Deep State

This surely counts as a (Friday) fright night topic. Appropriately, it’s an undertow NRx theme already, although typically only casually invoked — almost allusively — as the necessary complement of the public state’s naked superficiality. Rod Dreher focuses upon it more determinedly than any NRx source I was able to rapidly pull up. (This would be an easy point for people to educate me upon.)

Dreher’s post is seriously interesting. One immediate hook:

Steve Sailer says that the Shallow State is a complement to the Deep State. The Shallow State is, I think, another name for what the Neoreactionaries call “The Cathedral”

As a State Church, the Cathedral is essentially bound to publicity. Its principal organs — media and education — are directed towards the promulgation of faith. It tends towards an identification with its own propaganda, and therefore — in Mike Lofgren’s words — to the full manifestation of visible government. Perfect coincidence of government with the transparent public sphere approaches a definition of the progressive telos. Since Neoreaction is particularly inclined to emphasize the radical dysfunctionality of this ideal, it naturally presupposes that real government lies elsewhere. In this respect, NRx is inherently destined to formulate a model of hidden or occult government — that which the Cathedral runs upon — which inevitably coincides, in all fundamentals, with the deep state.

What then? Has there been a direct NRx address to the quesion, what do we make of the deep state? Moldbug even declares: “… the United States does not in fact have a ‘deep state.'” In context, this is a complex and suggestive evasion, but it is an evasion nonetheless. There can be no call upon neoreactionaries to articulate their relation to something that does not exist.

In contrast to the Master, I am thoroughly convinced that a US deep state exists, and that the problem of articulation is a very different one. Public articulacy is — at least — not obviously appropriate to the deep state, for transcendental philosophical or occultist reasons (which are the same), since it is the very nature of hidden government not to be a public object. Public representation of the deep state is exposure — an intrinsically political, antagonistic engagement. It’s Wikileaks. This is not to denounce such an operation, reactively, but merely to note that the question has thereby been missed. The righteousness of state sublimation into the public sphere is assumed (and this, to repeat, is progressivism itself).

Under the name of the Cathedral, Nrx depicts the state phenomenon as a degenerative abomination. The deep state (or state-in-itself), in contrast, poses a far more cryptic theoretical and practical problem. It’s worth puzzling over, for at least a while.

December 12, 2014admin 47 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Political economy

TAGGED WITH : , , , , ,

47 Responses to this entry

  • Bryce Laliberte Says:

    The problem with identifying and analyzing the deep state is that all, if there are any, of its actions subsist under plausible deniability. It is almost certain there is some concerted conspiracy taking place in the shadows, but it is also almost certain it is impossible to identify the machinations or intent of this conspiracy without privileged information. A “conspiracy” and a “deep state” are practically synonymous. As such, all speculations are worthy, but none will be provable.

    The CIA funded modern art. Why? We’re told it’s because it was meant to prove the superiority of American culture to Soviet culture, but that’s pretty silly. A key strategy in psyops is covering the little move with the big move; distraction and misinformation, in other words. There’s a scene in Expendables 3 where the villain purchases a modern art piece for 3 million, which he uses to permit the transportation of weapons across borders with minimal inspection; though it isn’t elaborated on in the movie, this strategy makes sense. His participation in the modern art scene gives him a cover for his wealth, since he does “deal” in modern art. It also gives him privileged access to certain forms of transportation and an excuse to spend most of his time abroad. Not that this is necessarily what actually took place with modern art, but it was certainly a cover for something.

    Worth looking into:


    WowJustWow Reply:

    So the idea is to engage in petty irrelevant conspiracies with the hope that they will be exposed and talked about, making it harder to identify the big conspiracies. A double-modified limited hangout?


    Posted on December 12th, 2014 at 4:33 pm Reply | Quote
  • pk Says:

    An interesting angle of analysis would be cases where the Shallow and Deep states conflict. For example, the Cathedral loves to criticize the military-industrial complex, the police, the prison system, America’s interventionist foreign policy and the finance industry. Yet these groups can usually be expected to win despite public (or Cathedral) opinion: the prison system expands, police departments receive a steady stream of military surplus weaponry, the US continues to intervene (more or less openly) abroad and hedge funds are more or less above the law.

    This makes *no sense* if the Cathedral is the true power in America.


    Rasputin Reply:

    It makes sense if you read Moldbug.


