In het volgende artikel uitleg van
Edward Snowden over hoe de deep state werkt (in de VS). Zoals je wellicht al
bekend was, het gaat bepaald niet alleen om de geheime diensten, maar
bijvoorbeeld ook om de ambtenaren op sleutelposities, die na een
wisseling van presidenten niet hoeven te vertrekken. Jammer dat
Snowden niet de grote bedrijven en banken noemt, daar deze wel
degelijk deel uitmaken van deep state......
Gezien dat laatste, hebben ook de
miljardairs veel invloed, immers zij bezitten bedrijven of hebben de
meerderheid van aandelen van bedrijven in handen, zoals die van de grote
dagbladen >> niet voor niets dat de 'journalistiek' in die bladen
allesbehalve onafhankelijk is....
Snowden legt uit hoe presidenten worden
ingepakt door deep state, alle hervormingen die zij willen
doorvoeren, zoals hervorming, dan wel opheffen van geheime diensten,
stranden en zullen blijven stranden...... (althans zoals het er nu uitziet en er moet wel een enorme catastrofe passeren wil daar verandering in komen......)
Snowden
Explains How the Deep State Influences Presidents
March
24, 2018 at 11:36 am
(TIM) — Famed
whistleblower Edward Snowden was recently interviewed by Italian
publication La Repubblic. The publication noted the 5-year mark of
Snowden’s historic act of blowing the whistle on the NSA’s
expansive surveillance programs and that “many thought he would end
up very badly, but when he connects via videolink for this interview
with la Repubblica, he seems to be doing very well: the frank smile
and peaceful face of someone who is easy in his mind.”
In
an excerpt from the exclusive interview, Snowden
explained how the presidencies of both Obama and Trump are shaped by
the Deep State following an illuminating question by journalist
Stefania Maurizi.
Stefania
Maurizi: We
saw that President Obama, who was an outsider to the US
military-intelligence complex, initially wanted to reign in the
abuses of agencies like the CIA and the NSA, but in the end he did
very little. Now we see a confrontation between president Trump and
so-called Deep State, which includes the CIA and the NSA. Can a US
president govern in opposition to such powerful entities?
Edward
Snowden: Obama
is certainly an instructive case. This is a president who campaigned
on a platform of ending warrantless wiretapping in the United States,
he said “that’s not who we are, that’s not what we do,” and
once he became the president, he expanded the program. He said
he was going to close Guantanamo but he kept it open, he said he was
going to limit extrajudicial killings and drone strikes that has been
so routine in the Bush years. But Obama went on to authorize vastly
more drone strikes than Bush. It became an industry.
As
for this idea that there is a Deep State, now the Deep State is not
just the intelligence agencies, it is really a way of referring to
the career bureaucracy of government. These are officials who sit in
powerful positions, who don’t leave when presidents do, who watch
presidents come and go, they influence policy, they influence
presidents and say: this is what we have always done, this is what we
must do, and if you don’t do this, people will die.
It
is very easy to persuade a new president who comes in, who has never
had these powers, but has always wanted this job and wants very, very
badly to do that job well. A bureaucrat sitting there for the last
twenty years says: I understand what you said, I respect your
principles, but if you do what you promised, people will die. It is
very easy for a president to go: well, for now, I am going to set
this controversy to the side, I’m going to take your advice, let
you guys decide how these things should be done, and then I will
revisit it, when I have a little more experience, maybe in a few
months, maybe in a few years, but then they never do.
This
is what we saw quite clearly happen in the case of Barack Obama: when
this story [of Snowden exposing the NSA’s mass surveillance] came
forward in 2013, when Obama had been president for five years, one of
the defences for this from his aides and political allies was: oh,
Obama was just about to fix this problem! And sure enough, he
eventually was forced from the wave of criticism to make some limited
reforms, but he did not go far enough to end all of the programs that
were in violation of the law or the constitution of the United
States. That too was an intentional choice: he could have certainly
used the scandal to advocate for all of the changes that he had
campaigned on, to deliver on all of his promises, but in those five
years he had become president, he discovered something else, which is
that there are benefits from having very powerful intelligence
agencies, there are benefits from having these career bureaucrats on
your side, using their spider web over government for your benefit.
Imagine
you are Barack Obama, and you realise – yes, when you were
campaigning you were saying: spying on people without a warrant is a
problem, but then you realise: you can read Angela Merkel’s text
messages.
Why bother calling her and asking her opinion, when you can just read
her mind by breaking the law? It sounds like a joke, but it is a very
seductive thing. Secrecy is perhaps the most corrupting of all
government powers, because it takes public officials and divorces
them from accountability to the public.
When
we look at the case of Trump, who is perhaps the worst of
politicians, we see the same dynamic occurring. This is a president
who said the CIA is the enemy, it’s like Nazi Germany, they’re
listening to his phone calls, and all of these other things, some
claims which are true, some claims which are absolutely not. A
few months later, he is authorizing major powers for these same
agencies that he has called his enemies.
And
this gets to the central crux of your question, which is: can any
president oppose this? The answer is certainly. The president has to
have some familiarity going in with the fact that this pitch is going
to be made, that they are going to try to scare him or her into
compliance. The president has to be willing to stand strongly on line
and say: ‘I was elected to represent the interests of the American
people, and if you’re not willing to respect the constitution and
our rights, I will disband your agency, and create a new one’. I
think they can definitely be forced into compliance, because these
officials fear prison, just like every one of us.
