CIA, JFK Assassination, Israel, Watergate, Cold War Dynamics: Aaron Good on James Jesus Angleton (This is one of the most comprehensive videos I have seen.)

I would transcribe his entire talk because almost everything he says is interesting and important. He also shared his opinion on Parenti and Chomsky, which aligns with something I wrote some time ago. I highly recommend everyone watch the full video.

8:10

“In Angleton’s mind they would say, well, if the Soviets can publicize this, it would make the US look bad, it would be bad for the Cold War, it would be bad for Freedom if they knew these secrets. So, you have to create a bureaucracy to manage these secrets and oversee the keeping of these secrets. Angleton’s Counter Intelligence office and the office of security that he managed as well was the inner sanctum really of all of these secrets. So, he was not only managing this, but he was managing the Israel account, and what all that entails is probably one of the great answers to a lot of questions, perhaps about the deep events of the ’60s and ’70s, about Watergate, about the ’60s assassinations, and so on.|

Muammar Gaddafi in English AI Reconstruction (Let’s Listen to the “Hitler” of My Youth, Whom We Killed)

Muammar Gaddafi: “Then there is the assassination of United States President Kennedy in 1963. We want to know who killed him and why. There was somebody called Lee Harvey Oswald, who was then killed by one Jack Ruby. Why did he kill him? Jack Ruby, an Israeli, killed Lee Harvey Oswald, who killed Kennedy. Why did this Israeli kill Kennedy’s killer? Then Jack Ruby, the killer of the killer of Kennedy, died in mysterious circumstances before he could be tried.

We must open the files. The whole world knows that Kennedy wanted to investigate the Israeli Dimona nuclear reactor. This involves international peace and security and weapons of mass destruction. That is why we should open this file.”

36:02

“Parenti had a different take on the communist countries. He saw anti-communism as being aligned with fascism, and he connected this to history pretty effectively and obviously. The Nazis, the Italian fascists, and the Japanese fascists called their alliance the Anti-Communist International. After World War II, the US essentially created its own version of an anti-communist international, even using a lot of Nazis and ex-Italian fascists. I say "ex" because the Italian fascists weren't in charge anymore, but they were still fascists, as well as Japanese right-wing fascist figures.

It really was that the US kind of took over this fascist apparatus, except they made it covert. Parenti saw that countries like the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China weren't able to create socialist utopias, but it has to be kept in mind that they were operating under a state of siege for the entirety of their existence. From 1917 on, the Western capitalist imperialist countries were trying to crush the Soviet Union. Since it was established, they invaded very early with a coalition of Western powers to try to reverse the outcome of the Russian Revolution, but they were not successful.

China likewise had many difficulties brought on by war and centuries of imperial predations from Britain, the US, France, Germany, and all these countries that joined in suppressing the so-called Boxer Uprising or Rebellion. This was an example, along with the Opium Wars. Even when Japan was attacking China in World War II, it was being fueled by Standard Oil and American corporations, up until the point when Japan attacked French Indochina and then Pearl Harbor, and the West finally broke off relations with them. But China was subjected to enormous predations from Western imperialism, and then Japan picked up the mantle of Western imperialism and was even worse.

These countries, and the Soviet Union, suffered tremendously. The Soviet Union lost about 27 million people defeating the Nazis, and the Chinese lost maybe 10, 20, or 30 million—it's hard to know for sure—fighting Japanese fascists in World War II. These two countries suffered enormously to defeat fascism, only to find, in their perspective, a new fascist enemy encircling them: the new Western US-led anti-communist international, except now it's covert rather than openly saying, "We're the Nazis and we're going to take over everything."

This was how they would have seen it at the time, and Parenti pointed this out. Another thing about Parenti that separates him from the "loyal opposition" of Chomsky and Zinn is that he never accepted these blatant state lies about crimes of state, such as the Kennedy assassination. Parenti has a great chapter in his book, an essay, and he would give it as a talk—you can find recordings of it—called "The JFK Assassination and the Gangster State." I think I've seen it under a couple of different titles. But the point he argues is that the state is an organization that arises in human civilization once there is enough of a division of labor and an economic surplus to create a serious social hierarchy.

