Is there a Shadow US Government?

[PatrickHenry]

This poll is in response to a comment from the administrator expressing skepticism of the concept of a "shadow government."

"There exists a shadowy government with its own Air Force, its own Navy,its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself." — Senator Daniel K. Inouye at the Iran Contra Hearings

[rcne]

The question may be better reframed as 'What part does the US shadow government play in the world of the Illumini'

The existence of the Illumini has been speculated on for decades. Recently however, the existence has come more into the light of the publics eye.

The existence of the Illumini is only publicly known as a 'private club'.

The members are hard to identify, but the suspected member list reads like a who's who in the power structure of industry and finance.

[Young]

Reagan while first running for Prez said he would look into the Trilatteral commission. Then shortly thereafter he chose Bush as his VP and that Investigation fell off the balcony. Then Reagan was almost killed by a Man in love with Jodi Foster. So did they want full control then? I think this time around Edwards was a surprise VP choice, this almost makes me wanna vote Dem!




Young

[dotcoma]

I don't think it was a surprise at all...
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-break...3603-4126r.htm

[Osborn F Enready]

No suprise to me either. The party selected Edwards, not Kerry in my opinion, and they chose him because they feel he has made it clear he would serve their party agenda better than anyone else.

Their agenda, much like the Republicans, is a citizenry DEPENDENT upon Federal Government, so as to help ease the transition to globalization under the New World Order. They both want to grow government, increase laws, increase taxes, increase regulation, increase welfare, continue social security as it is, and they BOTH WANT TO INCREASE THE AVERAGE CITIZENS, BUSINESSES DEPENDANCE on FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FUNDING, LICENSING, REGULATION AND OBSERVATION.

Can you say, new socialism? I knew you could....

[Nono]

Nothing in the multiple-choice selection that I could really go for. The closest would be "Yes. There is a Shadow Government and it was established to destroy the freedom of America. It is unspeakably evil."

How many people in America honestly give a hoot about actual freedom? I don't think there's any sort of structured shadow government "established" in any formal way. But there is a system to protect the swagger of the rich by feeding people selected information -- that is, when the latter aren't too distracted by the bread and circuses -- in order to convey the illusion that they're making a well-informed choice in the exercise of their democratic right to franchise (uhh, I mean the minority who actually bother to exercise it).
And so they virtually always elect the tools of the greedheads.

On the rare occasions when they do go off the rails and vote for dangerous reformers, that's when the serious string-pulling starts and Measures are taken.

But mostly the system more or less runs itself, organically.
The depressing conclusion re human capacity for democracy: the masses are asses.

[PatrickHenry]

Are you voconvo members familiar with the Free Republic Conservative News Forum? I thought so. Just so that I am not labeled a "lefty" for posting opinions about the Shadow government of the US, I wanted to drop this on you. It dates to the Clinton Administration, but the circumstances referred to, curiously, haven't changed at all after four years of Republican unfettered rule.
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a37f592f42625.htm

Shadow Government of the United States and the Decline of America In spite of the difficulties facing America, there is still no other place I would rather live; however, our nation is at a crossroads, not unlike the difficulties faced by our forefathers. Many of the same conditions that prompted the Declaration of Independence prevail in America today. Of the indictments against the King of Great Britain, our Founders declared: "He has erected a Multitude of new offices, and sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People and eat out their Substance." There are literally hundreds of thousands of government employees administering various regulatory agencies with budgets in the billions of dollars. Regulatory compliance alone exceeds $460 billion annually. Our Founders, opposed to "taxation without representation," also declared that the King was: "...imposing Taxes on us without our Consent." Yet, taxation with representation now sees the average American working through May to meet his or her yearly local, state, and federal tax obligations. <snip> CFR member James Warburg (whose father Paul Warburg merged his Manhattan Bank with Rockefeller's Chase Bank), a former aide to FDR, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee this on Feb. 17, 1950: "You shall have world government, whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent."

The responses by the freeps after the lengthy initial post indicate clearly that opposing the New World Order is a "conservative" thing, not left at all. Maybe things have changed over there(at Free Rep.) with Dubya being the Hero of the Iraq War now, but the agenda of the shadow men remains unchanged.

[G. Adams]

Originally posted by Osborn F Enready, No suprise to me either. The party selected Edwards, not Kerry in my opinion, and they chose him because they feel he has made it clear he would serve their party agenda better than anyone else. Their agenda, much like the Republicans, is a citizenry DEPENDENT upon Federal Government, so as to help ease the transition to globalization under the New World Order. They both want to grow government, increase laws, increase taxes, increase regulation, increase welfare, continue social security as it is, and they BOTH WANT TO INCREASE THE AVERAGE CITIZENS, BUSINESSES DEPENDANCE on FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FUNDING, LICENSING, REGULATION AND OBSERVATION. Can you say, new socialism? I knew you could....

In fact a socialism so new it has nothing to do with socialism...

Socialism is not about controlling everyone else, although, it could be used to do so.

