The public have been so brainwashed by Big Brother’s lies, so that many people won’t believe this article unless they click onto the link wherever they happen to think that what it is alleging is false. Then, they will see the evidence, for themselves, and will recognize that they’ve been fooled about that matter, and those readers will learn something important that they didn’t know before—including that Big Brother is real, and what it actually is, and how it came to be the way it is. This is about reality, the reality behind the screen of lies.
* * *
Today’s Axis (the fascist powers) are the heirs of Hitler’s failed Operation Barbarossa to conquer the Soviet Union. After World War II, America’s CIA, along with Britain’s MI6 and other governmental agencies, plus the Vatican, produced “rat lines” for key Nazis (including their collaborators in other countries) to resettle in U.S., Argentina, and Canada (and in other countries, too, as the CIA-edited and written account at Wikipedia focused upon), and for these ‘former’ Nazis (who actually remained ideologically as nazis or racist fascists, and the CIA knew and welcomed this) to continue working to conquer the Soviet Union. These secret nazis carried out secret assignments not only for their new country’s military and against the Soviet Union, but also domestically against labor unions of all sorts, and against anything that the owners of the largest U.S.-and-allied international corporations wanted to be targeted.
This was and is an officially secret extension of the internationally coordinated farthest far-right, the few people who actually control the international corporations. It consists of the operations on behalf of the Deep State, but the agents who carry out these instructions are only agents; consequently, everything that they know regarding what they are instructed to do is told to them only privately on a need-to-know basis, so that only the members of the Deep State itself are aware of what the broader objectives of any given operation are. For example, the CIA’s operations aren’t part of the Deep State but particular ones of these operations represent the Deep State—the instructions they execute on these operations come from the Deep State; the CIA is an agency for the international Deep State, but not all of what the CIA does represents the Deep State. Not even the U.S. president himself is necessarily aware of what the agents of the Deep State are doing—not even of what the Deep State’s agents who are on the federal payroll are doing.
For example, as soon as Franklin Delano Roosevelt died in 1945, the Deep State (the controlling owners of the largest international corporations) started to take over, and not everything that it was doing was known at the time by the leaders of the official (elected) American government. Even U.S. President Harry S. Truman—though the sign on his desk said “The BUCK STOPS here!” and he meant it—was kept in the dark, and was occasionally deceived, about some things that the OSS (precursor to the CIA) and the CIA were doing. For example, Truman probably didn’t know that in 1948 the CIA perpetrated its first coup and this coup in Thailand established the off-the-books funding of the CIA from the international narcotics traffic, so that the CIA’s actual budget wouldn’t be restricted simply to the on-the-books funding, from U.S. taxpayers. This illegal funding-source has been crucial for many of the CIA’s operations, and makes bribes untraceable.
A subversive right-wing coup, centered in the United States but operating throughout all U.S.-allied countries, thus gradually took over in the formerly anti-Nazi U.S.-allied non-communist countries. This slow coup was internationally coordinated amongst aristocrats (the controllers of international corporations) from all participating countries. But it was internationally led by America’s aristocrats, starting when FDR died.
Some of the major operations of the international Deep State were courageously reported in a rare and classic BBC documentary, in 1992, shown in this video. As it makes clear, these agents of the Deep State considered themselves to be revolutionaries. They were heroes, in their own eyes. Here are two brief excerpts from that video:
8:35-9:00: “As the [Nazi] Germans withdrew, they left secret agents in the countries they had occupied. . . . For the retreating Germans, they were the staunchest elitists. They were selected from the SS and the fascist Black Legions. They were to become the footsoldiers in the next war, about to begin.
10:25-10:55: “Then [OSS second-in-command] Jim Angleton [James Jesus Angleton] appeared in August . He started recruiting fascists, because he said that the best way to control the communists was to hire fascists. One of the most tough ones was Prince Valerio Borghese, who ran what was known as the tenth flotilla. These are the guys that would execute partisans [anti-fascists] and hang them from lamp posts all over Italy.”
