The 1960 Kirk Douglas epic, Spartacus, may soon prove to be more than great entertainment. It may also turn out to be a prophecy of the end of the American Republic.
Throughout the movie, wealthy Romans assume they can buy anything–or anyone. When seeking a favor, Marcus Licinius Crassus (Laurence Oliver) says bluntly: “Name your price.”
Today, “Name your price” has become the password for entry into America’s Intelligence community.
Althugh not portrayed in Spartacus, one of the reasons for the fall of the Roman empire lay in its reliance on foreign mercenaries.
Roman citizens, who had for centuries manned their city’s legions, decided to outsource these hardships and dangers to hired soldiers from Germany and Gaul (now France).
Although Germans and Gauls had proven capable fighters when defending their own countries, they proved highly unrelible as paid mercenaries.
Niccolo Machiavelli, the father of political science, drew heavily on ancient history for his examples of how liberty could best be preserved within a republic.
Fully aware of the Romans’ disastrous experience with mercenaries, Machiavelli believed that a nation’s army should be driven by patriotism, not greed. Speaking of mercenaries, he warned:
“Mercenaries…are useless and dangerous. And if a prince holds on to his state by means of mercenary armies, he will never be stable or secure; for they are disunited, ambitious, without discipline, disloyal; they are brave among friends, among enemies they are cowards.
“They have neither the fear of God nor fidelity to men, and destruction is deferred only so long as the attack is. For in peace one is robbed by them, and in war by the enemy.”
Americans–generally disdainful of history–have blatantly ignored both the examples of history and the counsel of Machiavelli. To their own peril.
Mark Mazzetti, author of the bestselling The Way of the Knife, chronicles how the CIA has been transformed from a primarily fact-finding agency into a terrorist-killing one.
Along with this transformation has come a dangerous dependency on private contractors to supply information that government agents used to dig up for themselves.
America’s defense and intelligence industries, writes Mazzetti, once spread across the country, have relocated to the Washington area.
They want to be close to “the customer”: The National Security Agency, the Pentagon, the CIA and an array of other Intelligence agencies.
The U.S. Navy SEALS raid that killed Osama bin Laden has been the subject of books, documentaries and even an Oscar-nominated movie: “Zero Dark Thirty.”
Almost unknown by comparison is a program the CIA developed with Blackwater, a private security company, to locate and assassinate Islamic terrorists.
“We were building a unilateral, unattributable capability,” Erik Prince, CEO of Blackwater, said in an interview. “If it went bad, we weren’t expecting the [CIA] chief of station, the ambassador or anyone to bail us out.”
But the program never got past the planning stage. Senior CIA officials feared the agency would not be able to permanently hide its own role in the effort.
“The more you outsource an operation,” said a CIA official, “the more deniable it becomes. But you’re also giving up control of the operation. And if that guy screws up, it’s still your fault.”
Increased reliance on “outsourcing” has created a “brain-drain” within the Intelligence community. Jobs with private security companies usually pay 50% more than government jobs.
Many employees at the CIA, NSA and other Intelligence agencies leave government service–and then return to it as private contractors earning far higher salaries.
Many within the Intelligence community fear that too much Intelligence work has been outsourced and the government has effectively lost control of its own information channels.
And, as always with the hiring of mercenaries, there is an even more basic fear: How fully can they be trusted?
“There’s an inevitable tension as to where the contractor’s loyalties lie,” said Jeffrey Smith, a former general counsel for the CIA. “Do they lie with the flag? Or do they lie with the bottom line?”
Yet another concern: How much can Intelligence agencies count on private contractors to effectively screen the people they hire?
Edward Snowden, it should be remembered, was an employee of Booz Allen Hamilton, a consulting/security firm. It was through this company that Snowden gained access to a treasury of NSA secrets.
In March 2007, the Bush administration revealed that it paid 70% of its intelligence budget to private security contractors. That remains the case today–and the Intelligence budget for 2012 was $75.4 billion.
A 2010 investigative series by the Washington Post found that “1,931 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the country.”
