Is There a Deep State?

[Kirk Gallaway]

21 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I allowed Kirk's first comment because he was pointing out that "deep state" isn't some mysterious thing that we will never uncover. It's what happens when things go wrong and the people don't understand why. They blame it on the big, bad, deep state.

 

Thank you Sandy, that was my point.

But also,  in the case of Project 2025, beware of the "false flag deep state". That is that people who say they are going after the deep state who are actually the deep state. They are the ones trying to economically marginalize us.

 

With the second post, I sort of propose another deep state is the uninformed populace, not voting in their interests.

 

On one level, WTF do I know? People can disagree about some actions. In this case, for example it could be about  some departments of government being  more useful than others.

 

I like naming names and groups about specific actions they are taking or planning to take.

I personally think a thread like this is much more invigorating  when linking specific people and groups  to actions, than coming to no more specific conclusion than both the "donks and the phants" are "deep state", or there all "globalists", and all "globalists" are the "deep state",  which Greg D. pointed out to Ben that if you don't define your terms, is really meaningless.

 

This sort of hazy innuendo and diversion to nowhere will never appeal say, to young people looking to the  future, who want action.

Strangely. I agree with Mitt Romney on this one.  We can't just be old boomers barking at the deep state moon. If we can't be more specific about the problems, we should move on.

 

 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

I did define the Deep State, within reasonable length for a popular forum.

People interested in learning, and not sniveling, can read Michael Lofgren or Peter Dale Scott for extended takes on the Deep State, aka Shadow State, or global security state. 

The book "Shadow Government" by Tom Englehardt is also worth reading. 

As shorthand for a popular forum, the expression "Deep State" is useful and understood: 

A globalist security state working on behalf of globalist commercial enterprise, coopting political parties and media. Globalists who want access to markets, resources and labor pools worldwide, and compliant governments, and globalists are not loyal to any particular region, nation, nationality, or government.

For the Deep State, democracy is not a priority and they will depose US presidents, starting with JFK.

How else did the US enter not one, not two, but three fantastically expensive yet counterproductive wars, notable for cruelty in results, since the JFKA? Which one of these wars, even if successful, would have benefitted the US middle and employee classes? 

Why did President Biden publicly fist-bump with Mohammed bin Salman? 

When did the expression "national security" morph into "global security" without even a blush? 

Anti-communism?

Point out which of the global gigantic commercial enterprises are anti-communist. Apple? Disney? NBC Universal? GM? BlackRock? JP Morgan? WalMart? Amazon? Goldman Sachs?  Tesla? All are cozy with the CCP (especially Apple, they of the famous 1984 ad). 

All would be cozy with MbS if need be and are. 

Of the two major US political parties, which one is not run by globalist-Deep State interests? 

Liz Cheney and HRC---which one is not the globalist? 

Edited September 19, 2023 by Benjamin Cole

[W. Niederhut]

12 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Why did President Biden publicly fist-bump with Mohammed bin Salman? 

 

Remarkable myopia by Ben Cole, in light of George H.W. "Bandar" Bush's longstanding close relationship with the immensely wealthy Saudi royal family, whose net worth has been estimated at $15 trillion.

Does Ben know that Osama Bin Laden's brother was a major investor in George W. Bush's Arbusto Oil Company?

That GHWB and the Carlyle Group were dining with Bin Laden in D.C. on 9/11?

That Saudi Prince Bandar was the man who first told Secretary of State Colin Powell in December of 2002 that George W. Bush and Cheney were going to invade Iraq?  (According to Plan of Attack by Bob Woodward.)

That Saudi Prince Mohammed Bin Salman loaned $2 billion to Jared Kushner-- Trump's envoy to the Middle East?

That Prince Mohammed Bin Salman has recently decided to cut Saudi oil production in order to sabotage Joe Biden and the Democratic Party in 2024?

 

Below: Trump's first trip abroad as POTUS in 2017 was to Riyadh, to do the sword dance with the Saudis

[Benjamin Cole]

7 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Remarkable myopia by Ben Cole, in light of George H.W. "Bandar" Bush's longstanding close relationship with the immensely wealthy Saudi royal family, whose net worth has been estimated at $15 trillion.

Does Ben know that Osama Bin Laden's brother was a major investor in George W. Bush's Arbusto Oil Company?

That GHWB and the Carlyle Group were dining with Bin Laden in D.C. on 9/11?

That Saudi Prince Bandar was the man who first told Secretary of State Colin Powell in December of 2002 that George W. Bush and Cheney were going to invade Iraq?  (According to Plan of Attack by Bob Woodward.)

That Saudi Prince Mohammed Bin Salman loaned $2 billion to Jared Kushner-- Trump's envoy to the Middle East?

