Expanded Power, Limited Liberty
Today, the executive branch has expanded yet again. The CIA being just one of those 16 powers that operate outside the view of the legislative and judicial branches and have no accountability to the American people or the media. The newly installed Department of Homeland Security — spawned from the events of 9/11 — is being used to conduct the next phase of operations by the executive branch, publicly known as the National Continuity Government. The “plan” for this new phase of clandestine operation within the country is due on the president’s desk in August. The declaration of such intent is on the website of the White House, thoroughly ignored by much of the national media.
Bed Partners
The most mournful of all epiphanies is the understanding of how intertwined the government is with media. The interrelationship goes further than who is sleeping with whom or who is married to whom. The national media, both in front of and behind the lens and the pen, is neck-deep in quicksand with the government. Consider that the leader of the executive branch is the President, and he, above all, would be in a position of knowledge about the information now being disclosed by the CIA. And consider the fact that under Bill Clinton the White House spokesman was George Stephanopoulos. Then consider the fact that ABC news, for many years, has featured the same spokesman as its anchor for a political program featuring its best celebrity journalists.
On the flip side of the coin, revered journalist Tony Snow jumps from FOX News into the arms of George W. Bush and becomes his patsy, singing the songs written by the White House in the same choir to which Stephanopoulos once belonged. The conflict of interest doesn’t stop with just these two examples.
9/11: The Role of U.S. Government
Such duplicity provides the backdrop behind the media that completely ignored the glaring contradictions proffered by the government in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. Considering that the “war on terror” has become the rallying cry of the government since 2001, the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq (again) were conducted based upon 9/11 fears, the USA Patriot Act, the Dept. of Homeland Security and the various kidnappings, secret prisons, indefinite unlawful detainments, torture, and murders conducted by secret elements within our government all find their rationale rooted in 9/11. All this has required investigation by the national media and independent appointees by Congress.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Doug Hunter
What news is this? Everything I've heard so far is widely known and now just officially been verified. This is child's play compared to what the true conspiracy theorist imagines.
Infiltrating leftist groups listed as evil? Perhaps because leftist groups started civil wars and fought bitter insurgencies in dozens of countries killing millions of people around the globe during the time frame mentioned. Radical left governments are responsible for the vast majority of genocides during the 20th century killing tens of millions. If that's not worth looking into then we might as well dismantle all security agencies.
Calling yourself conservative is laughable, a conspiratorial revisionist nutjob is more fitting.
2 - Lumpy
And it's not controversial and not a conspiracy. It's the CIA doing what we created it to do. Try fighting a cold war without covert ops. Clearly it helps to be naive if you're a conspiracy buff.
3 - Dr Dreadful
Doug hits the nail square on the head. Conspiracies, as Dave's "tinfoil beanie wearers" depict them, are earth-shakingly nefarious plots which somehow require the collaboration of thousands without ever being found out.
Er, Mike? Everybody knows the CIA helped install the Shah, tried to assassinate Castro and conducted cynical experiments on black men, among others. The only news here is them finally accepting that the only thing they're worse at than keeping such activities secret is admitting it was them.
4 - moonraven
The really creepy reality of these CIA criminals is that they are heroes to most of the wannabees that post on this pathetic site.
5 - Clavos
"...the wannabees that post on this pathetic site."
And here you are. Almost daily.
6 - moonraven
But I am not a CIA wannabee, but a CIA target.
7 - Clavos
"But I am not a CIA wannabee, but a CIA target."
Bbwaaahahahahahahah!!!
8 - moonraven
I did not say VICTIM, you illiterate redneck.
9 - Clavos
I wouldn't laugh at victimhood, mr.
10 - Mike Green
Hmmm ...
I find it quite interesting that there are people who would defend the acts of the CIA and other secret elements within our government. It appears to me that the point of keeping things secret is due to the fact that transparency, truth, honesty and openness would negate the ability of such organizations to commit kidnappings, torture and murder at will. If such deeds were essential it would seem that those for whom the deeds were being conducted to protect would approve.
The explanations of such acts, however, seem to find their way into the hearts and minds of some who believe it is quite sufficient to trust in secret powers that lie to cover what they do, how they do it, when they do it and why they do it. Yet, the miraculous result is that no matter what the secret powers do they can convince the gullible and naive among us that it is worthwhile and justifiable.
These individuals who subscribe to the support of secret powers with faithful trust that those powers would never abuse such trust often consider themselves conservative. But I find they are no more conservative than any others who support murderous evil (Evil: defined as "without God") powers that seek to undermine, overthrow and control the homelands of others.
As a Christian conservative, I find the straight and narrow isn't a path provided by government, but rather by God. And as a Christian, I believe that the lies told by our government in order to commit acts it deems essential to its control and expansion of power around the globe are in opposition to the methods taught by Christ, my Lord and Savior.