Jesus never served as a spy or soldier. But he clearly understood a truth too many officials within the American Intelligence community have forgotten:
“For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
9/11, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, BARACK OBAMA, CBS NEWS, CNN, DEATH TAX, DEMOCRATS, DREAMERS, ESTATE TAX, FACEBOOK, illegal immigration, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, LANGUATE, MEXICO, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NAZIS, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, PATRIOT ACT, PEOPLE OF COLOR, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS, REPUBLICANS, TED CRUZ, TWITTER, WINSTON CHURCHILL
WORDS MATTER
In Business, History, Politics, Self-Help, Social commentary on January 23, 2014 at 10:02 pm“Hitler gave good speeches, too.”
That’s what many Right-wingers say in disparaging the oratorical effectiveness of President Barack Obama.
It’s a slogan that’s misleading on two counts.
First, the people saying it are exactly the type who would have voted for Adolf Hitler. And who vote for his wannabe dictatorial successors such as Joseph McCarthy, Newt Gingrich and Ted Cruz.
Second, the slogan dismisses the power of language–as though words are entirely divorced from action. On the contrary: Words–effectively used–can and usually do lead to action.
A classic example: During the desperate months of the Battle of Britain and the London Blitz, Prime Minister Winston Churchill’s soaring rhetoric armed his fellow Englishmen with the will to resist Nazi aggression.
The truth is, words matter. For good and ill.
Republicans, for example, have long used the power of language to gain and hold power.
Take their use of the phrase, “the death tax.”
The correct term used to be “the estate tax.” And it applied to a relatively small number of citizens who die leaving large estates.
But Republicans, struggling to make the world a better place for the ultra-rich, convinced millions of ignorant voters who don’t have estates that the tax applies to them.
The result: A Republican-introduced bill to the House of Representatives–“The Death Tax Repeal Act of 2013.”
Its goal: “To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the estate and generation-skipping transfer taxes, and for other purposes.”
In short: Relieve the ultra-rich from the unfair burden of paying taxes.
So far, the bill has not been passed.
Or take the 2001 “USA Patriot Act,” which did pass by overwhelming margins after 9/11.
Republicans crammed this full of Orwellian changes they knew Democrats wouldn’t like–such as vastly expanding the powers of the National Security Agency to collect files on American citizens.
So how did they get Democrats to support it?
By calling it the “Patriot Act.” By choosing this title, Republicans easily put Democrats on the defensive.
Anyone who dared oppose the bill would be attacked: “Why don’t you support the Patriot Act? Are you unpatriotic?”
The Left has also made use of language to obtain its political objectives.
Consider the highly popular and Politically Correct term, “People of color.”
This is used by blacks, Hispanics, Asians and American Indians when referring to members of their own particular ethnic group.
On the other hand, members of these groups become enraged if they’re referred to as “colored people.”
But what’s the difference? It’s like saying “jeans of blue” instead of “blue jeans.”
And, in either case, it totally hides what they really mean: “Nonwhites.”
Because to the Politically Correct crowd, “white” is not a color. Which is another way of saying, “Whites aren’t really part of the population.”
And here’s another Leftist-language achievement: “The Dream Act.”
This is a phrase conjured up by those who essentially want to remove all barriers to illegal immigration–at least as it applies to those mostly in Mexico and other Latin and Central American countries.
Its effectiveness lies in the magical word “dream.” As in the Walt Disney Cinderella song: “A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes.”
Thus, the United States now has millions of illegal aliens (the Left prefers to call them “immigrants,” which sounds nicer) who claim to cherish their Mexican heritage and love their native land.
But if they cherish Mexico so much, why have so many of these “Dreamers” fled this “paradise”?
And why is their “dream” to never live in Mexico again?
A final word: At election time, the TV airways are clogged with ads supposedly sponsored by “Citnzens for….”
As in: “Citizens for a Responsible Energy Policy.”
The only “citizens” who can afford to blitz the airways with millions oof dollars’ worth of propaganda are “citizens” who own wealthy corporations.
And when you read/hear words like “responsible,” watch out: Who is defining what as responsible?
When greed-based companies are the ones defining responsible, it means: Whatever creates greater profits for them.
You know, like gutting environmental protection laws and allowing behemoth corporations to pay no taxes.
So keep that in mind the next time you see a slick ad that claims your fellow “citizens” seek your support on an important issue.
Share this: