Chief “Choirboy” DCI John Brennan Lies During Confession to the American People and Commits “Major Sins/Crimes” Against The Holy Church Of America!
John Brennan should be fired and tried for crimes against the state! CIA needs a major house cleaning. The dynamics of narcissism and greed rarely lie or deviate.
What do I mean?
I have been writing for several years about the sanctimonious ‘choirboy’ John Brennan, an acolyte of the nefarious, ignoble former DCI George Tenet (see earlier post) insisting this Brennan is a cowardly, Machiavellian, duplicitous traitor to America. When he was a Special Assistant to CIA asset, George W. Bush and then worked for another CIA asset Obama, Brennan had already violated more domestic and foreign laws by assisting in the illegal assassination of innocent people in the WTC, then in the drone wars in Iraq, Pakistan Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan etc.
I have been writing for several years about the sanctimonious ‘choirboy’ John Brennan, an acolyte of the nefarious, ignoble former DCI George Tenet (see earlier post) insisting this Brennan is a cowardly, Machiavellian, duplicitous traitor to America. When he was a Special Assistant to CIA asset, George W. Bush and then worked for another CIA asset Obama, Brennan had already violated more domestic and foreign laws by assisting in the illegal assassination of innocent people in the WTC, then in the drone wars in Iraq, Pakistan Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan etc.
What then are the lessons that we, Americans should learn from this history of unending CIA travesties against the USA and the world?
[1] The CIA is completely BROKEN and not effective, despite their myth-making movies to the contrary. Remember taxpayers: you are funding that nonsense they produce.
[2] The USA has over sixteen different intelligence agencies, the CIA has become the least effective and the most bloated of them all.
[3] CIA has repeatedly failed to predict any major world-wide events such as the impending chaos of the Middle East; and, instead has forced the USA to concentrate major assets on a non-existing “War On Terror”.
[4] In a world where cyber-attacks have become the major threat, do we really need a civilian agency that has not been tasked to develop the electronic capabilities that the NSA has already implemented and utilized in an overzealous fashion?
[5] Do we need the CIA to run covert operations using Special Forces units seconded to the agency when in fact the proper purview of the SOF belongs to the Military Command C4 structure and not Special Operation Low Intensity Conflict –SOLIC OFFICE IN THE CIA.
You get my drift by now…
With the advent of yet another civilian agency after 9/11-DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE--- either the CIA has to be abolished or the DNI has to go. Certainly, Americans really don’t need two redundant civilian intelligence agencies. Most of our Presidents who had served in the military, namely Gen. Eisenhower, Jimmy Carter [Naval Submarine], and Nixon [Army] understood that the CIA was a complete travesty of efficiency, accountability and utility.
Ike reprimanded Allen Dulles, the DCI warning him to cease and desist CIA activities lest they continue to leave a “LEGACY OF ASHES”. Carter under the guidance of Adm. Stanfield Turner, literally fired 4000 CIA operatives and re-assigned State Dept Political Officers and Military Intel officers to take over the CIA functions. Nixon never trusted the CIA and had control points of selected individuals inserted in the agency to monitor the CIA activities.
It’s time to heed the warnings of Senator Mark Udall of Colorado as well as his distinguished family members who have insisted for over 40 years that the CIA activities have ‘been illegal’ and that ‘John Brennan’ should be fired’ and I will add, indicted.
The present CIA really does not exist as it was originally constituted some sixty years ago. It is no longer staffed by dedicated Americans who want to serve the country. Instead we have close to 60-80% of the CIA functions out-sourced to the Military-Industrial complex with ‘consultants’ who can be ‘hired and fired’ at will.
It’s time for America to insist that the CIA be abolished, or at least reorganized under the auspices of a president who was not trained and nurtured by the CIA like Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr and Obama.
If we don’t elect those who are beholden to the CIA , then Americans might have a chance to develop a more effective, accountable intelligence agency that serves the citizens and the republic of the USA rather than the monetary interests of Booz Allen, L3, SAIC, Mitre, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon etc. Please understand that if Hillary or Jeb are elected, we will still have the same old problems. Please vet out our Presidential candidates first then we can deal with the next iteration of a new CIA…. If there is to be one.
