5 ms·

"While I think the stated concern about a 'deep state' is rather exaggerated," We've been involved in a lot of scheming stuff esp in Middle East for decades. T

"While I think the stated concern about a 'deep state' is rather exaggerated," We've been involved in a lot of scheming stuff esp in Middle East for decades. The same names keep turning up in the higher ranks regardless of who is President in U.S.. Especially Cheney's. We also find a lot of it comes from the CIA's meddlings despite the public not wanting any of those particular operations. At one point, they were straight-up funding themselves with drug money to do whatever they wanted with their own private military. Recently, esp with Iraq, it's close-knit groups of civilians in think tanks, civilians in defense contractors, executive-branch officials who sometimes pull six digits on side from defense contractors, and Congress committee reps with stock in same companies. There's definitely a deep state going on. It got cemented, though, when continuity of government legislation was enacted after passing of State of Emergency and Patriot Act. The power it gives the executive branch, esp ignoring Constitution and accountability, is likely why they reinstate it every year. I imagine Congress is just too afraid to fight with them. GAO said Congress hasn't even read any of their reports on the NSA and such. They're totally uninterested in reigning in deep state whether it's not giving a shit, making money off it, blackmail via surveillance system, or death threats.

shard972 10y ago
Remember that the NSA was busted by Snowden for spying on the head of the intelligence oversight committee Dianne Feinstein, targeting the computers they stored information related to their work in intelligence oversight.
- nickpsecurity 10y ago
  I thought that was the CIA hacking into the servers they set up for them during the torture investigation. If I'm wrong, please give me a link to evidence showing it.
mcguire 10y ago
True. But, do you think "Mr. Trump, apparently seeking to cut the intelligence community, State Department, and other agencies out of the policy-making process almost entirely, may have triggered a conflict whose escalation we are seeing in the rising number of leaks." is a good way to oppose that?
- nickpsecurity 10y ago
  It would be a start if the person doing it was well-informed on our intelligence sector and diplomacy. Plus, was acting in the best interest of the general public. Trump isn't any of that. He's just driven personal ego and power. Really, bad things could happen if the likes of CIA think he's a real threat to them. So far, he's just ignoring them or unaware the power players even exist. That lets them continue their schemes. His voters and campaign also preferred having a surveillance/police state so long as it's aimed at other voters with different color and religion. What little I've followed has just been mud slinging and toothless politics. Deep state is watching him closely but not affected yet.
s_kilk 10y ago
Indeed. I find it comical that some Americans think they don't have a Deep State.
- nickpsecurity 10y ago
  It's funnier when you think of what many of them asked for and later defended as a response to terrorism: 1. Secret people with secret surveillance of whole country. 2. Secret groups watching, kidnapping, renditioning, and/or assassinating their enemies (presumably terrorists). 3. Secret court with secret interpretations of law regulating those secret people. 4. Secret programs (SAP's/USAP's) doing billions of tax dollars work of secret stuff decided in secret by a handful of people. 5. Effective criminal immunity for all these people if whatever they did was ordered by those secret programs, groups, and/or people. There's no secret government, though. No no no. We have a representative democracy here. Laws are passed. Executive fairly enforces them. Courts test them. There ain't no deep state. Just some people that can't talk about what they do that's all legal or at least justifiable only hurting the right people. Maybe I'm slow or just don't consume the right kind of mushrooms. I just keep thinking... given the above... there's de facto two or more governments running in parallel each doing their own thing with some interactions (eg parallel construction) that should also concern us. That one is full of professional con artists and killers with secrecy and criminal immunity should be scary enough in a democracy but few worry about that either.

shard972 10y ago

Remember that the NSA was busted by Snowden for spying on the head of the intelligence oversight committee Dianne Feinstein, targeting the computers they stored information related to their work in intelligence oversight.

nickpsecurity 10y ago
I thought that was the CIA hacking into the servers they set up for them during the torture investigation. If I'm wrong, please give me a link to evidence showing it.

mcguire 10y ago

True. But, do you think "Mr. Trump, apparently seeking to cut the intelligence community, State Department, and other agencies out of the policy-making process almost entirely, may have triggered a conflict whose escalation we are seeing in the rising number of leaks." is a good way to oppose that?

nickpsecurity 10y ago
It would be a start if the person doing it was well-informed on our intelligence sector and diplomacy. Plus, was acting in the best interest of the general public. Trump isn't any of that. He's just driven personal ego and power. Really, bad things could happen if the likes of CIA think he's a real threat to them. So far, he's just ignoring them or unaware the power players even exist. That lets them continue their schemes. His voters and campaign also preferred having a surveillance/police state so long as it's aimed at other voters with different color and religion. What little I've followed has just been mud slinging and toothless politics. Deep state is watching him closely but not affected yet.

s_kilk 10y ago

Indeed. I find it comical that some Americans think they don't have a Deep State.

nickpsecurity 10y ago
It's funnier when you think of what many of them asked for and later defended as a response to terrorism: 1. Secret people with secret surveillance of whole country. 2. Secret groups watching, kidnapping, renditioning, and/or assassinating their enemies (presumably terrorists). 3. Secret court with secret interpretations of law regulating those secret people. 4. Secret programs (SAP's/USAP's) doing billions of tax dollars work of secret stuff decided in secret by a handful of people. 5. Effective criminal immunity for all these people if whatever they did was ordered by those secret programs, groups, and/or people. There's no secret government, though. No no no. We have a representative democracy here. Laws are passed. Executive fairly enforces them. Courts test them. There ain't no deep state. Just some people that can't talk about what they do that's all legal or at least justifiable only hurting the right people. Maybe I'm slow or just don't consume the right kind of mushrooms. I just keep thinking... given the above... there's de facto two or more governments running in parallel each doing their own thing with some interactions (eg parallel construction) that should also concern us. That one is full of professional con artists and killers with secrecy and criminal immunity should be scary enough in a democracy but few worry about that either.