COUP: Under cover of #muslimban, Bannon throws top general and spy off the National Security Council and installs himself in their stead

[anon61221983]

I know. I wonder what changes were made, if at all.

[anon61221983]

@enso

El Jefe

[anon61221983]

Not too far from Bin Laden’s stated aims, actually.

[Enkita]

@anon73430903

I didn’t say it was desirable, i just suggested it as a possibility.

I wasn’t criticising your post, just observing that if one man can face down a military coup, it could happen again.

[Enkita]

@anon67050589

That seems a little…suspicious. That whole section does not give specifics where it would be normal to do so (actual dates or title) but makes a point of playing up his bona fides to justify him being on the Security Council now.

I believe the Royal Navy has put its officer records on line. Has the USN not done the same?

[ChickieD]

I like Tangerini Mussolini

[anon61221983]

Sure, but I don’t think historians of the Nazis or Holocaust agree on that point, and which is the most believable reality. Constructionists vs. functionalists view of those events rests on this very issue of intent vs. stumbling into things. There are many possible explanations for the dissonance which doesn’t preclude them believing in the mission, and I think taking either over the other as the gospel would miss some key elements of why that dissonance existed in the first place. This gets back to the argument Arendt made about Nazi germany, the banality of evil, that it comes from the basic level of dehumanization of people distant from people taking actions that can sometimes be found in bureaucratic societies.

None the less, at the end of it all, whether they believed in it or not, the result was the same, which was mass murder and attempted genocide. We should believe them, because of the actions they took, whatever the reservations or dissonances behind the scenes might have been.

[anon61221983]

@Enkita

Has the USN not done the same?

I seriously doubt it.

[wrecksdart]

@Enkita

Has the USN not done the same?

Yes. Uh, but with some…‘Pacific’ help.

[RichZellich]

They are still mandatory “shall attend” members of the PC when their areas are under discussion. They are mandatory “shall attend” members for full NSC meetings at all times.

[Enkita]

At this late stage I suddenly find myself wondering if there is a way to get a bowl of oversized and rather hard pretzels into the White House TV room?

[Enkita]

@anon61221983

and I think taking either over the other as the gospel

I don’t think I did that.

[RichZellich]

You’re profiling - that’s a photo taken at a Cowboy Action Shooting match. Matches are as much costume reenactment events as they are target shooting. Everybody is in an 1800’s outfit of some kind (or a 1930’s-1950’s flashy B Movie outfit for one specific category).

I’m a Jeffersonian liberal (in the case of the Bill of Rights, a Jeffersonian conservative - I like all of the BoR amendments).

[jproffitt71]

Edit: Found it. The national security advisor invites members.

Original: I searched for this for half an hour but could not find a direct answer: Who gets to decide when their areas are under discussion?

[Brainspore]

@RichZellich

They are still mandatory “shall attend” members of the PC when their areas are under discussion.

Pray tell, what might the National Security council be discussing that is NOT relevant to the Director of National Intelligence or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff?

[hecep]

With all sincerity, please forgive me for profiling.

[awesum1075atl]

Sadly WE have to become the monster. More and more of that seeps into my head…alternative facts, their way or else, we are taking names. Holy crap how do you fight that? We have to play dirty and hope we don’t go completely “full retard**” so we can get our humanity back.

Tropic Thunder reference**

[Melizmatic]

Too late; the current admin is already on board a bullet train to that destination.

[ficuswhisperer]

@lamaranagram

What’s the WORST thing someone can do? I would say rape and murder a child. Yup - they’d see through that.

I’m reminded of Negativland’s song Happy Hero.

If someone told, no
Accused of fucking teen-aged boys and beating others cold
You’d side with me!
And enough of you would doubt it, which would likely set me free
You’d say I didn’t do it and that anyone could tell
'cause he’s smooth and smart and pretty
And he reads his lines so well

[RichZellich]

Ya got me, but this is essentially the same order George W. Bush issued as soon as he took office.

Best I can tell, it’s up to the Committee chair to decide - or maybe the principals can show up when they think it falls in their area (it says they “shall” attend, but that’s all).

If you want to look up the previous NSC iterations, the following excerpt gives you the four Directives and one Memorandum about the NSC makeup from the five most recent Presidents:

“With every new president comes a new memorandum or directive (and
acronym) organizing and guiding the NSC. President Obama issued
Presidential Policy Directive-1 (PPD-1); President George W. Bush issued
National Security Presidential Directive-1 (NSPD-1); President Clinton
issued Presidential Decision Directive-2 (PDD-2); and President George
H.W. Bush issued National Security Directive-1 (NSD-1). It is important
to state up front that NSPM-2 ultimately serves as the operating manual
of the NSC but it is not necessarily how national-security
decision-making will ultimately happen in practice.”

The above from a person who served as an NSC staffer under both Bush 2 and Obama.