Is This True About The Deep State?

"Controlled Opposition" a/k/a bad guy strawman



Aristotle wrote about this too.

quote:

---

The tyrant is also fond of making war in order that his subjects have something to do and will always be and want of a leader

---

LOL.

If you had invested $10,000 in Home Depot in 2001 it would be worth $250,000 today, assuming reinvestment of profits.

Tesla stocks would be worth over $250,000.

Lowly Dollar Tree stocks would be worth over $500,000.

The list of stocks that would have outperformed defense stocks mentioned in that supposedly damning example is probably longer than your arm.

The "Deep State" apparently sucks at making money for themselves.

Yeah. They've run it all. And control both sides. And when they don't because of independent third parties, candidates like the Ross Perots and Ron Pauls get curb-stomped.

quote:

---

The [supposed] “Conservative movement” has undergone many convoluted and dramatic transformations over the past sixty years....

...A major objective of National Review [and counterfeit conservative William F. Buckley Jr.] from its inception was to transform the American right wing] from non-interventionism to an interventionist global warmongering (]initially anti-Communist) movement, the entire effort was in essence a CIA operation.... projecting American imperial and domestic state power since 1955.

---

Buckley the Bonesman was a worm. He his fascist brethren smeared and took down the only truly "America First" movement -- The John Birch Society. And replaced it with the new GOP -- a Statist-Globalist and war party.

Everything is smoke & mirrors. The corporate shadow-controllers of the USA have always controlled opposition and both sides. Nothing about the way things work or the agenda to control everyone and everything has ever changed. It can be argued America's citizenry has had one single solitary "Golden Age" in 250 years, (1946-2000). And even during that time there wasn't peacetime very long (see Korea, Nam, Iraq, etc etc)

quote:

---

...two ideological elements created and fostered by the intelligence community: the synthetic “Conservative Movement” and the Neoconservatives…

---

Trump now openly fronts the new Neocon-Globalist Party. Folks won't want to consider the evidence but "MAGA" was always a synthetic con and now a stillborn.

To believe Donald Trump is not under complete control of this corrupt system of the shadow elites and "independently" steering America into "greatness" is patently naive and delusional. He is merely the Elite's puppet enriching and expending its empire. He is one of them.

Those globalist-financiers who placed him in power both times (after setting us up by installing Potato's scorched-earth in between) never surrender their own power and control -- not one bit. They merely choose their best charming candidate to front their entire agenda -- being sure to toss the serfs a few bones here and there to reinforce the theater and appease believers in their "Constitutional Republic" system of illusion.

quote:

---

Who knew this place would become Neocon Central?

---

And wacka — a virulent #neverTrumper — will gladly serve as their Pied Piper. In another thread, wacka suggests that our nation’s past disastrous interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc… weren’t mistakes or miscalculations, but instead were part of a larger, orchestrated strategy:

How do you know that history hasn't worked out exactly the way we wanted it to work out? How do you know that we aren't repeating the same actions because we're batting a thousand?

And he further suggests that they were a rousing success: I’m not sure if he is a depraved ghoul or simply delusional — possibly both. In any event, wacka is a straight up neocon clown.

quote:

---

Everything is smoke & mirrors.

---

All I know is that while we continue to fight these foreign wars of perpetuity to supposedly rid the world of Islamic radicalism or communist infiltration in the Western Hemisphere, the progressive left in this country continues to march ever onward.

For those keeping score at home: NYC — the throne of the Western Financial System — just swore in a commie-jihadist as its mayor.

quote:

---

The "Deep State" apparently sucks at making money for themselves.

---

Nope, they just launder it and steal it from us.

I think what’s true is that you’ve sought out and found something tailor made to confirm your own preconceived notions, beliefs and biases. Are there baseline facts included in the piece, such as timeline events, certain individuals who were in certain positions/offices, historical events etc? Sure there are. Of course there are. The piece is not exactly a work of fiction. But the premise of it comes from a particular viewpoint of opinion, likely an opinion(s) that you personally hold.

And the foregoing description applies to everyone, myself included, generally speaking - the concept of confirmation bias, that is. It’s not some shocking or novel concept, I don’t portend to be dropping any high level knowledge here.

Interesting read.

There are definitely some complexities beyond the scope of this thread that implicate the West in allowing the USSR to become the monster that it became. But the USSR v US/West Cold War really did set up the stage for what the article describes.

Reading this, I'm also reminded me of something in William Cooper's Behold A Pale Horse.