And Congress! Grow some! Do some work for your bloated salaries! You are supposed to represent the people but you have done nothing to contain this cancer! The CIA is wasting valuable resources (as in our tax dollars) that could be going toward building our country’s economic future for the information age.
Dr. Pieczenik, yes, think about that, the last four presidents in succession have been CIA... what? Groomed, asset, flunky?
ReplyDeleteBut it ain't good whatever it is.
You want a better government... don't put a CIA asset into the White House.
A governor who hasn't been polluted by Washington.
Former NSA heads who turn around and sell their services.
Even attempt to patent technical/software gleaned from their access to secret government technology.
And we were supposed to love the guy.
It is shameful.
ReplyDeleteBrennan at least confessed when he was caught, and in this business that's progress.
ReplyDeleteThe real villian is Hayden, the nerdy little turd who was in charge when all this shit was happening, lied to Congress, and continues to lie about every aspect of what he did.
As for all these matters about reforming the intl community or dismantling CIA....
These ideas have been kicked around and studied over and over again.
The way I look at it is like this....
If you're going to set up a covert action force then you have to have it in the same agency as the bureau creating the intelligence acted on. You can't have CIA collecting the intl and then hand it off to another agency for action. So the agency with the officers working out of the embassies under diplomatic cover has to be the same agency chosing what to do with the intl in the field....and that means having covert action and intl under the same roof.
Unfortunately the uniformed services are not suited to do secret intelligence gathering. The used to do that a little prior to WWII, but the culture of the military just isn't suited to the diverse and seedy world of spying. Military officers can't be put into those seedy and slimy positions or encouraged to delve into these criminal worlds. It's against their culture.
So that's how we wind up with CIA with all these covert action and paramilitary duties.
CIA has always been a diverse organization. There are white hats and black hats there...Democrats, Republicans, socialists, fascists, etc...
But the people who rise in the organization are those who perform what the bulk of the rest of the security community wants...and that means most Presidents, the uniformed services, etc...
In the Cold War that meant not permitting any country anywhere to be neutral or non-aligned. That meant genocide against scores of societies which didn't two the line.
Today it means supporting the bureaucratic missions which the Congress and President desire based on media-driven, paranoid, ratings obcessed, Jack Bauer fictional narratives which most Americans find enthralling and entertaining....
The bureaus do what they do because the public likes the drama of terrorism.
By the early 1960s the people who had risen to the top in CIA reflected what Eisenhower, Allen Dulles, and the military wanted...and that was to not tolerate any non-aligned governments anywhere.
DeleteEisenhower later regretted what was done, but it was HIS orders which led to every single thing CIA did during his era. The Iran coup plan was rejected by Truman, but then Eisenhower came in and revived it!
Then Eisenhower was behind the coup in Guatamala, and on and on...
Eisenhower was behind the coup attempts against Sukarno...
So if he didn't like what he created then he should look in the mirror.
But the people willing to do these genocide operations became the leadership, and then when Kennedy wanted to change to allow neutral or non-aligned governments and stop the genocides...
The leadership of CIA killed him.
And the officers who did it were these...
Allen Dulles
William Harvey
Mr. Cabell
Cord Meyer
James Angleton
Tracy Barns
David Phillips
David Morales
The public loves the theater of terrorism
DeleteIt's like living in a world where you are actually living the stress and fun of watching a horror movie.
You see other people being killed, and you want to believe that you won't be killed...
That's where CIA, etc. comes in...
Their role is to make the public feel safe. To make them feel that only other people will be killed for their entertainment...
But they themselves won't really be killed because we have CIA and people like them to keep us safe.
We can enjoy watching the Boston bombings, and other dramas in Iraq, etc...
But it won't really hurt us, the individuals watching all this.
We have our own colosium...the "Flavian Ampitheater" as it was known in Rome.
DeleteWe don't throw convicts or slaves into the theater to be killed and then feel good because it's not us...
But we do enjoy the same thing when it happens on it's own in the real world. We don't contrive it but we enjoy it when it happens.
Am I wrong?