    Steve Johnson Reply:

    It makes perfect sense if you realize that the Cathedral knows it can’t rule so has to contract out some functions – like keeping street safe enough that there isn’t a revolt. Cathedral run prisons would be hard pressed to even have guards. Cathedral policing is anarcho-tyranny.

    The military could oppose the Cathedral so they get paid off in defense contracts and kept busy with unwinnable foreign interventions.

    The finance sector is tightly bound up with Cathedral money laundering and parasitism on industry. Have to make sure that the funds flow out of industry – which is not Cathedral dependent – and flows into banking – which is. Hedge funds are needed to keep it flowing smoothly. The big banks used to be smart but then they became more direct arms of the Cathedral so they became too stupid to perform their real function. Hedge funds take up the slack.


    cassander Reply:

    the cathedral doesn’t think, it evolves.


    John Reply:

    > For example, the Cathedral loves to criticize the military-industrial complex, the police, the prison system, America’s interventionist foreign policy and the finance industry. Yet these groups can usually be expected to win despite public (or Cathedral) opinion.

    I think you are misinterpreting the Cathedral as a monolithic-type entity (a common misconception). It functions more like a Hydra, with each of the heads superficially free to pursue their independent desires, yet all ultimately coordinating with the will of the shared body.

    What you’ll notice is that the Media never puts any real and sustained pressure on any of the areas you’ve mentioned. They apply superficial criticism of obvious social wrongs in order to cement their public credibility as the voice of reason and morality.

    But they never bring anything close to the level of persecution and outrage reserved for the sex assaulters and racists of the world. Those witch trials hold public attention, while the military industrial and finance cartels are free to go about their merry way. No one (who matters) is left to notice.

    The unity of Cathedral entities is occulted, with much of its psychological potency derived from the apparent individuality of the separate branches.


    Mike Reply:

    “For example, the Cathedral loves to criticize the military-industrial complex”

    They sure criticised the hell out of it in 1941-45.

    Wait. No they didn’t.


    Posted on December 12th, 2014 at 4:38 pm Reply | Quote
  • Amon Khan Says:

    The closest thing to a Deep State in Amerika is the ZOG.

    Here is a good article that touches on this topic:

    “It is curious: Though I have spent a lifetime in journalism, I do not read a newspaper, not the New York Times nor the Washington Post nor the Wall Street Journal. Nor do I have television service.

    Why? Because, having worked in that restaurant, I know better than to eat there. The foregoing media are quasi-governmental organs, predictably predictable and predictably dishonest. The truth is not in them.

    Within the news racket, this isn’t news. More interesting is that a large part of the intelligent population agrees. We now have a press of two tiers, the establishment media and the net, with sharply differing narratives. The internet is now primary. The bright get their news from around the web and then read the New York Times to see how the paper of record will pevaricate. People increasingly judge the media by the web, not the web by the media.

    The major outlets (this will not be a blinding insight) as always are in near-lockstep—that is, controlled. Reporters understand the rules perfectly. You do not, not ever, criticize Israel. You don’t say anything remotely interpretable as racist. Women are sacrosanct. Do not offend the sexually baroque. The endless wars get minimal coverage and almost nothing that would upset the public. Huge military contracts get almost no mention.

    None of this is accidental.”


    Posted on December 12th, 2014 at 5:20 pm Reply | Quote
  • Friday Night Fragments #6 | The Legionnaire Says:

    […] and it seems my self-satisfaction was misplaced. Nick Land beat me to the punch on the subject with this post, and several of the ideas that are suggested indicate that I was on the right track but I’d […]

    Posted on December 12th, 2014 at 9:00 pm Reply | Quote
  • Ryan Says:

    Try this red pill: The USA does not have a state. It has no deep state, no shallow state, it simply has no state.

    The USA has a Cathedral, it has a military, it has a Mukhabarat, a finance industry, a fiat currency and a central bank, a court system, police, and several other institutions one might be tempted to draw a circle around and give a name to. But the one word which would be completely inappropriate would be “state,” because the edifice lacks centralization of power, the defining element of a state.


    Derfel Reply:

    During the Middle Ages this was understood as the dychotomy between spiritual and temporal power. The USG has spiritual power, it derives it’s legitimacy from religious ideas such as democracy and progress, the POTUS is more akin to a Pope, a very powerful Pope like Innocent III of course, than with a legit King or even a Emperor.