That Prince Mohammed Bin Salman has recently decided to cut Saudi oil production in order to sabotage Joe Biden and the Democratic Party in 2024?

 

Below: Trump's first trip abroad as POTUS in 2017 was to Riyadh, to do the sword dance with the Saudis

I agree the Bushes (and Cheneys) are totally compromised by connections to Mideast autocracies, and the bulk of the GOP is compromised as well (and the rest if DC too). 

Trump was and is sui generis, insincere, transactional in nature, self-interested but not a member of the Deep State. Quite the opposite. 

In fact, a reasonable argument can be made that the Deep State put torpedoes into Trump from before he became president. 

The same thing is happening to RFK2 now. 

And Biden publicly fist-bumps with MbS. 

So it goes. 

W--Try for a civil, collegial tone in your commentary. Accusing other commenters, and by name, of "myopia" is the sort of ad hominem argument that only befouls this forum. 

 

 

 

Edited September 19, 2023 by Benjamin Cole

[Kirk Gallaway]

14 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Why did President Biden publicly fist-bump with Mohammed bin Salman? 

Exactly, W.!  What a silly point to make. There's nothing uncivil  with calling it "myopic", when he was so obviously overlooking the obvious. And Trump, brandishing a sword and  dancing with the Saudis and holding the "sacred sphere" didn't register with Ben? Because in Ben's mind, Trump is not a "globalist?'

But then this one.

 

Ben:When did the expression "national security" morph into "global security" without even a blush? 

 

Sez who? Who are you quoting ? Ben in his tortured mind?

 

As so often Ben, You're just spamming throwaway questions and not answering any. You're missing the very point.

You're not talking to Thai kids trying to learn English. Raise you bar and stop trying to BS us!

Blush that!

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

15 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I did define the Deep State, within reasonable length for a popular forum.

People interested in learning, and not sniveling, can read Michael Lofgren or Peter Dale Scott for extended takes on the Deep State, aka Shadow State, or global security state. 

The book "Shadow Government" by Tom Englehardt is also worth reading. 

As shorthand for a popular forum, the expression "Deep State" is useful and understood: 

A globalist security state working on behalf of globalist commercial enterprise, coopting political parties and media. Globalists who want access to markets, resources and labor pools worldwide, and compliant governments, and globalists are not loyal to any particular region, nation, nationality, or government.

For the Deep State, democracy is not a priority and they will depose US presidents, starting with JFK.

How else did the US enter not one, not two, but three fantastically expensive yet counterproductive wars, notable for cruelty in results, since the JFKA? Which one of these wars, even if successful, would have benefitted the US middle and employee classes? 

Why did President Biden publicly fist-bump with Mohammed bin Salman? 

When did the expression "national security" morph into "global security" without even a blush? 

Anti-communism?

Point out which of the global gigantic commercial enterprises are anti-communist. Apple? Disney? NBC Universal? GM? BlackRock? JP Morgan? WalMart? Amazon? Goldman Sachs?  Tesla? All are cozy with the CCP (especially Apple, they of the famous 1984 ad). 

All would be cozy with MbS if need be and are. 

Of the two major US political parties, which one is not run by globalist-Deep State interests? 

Liz Cheney and HRC---which one is not the globalist? 

Ben: I don't want to hear your reading list. I want to hear your own thoughts. Your challenged for  spamming the term "globalist" by 2 different people.  Then you mentioned in your response "globalist" no less than 8 times!

 

None of your stuff is ever actionable. Where do you stand on Project 2025?

This is what I mean by grown up talk. Apparently Biden's trying to take action against this.

 

Biden administration proposes new rule that would limit Trump purge

 

 

Here's your strongest paragraph, but your use of terms is sloppy and inexact. Hey, I'm sloppy sometimes too.

 

Ben: A globalist security state working on behalf of globalist commercial enterprise, coopting political parties and media. Globalists who want access to markets, resources and labor pools worldwide, and compliant governments, and globalists are not loyal to any particular region, nation, nationality, or government.

 

Instead of "globalist", What aversion do you have to using the term  "the corporate state", or corporatism or the multi national corporate state?

Do you realize corporations also domestically coopt political parties? It's often about taxation. It's not just "globalists" over international policy!

 

How about this? A corporate  state working on behalf of commercial enterprise, coopting political parties and media.  A corporate state that wants  access to markets, resources and labor pools worldwide, and compliant governments,  and the corporate state is not loyal to any particular region, nation, nationality, or government.

 

It's much more precise, a bit redundant, but that's part of your writing style.

 

 

Ben: How else did the US enter not one, not two, but three fantastically expensive yet counterproductive wars, notable for cruelty in results, since the JFKA? 

 

You're not making critical distinctions here. When you assert that GW's War in Iraq was a deep state or "globalist" war, you're really letting Bush off the hook for a very historically grave decision.  This wasn't at all like the Vietnam War. There was no institutional pressure by the government to start that war, nor was there any political  or popular pressure for Bush to invade Iraq, as there was in Afghanistan. This was a completely elective war by Bush and his PNAC bedfellows and the public got duped into it.

.

Ben: Which one of these wars, even if successful, would have benefited the US middle and employee classes?

 

When you're seeking to assign blame. Your use of "globalist' in your writing is so corporate in that, the last term you'd ever  use is "corporate". And you insisted many times in the past on using the term,"employee class". Why don't you ever  use the term "working class"? Are these terms too direct for you?

 I hate to be so relevant but where do you stand in the UAW strike?

 

 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

8 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Ben: I don't want to hear your reading list. I want to hear your own thoughts. Your challenged for  spamming the term "globalist" by 2 different people.  Then you mentioned in your response "globalist" no less than 8 times!

 

None of your stuff is ever actionable. Where do you stand on Project 2025?

This is what I mean by grown up talk. Apparently Biden's trying to take action against this.

 

Biden administration proposes new rule that would limit Trump purge

 

 

Here's your strongest paragraph, but your use of terms is sloppy and inexact. Hey, I'm sloppy sometimes too.

 

Ben: A globalist security state working on behalf of globalist commercial enterprise, coopting political parties and media. Globalists who want access to markets, resources and labor pools worldwide, and compliant governments, and globalists are not loyal to any particular region, nation, nationality, or government.

 

Instead of "globalist", What aversion do you have to using the term  "the corporate state", or corporatism or the multi national corporate state?

Do you realize corporations also domestically coopt political parties? It's often about taxation. It's not just "globalists" over international policy!

 

How about this? A corporate  state working on behalf of commercial enterprise, coopting political parties and media.  A corporate state that wants  access to markets, resources and labor pools worldwide, and compliant governments,  and the corporate state is not loyal to any particular region, nation, nationality, or government.

 

It's much more precise, a bit redundant, but that's part of your writing style.

 

 

Ben: How else did the US enter not one, not two, but three fantastically expensive yet counterproductive wars, notable for cruelty in results, since the JFKA? 

 

You're not making critical distinctions here. When you assert that GW's War in Iraq was a deep state or "globalist" war, you're really letting Bush off the hook for a very historically grave decision.  This wasn't at all like the Vietnam War. There was no institutional pressure by the government to start that war, nor was there any political  or popular pressure for Bush to invade Iraq, as there was in Afghanistan. This was a completely elective war by Bush and his PNAC bedfellows and the public got duped into it.

.

Ben: Which one of these wars, even if successful, would have benefited the US middle and employee classes?

 

When you're seeking to assign blame. Your use of "globalist' in your writing is so corporate in that, the last term you'd ever  use is "corporate". And you insisted many times in the past on using the term,"employee class". Why don't you ever  use the term "working class"? Are these terms too direct for you?

 I hate to be so relevant but where do you stand in the UAW strike?

 

 

 

I support the UAW strike. Biden actually gave a good presentation on the strike, although I do not know if he or the White House is working effectively behind the scenes aid the UAW. 

Why US automakers can blithely put factories into Mexico without the slightest concern in Washington is beyond me....

 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

9 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Exactly, W.!  What a silly point to make. There's nothing uncivil  with calling it "myopic", when he was so obviously overlooking the obvious. And Trump, brandishing a sword and  dancing with the Saudis and holding the "sacred sphere" didn't register with Ben? Because in Ben's mind, Trump is not a "globalist?'

But then this one.

 

Ben:When did the expression "national security" morph into "global security" without even a blush? 

 

Sez who? Who are you quoting ? Ben in his tortured mind?

 

As so often Ben, You're just spamming throwaway questions and not answering any. You're missing the very point.

You're not talking to Thai kids trying to learn English. Raise you bar and stop trying to BS us!

Blush that!

 

U.S. Global Security Challenges and Strategy

https://www.csis.org/analysis/us-global-security-challenges-and-strategy

This is typical fare from the global security crowd. This is rife. I could link to 1,000 such articles, white papers, administration statements and so on, and from both parties. I wonder how many hundreds of think tanks now are on the Beltway pontificating on global security. 

The US globalized, hyper-mobilized US military does not exist to prevent a military invasion of the US. That is obvious. 

The US military archipelago is a worldwide guard service for globalist enterprise. Cost to you?

$5000 a year (DoD, VA, black budget pro-rated interest on the national debt).

Cost to a family of four? $20k a year. 

Every year, in perpetuity and rising. 

Why is this cost, expressed in this manner, never a topic at The Wall Street Urinal or The Washington Donkfartz Post? 

The Deep State is better-funded and more technologically advanced than ever. Big expansion after 9/11.