Jump to content
The Education Forum

Trump and the Unspeakable?


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Wrong.

 

"Operation Trust" (shortly followed by other "active measures" counterintelligence operations) was launched 20 years before even the Office of Security Services' predecessor, the Office of the Coordination of Information , was founded, Cliff.

And the Sovs, were lightyears ahead of us in waging highly successful "strategic deception" (aka "operational deception") counterintelligence ops.

 

All in all, the Soviets/Russians had a tremendous head start and, generally speaking, have run circles around the OSS/CIA from day one.

The Reds were financed by Morgan/Harriman money long before they took power.

My point is American interests have screwed with the Russkies for more than a century.

 

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 116
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

3 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Russia may be a diversion to get the old guard back in charge. If I am right, Trump will be taken out be the media, before he serves 2 years; and we may end-up with 10 Years of Pence.

I hold the same revulsion for Trump that many people do. But there is no getting around the fact that most politicians and people are multi faceted, we/they wear different hats. One hat that Trump says he wears is that of the deep-state disruptor. I see some evidence of that being true. His recent statements regarding Big Pharma is hugely important. He did not cave completely on the records release and his most out of character statement came with regard to the same when he said "I have no choice" back in November. That was something to behold, I not know if that struck a chord with anyone else.

He promised a stupid wall and he has to follow through, or try to.

I just see him as posssibly making a turn towards the better. He is no conservative, fiscally, morally or otherwise. He's not a neocon. He's not a real oligarch, in the mold of Rockefeller and the like. He's a phony, wannabeee Oligarch.

Lastly the media is and has been on a Russia-did-it trip with regard to the elections. I start any analysis  by assuming that I am being lied to, and then see if that makes sense. I don't see the Russians as having put Trump in power, I see domestic forces as having prevented Hillary from taking the WH, propping up Trump for a couple years, then sliding in an unelected agent for the Sam-ole same-ole crap that we have seen for 50 years.

So, although it may go against the very core and conscience of your soul, you (anyone) may want to consider voicing support for Trump, because ten years of Pence might very well be the alternative.

Michael - while I’m in some agreement with you I would never vote for Trump or Pence. I don’t think Trump is a wannabee oligarch. I think he’s is a despicable, misogynistic power hungry barely human being. I agree with your fear of a Pence presidency, and like Cliff (and probably you) see the so-called Christian backing of Trump as the worst kind of hypocrisy. I’m actually glad they feel so emboldened to come into full light of day. I’ve never had any doubts as to who they were. But they are a part of our fractured democracy, and have been since Jefferson called them ‘Jesus cults’. But I have no fear of a Pence presidency, because he will never be elected even if he assumes the presidency by default in the next few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

The Reds were financed by Morgan/Harriman money long before they took power.

My point is American interests have screwed with the Russkies for more than a century.

 

Deep history Cliff, that few would agree with, though I do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Looks to me like The Deep State is divided into 3 factions.

There are elements devoted to corporate interests -- Globalists.

There are elements devoted to the institution itself -- Institutionalists.

There are elements devoted to the evangelical Khristian Kaucasian Kaliphate, the GOP right wing -- Dominionists.

The Institutionalists are pissed at Trump because he's incredibly incompetent.

The Globalists are cool with Trump because he cut their taxes, and they know they can keep his anti-trade impulses bottled up.

The Dominionists love the guy -- he's their Dear Leader.

These treason weasels are relentless.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-bishop-disability-voters_us_5af5b085e4b0e57cd9f9042f

Look again.  Big Pharma loved the announcement.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-pharma-drug-prices_us_5af5920de4b032b10bf9eaa7

 

Cliff, I generally like where you take some of these discussions.

The Globalists are cool with Trump because he cut their taxes, and they know they can keep his anti-trade impulses bottled up.

I think that's on target. This is the greatest pro globalist business atmosphere of the post war era. They are a bit upset at the China rhetoric. But are confident as in all situations that a President that has tied his fortunes to the well being to the stock market, ultimately won't let them down. Michael, I would agree with you. I think Trump's desire to bring down drug prices is one of the few things he has advocated I can agree with, that I think he has a fair chance of doing something that no other candidate can do. But the reality is the Biotech sector started declining an hour before his speech, and rebounded after when Trump made no specifics about what he was going to do. This sort of dismissing Trump is now just commonplace in the markets and done out of habit. Hopefully he'll get specific in the future, and I do think he'll probably get something accomplished, but not near as much as many of us would like. IMO

The Institutionalists are pissed at Trump because he's incredibly incompetent.

I definitely agree, how can you get anything done, with someone who knows absolutely about how his government works? There are actually people here who think the institutionalists (deep state) are the cause of everything! But the Globalists are tickled pink and welcome the "Deep Staters" and their diverting attention from the ecstatic roll they've been on for the last 35 years, by which they've been able to accomplish what they want while barely firing a gun. Now they find themselves where there's not a lot of need for subversion and they pretty accomplish everything they want, largely out in the open, legislatively. And the big bonus  is that if the proponents of the  "Deep State government conspiracy" can make enough trouble, they just might be able to dismantle the safety net and maybe someday completely dismantle Social Security (because there isn't enough money ,right?)  And the Globalists will say, "We agreed with you, government just by nature is corrupt". Now you can have the self reliant satisfaction of foraging for yourself in your old age. And we'll see how powerful the proponents of the "Deep State government conspiracy" advocates, (who got what they wished for),  or the rest of us, become then.

There are elements devoted to the evangelical Khristian Kaucasian Kaliphate, the GOP right wing -- Dominionists.

Yes, the cultural aspect. The white racism. Never ever mentioned, just the callous disregard of anyone's needs outside of themselves, just pawns in their game.

Oh come on, Cliff. Don't be so PC. Just get over it!

 

 

 

 

Edited by Kirk Gallaway
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

The Reds were financed by Morgan/Harriman money long before they took power.

My point is American interests have screwed with the Russkies for more than a century.

 

 

Bummer, dude.

 

And evil, evil, evil America was the only country whose "businessmen" screwed with them?

 

Nothing to say in response to my highly informative post, Cliff?

 

I thought we were talking about the efficacy of Russia's and the U.S.'s counterintelligence ops against each other.

 

The biggest success for the former, imho, went down on 11/08/2016 in the latter country.

 

--  T.G.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graves' and Varnell's view of history is so incredibly lopsided and agenda driven its almost funny.

The US intervention is Russia after Gorbachev is documented in places like the LA Times and Time Magazine.  It was massive.  Done in support of that fascist Yeltsin and done mostly by Bill Clinton, after Yeltsin had requested Freidnmanesque shock therapy for the Russian economy.

The shock therapy drove Russia into an economic crisis worse than the Great Depression.  The Russian people were about to get rid of Yeltsin.  Suddenly a team of political advisors arrives to aid him, including Dick Morris.  They had hundreds of thousands of dollars to spend to revive his candidacy. And then the IMF, at Clinton's urging, gave him a grant of millions.  To stave off impeachment, Clinton's buddy Yeltsin bombed the Kremlin killing scores of innocent   bystanders.  

‘The largest giveaway of a nation’s wealth in history….’

-Mortimer Zuckerman, member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), owner of US News & World Report, relating what took place in the looting of Russia under Boris Yeltsin.

 

Geez Tommy, would these qualify as Bagley's "active measures".

As per Varnell, the CIA redid the plan at JFK's request in mid March.  He thought it looked too much like a World War II operation.  This information is contained in the declassified Kirkpatrick Report. Which is still the best compendium of information on the Bay of Pigs that I know of. (See Peter Kornbluh, Bay of Pigs Declassified, pp 125-27)

 

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Bummer, dude.