    And if the “state” is actually the Church, who is the “state” itself, who holds temporal power?

    Well, i’d say the same people as ever, the aristocracy in it’s different forms and places in the hierarchy. The intelligence community, entrepeneurs, the mafia, street gangs etc. It makes for a more dynamic view of U.S. history when you see America not as a nation or state but as a battlefield where different nations and different temporal states and rulers fight for power between themselves and with the spiritual hierarchy of the Church, which strives to establish a Theocracy.

    Basically, Guelphs and Ghibellines.


    nydwracu Reply:

    Now analyze democracy in the way you’ve suggested. Much will follow.


    Ryan Reply:

    Wow that was interesting.


    Posted on December 12th, 2014 at 9:02 pm Reply | Quote
  • Deep State | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on December 12th, 2014 at 9:05 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alrenous Says:

    I would say USG has loosely interconnected pockets of well-hidden or -disguised Wormtongue cliques. They’re not coherent enough to call a ‘state,’ or even a network of ministates.

    I think they have real command, but the jurisdictions are fractured, meaning there’s lots of these cliques and no head clique. I think they’re deliberately avoiding spreading their own propaganda, because they know they’ll start to believe it, among other benefits. There’s at least two layers – they order their metonymic secretary to tell the PR agent like the President to deal with some problem, in the abstract, no details. They then studiously avoid watching TV, as evaluating POTUS’ performance is the secretary’s job. The politician is then more or less stuck post-hoc rationalizing decisions they don’t understand and weren’t party to.

    On one hand the deep commanders’ control is slow and imprecise due to transmission lag and losses. On the other hand it forces manoeuvre warfare.


    Posted on December 12th, 2014 at 9:08 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alrenous Says:

    Btw, this probably has many details wrong:

    However, it has the frame right. It’s just a matter of filling in the lines.

    Or even, by having postulated a concrete frame, it throws into sharp relief what a proper frame should look like.

    Or, error calls forth correction. By being concrete and specific, it focuses the mind on correcting the concrete and specific. Abstract theories have to resolve to something concrete – the reverse is not true. The abstract is ultimately but an aid to the concrete.


    Posted on December 12th, 2014 at 9:18 pm Reply | Quote
  • Andrew E. Says:

    Yes. This post, in my view, suggests the correct line of inquiry to get at the bottom of things (to the extent possible as Bryce mentions above). Jay Dyer has done much on this front from a religious trad perspective.


    Posted on December 12th, 2014 at 9:55 pm Reply | Quote
  • VXXC Says:

    It’s not the Intelligence Community. Way too much public light and oversight.

    Look for who’s been getting away with anything and everything for the longest time. It only became a generalized privilege of government very recently.


    Posted on December 12th, 2014 at 11:05 pm Reply | Quote
  • Frog Do Says:

    I would argue Moldbug is right. That is his central contribution, really. The “deep state” is an directed conspiracy that directs everything in USG. The Cathedral is a distributed conspiracy that directs everything in USG. Surely cabals exist, but the distributed slash networked nature of The Cathedral means they are outplayed, or at least managed.

    Unless anyone has evidence to the contrary.


    Erebus Reply:

    I agree with you completely.

    I am also in full agreement with Moldbug in what he said here:

    “Power in the West is held by the civil service, that is, the permanent employees of the state. In any struggle between the civil service and politicians or corporations, the civil service wins.”

    That’s really all there is to it. I see, firsthand, how the underfunded FDA stymies the efforts of pharmaceutical mega-corporations. I also know that the military bureaucracy is vastly more powerful than the corporations which exist merely to service it. Then there’s the Homeland Security & NSA panopticon, which makes corporate “big data” look like an utter joke.

    The deep state is the civil service. One could make the argument that it’s controlled by the zeitgeist, which is shaped and manipulated by the Cathedral. (Indeed, I think it’s a plain fact that the Cathedral controls the attitudes of the civil service, rather than the other way around.) However, I think that “the deep state is controlled by cabals” is an extraordinary claim, which requires extraordinary proof.

    …With all that said, the picture is very different in Asia. It’s a smaller stage, and intelligence communities and deep-pocketed corporations have a lot more leeway. This is most obvious in present-day Thailand, Burma, and Taiwan. The “deep state” is also a major feature of Japan’s post-war history — in which particular case it consisted of a turbulent mixture of organized crime, a civil-service culture, and foreign influence primarily from the USA and Korea.


    cassander Reply:

    the civil service isn’t a deep state. deep states select formal leadership and exercise control over them. the civil service can stymie presidents, try to manipulate them, but it doesn’t control them. their power comes from size and inertia. they make most of the decisions not because they control the president, but because they make millions of decisions every day, only a tiny fraction of which ever reach the attention of an elected or appointed official. most importantly, though, the civil service can’t be a deep state because it doesn’t even control itself. This isn’t the turkish military, there’s no general or cabal of generals who can command everyone, it’s a thousand tiny fiefdoms each running largely on autopilot.


    Erebus Reply:

    My apologies for the sloppy terminology. Having said that, coordination between civil service fiefdoms is the closest thing the US has to a deep state. Cabals probably exist, almost certainly in the intelligence community and possibly in the judiciary as well, but I don’t think that they’re of very great importance in their own right. The Blind Idiot God that is undirected coordination between different pieces of the civil administrative machinery… this is, in my own estimation, the closest thing the US has to a deep state.

    Posted on December 12th, 2014 at 11:30 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alan J. Perrick Says:

    The “Deep State” is probably best seen as the Supreme Court, where ethnic whites (Jewish and Roman Catholics) preside over the destruction of the white American population.


    Posted on December 13th, 2014 at 12:06 am Reply | Quote
  • an inanimate aluminum tube Says:

    This seems like an important point, with the potential for fission.

    If the Cathedral is *just* ultra-Calvinism run amok, with nobody really driving it, as Moldbug suggests, then the NrX theory of government is somewhat uh… unique.

    But if the Cathedral is ultra-Calvinism run amok, *as manipulated by the deep state*, then the NrX theory of government roughly matches up with the theories promoted by White Nationalists, Conspiracy types and even some of the anti-establishment Left, there is just some disagreement about the composition and aims of the deep state.

    It seems to me that if the Cathedral was purely a natural force, ultra-Calvinism run amok, it would be more self destructive and it would head towards a left singularity. For example, by killing the goose that lays the Golden Eggs with economic leftism or serious environmentalism (not the highly abstract and manageable global warming).

    But there was no economic left singularity in the United States. The Cathedral deftly avoided self destruction and pulled back on economic leftism when it looked like further “progress” would be too costly, instead creating entirely new issues out of nothingness, ones that made the Cathedral more powerful than ever, instead of leading it to self destruction.

    Things could have happened differently.


    Cassander Reply:

    The cathedral is ultra Calvinism run amock without deep state manipulation. It hasn’t gone full singularity because it’s composed of a set of institutions. Singularities emerge from revolutionary situations, when everything is more flexible because institutions are dissolving and reforming. You’ll note that the closest the us came to singularity was the early fdr presidency, when his power to make new institutions of bottomless power like the NRA was briefly near infinite. The persistence of institutions, the weak persistence of constitutional and legal tradition, and the decentralised nature of the cathedral slow it down.


    Rasputin Reply:

    This is an important point, which certainly has the potential for fission. I think it is admin’s first substantial break with Moldbug – something which goes far beyond a ‘quibble’, and really necessitates a much more substantial argument. Moldbug is emphatic that the Cathedral has no central administration, no cabal, no hidden Jews pulling the strings, that what guides it is a dialectical process that always swims left – over time. Decay is a slow process, not because of a ‘deep state’ secretly directing things, but because the process takes place over a generational timeframe.


    nydwracu Reply:

    Influence isn’t direction.

    Peter A. Taylor Reply:

    nydwracu wrote:

    “Influence isn’t direction.”

    Bingo. Lots of people have influence. No one faction can rule alone.

    The Cathedral can tell the Civil Service and the voters what to think, but only within limits. Bryan Caplan talks about “wiggle room” and “margins of indifference” in _The Myth of the Rational Voter_. It’s a little like Jonathan Haidt’s “rider” and “elephant” metaphor. The rider can’t really make the elephant do anything that it really doesn’t want to do. Eventually the elephant will get pissed off, and there may not be much warning.

