John Chuckman
EXPANSION OF A COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN PATRIOT RISING
“Strzok Farce Shows Obstacles to Opening TWA 800 Case”
Well said.
But I'm afraid the patterns discussed here are far more common than just the cases of TWA Flight 800 and Mr. Strzok's recent, controversial activity.
As far as Strzok goes, just the fact that he was both an FBI agent and worked for CIA should be enough to impugn all credibility, but we really don’t see that kind of appropriate cynicism in Washington concerning the security services.
I read a piece recently that discussed why 9/11 happened, given all the activity of American security services. And someone was quoted as saying it had to do with “the wall,” and by “the wall,” he meant the old strict separation between the work of CIA and that of FBI. I just laughed at that, it’s such nonsense.
The anecdote though clearly highlights how the security services are regarded in official Washington. It is with a very illusory sense of things. Of course, the truth of 9/11 is that it is one more completely unexplained event, not unlike Flight 800.
If you believe that the gang in the planes actually caused the entire event, then I suppose you might say what the person said in the article, but then you already start from a false premise.
The fundamental problem has to do with America’s being an imperial power, a huge and hugely corrupt political power, and in that role, it engages in many dark and criminal behaviors throughout the world, and, by the way, it does so under whichever of the two parties is in power.
They both, Democrats and Republicans, loyally serve the empire and its willing helpers at the CIA and the Pentagon. They might argue about school prayer or abortion rights or flag-burning Amendments to the Constitution, but when it comes to launching wars and coups and assassinations, they are all “on side.”
And that goes for the various dirty tricks played by the security services, too, which are major parts of their work. It’s only when one of the parties feels it has been targeted that they climb up on their high horse.
The problem in America that gives us matters such as the Flight 800 dishonest investigation or the work of a man like Strzok, is not a matter of a political party, such as the Democrats, or of a newspaper, such as The New York Times.
The workings of imperial America involve a vast number of dark acts and, of course, a compliant press to keep them covered up. “Compliant” isn’t even the right word because the major high-end newspapers in the United States are parts of large corporate entities which operate hand-in-glove with government.
Newspapers and broadcasters are highly dependent on government, for everything from approvals for mergers and acquisitions on their business side to leaks and access for interviews on the news side.
And then there’s the press’s dependence on advertising revenue, which doesn’t tend to come from critics or humanitarians or intellectuals, but from other profit-seeking corporations whom they cannot afford to offend.
The New York Times, for example, has been quite accurately described as the official house organ for the American power establishment.
If you’ve ever worked for a corporation and received their in-house publication for employees, you know it is not the place where you will read of any controversies, secrets, or advocacy for anything beyond the company’s continuing to function profitably.
Now, a newspaper must behave a little differently than a corporate house organ, or it would quickly lose all credibility and trust, but its “house organ” status definitely defines limits and boundaries, activities which are permitted and others which are not. It doesn’t tell its reading public about this unwritten contract that it has with government and corporate interests, but it is there, and critical readers will understand its outlines over time.
In the case of The New York Times, there is a very long list of past actions which should have created greater skepticism about it, but readers like their fat newspaper each day full of everything from travel stories to business news, and many are loath to give it up on concerns for journalistic principles. And on all those kinds of things, papers like The Times do a very good job, a fact which continuously rubs off on their credibility and popularity.
The Times has been caught countless times doing questionable things, but it maintains its position, threatened seriously only by changing technology and changing advertising patterns. Who knows, it may even receive hidden subsidies here and there from interested parties, such as the CIA, just as we now know Google was helped into this world by the CIA which now benefits greatly from its operations.
The Times has hounded people wrongly accused of crimes – as Richard Jewell in the Atlanta Olympic bombing or government scientist Wen Ho Lee concerning espionage for China - by the FBI, from whom it undoubtedly received a stream of leaks.
It has identified people it was not supposed to identify when it is defending its clan, as in the case of a woman who accused a member of the Kennedy family of rape years ago.
It only recently confirmed what many long thought, that every story about Israel is passed by the official Israeli Censor before publication.
It has been caught with CIA people salted into its staff on more than one occasion, and it has published outright lies or disinformation, which, if it were unlucky to be caught at, it later retracted.
Retraction has been a favorite technique of The Times. It gets to publish something wrong at the time when the information may be critical, and then come back later to retract, when the information may be far less critical. This way it achieves its disinformation or propaganda goal while later giving itself a pat on the back for admitting errors, bolstering its reputation for honest journalism, a reputation in critical matters it just does not deserve.
But The Times has many such games that it plays and does not use any one of them excessively for fear of disturbing readers. It is a constant artful balancing act which must be performed in all “news” about key political matters and absolutely all matters bearing on the operations of America’s armies, security services, and of the empire abroad.
To turn true and frightening events, such as the Strzok matter or the Flight 800 investigation, into mere partisan politics diminishes their import and, in the end, rather serves itself as a kind of "cover up," a cover up of fundamental problems at work in the country.
Power, as Lord Acton said, tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
America, unfortunately, finds itself pretty much in the absolutely corrupt stage of its life-cycle. And no single political party or publication is responsible for that.