So, within just months of FDR’s 12 April 1945 death, the West’s Deep State was already in full start-up mode, to achieve ultimately a fascist victory, not only against the U.S.S.R., but also against Western countries themselves. This is the historical reality, about the West, after WW II.
Angleton’s alleged father, James Hugh Angleton, had allegedly been assigned by OSS chief Bill Donovan to the OSS’s X-2 operation to identify as many secret fascist operatives in Europe as he could; and “By the end of World War II, the X-2 had discovered around 3,000 Axis agents.” The alleged son (Jesus) was now harvesting his alleged father’s crops, who have flowered to what we have today. However, the official U.S. Government record of “Angleton, James H. Jr.” “Age: 28” Date: 4 Dec. 1945” (see page 4 there) indicates that he (Hugh) must have been born around 1917. And yet the official birth date of his alleged son, James Jesus Angleton, was 9 December 1917. The New York Times 7 March 1973 obituary, “James H. Angleton Dead at 84; National Cash Register Officer”, asserts that:
As liaison officer between the O.S.S. and the Fifth Army he assisted the military‐government mission in Italy and captured codes, card files and documents important to American security.
After the war he returned to Italy and worked for the restoration of Italian business and industry and for a stable, democratic government.
He was for many years president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Italy.
Instead of his having been born in 1917, he had actually been born in 1889, which is believable.
So, one can reasonably infer that in 1945, the 56-year-old Hugh Angleton passed along to the 28-year-old Jesus Angleton, his contact list of approximately 3,000 secret operatives of Hitler and of Mussolini in Europe, and that this son (Jesus) proceeded promptly to recruit these secret Nazis and Fascists to work for the OSS. The father could retire rich, while the son went on to grow and harvest his crops for America’s war against Russia (not actually against communism—which was the cover-story).
Jefferson Morley’s trashy ‘biography’ of Jesus, The Ghost, fails even so much as to mention that Jesus’s father had been OSS, just like the son, and had passed his torch along to him, and that the son ran with his father’s torch. To Morley, that torch did not exist, and Jesus’ father was just a successful American businessman who happened to be living in Italy at the time of WW II. One can’t take seriously anything that’s published about such people, except that they recruited Fascists and Nazis into the CIA, and that Jesus continued on as a friend and supporter of Nazis and of pro-Nazis.
This doesn’t necessarily mean (as superficial persons might think) that Jesus was against Israel. Israel itself is Jewish racist-fascist—nazi-Jewish, apartheid and all the rest of what racism and tribalism mean (just a different target for their racism, Palestinians, like Russians were the targets that the CIA hated), and, of course, it is capitalist.
Jesus was out to conquer Russia, and he used nazis to the hilt, for that purpose. That’s the reality, which is fully consistent with all of the little that’s reliably known about him. More is reliably known about his subsequent boss, Allen Dulles, who was nazi through-and-through, and who relied heavily upon Angleton. As David Talbot wrote, in his excellent biography of Allen Dulles, The Devil’s Chessboard (page 29), “If their powerful enemy in the White House [FDR] had survived the war, the Dulles brothers would likely have faced serious criminal charges for their wartime activities.” FDR didn’t want Truman as his V.P., but the party’s big donors were rabid against the person he did want. So, Truman got the nod. And the billionaires got what they wanted, which was someone who was almost as much of a fool for president as his successor, Eisenhower (who handed foreign affairs over to the Dulles brothers), turned out to be.
When the Soviet Union broke up and ended its communism in 1991 and thereafter, their former Warsaw Pact military alliance became gradually absorbed into America’s NATO alliance—and now even a former part of the Soviet federation itself within the former Soviet Union (and which thus is no mere Warsaw Pact ally), Ukraine, is being invited into NATO, and is preparing for admission into the anti-Russia military pact—into the U.S. alliance against Russia—and hopes to conquer Russia totally. The name for the broader U.S. plan here (of which the takeover of Ukraine is only a part) is “Nuclear Primacy”—the U.S. government’s goal is U.S. victory in a nuclear war against Russia, and this goal can be achieved only if the U.S. nuclearly blitz-attacks Russia, and if that blitz-attack eliminates Russia’s retaliatory weapons (sufficiently to meet the U.S. government’s top-secret standard of what would constitute acceptable damage to the U.S. from a Russian retaliatory attack). This is the ultimate strategic plan (and all details of it are prohibited from being made public).