 

And evil, evil, evil America was the only country whose "businessmen" screwed with them?

 

Nothing to say in response to my highly informative post, Cliff?

 

I thought we were talking about the efficacy of Russia's and the U.S.'s counterintelligence ops against each other.

 

 

 

I thought we were talking about the ways countries screw with each other.

(My bad.  The mis-understanding is mine.)

For instance, W. Averell Harriman in the 20's and 30's helped resuscitate the Soviet Union's manganese and oil industries.

During that time Harriman's banking interests financed the Nazi War Machine.

Soviet manganese was shipped to Germany to make the steel Hitler wanted use to take over the Soviet oil fields.

How many Soviets died to prevent that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

As per Varnell, the CIA redid the plan at JFK's request in mid March.  He thought it looked too much like a World War II operation.  This information is contained in the declassified Kirkpatrick Report. Which is still the best compendium of information on the Bay of Pigs that I know of. (See Peter Kornbluh, Bay of Pigs Declassified, pp 125-27)

 

And then the plan was revised again by Bundy, who proposed the D-Day-2 false flag attack with 16 planes.

Kennedy cut the number to 8.

How can you deny this with a straight face?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cliff Varnell said:

And then the plan was revised again by Bundy, who proposed the D-Day-2 false flag attack with 16 planes.

Kennedy cut the number to 8.

How can you deny this with a straight face?

It is an important debate. Greg Burnham follows Prouty in maintaining that Bundy called off an airstrike the night before, when three planes were left. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Graves' and Varnell's view of history is so incredibly lopsided and agenda driven its almost funny.

The US intervention is Russia after Gorbachev is documented in places like the LA Times and Time Magazine.  It was massive.  Done is support of that fascist Yeltsin and done mostly by Bill Clinton, after Yeltsin had requested Freidnmanesque shock therapy for the Russian economy.

The shock therapy drove Russia into an economic crisis worse than the Great Depression.  The Russian people were about to get rid of Yeltsin.  Suddenly a team of political advisors arrives to aid him, including Dick Morris.  They had hundreds of thousands of dollars to spend to revive his candidacy. And then the IMF, at Clinton's urging, gave him a grant of millions.  To stave off impeachment, Clinton's buddy Yeltsin bombed the Kremlin killing scores of innocent   bystanders.

Geez Tommy, would these qualify as Bagley's "active measures".

As per Varnell, the CIA redid the plan at JFK's request in mid March.  He thought it looked too much like a World War II operation.  This information is contained in the declassified Kirkpatrick Report. Which is still the best compendium of information on the Bay of Pigs that I know of. (See Peter Kornbluh, Bay of Pigs Declassified, pp 125-27)

 

 

James,

 

OMG.  I mean, I mean.

 

When you say "bombed the Kremlin," are you referring to the 1999 "Russian Apartment Bombings" (which bombings, none of them within Moscow's city limits and therefore nowhere near "The Kremlin," by the way, which killed 300 Russian citizens and led to the imposition of martial law, the assumption of the presidency by Putin, etc, etc, and which bombing were traced to Putin's favorite charity organization, the FSB (you know, the successor, along with the SVR, to the KGB, the NKVD, the MGB, the ...) ?

Is that what you're referring to?

 

--  T.G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Because its common knowledge to anyone who has studied the Bay of Pigs that is why.

 

You're denying that it was Bundy's plan to conduct D-Day-2 attacks?

Study this! 

Emphasis added.

Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961–1963, Volume X, Cuba, January 1961–September 1962

64. Memorandum From the Presidentʼs Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy) to President Kennedy 0

Washington, March 15, 1961.

SUBJECT

  • Meeting on Cuba, 4:00 PM, March 15, 1961

CIA will present a revised plan for the Cuban operation.1 They have done a remarkable job of reframing the landing plan so as to make it unspectacular and quiet, and plausibly Cuban in its essentials.

