Please help support this site by making a tax-deductible contribution through Pay Pal, or by patronizing the advertisers who help make it possible. Thank you...
For a new book from CFIS Chairman Charles S. Viar, please click on the following link: Just Before Midnight: A Tale of Love, Romance, Treachery and Treason
PLEASE SEE OUR SPY WARS AND TERRORISM PAGES FOR NEW POSTS
Updated 16 May 2013
BREAKING THE TABOO
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) has broken a long-standing Washington taboo. In a recent fundraising letter he signed for the National Association on Gun Rights, Sen. Paul stated that President Obama is working "with anti-American globalists plot[ing] against our Constitution."
According to Ezra Klein, who reprinted the entire letter in the Washington Post, "It's one thing for no-name pols to work on the fringes" but Paul's claims are "black helicopter stuff."
Mr. Klein is apparently unaware that "black helicopters" do indeed exist, and have existed for a very long time. According to confidential sources who were associated with the "black helicopter" program, the still-secret aircraft were first operationally deployed as anti-terrorist platforms during the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics.
Mr. Klein seems equally oblivious to the fact that "Globalism" has been the unstated but very real objective of American foreign policy for decades. Some historians trace Globalism to the Council on Foreign Relation's War and Peace Studies program, begun in 1939. Others have argued with good reason that it actually dates to the (unofficial) founding of that organization in 1909.
That said, it is perhaps even more plausible that Mr. Klein has merely fired the opening shot in an Establishment-orchestrated effort to first smear and then marginalize Sen. Paul, which is the standard treatment the Establishment-controlled media visits on those who violate the Washington Taboo by openly acknowledging the Supra-National Policy of Globalism, or who have the temerity to raise uncomfortable questions concerning the future of constitutional government within larger framework of a global regime.
THE SECOND TERM CURSE
Winning a second presidential term is a mixed blessing at best. Although re-election is preferable to defeat, it comes at considerable cost: every president in recent memory who has won a second term has been engulfed by scandal. Eisenhower was tripped up in a lie after the Soviet's shot down a US spy plane; Nixon was destroyed by Watergate; Reagan was pummeled by the Iran-Contra scandal; Bill Clinton impeached - but not convicted - for lying under oath; and the astonishing incompetence George W. Bush was revealed for all to see by his bizarre and bungled response to Hurricane Katrina.
For President Obama, the curse has delivered a double-whammy: Not only have Republicans been vindicated in their claim that the Obama Administration tried to cover up the Benghazi fiasco - in which a US Ambassador and three other diplomatic personnel were murdered by Al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists on the anniversary of 9/11 - but a near simultaneous revelation that the IRS has been targeting Conservative donors and organizations has placed the Administration in serious legal jeopardy. President Nixon was driven from office, in part, for the same offense.
So far, the President's excuses have been lame at best. With regard to Benghazi, Mr. Obama asserts that the statement made by his Administration at the time reflected the best understanding of the tragedy then available. But that is clearly not the case, as we now know the "talking points" issued by the White House had been repeatedly changed and watered down, to the point where they were little more than officially sanctioned fantasies. Contrary to White House claims, the senior CIA officers speaking off the record claim the Agency had immediately attributed the attack to Al Qaeda-affiliates; indeed, given the timing of the assault, one would have to have been mentally deficient not to make the connection on that basis alone.
Mr. Obama's statements to date regarding the illegal IRS harassment of Conservatives may be better founded, but are damning nonetheless: If it is true that the targeting was dreamt up and executed by mid-rank IRS officials, the President was asleep at the switch; if not, he is culpable for a criminal offense.
Mr. Obama has clearly been less than honest with regard to Benghazi, and may well be dissembling about the IRS targeting as well. But aside from political expediency and alleged character defects, there may well be a deeper reason: the President has redefined America's National Policy and the Grand Strategy that supports it, and is in the midst of a delicate strategic re-positioning away from the Mid East and toward the Asian-Pacific Theater. Ending the War on Terror - or at least sweeping it under the rug - is an essential precondition for success in this maneuver.
Because many Conservatives and Conservative organizations are militantly pro-Israeli - especially, Tea Party organizations - they pose a threat to his effort to disengage from the Mid East. Having been conditioned by decades of Establishment propaganda, many - perhaps most - honestly believe that the US-Israeli relationship is an alliance of like-minded democracies.
In actual fact, the relationship has always been one of mutual exploitation: the United States embraced Israel - a country it had previously held at arms length - in 1967, to support its newly adopted National Policy of Deliberate Energy Dependence and the supporting Grand Strategy of Oil Control/Armed Mid East Intervention. At the time, the Mid East was believed to be the world's largest source of oil outside of the Soviet Union, and Israel was seen as a useful proxy.
