Is the ‘Deep State’ Limited to the Federal Bureaucracy? No, Says Noted Author on the CFR
By Mark Anderson
STOP THE PRESSES News Association Director
The author of “The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline,” says the deep state itself has become concerned to an unprecedented degree that the widespread popularization of the words “deep state” could get out of hand and wake up an uncomfortably large cross section of the U.S. and world population to the reality of a power behind the throne that runs deeper than the government itself.
“The ‘deep state’ is probably the most commonly used phrase for what we used to call ‘the Establishment,’ the ‘Insiders,’ the ‘Global Elite,’ the ‘Powers That Be,’ ” James Perloff told this writer (The TRUTH HOUND / STOP THE PRESSES).
Perloff, a popular writer in alternative media circles, has over the last 30-plus years penned briskly selling books to expose various facets of the deep state. His 1988 book “The Shadows of Power” is considered a foundational work for understanding the Council on Foreign Relations, or CFR, a major deep-state instrument legendary for supplying personnel steeped in the ideology of internationalism and world government for high-level government positions, while helping craft government policy behind the scenes that’s been largely detrimental to the American constitutional republic model of government.
Yet, such shadowy influence is still unknown among most Americans. But in the Trump era, in which the president has been seriously challenging media domination via his bully pulpit and his Twitter account, phrases like “fake news” and “deep state” have more or less become household terms—something that could give the central banking-connected trans-nationalist ruling clique a case of the jitters. Thus, a little damage control is in order.
Enter academic Margaret O’Mara. In the view of this writer, this professor of history at the University of Washington/Seattle was indeed doing damage control when she wrote an Oct. 26, 2019 New York Times op-ed column in which she claims that the deep state is limited to the federal bureaucracy, a.k.a., the civil service and the careerists who’ve worked there for decades while those elected to office come and go.
O’Mara noted, accurately enough, that the money and demands of 19th Century Robber Barons, in the post-Civil War years, corrupted the federal government and infested it with cronyism until a merit system was created on Teddy Roosevelt’s watch. What she failed to mention, however, is that the Morgan, Carnegie and Rockefeller money which helped foster that cronyism didn’t just fade away in terms of its influence; instead, it was shifted to creating the CFR and similar outlets with which to influence the government covertly rather than overtly. Thus, the deep state is more than just the government bureaucracy itself, vast though that bureaucracy may be. And, yes, that bureaucracy includes the CIA and the rest of the intelligence community; yet, the CFR and the CIA are well-connected, as are the CIA and the CFR’s younger sibling, the Trilateral Commission. For instance, this writer / STOP THE PRESSES shook hands with former CIA Director John Deutsch as he entered the 2014 Trilateral Commission meeting in Washington D.C.—a meeting just as “closed-door” or secretive as a CIA meeting itself.
Perloff agreed that O’Mara evidently is trying to reframe the meaning of “deep state,” so as to mask its true dimensions and make it sound like it’s just a sluggish bureaucracy prone to common corruptions and blunders, as opposed to something that involves certain tax-exempt foundations (Carnegie, Rockefeller), organizations like the CFR, Trilateral Commission, the Atlantic Council, the Bilderberg conferences and various other groupings involving people who served in high government posts like President Jimmy Carter (documented Trilateral influence) and Henry Kissinger (equally undeniable CFR and Bilderberg influence).
“And [we] used to have some relative independence from some of the newspapers,” Perloff continued. “Back in 1983 there were 50 corporations controlling media—now it’s down to five.” Asked if he believed the media is part of the deep state, Perloff replied: “The media? Absolutely. You can see it in terms of the media ownership, which is vital for getting people to think what you want them to, to get them to fight wars.”
Of course, Perloff didn’t overlook the sheer irony of the big media—which claims to “speak truth to power” in order to quell corruption, right wrongs and expose the power of the secretive state—actually being a part of the deep state. Perloff, like this writer and others, has taken note over the decades of key media people like Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Barbara Walters, Hedley Donovan (Time Magazine) and longtime Washington Post madame Katherine Graham, among many others, having belonged to the CFR and/or related organizations and in many cases co-mingled and spoke at the events of these tax-exempt institutions with painfully little publicity on their remarks and specific activities.
Summarizing, Perloff noted of the deep state: “Essentially it’s private but as Ferdinand Lundberg [a late author who chronicled the exploits of the “super rich,” including the Rockefellers] said, ‘they’ operate ‘behind the façade of democracy.’ And the deep state is also a Luciferian thing; no doubt in mind about that either. Secret societies—such as the Illuminati—they’re private, but to control the people you must control the government. You’ve got to have people in the state and defense departments to make things happen. There’s also been speculation that there are two CIAs or, more likely, two tiers of it—one, the regular wing, and another whose loyalty is not to America but to the deep state.”
On a more hopeful note about alternative media ultimately triumphing over this colossus of power, Perloff added: “I think ‘they’ underestimated the power of social media to inform people; I think they thought the internet would enable them to spy on us and we’d just shop at Amazon.” Although, he cautioned: “But You Tube recently wiped out 17,000 channels, according to You Tube itself and its new social policies.”