“Nuclear Primacy” replaces the prior meta-strategy, which was called “Mutually Assured Destruction” or “M.A.D.”—the belief that the purpose of nuclear weapons is to prevent a World War III, not to win a WW III. This new meta-strategy starts from the assumption that the number of people killed in the U.S. and allied countries by a counter-attack from Russia responding to a sudden and unannounced blitz nuclear invasion of Russia, by the U.S. and its allies, will be worth that (currently secret) cost.
Some experts say that since even the proponents of “Nuclear Primacy” have ignored instead of discussed nuclear winter, the only reason for the continuation of the ‘Cold War’ (the potential for an intentional nuclear war between America and Russia) after the end of the Soviet Union and of its Warsaw Pact and of its communism, is in order to advance the stock-values of Lockheed Martin, Boeing, SAIC, and the other international corporations whose sole main sources of income are the U.S. government and its allied governments. These government-dependent corporations have taken over the government, just like U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower publicly warned the American people against at the very end of his two terms of office, at a time when the process was, by then, already almost complete, and he himself had actually been the person who had done the most that anyone had yet done to advance the military-industrial complex. His famous “military-industrial complex” speech (and here is its broader context) urged future presidents to try to undo what he himself had actually already set inevitably into motion in America. It was as if he was warning to close the barn door so that the horse won’t get out, but the horse had already been stolen and was no longer even subject to this person’s control. Sales of weapons that American corporations market to the American government, and to its allied governments, thus came to wag the tail of America’s future ‘democracy’; nobody any longer could stop this process from being completed.
Now that the ‘anti-Islamic-terrorist’ excuses for selling and buying their weapons and services are declining, the focus is, yet again, increasingly against Russia and its allies, in order that the owners of those corporations (the category of corporations that depend the most upon their government) will continue to grow in wealth, and not to lose value of their investments. As the anti-Israel writer Philip Giraldi said accurately (though I think he misunderstands how the Deep State, of which he used to be an operative, actually functions), “Defense contractors need a foe to justify their existence while congressmen need the contractors to fund their campaigns.” He interprets the corruption in a tribal way, rather than as corruption itself and of any type, as being the reason why the United States continues to try to achieve ‘Nuclear Primacy’. But that explanation would not explain why nuclear winter is not being discussed by the proponents of ‘Nuclear Primacy.’
None of the publicly available estimates, behind the ’Nuclear Primacy’ meta-strategy, even discusses nuclear winter, which physicists say would follow such a nuclear war between U.S. and Russia, and would virtually eliminate agriculture and produce mass-starvation throughout the entire world, including in any ‘victor’ country. It threatens all tribes. The published studies regarding the possibility of “nuclear winter” all concern the likely effect of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan, or other and even lesser pairings. Whether or not the U.S. government has ever commissioned a study of what the likely effects of a nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia would be, is not publicly known. Possibly, this subject has been examined but the findings are not disclosed; but, also possibly, the U.S. government does not want such a study to be done, at all, so that no one will know what the findings might turn out to be. The latter possibility might, for example, be the case if America’s weapons manufacturing and marketing firms control the U.S. government. If constant increases in their sales is the objective that drives the U.S. government, then there would be sound reason for the U.S. government to prevent or at least suppress any such analysis of the global effects, inasmuch as its findings could crash those corporations’ stock-values, and the billionaires who control those firms and the U.S. government, might suffer enormous losses. This assumes that the U.S. government represents those owners and not the public. But in any case: marketing weapons that are suitable only for traditional, non-nuclear, wars, such as against regular jihadists, has apparently run its course and produced all of the sales-growth that that business-plan is likely to achieve; and, therefore, as has been the case since at least the time of the Obama administration, the U.S. is actively gearing up for an invasion of Russia. The U.S. government is behaving as if America’s weapons-producers own it. The weapons-producers (that is, the owners of the weapons-producers) seem to be in control of the U.S. government.
Whereas Giraldi and most other writers against U.S. imperialism—against development of control over the entire world by U.S. billionaires—allege that the origin of this imperialism is “Jews” (and specifically the Jews who joined together under the banner of “neoconservatism” after 1960), insufficient public attention has been devoted to the possibility that an even more crucial role in the Middle Eastern portion of the U.S. government’s plan is being played by the world’s wealthiest family, the royal Saud family of Saudi Arabia, who have the same obsession to conquer Iran that Israel’s government does. Israel’s powerful lobby in the United States is pressing the same things that the Saud family do; each of the two (Israel and the Sauds) pushes the invade-Iran theme, and each is at least accepting of all the rest of the other’s foreign policies; but, whereas lobbyists for Israel are viewed somewhat sympathetically by the American public, no lobbyists for Muslims have anything like the same level of acceptance by the U.S. public.
For a U.S. senator or representative to be championing Israel is accepted by the American public far more than is for that same person to be championing the Saud family, who own Saudi Arabia, or to be championing any of the 7 royal families who own UAE, etc. (Kuwait, Qatar, or even non-Arab governments, such as Pakistan). Whereas the Gulf Cooperation Council of fundamentalist-Sunni Arab kings constitute, by far, the lion’s share of foreign buyers of U.S.-made weaponry, Israel not only doesn’t have such enormous financial resources, but it even receives from U.S. taxpayers $3.8 billion in U.S. donations to Israel’s government, each and every year, in order for Israel to be able to afford to buy from U.S. makers the weapons that it does buy. In contrast to Israel’s relative pauper-status there, U.S. President Donald Trump personally sold to the Saud family $350 billion of U.S. weapons shortly after becoming president, and increased that to $400 billion soon afterwards. His sale, to the Sauds, of U.S. weaponry, is overwhelmingly the largest military sale in all of world history. It is Trump’s major achievement thus far in his presidency. (Trump can meet privately with King Saud, and with Netanyahu, but the Deep State calls him a ‘traitor’ for meeting privately with Putin. The Deep State hates Putin.)
Furthermore, the people who would control Syria, if the U.S.-Saudi-Israeli war were to win and replace Bashar al-Assad’s secular, non-sectarian, government, there, would be the Saud family—not Israel, and not the U.S. The American government is fighting in Syria for the Sauds to take over that country, an ally both of Russia and of Iran. Israel is part of that alliance—the alliance for the Sauds. America’s proxy boots-on-the-ground in Syria have been trained and led mainly by Al Qaeda there. That has a long history going back even to before Al Qaeda existed—1949. Occasionally, ISIS in Syria has also received American assistance in order to advance “regime-change” there. Sometimes, U.S.-backed ‘rebels’ in Syria have quit because U.S. forces were secretly transferring to ISIS weapons that the U.S. had originally supplied to less-fundamentalist groups.
Moreover, the Saud family have been (and perhaps still are) the chief funders of Al Qaeda, and maybe even of its spin-off organization, ISIS. 9/11 did great things for the military-contracting firms, the companies whose biggest foreign market is the Saud family. They’re on the same team. Though Israel has provided crucial assistance to both Al Qaeda and ISIS on some occasions, there is no publicly available evidence that Israel has been funding either group. But Israel provides, as its contribution, a huge portion of the team’s lobbying.
In addition: the financial bag-man for Al Qaeda up to the time of 9/11, the person who privately travelled to pick up each of the million-dollar-plus cash donations to Al Qaeda, specifically named Saudi Princes Bandar, Turki, Waleed, and Salman, among those donors, and he said that no Saudi Prince who lacks the endorsement of Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabist clergy can be considered by the Saud family to appoint as the next King, and that the Wahhabist clergy requested and received from Osama bin Laden a letter with bin Laden’s recommendations before they advised the Saud family upon that matter (whom to select as the next King).