DeleteI believe Kissinger made a similar observation about human nature when he stated "some people just like war" in his book entitled "Diplomacy", maybe for the same aforementioned sick reasons imo, i.e. not worrying about the consequences or thinking there are not going to be any, as if they themselves are insulated from their own evil acts. No man is an island. Will someone plz stop the world, I want to get off now. Never seen the world look more unsettled in my lifetime than now. I mean if you; survive the radiation to board a plane, & the ride on Malaysia air, dodge a missile strike, you might need to convert to the Muslim faith if your hijacked, or have your head cut off, unless the Ebola gets you 1st. What a fucked up world. Hey Raymond, you want to run for President? Cuz as Mit alluded to, you are sounding more & more sane every day.
DeleteMit, good summary. No, you are not wrong in my estimation, but my knowledge is limited to what I can read on the internet, I have no personal knowledge.
DeleteI do the best I can, when my attention is engaged.
Mit, I would suggest the Cold War mentality of not wanting any neutral or non-aligned countries is alive and well. That was what Libya, Syria, and, now, Ukraine, is all about.
Ukraine is an economic basket case, who wants to be responsible for that? Supposed geopolitical considerations and the leaderships' egos are what is driving this foreign policy.
Mit, your take on Eisenhower is a good reminder.
I like Ike and Ike did many good things in his presidency, but you are right about him regarding the overthrow of governments.
But at least he did openly & publicly warn Americans of the dangers of the Military-Industrial Complex.
In some respects, Eisenhower was always a soldier taking orders. I suspect he knew what the power that be wanted during his era.
That only upon imminent retirement did he choose to warn Americans of the dangers of run-away militarism speaks to a common occurrence.
How many people in the know waited until retirement to speak out?
Would it be better had they come forward earlier?
Yes, but it takes courage to put your "meal ticket" at risk.
My suspicion is that if the public could be educated of the dangers involved, and then that public knowledge translated into political opinion able to muster political action & support, more individuals would step-out and voice their knowledge of "bad actions" at cross-purposes with a democratic, constitutional republic.
I go back to the necessity electing a governor to the presidency. Preferably, a mid-western or western governor, independent of Washington D. C.'s power elite.
Potentially, he or she could sustain a populist political platform against the Washington elite.
I think Americans are now, more than ever, open to a populist approach and would support a president, working with a Congress elected in the same political wave that elected a populist president.
I know populism is subject to demagoguery, but it is also America's best chance to pull out of the current political trajectory, which is leading to an authoritarian, fascist government, supported by a police state, where "democracy" is just a fig leaf for the powerful running the government... if we aren't already there.
Mit, I mostly agree with your historical analysis of various, past political and geopolitical events.
Why do we mostly disagree on current foreign policy events?
That's what I would like to figure out.
Who do you like: Rand Paul, Mitt Romney or another? I agree that WASHINGTON power structure needs to be broken up. Western states are where to look, problem is the NEO CONS need to be exposed and eliminated from our political system. Romney made a mistake in the last go around by courting them.
DeleteThe neocons are no longer able to gain a majority of Americans to believe them. Just look how pitiful Cheney and his daughter are in their present antics and you can see that no matter how many times John Bolton, et.al. appear on Fox News they are only able to appeal to a small number of true believers. For that matter I believe George W. Bush himself turned his back on them in his second term.
DeleteI wish the parties would draft someone outside of politics to be the President. Maybe someone from science or business. There are a few really responsible business owners out there who pay their employees well and put nationalism before profits...
The people who lost control of Food Basket are like that, as were the owners of that fleece company in Boston who paid their employees even when their building burned down....
Someone who's been a Judge maybe like Andrew Napalitano perhaps....
But if we have to choose a politician then let's choose someone who had a successful career in something before going into politics. At least Rand Paul was an MD, and that counts for something. What's needed is someone with a real small government philosophy, not just for the social programs but for the police state as well. Someone like Rand Paul with a limited government view is necessary at this point, however much I am concerned that they will pull back too much on regulation of commerce and businessmen.
To me the government should regulate and license people in business and commerce, and we should all be skeptical of anyone in business and assume that they are going to be dishonest and hustlers...caveat emptor if you will.
Today under the Republicans the business community has turned this tradition around so that we are all supposed to view businessmen as heros.
That's a very new aspect in American culture, and it's dangerous.
Otherwise government should leave individuals the hell alone, and even families alone, and get away from family matters, domestic violence, on and on.....