    Peter A. Taylor Reply:

    “Propaganda does not deceive people; it merely helps them to deceive themselves.” — Eric Hoffer

    Rasputin Reply:

    The frame of legal incentives, combined with socio-economic consequences, provides the direction.

    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    It didn’t pull back. Rent seeking is just easier than revolution, and since they ‘won’ in the 60s, rent seeking it is. I don’t think they’re even smart enough (ala Gottfried) to realise they need “capitalism” to function, they’re just too lazy, stupid, and unprincipled to push for socialism when they can keep robbing evil racists.


    Posted on December 13th, 2014 at 12:28 am Reply | Quote
  • Scharlach Says:

    Reading Dreher’s article reminded me of Spandrell’s old post in which he wrote that a lot of economic and social events can be reduced to billionaires fucking with each other in their billionaire’s social circle.


    Posted on December 13th, 2014 at 1:46 pm Reply | Quote
  • Scharlach Says:

    Lofgren loses me—and loses some of his credibility in my eyes—when he says this:

    . . . a justice system that has practically abolished the constitutional right to trial for poorer defendants charged with certain crimes.

    Based on a link he provides there, it’s clear he’s talking about federal drug charges. It’s an aside, not central to his larger point, but he’s completely wrong about this, and wrong in a way that makes me think he’s not very good at reading covert operating procedures.

    I know people pretty high up the chain in L.A. law enforcement, who have worked narcotics, and who in turn know people high up the chain in the DEA. And after hearing their stories for years, I am completely convinced that very, very few people go to prison for doing drugs, and absolutely nobody gets railroaded in the federal system for doing drugs. People who are in prison for drugs, or who get railroaded in the justice system for a minor drug charge, are there because they are guilty of some much more serious crime that they got away with. Drug charges are proxy charges.

    In the movies, when the detectives are surveilling a bad guy who is head of some huge narcotics gang or who is a serial rapist, they never bust him on whatever small things they catch him doing during surveillance because they’re waiting for evidence that “will put him away for good.” In real life, it doesn’t work that way. In real life, especially in a nation where harsh drug laws exist, it is very easy to “put someone away for good”—or at least for a long time—on drug charges. And most bad guys do drugs. So if law enforcement wants a murderer or a rapist or the head of a narcotics gang put away, they don’t need to put together a huge case for any of that, they just need to catch the guy with some crack or meth. (The whole “blacks get busted more often than whites for drugs” meme results from this tactic. If blacks, like whites, just did their drugs at home while watching Netflix and eating Cheetohs, they wouldn’t go to jail for doing drugs, either.)

    So what does this have to do with the “deep state”? I don’t know yet. Something. For now, it just tells me that Lofgren has no idea about covert operating procedures in law enforcement, so I’m immediately skeptical about his ability to read the signs of covert operation anywhere else. Does he really think that the Justice Department and urban police departments have nothing better to do than to go around busting and railroading peasants for doing crack? Is this the guy I’m supposed to trust about the workings of the state?

    Not that there isn’t something like a social network of the powerful that may function like a “deep state.” I just wouldn’t trust Lofgren to be my guide to it.


    an inanimate aluminum tube Reply:

    No idea about Lofgren’s credibility, but he is specifically talking about the way that prosecutors use plea bargains to threaten defendants with very harsh punishments if they go trial to encourage them to plead to a less charge with a reduced punishment. They habitually game the system in this way to increase their conviction rates and avoid costly trials. Needless to say, some eggs get broken along the way.

    This isn’t a particularly interesting topic for those of us who view the whole system as rotten, but for softies who care about that kind of stuff there is certainly some room for controversy. Apparently what is common practice here is banned in other countries.

    Plea bargaining is criticized, particularly outside the United States, on the grounds that its close relationship with rewards, threats and coercion potentially endangers the correct legal outcome.[5]

    Author Martin Yant discusses the use of coercion in plea bargaining:

    Even when the charges are more serious, prosecutors often can still bluff defense attorneys and their clients into pleading guilty to a lesser offense. As a result, people who might have been acquitted because of lack of evidence, but also who are in fact truly innocent, will often plead guilty to the charge. Why? In a word, fear. And the more numerous and serious the charges, studies have shown, the greater the fear. That explains why prosecutors sometimes seem to file every charge imaginable against defendants.[6]

    This tactic is prohibited in some other countries—for example in the United Kingdom the prosecutor’s code states:

    Prosecutors should never go ahead with more charges than are necessary just to encourage a defendant to plead guilty to a few. In the same way, they should never go ahead with a more serious charge just to encourage a defendant to plead guilty to a less serious one.