As the major historian of contemporary geopolitics, Michel Chossudovsky, documented in an article, “Secret Meeting on the Privatization of Nuclear War Held on Hiroshima Day 2003: Behind closed doors at Strategic Command Headquarters”:
On August 6, 2003, on Hiroshima Day, commemorating when the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima (August 6 1945), a secret meeting was held behind closed doors at Strategic Command Headquarters at the Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska. Senior executives from the nuclear industry and the military industrial complex were in attendance. This mingling of defense contractors, scientists and policy-makers was not intended to commemorate Hiroshima.
The United States Government was already preparing for the time when the then-raging U.S. military buildup in order to deal with terrorism would need to be supplanted with a return to the major-power, strategic nuclear, weaponry, which could carry U.S. weapons-manufacturers back to the good old days of unlimited ‘defense’ spending, and unlimited war-profits to these firms. Dr. Chossudovsky continued:
The Privatization of Nuclear War: US Military Contractors Set the Stage
The post 9/11 nuclear weapons doctrine was in the making, with America’s major defense contractors directly involved in the decision-making process.
The Hiroshima Day 2003 meetings had set the stage for the “privatization of nuclear war.” Corporations not only reap multibillion-dollar profits from the production of nuclear bombs, they also have a direct voice in setting the agenda regarding the use and deployment of nuclear weapons.
The nuclear weapons industry, which includes the production of nuclear devices as well as the missile delivery systems, etc., is controlled by a handful of defense contractors with Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and Boeing in the lead.
Unlike regular corporations, whose markets are either consumers, or else other firms, the markets that these firms sell to are mainly the U.S. government (the military part of it), and the foreign governments that are allied to it—the biggest of those foreign buyers being the Saud family itself (the owners of the government of Saudi Arabia). So, this is a very exclusive team, of billionaires (trillionaires in the case of the Sauds), and of their agents throughout the world.
These are weapons-systems that cost in the billions of dollars, rather than in the millions of dollars. America’s generals and national-‘security’ advisors and other individuals who take part in the U.S. government’s planning and weapons-purchases, rotate between official government posts and international corporate boards; and, basically, as professionals in their line of work, they play both sides of that revolving door (between the government and ‘the private sector’) so as to maximize their own future likely income streams. They are not peace-planners. That’s not really what they get paid to do—avoid weapons-buildups and invasions. The people who get paid to do the peace-job don’t have nearly as much to sell, and they’ve got far fewer and poorer buyers for their services (maybe the public?). This is the reality of ‘the free market.’ Another word for it is: “corruption.” Whenever and wherever wealth is extremely concentrated in a few, corruption reigns, the public does not. For a country to have vast inequality of wealth is to have vast corruption, and to be ruled by it.
The CIA-controlled Wikipedia article on “Nuclear Winter” is written to deceive about the subject; and, therefore, for example, it opens one of its sections with a blatantly propagandistic title and introduction:
Soviet exploitation 
See also: Soviet influence on the peace movement § Claims of wider Soviet influence
In an interview in 2000 with Mikhail Gorbachev (the leader of the Soviet Union from 1985–91), the following statement was posed to him: “In the 1980s, you warned about the unprecedented dangers of nuclear weapons and took very daring steps to reverse the arms race”, with Gorbachev replying “Models made by Russian and American scientists showed that a nuclear war would result in a nuclear winter that would be extremely destructive to all life on Earth; the knowledge of that was a great stimulus to us, to people of honor and morality, to act in that situation.”
However, a 1984 US Interagency Intelligence Assessment expresses a far more skeptical and cautious approach, stating that as the hypothesis is not scientifically convincing.
Though the Wiki article discusses several studies that had been done in the 1980s modeling the consequences of an India-Pakistan nuclear war and comparably small ones, it mentions only dismissively the far-more-recent and inclusive study:
In a 2012 “Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists” feature, Robock and Toon, who had routinely mixed their disarmament advocacy into the conclusions of their “nuclear winter” papers, argue in the political realm that the hypothetical effects of nuclear winter necessitates that the doctrine they assume is active in Russia and US, “mutually assured destruction” (MAD) should instead be replaced with their own “self-assured destruction” (SAD) concept,.