The one major problem which remains is the air battle. I think there is unanimous agreement that at some stage the Castro Air Force must be removed. It is a very sketchy force, in very poor shape at the present, and Colonel Hawkins (Bissellʼs military brain) thinks it can be removed by six to eight simultaneous sorties of B-26s. These will be undertaken by Cuban pilots in planes with Cuban Air Force markings. This is the only really noisy enterprise that remains.

My own belief is that this air battle has to come sooner or later, and that the longer we put it off, the harder it will be. Castroʼs Air Force is currently his Achillesʼ heel, but he is making drastic efforts to strengthen it with Russian planes and Russian-trained pilots.

Even the revised landing plan depends strongly upon prompt action against Castroʼs air. The question in my mind is whether we cannot solve this problem by having the air strike come some little time before the invasion. A group of patriotic airplanes flying from Nicaraguan bases might knock out Castroʼs Air Force in a single day without anyone knowing (for some time) where they came from, and with nothing to prove that it was not an interior rebellion by the Cuban Air Force, which has been of very doubtful loyalty in the past; the pilots will in fact be members of the Cuban Air Force who went into the opposition some time ago. Then the invasion could come as a separate enterprise, and neither the air strike nor the quiet landing of patriots would in itself give Castro anything to take to the United Nations.

I have been a skeptic about Bissellʼs operation, but now I think we are on the edge of a good answer. I also think that Bissell and Hawkins have done an honorable job of meeting the proper criticisms and cautions of the Department of State.

 

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

James,

 

OMG.  I mean, I mean.

 

When you say "bombed the Kremlin," are you referring to the 1999 "Russian Apartment Bombings" (which bombings, none of them within Moscow's city limits and therefore nowhere near "The Kremlin," by the way, which killed 300 Russian citizens and led to the imposition of martial law, the assumption of the presidency by Putin, etc, etc, and which bombing were traced to Putin's favorite charity organization, the FSB (you know, the successor, along with the SVR, to the KGB, the NKVD, the MGB, the ...) ?

Is that what you're referring to?

 

--  T.G.

 

 

I think he means the Russian White House, not the Kremlin. It was the Russian Parliament or Parliament offices at the time.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_(Moscow)

 

...and the 1991 coup attempt..

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Soviet_coup_d'état_attempt

 

Or, more probably, The 1993 Constitutional Crisis...

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Russian_constitutional_crisis

 

 

 

 

Edited by Michael Clark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

I thought we were talking about the ways countries screw with each other.

(My bad.  The mis-understanding is mine.)

For instance, W. Averell Harriman in the 20's and 30's helped resuscitate the Soviet Union's manganese and oil industries.

During that time Harriman's banking interests financed the Nazi War Machine.

Soviet manganese was shipped to Germany to make the steel Hitler wanted use to take over the Soviet oil fields.

How many Soviets died to prevent that?

 

Cliff,

 

Funny,  I thought we were talking about someone whose name is mentioned in the title of this thread, and whether or not the cumulative, synergistic effects of 90-years of Ruski "active measures" counterintelligence operations, interwoven with 58 years of highly successful "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations (both types waged against the U.S. and, uhh ....THE WEST in general), could have, you know,  kinda "paved the way," "plowed the field," "sown the seeds", however you want to put it, and enabled a bigger impact on the way our 2016 Presidential Election turned out than some of the most recent "active measures" active measures waged against us (e.g. the actions of Cozy Bear, Fancy Bear, Guccifer 2.0, Julian Assange, Putin's legions of professional Sanint Petersburg-based trolls, et al.,) ... would have had, otherwise, i.e., without the said "plowing of the fields"?

 

But somewhere along the way, our widdle "debate's" God-given internal dialectics turned it into something more "whataboutism"- like in nature.

"But, but, Tommy, our homegrown and evil, evil,evil Deep State has been screwing the Ruskies for eons!"

 

Imagine that.

 

--  T.G.

 

 

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...