Now that vast new quantities of oil have been discovered in the United States and elsewhere - reserves that dwarf those of the Mid East, according to many oil analysts - the alliance with Israel is no longer necessary. Indeed, many foreign policy specialists now consider it a net liability. Throwing Israel under the bus without being seen to do so is therefore a major policy objective.
This interpretation squares with the more or less contemporaneous revelations that the IRS also targeted pro-Israeli organizations. Given the re-positioning now in progress, the Israeli Lobby is a problem - and it's in the interests of the Administration to silence pro-Israeli voices insofar as it can.
If the United States were a European country, with a more sophisticated and cynical public long accustomed to raison d'etat, all this might be no more than a tempest in a tea pot. But Americans have never accepted the notion that dishonest and underhanded dealings should be accepted for "reasons of state," and for that reason the burgeoning scandals of Benghazi and IRS targeting are serious indeed.
They may destroy Mr. Obama's second term administration, and his legacy as well.
9 May 2013
A SECOND AMERICAN CENTURY?
Is a second "American Century" possible? Despite the colossally stupid 50-year digression into the quicksand of the Middle East, there are promising indicators that the 21st Century will be an American century after all.
The single biggest reason? America's geopolitical position, between either end of the World Island. The second biggest reason is that China's astonishing 30-year dash to economic and technological development is slowing to a crawl.
Back in the 1990s, American strategists talked in hushed whispers about the need to break up China. No longer - American economic and military dominance now seems assured for decades and perhaps even generations to come.
For more on the economic side of things, please click on the link below:
CHINA SLOWS DOWN
6 May 2013
A SECRET ARMY
Having already purchased more than 1.6 billion rounds of small arms ammunition over the past year, the Department of Homeland Security is apparently soliciting bids for another 2 million bullets. The Department's massive and ongoing purchase of ammunition has raised disturbing questions as to why the DHS needs an ammunition store that rivals that of the US Army, and what they intend to do with it.
One likely explanation may be found in President Obama's 2008 campaign rhetoric. While running for the White House, Obama asserted the need for a civilian security force "as large and as capable as our military." But once elected, the issue vanished into the political mists.
The reason is simple: President Obama quickly learned that his proposed civilian security force was unnecessary, given the ongoing functional integration of local, state, and federal police agencies. This process began shortly after 9-11, and has continued without interruption in the 12 years since. For all practical purposes, the United States now has a national police force.
This is a problem for a formally democratic society, because a heavily armed national police force inevitably blurs the distinction between the police function and the military function. The task of the military is to defend the state against foreign enemies; the task of the police is to protect the citizenry from crime.
This distinction is the bedrock upon which civil society rests, and any blurring of the line between the police and the military undermines - indeed, threatens - democratic society.
Eradicating the line between the police and the military functions is the hallmark of totalitarianism. In Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, the SS and the KGB respectively were, technically, police agencies - but both had combat divisions organized on military lines and equipped with tanks, artillery, and other heavy weapons. In both cases, they were the Guardians of the Party-State, raised, organized, and trained to wage war without mercy upon their own people at home and upon the Party-State's enemies abroad.
There is no particular mystery as to why the United States is emulating the totalitarian states it crushed in World War Two and the Cold War: Since the 1930s the American Financial Elite has been committed to a rarely stated but nonetheless real policy of global integration, and the Establishment that depends on or profits from this Elite has quietly pursued this goal by increments.
Among the incremental policies designed to facilitate the emergence of a new global order is "Free Trade," which depends upon the free and unimpeded flow of capital, goods, services and labor across national frontiers; massive and sustained immigration, intended to change the color and character of the American people by diluting the traditionally white Christian majority; the celebration of "Diversity" and "Multi-Culturalism," which are more conducive to Empire than democracy; the philosophical shift in American jurisprudence, which has prompted the US Supreme Court to cite rulings of foreign courts in deciding domestic constitutional issues; and the functional integration of government bureaucracies and military, intelligence, security and police services, which gathered momentum after the attacks of 9-11. Here the Security and Prosperity Partnership is a case in point: for years now, government officials from the US, Canada and Mexico have been diligently working working to standardize bureaucratic practices, procedures, and paper work, in order to achieve an unprecedented level of government "inter-operability."
The end goal of global integration and the policies listed above to promote it are profoundly unpopular with the American people, and had they be given a chance to vote upon them, the voters would have rejected both by large margins. But they were never permitted the opportunity - indeed, the Political Class has resolutely refused to discuss the end goal of global integration, and done everything possible to avoid addressing the policies that support it. John McCain was defeated in his 2008 presidential bid, in large part, because he refused to discuss border security or immigration control.