The propaganda is strictly by Wikipedia there, not at all by Robock and Toon, whose article does not argue to replace “MAD” with “SAD” nor with anything at all, but instead documents and affirms M.A.D.—yes, Wikipedia outright lies, when it must—and their article summarizes studies published between 1980 and 2010, none of which modeled a U.S.-Russia war, but all of which were consistent with the authors’ conclusion; namely, that even those, much smaller, wars, would make things vastly worse for both sides (both sides would enormously lose) and would also produce mass-starvation in broader areas of the planet. Then, the article—which, as noted, was current as of 2012 (not just as-of those earlier periods)—summarily stated, as follows, all work that had been done on the subject, up till that time (and not since supplanted):
The new models show that a full-scale nuclear conflict, in which 150 million tons of smoke are lofted into the upper atmosphere [the minimum that a U.S.-Russia war would do], would drastically reduce precipitation by 45 percent on a global average, while temperatures would fall for several years by 7 to 8 degrees Celsius [13 degrees Fahrenheit] on average and would remain depressed by 4 degrees Celsius after a decade (Robock et al., 2007a). Humans have not experienced temperatures this low since the last ice age (Figure 2). In important grain-growing regions of the northern mid-latitudes [including both U.S. and Russia, as well as most of Europe], precipitation would decline by up to 90 percent, and temperatures would fall below freezing and remain there for one or more years.
The number of weapons needed to initiate these climate changes falls within the range of arsenals planned for the coming decade (Toon et al., 2008). For instance, the use of 4,000 weapons (the rough total for US and Russian arsenals in 2017 under New START), each with a yield of 100 kilotons (a typical yield for submarine weapons, but at the low end for most nuclear weapons), against urban or industrial targets would produce about 180 million tons of soot [30 million higher than that 150 million estimate]. A single US submarine carrying 144 weapons of 100-kiloton yield could produce 23 million tons of smoke if these weapons were used on densely populated Chinese cities.
The effects of the nuclear contamination itself are in addition to that estimation of the smoke-damages.
The U.S. weapons-manufacturers and their agents might not want the public to know this (and so Wikipedia lies about it), but not only would both sides lose from a U.S.-Russia nuclear war, but the entire planet would lose—and drastically. The cigarette manufacturers long hid the harms of their business, but today’s privatized weapons-manufacturing firms dwarf the corruption and harm that the tobacco industry perpetrated. The liars get well-paid, but the truth is far grimmer, and far deadlier—especially in this matter.
Unlike the CIA-Wikipedia fictionalized version, M.A.D. wasn’t “Soviet exploitation”—it was instead the reality recognized by both sides, and is the reality even today, despite what the U.S. weapons-manufacturers and their enormous sales-forces have been deceiving their publics to believe since 2006.
Consequently, I infer, from the evidence, that the leaders, of the operation to conquer Russia, are the controlling owners of America’s large ‘defense’ contractors, and of those individuals’ largest non-U.S. customer, the Saud family. The Sauds’ biggest competitors in the international-energy markets (which are their own main markets) are: Russia and Iran. Those same two countries are also the main enemies that are targeted by the U.S. alliance.
It makes sense for the Sauds to be the #1 foreign buyers of American-made weapons. Not only do they get the weapons, but they get control over the U.S. government, which, in turn, determines which nations will be America’s ‘enemies’ (the ‘military-industrial complex’s targets), and which nations will be America’s ‘allies’ (the ‘military-industrial complex’s markets). The Sauds buy their allies wisely. Their business-plan includes, as the most important ally, America’s aristocracy; and (as a crucial ally to add greatly to the impact of America’s aristocracy, supplementing them to win the U.S. policies the Sauds need) Israel’s aristocracy. The combination of those two control-levers over the U.S. government is powerful. Perhaps in the sudden global cooling from nuclear winter, the Sauds’ region will even become one of the world’s greenest and most fruitful. If anyone still exists then, at all.