Christians who support the expansion of the executive branch to the degree that today 16 secret agencies do as they please with no accountability to the American people, have inasmuch entrusted unknown and untrustworthy individuals to lead this nation in whatever direction they see fit. Such trust comes at a supreme sacrifice, since the children of Christians are the ones offered up on the battlefields (both known and unknown) to kill and be killed in the name of government lies and propaganda.
When I hear folks tell me how necessary it is for this government to go out and kill folks, overthrow governments, engage in secret wars and clandestine ops designed to establish American control, the explanation is usually underscored by fear of others. The propaganda is that millions of folks are dead due to the actions of others, which requires the United States to police the world as the arbiter of what is good and bad ... apparently always siding for the good and destroying the bad.
Such belief is astounding, especially given the reckless evil this government has perpetrated upon even its very own citizens. It is surprising that rational people could make a case for entrusting and empowering known liars to continue to act in secret despite having knowledge of numerous past acts that have nothing to do with protecting the U.S. or following the spirit or even the legalities set forth by our nation's constitution.
But the support of nefarious operations that continue within the machinations of our government does indeed stand firmly upon one rock solid foundation ... that America (in particular white America) is superior to all others and must dominate the world in order to remain so.
It is quite interesting that over the past century this nation has somehow come to believe it has some moral superiority over any other. And since the U.S. has a powerful military, it purports to deploy it in more than 130 nations of the 192 that exist in the world, claiming that our goals are good while any other nation that might think to do the same is evil and must be thwarted. From where is such thinking rooted?
This same mindset is what led this nation to follow Great Britain into Iran in 1953 and boldly steal what doesn't belong to us. What's a few hundred lives snuffed out and several thousand families negatively impacted when the end result is a puppet that acts on behalf of the U.S. in a land where oil flows underground like rivers?
The oil in the Middle East is now claimed as "U.S. vital interests" for which our nation will do anything, including empower other evil entities, in order to assure it remains under our control. And the idea that posters here would claim that such information isn't news nor worthy of consideration illustrates my point. An air of superiority permeates this place, where some look down upon others and exclaim how those "evil" people deserve to be butchered by our clandestine ops. Apparently, the belief is that the secret powers are beholden to the same goals of those who support them.
I find it necessary to call evil evil when I see it, rather than proclaim that since it is being done in my name then it must be good, or at the very least less evil than what occurs elsewhere.
I prefer to stand in the lighted path, where remaining close to God is the way of conservatives â€" while those who feel liberated from God's moral laws and principles can launch epithets and hostilities at me from the darkness, rather than debate the ideas I put forth.
I don't feel I am superior to anyone, whether they live here or in a cave somewhere on the other side of the world. My lifestyle isn't worth preserving if it means that millions of others must suffer and die to preserve it.
The Darwinian thought processes expressed here are quite disturbing, as they provide a window into the souls of those who think the targeting of others is okay simply because we are the stronger power. Yet, the hypocrisy in such thinking is quite evident, given that they do not think it is okay for other nations to conduct the exact same secretive operations (kidnappings, assassinations, overthrow of governments, torture, spying, murders, etc) that are part and parcel of routine operations of our government ... and have been for more than a half-century.
I admit to having an incredulous response to dismissal of the news that our CIA is just one of many powers within our government we cannot trust. I suppose when the information is finally leaked that the executive branch has been incrementally expanding its power in preparation for a complete dictatorial rule over the American people, perhaps at that point we all can agree that maybe having secret powers within our republic that are unaccountable to the people isn't necessarily a good thing.
Of course, at that point it will be too late to do anything about it. And those who sullenly admit they were wrong will do so knowing they were on the front lines of the propaganda war paving the way for such dictatorship.
11 - Dave Nalle
But I am not a CIA wannabee, but a CIA target.
Now there's the essence of NPD, the egotistically paranoid belief that shadowy organizations are targeting you, when in reality you're far beneath their notice.
Dave
12 - Dave Nalle
Mike, what you're writing about here is not the discovery of some new conspiracy, but the making public of the history of old programs and actions, most of which are well known from non-government sources. All we're getting here is the straight scoop from the CIA perspective on operations which were done under congressional and executive oversight - the oversight of people WE elected. They may be somewhat sensationalistic and even viewed by some who don't understand the context as shocking or evil, but they are what the times demanded.
What's more, your take on this whole issue is completely wrong. The choice to make these past operations public isn't revelation of conspiracy, since there's nothing new here, it's a sign of the CIA's willingness to be more open and honest and operate in a more legitimate manner, and that ought to be seen as a very good thing. That you don't see it as a positive step in the right direction is another demonstration of how warped the viewpoint of the conspiracy-obsessed can be.