Given the fact that a recourse to political remedy has been blocked, it seems likely that at least some Americans will resort to violence in an effort to stem what they see as a slide into global tyranny - and this, rather than terrorism, is the deepest fear of the Political Establishment, and the most likely explanation for the Department of Homeland Security's massive purchase of ammunition, and its associated effort to "heavy up" local and state police services with large caliber machine guns, armored fighting vehicles, and other weapons traditionally reserved for the military. The Political Establishment is afraid of the American people, and for good reason.
Editors Note: The CFIS would like to take this opportunity to urge concerned citizens NOT to engage in violent activities of any sort. We strongly encourage those who oppose the policy of Globalism, and the sub-policies that support it, to engage in political action, lawful non-violent protests, and public educational activities instead.
More than two years ago, the Center for Intelligence Studies predicted an alliance of necessity between Israel, Saudi Arabia, and other "moderate" Muslim states in the Mid East, in order to confront the growing power of Iran. Now it seems that alliance is in the process of overt formation.
According to The Times of Israel, a plan is in the works for a "Moderate Crescent" alliance of Israel, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, in which Israel would provide its Iron Dome missile defense system in exchange for access to early warning radar information.
Although it seems bizarre at first glance, such an alliance would be par for the course in the Mid East: During the Crusades, Christian and Muslim aristocrats intermarried freely and Christian and Muslim Knights routinely served masters that were, technically, their enemies. The number of Christians who fought for Islamic lords is unknown, but at one point almost a third of the army of the Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem were Muslims. Were one to walk through the King's palace there, one would have encountered a great many Knights by the name of Sir Mohamed or Sir Omar.
At the end of the day, international conflict is geopolitical; ideology is rarely more than a useful rationalization.
For more on this intriguing story, please click on the link below:
MY ENEMIES, MY FRIENDS
OIL, OIL EVERYWHERE
It turns out, there is no oil shortage. New surveys have located truly vast deposits of oil in the United States and elsewhere, and new technologies have made it possible to recover natural gas and oil from fields once thought unproductive or exhausted.
When coupled to a new understanding of the process of oil formation, first discovered by Soviet scientists, it's clear that the world not only has hundreds of times more oil than previously believed, but can never run out. It turns out that oil is formed continuously from methane seeping upward rather than biological remnants being pressed down, and for that reason oil is an inexhaustible resource.
The new discoveries, technologies, and the new understanding of oil formation have profound implications for both the "Green Movement" and also for American National Policy and the Grand Strategy that supports it.
In terms of ecology - and economy - it means that alternative energies such as wind, solar, and tidal power, and biofuel, can no longer count on fears of an oil shortage to propel them. Henceforth, they will have to depend on either government fiat - a distinct possibility - or competitive prices.
In terms of national Policy and Grand Strategy, it means the death knell for America's post-1967 National Policy of Deliberate Energy Dependence and the Grand Strategy of Oil Control/Armed Mid East Intervention that supported it. Because the Mid East is a strategic backwater, important only for the oil that lays beneath its sands, the new discoveries, technologies, and understanding of oil formation have made it possible for the United States to (economically) pursue a new National Policy of Energy Independence. As a result, the United States is already reducing its boot print in the Mid East. Its only remaining concern for the region as a whole is ensuring that oil continues to flow to its allies in Europe and Asia - nations that have scant oil reserves, and need more time to convert to alternatives.
In all likelihood, this is directly and immediately tied to the Administration's volte-face on Iran AND the emerging "Moderate Crescent" alliance discussed above. The Obama Administration had previously asserted its determination to prevent Iran from achieving a nuclear weapons capability; now it seems to be pursuing a policy of containment instead.
Whatever the actual case, one thing is clear: The Mid East no longer looms so large in American policy, and for that reason the United States will put as much distance between itself and the region as may be practical.
GRAMSCI, GIRLS AND SAUDI ARABIA
Antonio Gramsci is the most important revolutionary most Americans have never heard of. Once a leader of the Communist Party of Italy, Gramsci is notable for his out-of-the-box, heretical thinking. Unlike Marx and the far more doctrinaire Lenin, Gramsci believed that educational and cultural change were, together, the Road to Communist Revolution.
Had Stalin gotten a hold of Gramsci, he would have been shot. But in 1926, Mussolini grabbed him first - the fascist regime sentenced Gramsci first to five years in prison, and then to an additional twenty. His health broken by the harsh conditions of his confinement, Gramsci was granted a provisional release in 1934. He died three years later, at age 46.