Where does the EU, and where does the anti-Russia NATO alliance, fit into this reality? Some of Europe’s aristocrats are benefiting from alliance with the U.S., but others are not. And, of course, America’s aristocrats benefit enormously from having their support—i.e., from buying their support, bribing them in the legal ways. However, Europe’s aristocratic nazis weren’t supposed to have been the winners of WW II. So: nazi Europeans are Europe’s enemies, not its friends—just as nazi Americans aren’t friends but instead enemies to the American people. That hasn’t changed, and can’t change.
Only Europeans can decide what to do regarding nazi Europeans. And only Americans can decide what to do regarding nazi Americans. (One idea might be to refuse to vote for nazis, but, under existing circumstances, how would that even be possible?) Without constant deceit, this situation couldn’t exist anywhere. And if people are constantly deceived, they are powerless. Deceit is the chief weapon of Operation Barbarossa II, the American aristocracy’s war, not the German aristocracy’s war (which was more overtly physical—military—and was only secondarily based upon deceiving the public).
When the Sauds became America’s allies in 1945 via the secret “Quincy Pact” between FDR and Saud, FDR probably expected that it would move Saudi Arabia gradually toward democracy. What instead happened is that the Saud family and the losers of Operation Barbarossa became carried forward toward ultimate victory over the West, by an alliance between the Saudi and the American aristocracies. The Sauds and America’s aristocrats won; FDR and his democratic legacy and the American people ourselves, lost. The subterranean fascist forces turned out to be far more potent than FDR imagined. Perhaps the OSS had been deceiving him.
Incidentally, any secret treaty (including the Quincy Pact) is unconstitutional. None of this happened democratically. It was a slow coup. That’s what created today’s alliances, and today’s targets.
Thus, though Hitler lost, his cause (except for his anti-Jewish fixation) has been moving slowly and methodically toward victory, and it’s being led by the aristocracies of the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.
To understand the Deep State, its basic ideological principles need to be recognized. Under Hitler, hereditary rights and obligations were publicly recognized; and democracy, the rule over a land by the residents on that land, was publicly condemned. Not only the hereditary principle, but the imperialistic principle, the right of foreign conquest, was publicly honored. The two principles go naturally together. The main reason why the Sauds and the other (all of them fundamentalist Sunnis) Arab kings, want to conquer Iran, is that Shia Islam denies the right of hereditary rule. (This is also why in Syria, Bashar al-Assad claims no hereditary right to rule; if he were to do otherwise, he’d violate Shia Islam and he would be rejected by Iran.) The main reason why America’s aristocracy wants to conquer Russia (other than the latter’s natural-resources wealth, which has always been a reason) is that Vladimir Putin insists that only the residents in a land should possess sovereignty there, but the U.S. and British aristocracies insist upon the right to conquer foreign lands. As an ideology, Nazism totally affirms both the hereditary principle, and the imperialist principle. This is what the U.S.-Saudi alliance likewise affirms. And that is why, for example, the CIA has always favored monarchies and opposed democracies (or at least authentic ones, which the U.S. aristocracy cannot control).
* * *
So, what is Big Brother? It is the billionaires who own controlling interests in these companies. And that is why the most-respected of all institutions, in the United States (and by a substantial margin above any other) is the military. That is Big Brother in the real world.
Big Brother consists of a highly networked few extremely wealthy individuals, the majority of whom cannot be individually identified, because the ownership of these corporations is hidden behind layers of “street name accounts” and especially offshore accounts, but all being private financial entities whose profits are derived from sales to governments, instead of from sales to consumers, or to businesses whose customers are consumers. These firms function together like a highly networked cartel of secret arsonists who also make and sell the firefighting equipment. They thus secretly produce the market for their services. That’s the best type of business to be in. But it is also the most harmful type of business to be in. And they own that business—and news media and many other types of businesses that likewise are essential to the success of their core business, the one that accounts for the lion’s share of their real profits, the sales to governments.
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.