Small government for individuals, organizations, clubs and families, but corporations and businessmen should be licensed and regulated.
Dr. Pieczenik, yes, at this point I'm favorable to Rand Paul, but he is weak of illegal immigration and amnesty.
DeleteI will not support an amnesty proponent.
But, perhaps, a mid-western or a western governor will arise on the national political scene.
Rand Paul is good on foreign policy, but leaves something to be desired on domestic policy in terms of foreign trade, i.e., outsourcing and off-shoring.
Mit, another good comment.
" The present CIA really does not exist as it was originally constituted some sixty years ago. It is no longer staffed by dedicated Americans who want to serve the country. Instead we have close to 60-80% of the CIA functions out-sourced to the Military-Industrial complex with ‘consultants’ who can be ‘hired and fired’ at will."
ReplyDeleteThe Washington Post
December 22, 1963 - page A11
Harry Truman Writes:
Limit CIA Role To Intelligence
" INDEPENDENCE, MO., Dec. 21 — I think it has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and operations of our Central Intelligence Agency—CIA. At least, I would like to submit here the original reason why I thought it necessary to organize this Agency during my Administration, what I expected it to do and how it was to operate as an arm of the President...
... I decided to set up a special organization charged with the collection of all intelligence reports from every available source, and to have those reports reach me as President without department "treatment" or interpretations.
I wanted and needed the information in its "natural raw" state and in as comprehensive a volume as it was practical for me to make full use of it. But the most important thing about this move was to guard against the chance of intelligence being used to influence or to lead the President into unwise decisions—and I thought it was necessary that the President do his own thinking and evaluating.
... For some time I have been disturbed by the way CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas.
I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations. Some of the complications and embarrassment I think we have experienced are in part attributable to the fact that this quiet intelligence arm of the President has been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue—and a subject for cold war enemy propaganda.
With all the nonsense put out by Communist propaganda about "Yankee imperialism," "exploitive capitalism," "war-mongering," "monopolists," in their name-calling assault on the West, the last thing we needed was for the CIA to be seized upon as something akin to a subverting influence in the affairs of other people....
But there are now some searching questions that need to be answered. I, therefore, would like to see the CIA be restored to its original assignment as the intelligence arm of the President, and that whatever else it can properly perform in that special field—and that its operational duties be terminated or properly used elsewhere.
We have grown up as a nation, respected for our free institutions and for our ability to maintain a free and open society. There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it."
Truman realized the CIA WAS CORRUPT FROM ITS INCEPTION.
THIS ARTICLE RAN ONLY ONCE IN THE AM EDITION. AT THAT TIME THE PM EDITION GENERALLY RAN AN OPED FROM THE AM.
THE CIA SPIKED IT.
"THERE IS NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN."
History for me, is merely recycled corruption.
No one rarely pays the piper for their crimes against the taxpayer.
http://www.maebrussell.com/Prouty/Harry%20Truman's%20CIA%20article.html
http://consortiumnews.com/2013/12/22/trumans-true-warning-on-the-cia/
I wish there were no war on terror but the American public want it.
DeleteSo if all the politicians are going to wage the war on terror then who is going to conduct it?
Military officers can't do espionage, and neither can real diplomats.
The only people who can bribe people, kidnap them, blackmail them, etc. are going to be spies.
So we have to have spies if we are going to obtain secret intelligence, human intelligence that is.
And if we gather human intelligence through illegitimate means, which is the only way, then what are we going to do with it?
It's not going to work to give it to the Marines or the Navy or the Air Force or the Coast Guard or someone....
They wouldn't know the background of how it was obtained, what the depth was, etc.....
And why trust them with any decison as to act or not?
If I were a spy I wound't do all that work just so STRANGERS could make the decisions about what to do next.
That's the way it is.
Yes...let's turn over our potentially actionable intelligence to the Coast Guard. That will be their new mission.
DeleteMit, one caveat, the president with input from civilian and intelligence advisers should make the decisions on what actions should be taken.
DeleteYou shouldn't have the intelligence branch collect intelligence and be also judge, jury, and executioner.
That's the presidents burden.
Checks & balances mean division of work and authority. Yes, it is cumbersome, but as we have seen, unification of action, as in the Homeland Security Department, is where we get a police state.