Ironically, it was the non-Communist left that adopted his approach to revolution. European socialists and American Democrats both embraced his incrementalist approach, and his emphasis on educational and cultural change.
Now it seems that ultra-conservative Saudi Arabia has as well: For the first time, the Saudi government has authorized girls to participate in sports at some - but not all - of its gender-segregated schools. This follows the government's earlier decision to allow women to work outside the home in women's clothing stores, the participation of two Saudi women in the London Olympics, and the establishment of a non-gender segregated university.
By Saudi standards, these are revolutionary acts - and they are being carried out in accordance to Gramsci's prescriptions, in a cautious, slow-moving "White Revolution," i.e., a top-down revolution designed to strengthen the existing system by modernizing and updating it.
Given the Saudi government's intent, it's difficult to say whether Gramsci's Ghost is cheering them on, or spinning in circles.
23 April 2012
DID THE BUREAU BLOW IT (AGAIN) ?
According to the British newspaper, the Telegraph, the FBI seems to have dropped the ball again by, letting one of the Boston bombers slip through its fingers.
In a published report, the Telegraph asserted that the Russian security service warned the FBI about Tamarlan Tsarnaev last November. According to the Telegraph, Russian police observed Tamarlan making no less than six visits to a known Islamic extremist in the Russian republic of Dagestan during his last trip to the Russian Federation.
The Telegraph maintains that the Russian security service provided the Bureau with a case file on Tamarlan, but FBI requests for additional information were apparently ignored.
Since the bombing, the FBI has admitted that it did interview Tamarlan last November, presumably after receiving his dossier from the Russians. But since no "derogatory" information was developed in the course of the interview, the Bureau dropped the case. Had they kept him on their watch list, it is likely that the Boston bombing would have been deterred by their surveillance or disrupted before it could be put into play. But for reasons that are still unclear, they apparently didn't even monitor his or his brother's online postings - had they done red flags would have been raised.
Many other questions about the Bureau's handling of the case remain unanswered.
One is a report that Tamarlan called his mother two days after the attack and told her the FBI had already contacted him, and accused him of being responsible. If true, it would suggest that the Bureau knew a great deal more about Tamarlan than they have let on. It would also make the Bureau responsible for the killing of a MIT campus police officer the following day, and the grievous wounding of a Boston Transit Police officer the day after that.
Another is the fact that the Bureau didn't retrieve Tamarlan's file, or even cross reference the CCTV surveillance videos and cell phone camera recordings it obtained after the bombing with its own photographic data base - which contained Tamarlan's photograph. Had they done so, they would have identified the Tsarnaev brothers within hours, rather than days.
According to Sen. Lindsey Graham, "The ball was dropped in one of two ways. The FBI missed a lot of things is one potential answer, or our laws do not allow the FBI to follow up in a sound, solid way."
Representative Peter King, Chairman of the House Sub-Committee on Terrorism and Intelligence, was more openly critical. According to King, this was the fifth time the Bureau had bungled a counterterrorist operation by failing to follow up on valid information. According to the Congressman, the FBI's record in monitoring terrorist threats is one of failure.
Many Washington insiders would consider King's criticism of the Bureau as charitable. In addition to the unlawful killings at Ruby Ridge in 1992, the Waco massacre the following year, and the faked crime lab reports that caused approximately 200 federal convictions to be overturned during the 1990s, the FBI spent decades claiming it was impenetrable to Soviet spies, even as a Soviet agent was systematically looting its files. When the spy was finally uncovered in 2001, FBI officials tried to frame a CIA officer for the breach in order to cover up their failure and to protect the Bureau's allegedly unblemished reputation - just as they had done a decade earlier, when one of their informants was exposed as a spy for a supposedly friendly Mid East intelligence service. Had they faced the true facts in that case, they would have been forced to deal with a much larger "friendly" espionage ring that reached into the Bureau itself. Instead, they "shot the messenger," buried the case, and bought off the traitor with a government job.
This pattern of gross incompetence, denial and cover-up continued into the new millennium, first with the attacks of 9-11 - for which the Bureau bears primary responsibility - and then with the Sibel Edmonds case.
Hired as a Mid East language specialist in the aftermath of 9-11, Ms. Edmonds uncovered and documented massive fraud, theft, and willful incompetence within the Bureau's translation department; the deliberate sabotage of critical national security operations; a deliberate effort to hide the fact that the FBI had ample warning of the 9-11 attacks; and - apparently - outright treason on the part of a senior FBI official. As with the case of the FBI informer recounted above, the FBI leadership reacted by attacking the messenger, covering up the evidence, and buying off an apparent traitor. According to Ms. Edmonds' account, they then systematically destroyed her life - an action also consistent with the case above.