Vote all you want. The secret government won’t change. The people we elect aren’t the ones calling t
21 replies, posted
[IMG]http://c.o0bg.com/rf/image_960w/Boston/2011-2020/2014/10/16/BostonGlobe.com/Ideas/Images/CapitolWEB.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE]Though it’s a bedrock American principle that citizens can steer their own government by electing new officials, Glennon suggests that in practice, much of our government no longer works that way. In a new book, “National Security and Double Government,” he catalogs the ways that the defense and national security apparatus is effectively self-governing, with virtually no accountability, transparency, or checks and balances of any kind. He uses the term “double government”: There’s the one we elect, and then there’s the one behind it, steering huge swaths of policy almost unchecked. Elected officials end up serving as mere cover for the real decisions made by the bureaucracy.[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/10/18/vote-all-you-want-the-secret-government-won-change/jVSkXrENQlu8vNcBfMn9sL/story.html"]Source[/URL]
I don't know if this is a good or a bad thing.
Wut, it's like that in every possible country he didn't discover anything new.
I don't think there's a country which elects military staff and security officials; even in here they're all based on merits and experience, and that's a good thing because that means that they're split from the elected government.
The president controls what the military does. There are more than enough examples of the president stopping the military from doing something that the military leaders wanted to do (Korean War). This is bogus conspiracy nonsense.
We all know that the Supreme Hedgehog Emperor controls this planet anyway.
[QUOTE=Explosions;46287118]The president controls what the military does. There are more than enough examples of the president stopping the military from doing something that the military leaders wanted to do (Korean War). This is bogus conspiracy nonsense.[/QUOTE]
Except when they don't. Bush, for example, [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0]approved NSA's domestic espionage program[/url] without knowing the full extent.
[QUOTE=demoguy08;46287169]Except when they don't. Bush, for example, [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0]approved NSA's domestic espionage program[/url] without knowing the full extent.[/QUOTE]
Lol he still approved it. If he hadn't, it wouldn't have gone through. Just because he was an idiot doesn't mean he wasn't in control.
Lets not rule out the possibility of corporate lobbying.
You see corporations influencing the government all the time.
I thought this was common knowledge?
Oh wait, what am I thinking... Theres still people complaining about Obama, thinking he has undisputed power over every inch of America...
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;46287263]I thought this was common knowledge?
Oh wait, what am I thinking... Theres still people complaining about Obama, thinking he has undisputed power over every inch of America...[/QUOTE]
Of course he has. He is a black illuminati muslim lizardman
[QUOTE=rewkasu;46287299]Of course he has. He is a black illuminati muslim lizardman[/QUOTE]
Don't forget he's also comunist.
[QUOTE=Medevila;46287062]I mean if you want to argue the article I'd say it's far more evident that GOP obstructionism was the main factor behind Obama's failure at reform, as opposed to illuminati or some shit[/QUOTE]
Sorry, but I think you are grossly underestimating reality when saying "Illuminati or some shit".
During the Cold War, foreign policy was dictated and in large part influenced by a close group of people who were FAR, freaking FAR away from the popular vote.
When talking about the NSA, the CIA, etc etc, there are political charges and non political ones.
Why? Because the political ones change whenever a new president is elect, it means that someone else will replace the current head of X department/agency.
However, the non political ones, don't and won't change either for two reasons: It is stupid to change them whenever a president is elected (You don't dismiss a intelligence officer just because Obama stepped into the oval office) OR because he has the ability to pull so much shit, that nobody wants to touch him.
And that's where the problem lies.
People who have power, but not power which has been given to them via democratic means, but because they can manipulate and coerce people into doing things.
Remember that one American president tried to play the game that way, was discovered by Forest Gump, and in turn lost his charge over the massive public uproar.
Hey, it happens all over the fucking world. Corrupt countries being the most notorious one.
Example Nº1 nowadays? Russia. It has been, literally, under control of those who were in the past inside the KGB or controlled the direction of the Soviet industry. And nobody unless the country is deeply reformed will be ever able to touch them.
It's not bogus conspiracy nonsense. And yes, it has been called on upon many times, one of the most prolific authors being Norberto Bobbio (a fucking crack) who had this kind of stuff inside his "Failed ideals of democracy".
[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;46287356]Sorry, but I think you are grossly underestimating reality when saying "Illuminati or some shit".
During the Cold War, foreign policy was dictated and in large part influenced by a close group of people who were FAR, freaking FAR away from the popular vote.
When talking about the NSA, the CIA, etc etc, there are political charges and non political ones.