Dave
13 - Jeff Friedberg
I'm 62 and I happen to recall the Cold War, which was a very real thing, and an extraordinary threat of nuclear annihilation that required extraordinary means of defense. I never thought I ever live to say this (Jimmy Hendrix forgive me, please!) but you Younger Generation have No idea what you're talking about, and what you missed out on. You need to consider: NY, Houston, LA, Las Vegas, Boston, and Philly will teach the lesson one day soon, unfortunately, if predictions are true. You really need to start paying attention to the game, you seem to be out in the parking lot "Partying" (when did "party" become a verb?) and you're missing the action. Watch the skies, everywhere! Keep looking. Keep watching the skies!
14 - Paual Angelique Hafner
What is that guy talking about watching the skies? I do not get it.
I thinki anyting reported is only a tenth of what is really going on. Our government is founded upon secrecy.
It is obvious something is very wrong when our system only keeps two families in power for a generation.
Our constitution is out the window and who cares about what our founding fathers tried to create. The forth estate is in bed with the other three estates.
How often were we to have a revolution in order to keep things in check?
15 - Dave Nalle
I believe 'watch the skies' is a reference to a 1950s cold-warish science fiction film where earth is invaded by flying saucers. Was it "Earth vs. the Flying Saucers"? I think that's the title.
And Paula, in addition to not being able to spell your own name, you're just being paranoid. There are still plenty of checks and balances and safeguards in place, and the Constitution still works - we just have to make sure that all of these things are USED as they should be, and that depends on the vigilance of the people.
Dave
16 - Lee Richards
Dave,
I just don't don't understand how three days ago you described our government by saying, "while one hand is fitting us for slave collars...", and today you chide somone else for being paranoid about its abuses of power.
17 - moonraven
It's because Nalle just writes the first thing that passes through his mind--a dark and turbulent place filled with demons and warlocks and yellowdogs and obsolete game cards.
He is not be to be taken seriously.
18 - Dave Nalle
Lee, the vast majority of the CIA operations we're talking about here involved dealing with FOREIGN enemies and had little or no impact on US citizens. The only program I can think of which had any domestic impact was carried out through third party associates, not by the CIA itself.
That's enormously different from legislation passed specifically to infringe and/or alter the traditional rights of US citizens inside the country. What the CIA did harmed virtually no US citizens. What the Congress is up to with things like PATRIOT and Real ID harms every one of us.
Dave
19 - Baronius
Moonraven, you're back. You might find it fun to contribute to the conversation, rather than insult your fellow commenters.
Of course the CIA is a conspiracy: it's a group of people who meet together to coordinate things in secret. That doesn't make them evil or opposed to America's interests.
I can't tell from the article what new information has been released. The most noteworthy thing about the CIA has been its frequent public embarrassment. (In other words, they may be a conspiracy, but they're an ineffective one.) Their intelligence is often faulty, and their operations... well, Fidel is still alive, so they're doing something wrong.
20 - Zedd
Its the CIA.
Speaking about conspiracy theorists, MIKE pull yourself together.
21 - Devin
Where can I find a list of the 130 nations that we have some military influence in? I'm not doubting it, I'd just like to be able to know which ones for future reference.
22 - Mike Green
It is interesting that some of the comments here give the CIA and the rest of the secret elements within our government a pass.
Consider: "the vast majority of the CIA operations we're talking about here involved dealing with FOREIGN enemies and had little or no impact on US citizens"
The fact is this comment is based solely on assumption. And there are two things dreadfully wrong with the assumption.
A) No one commenting here knows how many secret ops the CIA has conducted abroad or on American soil. No one in this forum is privy to the actions of an unaccountable organization that is admittedly one that deceives the American people, witholds information, operates on its own agenda and claims no allegiance to American law or its highest law, the constitution.
B) The admission of the CIA regarding its willingness to assassinate leaders of foreign nations, overthrow governments by killing innocent peoples and engage in secret warfare is an obvious willingness to do such things based upon principles and ideals to which much of this nation's people do not subscribe. The idea that such activities were devoted solely to targets outside of this nation is undermined by the very admissions of spying on American citizens and maintaining secret ops on domestic targets.
Such information should raise the eyebrows of most of the citizenry, but it seems apparent that those who support such nefarious EVIL operations do so simply because they believe they themselves are not in the crosshairs. But such activities do not have a moral governor. The use of illegal spy tactics, kidnapping, secret prisons, torture and murder (not to mention the conspiracies to overthrow powers and initiate, as well as augment, wars that claim innocent lives) are tools of those who purport to be on the side of good when in fact they use evil methods and justify them with the notion that the ends justify the means.
Such a notion is preposterous.
Consider the impact on American citizens. The CIA cannot overthrow the Iranian government in 1953, enabling the U.S. to control that nation's oil for 26 years, and then assume such an act has no impact upon American citizens.
Do not Muslim nations have the right to defend themselves against U.S. aggression? Don't Islamic organizations operating under the umbrella of protecting all Muslim nations (see Muslim Brotherhood) have the right to engage in the defense of Muslim nations against western powers seeking to overthrow their governments?
Immediately after the U.S. lost Iran and the control of Iranian oil, Jimmy Carter announced the Persian Gulf â€" a vital artery of water allowing transportation of oil â€" was "U.S. vital interests" for which we would consider controlling by "any means necessary, including military force."
Um, excuse me. But it appears that the CIA's takeover of Iran led directly to the U.S. dependence of oil coming from the Middle East (not just Saudi Arabia). And it was the LOSS of IRAN that led to Carter's declaration that the U.S. was going to control the Persian Gulf by force.
If that doesn't impact American lives, what does? Aren't those American troops risking their lives? Isn't Carter's declaration one of war?
Try to imagine any country declaring the Gulf of Mexico a region for which military force would be used to control. Would that not be a declaration of war?
Then consider the fact that the CIA was intimately involved in the machinations that led to solidarity with Saddam. Consider the fact that the U.S. assisted Saddam in an invasion of Iran immediately following the loss of Iran.
The story timeline continues without interruption.
But where are the American people? Clueless!
Meanwhile, we supply Saddam with WMDs (chemical and bio) and the means by which to deploy them.
When Saddam is ticked off at us for double-crossing him (remember the Iran-Contra Affair?) and supplying Iran with the means to make offensive attacks against Iraq, he expresses his displeasure with a "mistake" assault on the USS Stark (1987). American sailors were impacted by the nefarious dealings of secret elements within our government.
Consider that after the assault on the USS Stark Bush (41) was STILL providing billions of dollars and military hardware to Saddam as late as the summer of 1990!
Consider also that Bush was setting Saddam up in July 1990 with his infamous declaration (through April Glaspie) of having "no opinion" on the pending assault on Kuwait due to an unresolved border dispute over oil.
Consider also that the same Bush claimed it was necessary to send over 500,000 U.S. troops to Saudi Arabia to "defend Saudi Arabia"!
Consider also that the same Bush claimed that "Iraq holds 10% of the world's oil" reserves and "Kuwait plus Iraq equals twice that."
The Gulf War invasion of Iraq saw a quick ground invasion and a retraction of most ground troops. What America lost sight of was the fact that the air control of Iraq (2/3 of its airspace) was never relinquished. And the U.S. bombed Iraq continually from 1991 through to 2003 when Operation Iraqi Freedom sent in another ground invasion. That's the same war, different operations. Gullible Americans believed the war in Iraq was over in 1991. Did they believe it again when the media and the president announced an end to the war in 2003?
How many secret ops were conducted through the CIA and the Iraqi National Congress and the Iraqi National Accord throughout Bill Clinton's administration? Were these also justified? They used the same tactics we accuse "terrorists" of using.
Consider that we sacrifice our troops in waging secret wars and secret ops that the American people are not privy to. And when such information is later revealed, I hear intelligent Americans proclaiming that such secret operations are just and in keeping with American goals and laws.
Such a perspective is quite opposite of the reality that clearly shows the government needs to hide its goals and operations from the American public precisely because we do not approve of the evil machinations that operate of their own accord, ansering to secret unelected powers while those we elect provide cover for the evil occurring beneath the surface.
Given the continuing aggressive violence perpetrated by our government, and the insidious plots that reap disastrous results, I am surprised to hear any American citizen advocating for faithful support of unseen and unknown powers, believing that such powers have our best interest at heart.
If, or perhaps when, the numerous questions pertaining to 9/11 are addressed in full and in truth, it may surprise quite a few of the proponents of the CIA and other secret government powers that our government is not, as the framers of the constitution knew, to be trusted.
Sacrificing a few American citizens in order to establish a foundation for a massive expansion of the executive branch power, as well as galvanizing support for another invasion of Iraq in order to establish a permanent presence between two devoutly fundamentalist Islamic nations in a region where oil flows abundantly is a small price to pay to gain the potential trillions of dollars in payback and establish control of a permanent strategic military region.
Anyone who thinks our government "would never do such a thing" has obviously never served in the U.S. military.
23 - Dave Nalle
Devin, I suspect that's a pretty round figure. And a broad definition of 'military' too. Of course, most of our food and other non-military aid gets taken by dictatorial regimes and turned into weapons, so that might count too.
The number of countries we actually supply with arms, military training and support - REAL military aid - is a lot smaller than 130.
Dave
24 - Dave Nalle
Damn, we need a term as catchy and effective as 'moonbat' to use for people like Mike. Any suggestions?
Dave
25 - Dr Dreadful
A very broad definition of "military". You could say that the number of countries the US has "military" influence in is actually all of them, since any of the nations on Earth could, in theory, be wiped off the map at the touch of a button in a briefcase.