    Posted on December 13th, 2014 at 2:12 pm Reply | Quote
  • forkinhell Says:

    What is/was the Deep State of the Catholic Church? Scripture? How far does the Cathedral analogy hold? Is the Deep State behind the Cathedral physical… or something else?


    an inanimate aluminum tube Reply:

    There is a lot of talk of various cabals within the Catholic church who pretend to be Catholic but actually have other agendas.

    If this talk is correct then it could be said that there is a deep state within the Catholic church.

    I don’t make any claims to understand the truth of this situation.


    cassander Reply:

    what it is today, I couldn’t say. but in the glory days of the renaissance, it was the important noble families in italy, borgia, Sforza, medici, orsini. All had prominent sons or cousins who were bishops and cardinals and they manipulated the church for fun and profit.

    more fundamentally, the cathedral analogy is not meant to compare the functioning of the modern US to the way the medieval church operated, but to the way medieval states responded to the church’s influence. the medieval church did not claim secular power (outside of the papal states), but it did claim spiritual power over catholic monarchs, including, occasionally, the power to appoint and depose kings. the church did not make good on this claim with power, it never had a real army, but it had immense influence. it owned huge amounts of land, and thus money, it ran all the universities and schools, had all sorts of spiritual penalties it could impose, and commanded the loyalty of millions of catholics. the modern cathedral, of course, has no pope, but as a system it exercises the same sort of influence on the modern state.


    Posted on December 14th, 2014 at 2:32 am Reply | Quote
  • nydwracu Says:

    It was a great evil for Britain and France to divide the world between them.

    (cut to shot of modern-day Somalia)

    That’s why the USA and the USSR had to get together to screw them, and divide the world between themselves instead.

    (cut to shot of starving children in Ethiopia)


    Posted on December 14th, 2014 at 3:54 am Reply | Quote
  • Lightning Round – 2014/12/17 | Free Northerner Says:

    […] deep state. Related. Related: The Cathedral, shallow state, and deep […]

    Posted on December 17th, 2014 at 6:33 am Reply | Quote
  • Andrew E. Says:

    From Flemings’s Dr. No:

    “Mr. Bond, power is sovereignty. Clausewitz’s first principle was to have a secure base. From there one proceeds to freedom of action. Together, that is sovereignty. I have secured these things and much beside. No one else in the world possess them to the same degree. They cannot have them. The world is too public. These things can only be secured in privacy. You talk of kings and presidents. How much power do they possess? As much as their people will allow them. Who in the world has the power of life and death over his people? Now that Stalin is dead, can you name any man except myself? And how do I possess that power, that sovereignty? Through privacy. Through the fact that nobody knows. ” (pg. 161)


    Posted on December 18th, 2014 at 6:06 pm Reply | Quote
  • This Week in Reaction | The Reactivity Place Says:

    […] Deep State—Deep Schmate: Finally, someone deigns to tell me What It Even Is. […]

    Posted on December 19th, 2014 at 11:52 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alex Says:

    it is the very nature of hidden government not to be a public object



    Posted on December 20th, 2014 at 8:49 pm Reply | Quote
  • Lightning Round – 2014/12/17 Says:

    […] deep state. Related. Related: The Cathedral, shallow state, and deep […]

    Posted on December 22nd, 2014 at 3:15 am Reply | Quote
  • The Mafia, Endo-Imperialism, Endo-Colonialism And The Secular State | The New International Outlook Says:

    […] There are clearly a lot of interesting lessons that can be teased out of the area of the Deep State and organised criminal organisations in relation to the […]

    Posted on January 3rd, 2015 at 5:38 am Reply | Quote
  • Power vacuums | reactionaryfuture Says:

    […] There are clearly a lot of interesting lessons that can be teased out of the area of the Deep State and organised criminal organisations in relation to the […]

    Posted on January 19th, 2016 at 4:13 am Reply | Quote
  • R. J. Moore II Says:

    @Andrew E. SPECTRE is transparently supposed to be NWO internationalism with a strong Illuminati flavor.


    Posted on February 2nd, 2016 at 11:05 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment