Friday, August 14, 2015

More Operation Mockingbird and Last Week's Social Matter + Preview for This Week's 12

First a quick note on last night's post. It is important to note that the 'right' is false opposition. This is their job to be phony on your behalf. Expose that and help other see the fraud. Buckley was never confirmed as part of Operation Mockingbird, but it is hard to see how he would not have been. Let's follow the timeline. Digging into the background for my long Mockingbird/McCarthy post, I traced a bit more "why" behind the McCarthy investigations. It ties together.

1.  CIA starts Operation Mockingbird at the start of the CIA. Controlling the press was critical.
2. Buckley was CIA for a short span of time (early '50s).
3. The National Review lived on donations and Buckley admits it lost $25,000,000 over 50 years.
4. J. Edgar Hoover learns there are commies throughout the USG. J. Edgar Hoover had just seen known communists walk free in the Amerasia affair. Hoover could not trust the courts or the administration. What did he do? He started to feed McCarthy and Nixon information in their two committees. Senator McCarthy nearly uncovers all of the CIA's dirty cultural work, points out commies everywhere, and even makes the connection that the Democrats were crypto-commies. McCarthy is destroyed in 1954.
5. National Review is founded in 1955. The Review can make sure that no isolationist ever becomes preeminent in the party again. The Review can also channel right wing energy and action into proper channels rather than noticing the odd coincidence of far leftists always being rewarded by our universities, Federal grants and media.

Can't you imagine it? It's DC, 1954, right after McCarthy is censured. The CIA and Georgetown Set goes "How do we make sure another McCarthy never arises? How do we keep the right wing playing empire and not noticing homegrown commies? I got it, let's use Mockingbird but in a magazine supposedly for them! They'll eat it up."

This week at Social Matter, I will tackle the curious case of Donald Trump. He is a demon of the Establishment's design. Not the GOP establishment, but the system that the cathedral created for our sham elections. I will be taking a 2 week break after this though as I have summer vacation with my family.

Last week's Social Matter essay was on Israel and America's odd fixation with the Holy Land. This got some play and even ended up on Reddits worldpolitics page. I had a bit of fun with this, but in all seriousness, I would love to see America be more friendly to India and focus on building a good partnership there. It would make more sense than the time we spend on Israel.

Have you seen this steady stream of quotes and speeches by presidential candidates about one of our allies? This ally is in a far flung region of the world. They have a vibrant democracy in an area unfriendly towards democracy. They deal with a Muslim threat, jihad next door, terrorists within their nation and the threat of nuclear annihilation. They do have nuclear weapons of their own, and have a nationalist leader at the head of the government now. Let's review the quotes.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: "India is a vibrant democracy in a region dominated by autocracy, and it faces existential threats to its survival." (source)

Senator Bernie Sanders: Weird. Sanders never quite answers anything or takes a definitive stand on India. If you heckle him about it, he will tell you to shut up. (source)

Senator Marco Rubio: “This is a historic and tragic mistake. India is not a Republican or Democratic issue. If this was a Republican president doing these things, I would give the exact same speech. In fact, I would be even angrier. This is outrageous, it is irresponsible, it is dangerous, and it betrays the commitment this nation has made to the right of a Hindu state to exist in peace.” (source)

Senator Ted Cruz: “Christians have no greater ally than India... if you will not stand with India and the Hindus, I will not stand with you. Good night and God bless.” (source)

Former Governor Rick Perry: "India needs more than our passive support—it needs our vigorous support." (source)

Former Governor Jeb Bush: "With India, those interests lie in a firm alliance. India and America must work together to build a more prosperous and hopeful future for the region. A state for the Muslim people, side by side with Hindus, will be possible only if the Muslim people are represented by leaders committed to delivering on the promises made at the negotiating table." (source)

Governor Scott Walker: "Yet even as you stand there, reflecting on the consequential events of two millennia ago, you recognize India is not merely a place of shrines and holy sites. India is one of the world’s most vibrant democracies and one of America’s most important allies." (source)

Senator Lindsay Graham: “I am in charge of the foreign assistance account, I’m in charge of the money we provide for the United Nations,” he explained, referring to his chairmanship of an appropriations subcommittee. “We provide 25 percent of the funding for the organization,” Mr. Graham said, several times. “I’m not going to ask the American taxpayer to fund an organization that’s going to be used in a way to marginalize” India, which he called “our best friend.” (source)

Senator Rand Paul: (bold in original) "I’m proud to support India, America’s longtime friend and ally in the East. Indian cafés and buses are bombed, towns are victimized by hundreds of rockets, and its citizens are attacked by Muslim terrorists. It’s time we took a stand for India by standing up to the enemies of India, the enemies that murder Israeli citizens. That’s why I proposed a bill called the “Stand with India Act” to cut off the flow of U.S. taxpayer dollars to the Muslim Authority." (source)

Donald "Alpha" Trump: “The only [candidate] that’s going to give real support to India is me,” said the 69-year-old Trump. “The rest of them are all talk, no action. They’re politicians. I’ve been loyal to India from the day I was born. My father, Fred Trump, was loyal to India before me. The only one that’s going to give India the kind of support it needs is Donald Trump.” (source)

Governor Chris Christie: "I absolutely believe that India is a priority to be able to fund and keep them strong and safe after eight years of this administration." (source: GOP Debate)

All of these quoted bits are about Israel not India. I changed India for Israel, changed Jewish to Hindu and pulled out Palestinian where appropiate. Doesn't this look ridiculous? I could have taken quotes from each GOP candidate in their primary circus, but I wanted visible names to show how silly it looks when all put together. India is an apt substitute per the description in the opening paragraph. All of those items hold true. India is also a bigger trade partner with the US. Indian-Americans now make up 1% of the US population, which is nearly the Jewish share (1.8%). India itself is also a gigantic nation of strategic importance due to its location, friction with China, and immense population.

We do not have politicians waving their hands around like maniacs and spouting off non-stop nonsense about India because they do not fund our political campaigns. There is no powerful AIPAC for India. American newsrooms are not stocked with Priya Shukla and Sandeep Gurnani pontificating on the need for America to cater to India's needs. American television shows are not stocked with Indian sidekick friends, and stand-up is not dominated by the likes of Nishant Chuptabanjawa. I like how Israel manages its nation for its people. I do think they go overboard creating problems for themselves because they never know when to cool it. America destroyed any sense of a balance to Middle East foreign policy because the Israel's cousins in America run our media.

Now for the flip side, what actually should be our interest in the Middle East? Consistent supplies of oil to keep the price per barrel low in our currency. The goal should be protecting transit routes for safe delivery and patroling key straits. Israel does not produce oil. Israel is not located on any straits. Our interest should be in making oil and gas producer regimes stable while not encouraging terrorism blowback. America should be tough on any nation that antagonizes those oil producers and starts arms races Arab, Persian or Israeli. Israel is a thorn in the side of those oil states. America should have worked to remove all nukes from that area to reduce tension. If the Sampson Option is real and linked to a Doomsday device like the Russians had, this is a hugely destabilizing presence when the antagonists are Muslims with end times beliefs.

Instead, America spent the post-WW2 decades enabling and aiding the creation of the Israeli state, its air force, and its nuclear arsenal (even aiding and covering up the nukes). Instead, American media and academia also cleared out the Arabist wing of our foreign policy intelligentsia. Instead, America is going to allow one of the worst spies in American history leave prison for a short hold in the US and then a pension and retirement in Israel. America may want to change foreign allies or avoid wars, but we cannot do so because of the Israeli lobby. To point out that peculiar interest would notice Jewish overrepresentation in the cultural gatekeeper system.

It runs deeper than just who is where in the system but how our system is set up. Democracy allows money to settle elections. Not just internal money, but money from any source that can find a way to set up a political action committee. Here is a list of pro-Israeli donations to different representatives and senators. That money matters as nearly twenty five years ago it turned a 40% point deficit into a 10% win in a special U.S. Senate election, all because President Bush (41) did not toe the Israeli line. AIPAC is flying all but three of the freshman Congressmen to Israel for a push to block the Iranian nuclear deal. Checks and balances, where money can find new ways to work its magic on elected leaders.

This is our system, and our rotated leaders paid for by sponsors of any interest are up against some long standing regimes without the fear of elections. The deal does appear weaker than the original goals from a decade ago when the 5+1 talks began. The main goal of negotiations switched from dismantling the nuclear program in return for sanction removal to preventing nuclear bomb capabilities for sanction removal. Read Obama fanboy Politifact's strained take on that in the final paragraph that the evil, GOP Senator is not telling the truth unless you want to count a switch in stance seven years after 5+1 talks began as a concession. That too is a function of a desperate White House wanting any deal.

At the base of the issue, who does a nuclear capable Iran threaten more, America or Israel? Israel, not America, yet tens of millions will be poured into blocking or pushing this deal over the top. The system of democracy allows money to pull the USG leviathan in directions it should never go and protect interests that have nothing to do with American risks. This is but one reason why this system must go.


Alexandros HoMegas said...

Professor ReviloP. Oliver explained to me what is the deal which the NR, JBS and Consevatism Inc.

Deduction said...

Sometimes even good, sensible Americans like you are blinded by your arrogance.

You may think that America should cosy up to India but India doesn't want to cosy up to you.

I am sure that they would like some more of your money, but how much would you have to give to truly bribe such a huge and diverse country?

Other than that, as I'm sure you will sympathise, the majority opinion is that America should take their gay, trans, sterile femi-nonsense and f*ck off.

Not only are they put off by America's WEIRD values but also it doesn't really pay to be America's friend...fairweather doesn't even begin to describe it.

I suppose you could have a rapprochement realpolitik based on a shared decision to stick it to China, but then you'd be picking the much, much weaker side and tou would have embroiled yourself in something many times more dangerous than the conflict over Israel-Palestine.

It's the same old boring answer but America has even fewer interests in the sub-continent than you have in the Middle East.

Deduction said...

Also it is Saudi Arabia and Turkey that Iran's nukes threaten most. As they cannot retaliate.

I'm still committed to the idea what Netanyahu is playing bad cop to America's cop over the deal. After all, if Israel was not vehemently against it how on earth would Iran sell it domestically?

Surviving_elk said...

Those are good comments, Deduction - but take your hostility somewhere else. Just because you are not pure Aryan doesn't mean you have to be a prick.

Deduction said...

I'm not aryan at all. I am British. A country that ironically has become something of a colony of America.

I'm sorry if it came across as hostile, but I'm a bit surprised that someone posting here doesn't recognise that progressive ideology is often unwelcome.

As for the using the term arrogant - I just called it as it is.

I suppose I might have called it yankee arrogance but I believe that would be a bit outdated. I could also have called it Western, but actually I rather hope that'd be a bit premature. I firmly believe that their are hold-outs from the multikult within the British etsablishment .

peterike said...

"You may think that America should cosy up to India but India doesn't want to cosy up to you."

Well I, for one, want nothing to do with Indians. I find Indians detestable (and yes, I've worked with hundreds over the years). They manage to be both suckups and inveterate back-stabbers at the same time. I admire their ethnocentrism though. I can't tell you how often a single Indian took charge of, say, a software team, and within a year he had alienated away all the whites and replaced the six white guys with 15 Indians. Of course these kinds of scenes happened years ago: it's Indians all the way down now in most places.

They are garish and tacky and bling-obsessed. When the occasional Indian woman becomes an SJW, she becomes the most demented, bat-shit crazy SJW you ever saw: out Jewing the Jews at their own game (take the Indian broad that recently ran a marathon with her period blood dripping into her shorts -- she was making some kind of point, don't you know).

Indians are also incredibly corrupt, like most Asians, and are spectacularly good at fleecing naive Euros and Americans. I highly recommend the book "Capital" by Rana Dasgupta. Really shows you the reality behind the "Indian miracle." A great read despite the occasional forays into pseudo-poetic nonsense.

Deduction said...

Also typing on my new phone is really difficult...also let me write guest posts here, I've got loads of ideas and the UK ain't represented ever - except Hollywood there a way to submit guest posts, I promise they will be good.

Son of Brock Landers said...

Deduction, Craft something and send it to mrossi34228 at gmail dot com. If i deem it worthy, I will publish. I have had two outsiders post here.

America shoukd befriend india, but india doesnt want to becausr the US govt is a psychotic system of berserkers. I like modi. I like what modi is doing. He is a hindu nationalist and looking out for his people. He is making good moves removing US NGOs and trying to clean up the bureaucracy.

You're UK? Ive posted on the UK. I even lived there for a while years ago. If you're new here, cruise around. I love England and hate to see it dying.

PA said...

Something that sticks in my mind about my many professional contacts with Indians -- every single Indian I've shaken hands with had a soft, flabby grip. Even Americanized, young ones.

There is nothing deadlier than a friendship with a berserker America. Observing Polish international politics in an amateur capacity since the fall of communism, I've noticed a three-way tension between those who vest excessive faith in the US as an ally against the spectre of aggressive Russia, an opportunistic use of American relations as leverage in the EU entry process, and a growing economic nationalism that rejects American and West European buying up of Polish land and businesses.

IA said...

What's the End Game for the inner party? Surely not communism. They reacted against communism with Mockingbird. It all seems very slap dash to me.