write this book. This past year since it came out, I observed many columnists have referred to it when discussing the deep state.

I have recommended this book to many people. It does not presuppose a high level of knowledge, it's well written and it's non-partisan (or perhaps anti-partisan).

English Outsider

To Shaun - I was reporting on what is being said about Trump by our media, and how that is influencing people here. I hope that didn't give you the impression I myself share those views.

I don't. I know little about your President-elect but I watched some of his campaign speeches and as an individual he comes across to me, as I said, not as the cartoon monster the media paint him as but as a normal if outsize personality. As a politician - well, I think he's going to be what you make of him. With continuing popular support he'll be able to clean things up. Without it he won't. Even this early on there are on this site indications that the killing will let up as a result of his victory so that's on the credit side already.

Peter Reichard

It is not that Obama has suddenly come to his senses so much as it is that the election of Trump changes the calculus for him as he is now going to hand off the Syria baton to someone who is going to run in a very different direction than Clinton would have. The change in policy has been done to facilitate this transition, a positive development.


Well, Tyler, I don't like him either. So what. LBJ once said 'I'm the only president you have got'. As for all those pampered children in Major Universities with their special 'cry rooms' and 'comfort puppies' who can't accept the reality of a perfectly legitimate election, they need to grow up and get over it. He won. That's good enough.



I think there is some truth in that. I don't believe he ever ensure to support them but was overruled.


Col. Lang,

I've listened to Turkish interpreter and whistleblower Sibel Edmonds talk about what she knows about The Deep State in the US and blackmail by those to control others. She can be found on YouTube


Cee et al

someone will have to give me a link to the Edmonds material. I am not going to search for it. pl


I have to agree with this. I have no idea where Trump is going and neither does anyone else. He promised to recognize Jerusalem as capital by moving the embassy there, which the Borg would like. Now he has, reportedly, backed off. He promised to rip up the Iran deal, now he is backing off. He sounds like he will be less hostile to Russia, but Bolton's name gets floated for Cabinet. People are just reading into him what they want.



Will, curious why you choose 2.718 and not simply Will-e, or Willie for that matter.

CIA hires sniping from rooftops at police and demonstrators

I would be interested in facts, urban legends and rumors around this issue. ;)


All of these form a coherent body of group think motivated internationalists who are very influenced by neocon and R2P thinking.

Thanks, I am a bit struggling with the Borg.

Human Rights, as philanthropic heart-felt enterprise, versus Human Rights used as political weapon?

With many, many players that may not ever know to what extend they play or are played with?


i said to honor Euler. there's lots & lots of reports about the Kiyev Ukrofascist Maidan coup and what happened in Syria. The pix at the top of the post is very instructive. The Kerrys & Assads dining in a cosmopolitan setting. Then a few years later, Ambassador Ford openly traveling around trying to overthrow the government and the CIA covertly trying to overthrow it using weaponized Wahhabi and the Ikhwan.


robt willmann

The New York Times says that the Wall Street Journal says from an interview with Trump that: "President-elect Donald J. Trump said Friday [11 November] that he was likely to abandon the American effort to support 'moderate' opposition groups in Syria who are battling the government of President Bashar al-Assad, saying 'we have no idea who these people are'.”--


(Browser 'cookies' need to be turned on to view the article.)

Pitch Pole

Brilliant reply Tyler, truly the soul of wit and edifying as usual.

You are correct, I don't like Trump almost as much as I didn't like Clinton, very close. I can give many considered reasons, based in arguable fact to support my dislike of her. Likewise with Trump - all considered and ready for examination. What I'm looking for a rational reason - look it up, the dictionary will give you guidelines - for why you support him.

I've yet to hear a reason supported by any evidence linked to actual reality as why you think he is going to do such a stellar job. So please do enlighten us all but do keep the juvenile name calling bullshit to a minimum if you are capable and remember that productive argument requires points linkable in some way to objective reality. Or if you're just going to insult people, reddit has plenty of channels that are much more your speed.

Pitch Pole

Completely agree - elections have consequences and everyone saying "not my president" have missed the point. That's not to say they should not protest the rhetoric or the policy or the results when he's had a chance to run the show for a while. For better or worse, whether you're a republican or not, they own that fully now. In two to four years we'll know how it all turned out.


Maybe I am an optimist but I have always considered the deep state to be people like you, Colonel Lang. I think of Major General Smedley Butler, who exposed the plot against FDR.

I was impressed with Tyler's article on Trump's success but I worry that Trump is against the Matrix, that multi-tentacled beast that seems to subvert everything. With all its money and power, can one man confront that and live?


More likely this is a 'clean-up' operation. Or at least one that provides a certain degree of plausible deniability if a later, post-Obama government decides to investigate the whole Syrian debacle.

It is now known that money & material from the US/Saudi/Qatar alliance was going to the worst extremist Islamic rebels in Syria. And that weapons from the wreck that is now Libya were being funneled to these worst elements, probably via Benghazi. And that circumstantial evidence (i.e. events such as the US airstrike on the Syrian Army's outpost that a] scuttled the ceasefire, & b] resulted in Al Nusra taking that outpost after the strike concluded; photographs of McCain with the eventual leaders of Al Nusra/AQK in Syria … etc...) seems to indicate a level organizational assistance by the US to these extremist groups, and of operational coordination existing between these extremist elements and the US after they were formed.

All of which means there must be a hell of a lot of incriminating proof on the ground - people and things - in Syria that must be eliminated.

So, by targeting ISIL now, finally, Obama is also attacking and (he hopes) eliminating anything & anybody that might be willing/able at a later date to say 'Yes, we were working for the Americans the whole time', as well as provide a counter narrative, such as 'How can we (the Obama administration) be accused of working with these horrible people, when we so clearly tried to destroy them?'

Frankly, this is the tactic of criminals almost as old as prostitution.

different clue

Colonel Lang,

Here is a post on the same Rigorous Intuition blog from which I got the post about the Rabin Assassination, only this post is about some things that Sibel Edmonds found out.

Sibel Edmonds material appears to be scattered thinly here and there. Her blog might be a jumping off point to various scattered material.



There is no proof offered just conspiracy theory imaginings. pl


pitch pole

"What I'm looking for a rational reason - look it up, the dictionary will give you guidelines" You are not allowed to insult people here. Understand? pl

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