Disclaimer: Of course, everything Bill Cooper said must be taken with a grain of salt... He was Alex Jones before Alex Jones.

I recall a part towards the beginning of the book (before he goes all in on aliens) where Cooper has a chapter devoted to the Executive Branch continuity plans for Cold War threat contingencies as part of the creation of the Deep State. Eisenhower, who Cooper alleges was either socially close or somehow connected to the Rockefeller's, turned towards them (to Nelson, I think... I'm just posting this off the top of my head without research and welcome any corrections) for assistance in developing those continuity plans. I think this wikipedia entry describe this committee / effort, and it looks innocent enough in this context:
wiki
Cooper, of course, contends that it led to the entrenched, parasitic bureaucracy, which became a feature of the Deep State.

The Rockefeller family is only briefly alluded to in your article here:

quote:

---

The populist grassroots masses of the Old Right were opposed in several GOP presidential elections (1936-1952) by the anglophile northeastern seaboard establishment forces within the nexus of the Morgan and Rockefeller Wall Street financial blocs.

---

But I think when you look at their contributions that influenced the government across the board, a pattern emerges:
- What was their role in helping set up the administrative state during the Eisenhower admin?
- What was their role in the formation of groups like the UN and WHO?
- the CFR and Trilateral Commission?
- What was the influence that Rockefeller had over Nixon? Per Cooper's book, Nixon was more of a true conservative from California, who was taken under the Rockefeller wing. He later accepted David Rockefeller's protege, Kissinger, who played a pretty huge role in opening the door to China (which has benefited Rockefeller, Wall Street, and international interests (UN/WHO... unironically founded by the Rockefellers as well) at the expense of Main Street and a financially healthy US). Nixon also implemented some rather leftist social policies, which I suspect was a result of Kissinger/Rockefeller associations.
- David Rockefeller was close to Allen Dulles and was allegedly briefed on CIA matters routinely:

quote:

---

In Cary Reich's biography of his brother Nelson, a former CIA agent states that David was extensively briefed on covert intelligence operations by himself and other Agency division chiefs, under the direction of David's "friend and confidant", CIA director Allen Dulles

---

wiki
(Note: In the interest of time, I'm using Wikipedia, which is a general & neutral, if not left-leaning, source, which is sufficient... and it has footnotes/citations for anyone interested in digging further.)

My overall point is that it is interesting to consider some of the above as supplementary information to your article. I think the "synthetic" conservatism described here is essentially the same as neocon "Rockefeller" Republicanism.

quote:

---

I think what’s true is that you’ve sought out and found something tailor made to confirm your own preconceived notions, beliefs and biases. Are there baseline facts included in the piece, such as timeline events, certain individuals who were in certain positions/offices, historical events etc? Sure there are. Of course there are. The piece is not exactly a work of fiction. But the premise of it comes from a particular viewpoint of opinion, likely an opinion(s) that you personally hold.

And the foregoing description applies to everyone, myself included, generally speaking - the concept of confirmation bias, that is. It’s not some shocking or novel concept, I don’t portend to be dropping any high level knowledge here.

---

Certainly my political outlook arises from a particular political philosophy; anyone vaguely familiar with my posting history here should easily infer that I’m broadly aligned with the premise of the piece. But this isn’t a set of views I reverse-engineered to fit a single personality or election cycle.

I held essentially the same criticisms of the political establishment long before Trump emerged as viable Presidential candidate. I further expect to hold them long after Trump’s Presidency has been safely embalmed in Netfix political retrospectives, think-tank op-eds and cable-news therapeutic panel discussions.

What has changed is that many posters on this forum who once shared very similar opinions now treat them as heretical — despite having made the same charges not all that long ago. So confirmation bias isn’t the revelation here: the more curious development is how a stable and consistent set of beliefs suddenly became disqualifying the moment those beliefs are applied regardless of who is holding office.

quote:

---

It's pretty hilarious that a lot of yall believe that:

1. The Deep State exists
2. But guys like Trump & Musk aren't apart of it

Musk is the richest man in the world and Trump is the single most powerful man in the world but they constantly get out-maneuvered by more powerful billionaires? Maybe yall should listen to those guys then.

---

I have long maintained that any vote in this UniParty® charade is a vote for the left or right wing of the Deep State.

I also believe that the populist MAGA movement posed a legitimate threat to that political establishment and Trump has scar tissue on his ear to prove it.

I further believe that Trump’s Presidency has now been totally co-opted by elements in the very establishment that so opposed him.

None of these opinions are in contradiction with each other.