Why? Because the political ones change whenever a new president is elect, it means that someone else will replace the current head of X department/agency.
However, the non political ones, don't and won't change either for two reasons: It is stupid to change them whenever a president is elected (You don't dismiss a intelligence officer just because Obama stepped into the oval office) OR because he has the ability to pull so much shit, that nobody wants to touch him.
And that's where the problem lies.
People who have power, but not power which has been given to them via democratic means, but because they can manipulate and coerce people into doing things.
Remember that one American president tried to play the game that way, was discovered by Forest Gump, and in turn lost his charge over the massive public uproar.
Hey, it happens all over the fucking world. Corrupt countries being the most notorious one.
Example Nº1 nowadays? Russia. It has been, literally, under control of those who were in the past inside the KGB or controlled the direction of the Soviet industry. And nobody unless the country is deeply reformed will be ever able to touch them.
It's not bogus conspiracy nonsense. And yes, it has been called on upon many times, one of the most prolific authors being Norberto Bobbio (a fucking crack) who had this kind of stuff inside his "Failed ideals of democracy".[/QUOTE]
The CIA and NSA are under the authority of the president. He has the ability to choose its leaders and control their policies. Presidents have done this many times. There isn't some permanent "non political" cabal of people who secretly run the show with no accountability.
[editline]20th October 2014[/editline]
People love to believe in this shit because it dissolves them of all responsibility and feeds into their own apathy. "Oh it's all hopeless." "We can't really change anything." It's right up there with the whole "both parties are the same and elections are meaningless" bullcrap that keeps being peddled.
[QUOTE=Explosions;46287382]The CIA and NSA are under the authority of the president. He has the ability to choose its leaders and control their policies. Presidents have done this many times. There isn't some permanent "non political" cabal of people who secretly run the show with no accountability.
[editline]20th October 2014[/editline]
People love to believe in this shit because it dissolves them of all responsibility and feeds into their own apathy. "Oh it's all hopeless." "We can't really change anything." It's right up there with the whole "both parties are the same and elections are meaningless" bullcrap that keeps being peddled.[/QUOTE]
if you really think that, you should about the SIDE, about the KGB, about the Mossad etc etc
Every single intelligence gathering agency in the world has a group which more or less has stayed through all changes of administration.
Hell, was MK Ultra approved by the executive power?
Or damn, the tuskegee experiments.
snip
He's right to a certain degree. The CIA/DOD/NSA/etc don't directly control the country, obviously. But they do wield a vast amount of influence. Case in point: the myth of the missile gap in the 1950s. CIA and DOD analysts "overestimated" (read: deliberately exaggerated) the number of rRussian missles to make it seem like they had exceeded the US's stockpiles. This lead to a massive increase in spending, which in turn both increased the military's strength and increased profits for defense contractors, who were very cozy with the Pentagon by this time.
He's right to a certain degree. The bureaucracy is designed to be at least partially insulated from politics, and to continue functioning in a professional manner as elected representatives come and go. It's a good thing, too: In the past, each election cycle meant everybody was fired and their jobs were awarded to political supporters who didn't know anything about the job. Unfortunately, that also makes the system less responsive to public opinion.
Institutional inertia is a force to be reckoned with, especially among in the military. The bureaucracy is full of people who have watched decades worth of congresspeople and presidents come and go. They don't change easily, regardless of who is in charge. And, that problem is compounded by the fact that regulators in Congress are often "captured" by the agencies they are supposed to regulate. Look at Diane Feinstein, she's the head of the Intelligence Committee that is supposed to regulate the intelligence community, and it made her the biggest champion of surveillance in the entire government. I think the same kind of thing happened to Obama. The daily barrage of security briefings and trumped-up threats from people seeking to preserve their own budgets converted him to the security state's way of thinking.
[QUOTE=rewkasu;46287299]Of course he has. He is a black illuminati muslim lizardman[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;46287329]Don't forget he's also comunist.[/QUOTE]
Stop being tin foil wearing conspiracy theorists. There's no such thing as muslims or lizardmen.
[QUOTE=minilandstan;46288944]Stop being tin foil wearing conspiracy theorists. There's no such thing as muslims or [b]lizardmen.[/b][/QUOTE]
[img]http://facepunch.com/image.php?u=240302&dateline=1396947554[/img]
BELIEVE AS I SAY
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;46287244]Lets not rule out the possibility of corporate lobbying.
You see corporations influencing the government all the time.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, after reading just the headline, I assumed this was going to be about the Oligarchy.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.