This first comment is from Namelessrange at 4&20 under a post about impeachment:
Nevermind the hypocrisy of members of Congress being OK with the NSA/CIA spying on U.S. citizens, but having issues with the CIA spying on them, but I think a pretty damning case can be made that Obama should be impeached.
The CIA was caught spying(hacking into the computers) of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and the bastard didn’t even bat an eye.
The Executive Branch was spying on the Legislative Branch. The head of the Executive Branch is out of control. There is a massive breakdown in the Separation of Powers, and Obama is culpable.
I file it under “miles to go before I sleep,” as NLR is only beginning to understand the corruption of his country’s government. As JC noted elsewhere, it is very difficult for citizens brought up to love and admire this country and its institutions to accept that they are corrupt. The post below hints at a scab you might not want to scratch, of our black-op boys running the opium trade in Afghanistan. I might also introduce him to a group of men and women in Langley who routinely meet and decide who they are going to murder, and how. They do not kill bad guys. They are the bad guys. They murder good people who get in their way.
Below is an excerpt from the CIA manual on assassinations, which of course does not exist, never did, and once found, was discarded and never used again:
For secret assassination, either simple or chase, the contrived accident is the most effective technique. When successfully implemented, it causes little excitement and is only casually investigated.
The most efficient accident, in simple assassination, is a fall of 75 feet or more onto a hard surface. Elevator shafts, stair wells, unscreened windows and bridges will serve. Bridge falls into water are not reliable. In simple cases a private meeting with the subject may be arranged at a properly-cased location. The act may be executed by sudden, vigorous [excised word] of the ankles, tipping the subject over the edge. If the assassin immediately sets up an outcry, playing the “horrified witness”, no alibi or surreptitious withdrawal is necessary. In chase cases it will usually be necessary to stun or drug the subject before dropping him. Care is required to insure that no wound or condition not attributable to the fall is discernible after death.
Falls into the sea or swiftly flowing rivers may suffice if the subject cannot swim. It will be more reliable if the assassin can arrange to attempt rescue, as he can thus be sure of the subject’s death and at the same time establish a workable alibi.
If the subject’s personal habits make it feasible, alcohol may be used [words excised] to prepare him for a contrived accident of any kind.
Falls before trains or subway cares are usually effective, but require exact timing and can seldom be free from unexpected observation.
Those cut ups! Imagine you are pushed into a river by a murderer, and the last thing you see before dying is the killer swimming toward you, laughing, saying “I am here to rescue you!” as he clubs you the final blow or pushes your head under water to hold you down and finish the job. It’s a coffee break laugh at Langley.
These are our people, they do this for a living. They are not out of control. This is how they keep control. If they confined themselves to wiretapping now and then, they’d be less a bother to democratic governance. But people who work in Washington and who have any power at all know about the underbelly of American government, the power of assassination, intimidation, blackmail. This “out of control” executive, like all before him since 1963, works with gun at his head. We live in pathocracy.
This, below, from Rob Kailey:
As per norm, [Mark] teases the reader to the appropriate conclusion (he wants) when in fact he probably just ought to flat out state it. But that would require being overtly logical, which for some reason I will never understand Mark often seems to think abhorrent, or low minded.
This comment, which I found fascinating, serves more to highlight differences in individual mindsets than any defects in character or writing style for either of us. Rob wants me to merely say what I am trying to say without being coy. But my fingers don’t work like that. I guess I’d never be able to write an assassination manual.