the_human_being
Gold Member
- Sep 8, 2014
- 15,277
- 2,741
- 290
>>Shit was corrupt long before they rolled into town.Shit was corrupt long before they rolled into town.
The Deep State killed Kennedy, put LBJ on the thrown and covered it up. That is the height of corruption.
The Dem and Rep. parties colluded to get rid of Nixon. That is the height of corruption.
Shit has been going on a LOOOONG time. Neo-cons in the Reagan admin. had wealthy donors fund Contras against congress explicit orders. Corruption continues. It only gets worse.
Let's not even broach the policies that led to Sept. 11 that enabled the military industrial complex to thrive after the cold war. A quick peek into Hillary's inner circle will reveal the same links to the terrorist circles are the same links to those who fund her foundation. Who our enemies and who our allies are seem to be one and the same, just to keep the security/and war machine moving along. Such is the tale of the Deep State. It matters not which party is in power.
They say the tin pot dictators and third world nations are mired in corruption, but no place on Earth has corruption so down to a science as in the US which makes it all look legal legitimate. With the wholly owned government schooling and corporate press making anyone that understands it all (with the exception of a few intellectuals e.g. Carroll Quigely, Dr. Peter Dale Scott,) look like a lunatics or a fools.
Maybe so, but never so obvious to the public at large as this latest one. And still they take us for fools knowing no one is going to be able to do much about it. What do you suggest, give up?
For the record, I do not doubt much of what you said here to be the case. We are in the dark. Surely Obama is a Manchurian candidate if there ever was one. However, I do disagree that keeping the war machine rolling and making money for whomever is the primary factor in all these geo-political manipulations by giant corporate or global powers, if that is what you were suggesing. I think it is even more diabolical than that.
And as far as the contras go, I think Reagan was totally in the right (for the common good) to secretly fund them against evil Marxists oppressing nations, and not waiting for a timid or waffling congress to decide one way or the other.
Even if Hillary wins in November, I don't think Putin would be justified in secretly funding militia movements to take up arms against her rule. Why? Because first, it is none of the Russians business what goes on in the US national political borders, we are a sovereign nation. Second, if the people desire her, then so be it.
The same can be said to be true in the instance of Nicaragua. I may not have liked the Sandinista government, but it is 1) immoral to get involved in the internal affairs of another nation and 2) unethical to violently contravene the elected will of a sovereign people.
Why should US blood and treasure be wasted to do something that is immoral and unethical when it only benefits the elites that run this nation? They run the banks, the arms industry, the international corporations that had an interest in expanding to that region of the world. It really never benefited the US taxpayer.
Aside from the corrupt state Marxist philosophy being a pretext to brain wash US taxpayers?
Fuck the deep state. If you fell for that ploy, you are just as easily going to fall for the phony "terror war." If you don't know what I am talking about. . . See Huma Abedin.
Wasn't there or isn't there a thread on here talking about some Syrian airplanes almost dropping bombs on US troops operating inside the sovereign nation of Syria? US troops which were not invited into Syria by the Syrian government?