Our intelligence services have become obsessed with overturning regimes, rather than just gathering information that can help them protect Americans. In the long term, this strategy does more harm than good for America, and causes chaos and suffering around the world. I intend to change that.

submitted by Orangutan from (twitter.com)

all 11 comments
sorted by:
new (suggested)
topinsightfulfun

[–]bucetao6969Im a guest here. Do not take my opinion as of a community member 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I guess the "patriotic act" isn't very patriotic is it.

[–]risistill me 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Have become? Implying some relatively recent change?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Mosaddegh

Of course, regime change in Hawaii pre-dated the CIA, but government always had intelligence gathering somewhere in its composition.

[–]InumaGaming Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

That was always their plan since they forced Harry Truman into the presidency.

Effectively the start of the Cold War was the start of the corporate coup of America.

They hated FDR and worked to overthrow him then he was poisoned by his mistress.

Henry Wallace was ousted and he was the Bernie Sanders of the last millennium.

The left was assassinated and COINTELPRO ensured the growth of the military industrial complex.

When the left was destroyed, a Synthetic Left took over.

We have a lot of work to do to make this country into a nation and that means defying the intelligence agencies that reign with death.

[–]risistill me 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Henry Wallace was ousted and he was the Bernie Sanders of the last millennium.

I will post only about the above sentence.

I'd say that Sanders was not even a pale imitation of Wallace.

Henry A. Wallace ran for President as the candidate of a newer political party and against a Democrat incumbent. Even the Senator Sanders of 2015 would have called Wallace a "spoiler."

Sure, they both like the New Deal, but Wallace liked it--and more--in 1933, maybe earlier, when the Supreme Court was about to begin declaring piece after piece of it unconstitutional because allegedly outside the powers granted the federal government by the Constitution of the US. Running on it then was revolutionary ideologically. Running on it in 2015, not so much.

[–]InumaGaming Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

True, and I'm only using the Sanders name have people understand what Henry Wallace did before that. But even then, EVERYTHING about the New Deal and what Wallace did should be done again by people in office.

The honest Bernie we needed was the 1988 version because the 2015 had sold out to Howard Dean in the 90s anyway and was a spoiler for the Democratic Party back then.

[–]risistill me 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Relatively recently, I read that Bernie had resigned from the Liberty Union Party after losing an election.

First, who resigns from a Party? Most of us change our registration--unnecessary in Vermont now, but maybe not then--and/or just stop voting that ticket. But no, Bernie resigned after losing an election. So, that alone seemed odd.

Even odder? Bernie and the Party Treasurer resigned after Bernie lost that election. Reading that raised a huge question in my mind, but, so far, that's all I've found on that topic.

I did see this: https://www.vice.com/en/article/bnjby3/the-vermont-political-party-bernie-sanders-founded-isnt-into-him-anymore

[–]InumaGaming Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Before that, they were calling him Bomber Bernie in 1999.

That's pretty brutal. But even then, Michael Parenti distanced himself from Bernie too.

That was over Yugoslavia.

Kind of showed that lefties in the know should have never trusted Bernie if they'd done their research and most of us hadn't. I stumbled and more knowledgeable people got me up to speed on him while I was looking around.

[–]risistill me 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You are right. I think desperation plays a role. As long as you believe you just have to vote for someone, you will be desperate to make a choice and that desperation will make you overlook a lot. Human nature being what it is, once you make a choice, you become a fan.

PS Both as to Mondale and Clinton, Sanders' endorsement speeches did what Cenk, Hartmann, Chomsky and others do every election: First, he excoriated the candidate, then told Americans they just had to vote for him because the other guy was so much worse--standard, nay hoary, Dem "lesser" evil propaganda..

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Wow, fascinating. And that bit at the end is very sad.

[–]risistill me 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Adding on, in the name of fairness. Both the reporter and Bernie's old friend have been unfair or inaccurate or both, about "socialist." That was a label that media, Republicans and Democrats hung on Sanders on the assumption that it would sink him.

I followed his 2016 campaign as closely as I could without ignoring my responsibilities. Bernie said he was a Democratic Socialist. When interviewers would say things like, "So, you're a socialist." Bernie would say "Democratic Socialist." However, I never heard him explain the difference between the two. And, since he was running at the time as a Democrat, I can see where people who were not familiar with the DSA would understand that as, "I am a Democrat who is a socialist."

That's all from me on this subtopic as my issue with one sentence seems to be running away with this thread, which was not my intention.

[–]risistill me 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've seen him look past people as though they did not exist twice. Both times, I thought he was was justified.

But turning your back on someone you last knew as a toddler or an infant? However, we do need to remember that we have only one side to that story.