This organization, the state, exists to maintain the hierarchy. It organizes things like roads, writing systems, taxation systems, and other infrastructures that allow for culture to develop and for civilization to become more complex. But it also has this gangster role of making sure that nobody challenges the prevailing politico-economic hierarchy. There is always this iron fist to ensure that the people are kept in their place.”

Click to access the-secret-treaty-of-fort-hunt.pdf

The Secret Treaty of Fort Hunt - Did Nazi's Surrender or Merge with US Intel - Carl Oglesby (1990)

The Nazi SS NEVER did surrender, they signed a Secret Treaty called The Secret Treaty of Fort Hunt - The Jesuits with the Cardinals and the Pope secretly made a deal to MERGE the Nazi's Intelligence O

52:17

“When you disobey the king, it's essentially like disobeying God, which isn't just bad politically—it's blasphemy. You must respect and worship the king because he is like the earthly messenger of God. This was the prevailing belief in Europe during the Middle Ages. Eventually, this changed as feudalism was overthrown and capitalism emerged, bringing its own set of justifications.

In Europe, capitalism created these justifications because people were taking over land to raise sheep for the new textile industry, which was the first modern industry of capitalism. This created population pressures because all these people were kicked off the land. That's why the Pilgrims, even the Puritans, came to the US—there was not enough land, and they needed places to expand. It's also why they went to Ireland.

However, they didn't couch this expansion as capitalists kicking people off their land and then stealing other land and murdering people. Instead, they framed it as a "civilizing mission." In the case of the Spanish, they weren't quite capitalist yet; they were primarily plundering and setting up primitive large-scale agricultural enterprises as they colonized the Western Hemisphere. They claimed to be sending people to Christianize the natives, saying they were there to "Christianize these heathens" while also stealing unimaginable sums of gold from the Incas and Aztecs. It was for "the glory of God," or so they said.

To us today, these excuses seem implausible. Britain had its own "civilizing mission" when it was slaughtering people in Ireland and later moving further west to settle in North America. As the US became an independent country, it continued these colonial practices. The US started as a project of English colonialism and was initially a commercial enterprise. The Virginia Company was selling tobacco out of Jamestown, and the Massachusetts Bay Company was another example. These were the early settlements in the US, and they were business enterprises.

The US has some aspects of what we might think of as liberalism or the Enlightenment, such as the statement that "all men are created equal." These are the more beneficial or enlightened parts of our civilization. However, they also had a strong emphasis on the defense of property built into liberalism. John Locke is considered the father of American liberal democracy, which includes beliefs in free speech and representative government. Locke emphasized "life, liberty, and property," but even someone like Thomas Jefferson thought this was too blunt. Instead, Jefferson said "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" to appeal more broadly, as not everyone was a property owner.

This emphasis on property shows that America is fundamentally about property, even though the Founders knew they couldn't say it outright. The US has always prioritized property. As C. Wright Mills wrote in the 1950s, the US doesn't have Confucianism or any other national myth that unifies us and gives us purpose. The one thing that never goes out of style in America is making money. If there's any national hero in America, it's probably not Jesus or any religious figure; it's Horatio Alger and the American dream of making a lot of money.

This materialistic culture affects how Americans think. There's nothing that trumps making money in this society. If someone thinks they're so smart, people might ask, "Well, if you're so smart, why don't you have all the money?" It's an absurdly materialistic culture if you stop and think about it. The fact that some parts of America are so superficially Christian while simultaneously worshipping the "golden calf"—or even someone like Donald Trump with his golden toilets, who is beloved by many American evangelicals—is very strange. It points to how civilizations create their own myths about why they do what they do and why there's a hierarchy with some people in charge while others must follow orders to get by.

These myths share a common purpose: legitimizing hierarchy and top-down domination of society, or oligarchy. Every civilization has been an oligarchy of one kind or another. We've never truly achieved something that could be called democracy or socialism in any pure sense. However, these ideals could still guide us in thinking about what needs to be changed, assuming that a social revolution is not imminent in the United States—and I don't think that it is.”

"life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" = "life, liberty, and property,"