Personally I believe that people behind the scenes are not instituting greater socialist, capitalist or fascist changes, rather, they are just using whatever course they find most suitable to better manipulate us all. It is not about securing private property or abolishing it, it is simply about the accumulation of power into their own hands. So, for themselves at the very top, they will maintain and expand capitalist mechanisms, such as the IMF or WTO, while for those at the bottom, greater social policies in order to foster greater dependence upon government. A government they of course own.

[Milton Bradley]

Originally posted by G. Adams, In fact a socialism so new it has nothing to do with socialism... Socialism is not about controlling everyone else, although, it could be used to do so. Personally I believe that people behind the scenes are not instituting greater socialist, capitalist or fascist changes, rather, they are just using whatever course they find most suitable to better manipulate us all. It is not about securing private property or abolishing it, it is simply about the accumulation of power into their own hands. So, for themselves at the very top, they will maintain and expand capitalist mechanisms, such as the IMF or WTO, while for those at the bottom, greater social policies in order to foster greater dependence upon government. A government they of course own.

If you truly believe that, would the right course of action to be looking to see who established those mechanisms they use to manipulate you/us? Follow the money trail, so to speak.


If you were to do so, you would end up in the camp where Osborn, Patrick, myself, and others now reside. Firmly convinced that there are in fact many enemies living within our own borders, and most of those either make, or finance the making of the laws that us commoners have to live by. Puppets of the people who REALLY do have all the money. The Rockeflounders.


Please click here. http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/ If you can truly dismiss this mans work as "theory", than you are a braver, or far more trusting man than I.

[rcne]

MB, interesting link. The most thought provoking item I came to understand is that - for the first time in the history of man total world domination IS possible.

This organization is not just 'enemies within our borders', but a seemingly world organization.

I believe it exists and can easily move when and where it wants. When and if parts of it come under scrutiny (we would never know), that part relocates.

Always in the background, always consolidating power.

[G. Adams]

Originally posted by Milton Bradley,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Milton Bradley,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-G. Adams, In fact a socialism so new it has nothing to do with socialism... Socialism is not about controlling everyone else, although, it could be used to do so. Personally I believe that people behind the scenes are not instituting greater socialist, capitalist or fascist changes, rather, they are just using whatever course they find most suitable to better manipulate us all.  It is not about securing private property or abolishing it, it is simply about the accumulation of power into their own hands.  So, for themselves at the very top, they will maintain and expand capitalist mechanisms, such as the IMF or WTO, while for those at the bottom, greater social policies in order to foster greater dependence upon government.  A government they of course own.

If you truly believe that, would the right course of action to be looking to see who established those mechanisms they use to manipulate you/us? Follow the money trail, so to speak.


If you were to do so, you would end up in the camp where Osborn, Patrick, myself, and others now reside. Firmly convinced that there are in fact many enemies living within our own borders, and most of those either make, or finance the making of the laws that us commoners have to live by. Puppets of the people who REALLY do have all the money. The Rockeflounders.


Please click here. http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/ If you can truly dismiss this mans work as "theory", than you are a braver, or far more trusting man than I.[/b][/quote]

I have always been in this camp as regarding the state and centralisation of power. What we replace this current state with, however, you'll find me firmly on the hard left. Allowing the centralisation of wealth is just as dangerous in my opinion as the centralisation of political power.

[G. Adams]

I began jumping around that site you provided, with an open mind, but thats somewhat been tainted after reading part of the "National Socialist" section. he says

"The execrable German Marxist philosopher Theodor W. Adorno...once famously remarked that "after Auschwitz there can be no art." Although Adorno was no Nazi (indeed, he spent World War II in exile in Hollywood where he devoted his time to denouncing America and ridiculing American culture, especially "Negro jazz"), his willingness to deny art to those who had been brutalized by his fellow countrymen reveals an arrogance so profound that it is simply beyond the capacity to analyze. It also is a clear demonstration of how easily all Germans (whether of the left or the right) fall into the risible delusion that they somehow constitute a "master race."

Bloody hell, not making any generalisations here. A "clear demonstration of how easily all Germans fall into the risible delusion that they somehow constitute a master race"? He got to that conclusion by one German's beliefs? I think he's fallen into the risible delusion that any race of people share beliefs on the basis of that race.

Also, further down that article he suggests that if US soldiers had ever been found committing the kinds of atrocities the Germans committed onscreen, in this case making disabled Jews dance in the street, they'd have been thrown in the brig for life. I'm sorry, but has he never heard of all the atrocities that occurred in Vietnam? Or US servicemen raping young girls in Japan and virtually getting away with it? And if we were using Rush Limbaugh's thinking, such acts would just be "like fraternity hazing pranks". Or is that only when Americans do it to Arabs?

I'll keep going, but his credibility is weak for me after that.

[Milton Bradley]

G. Adams.


It seemed clear to me that the Author was talking about Pre-WW II Germany, and not modern Germany, or German peoples.


I think you were in a hurry to find something you didn't "like".


I admit that it is a highly cerebral read, and it pays to have a Dictionary close by.

[G. Adams]

No, this comment he made was part of his attack on Germans for laughing during a scene of The Pianist. That was in fact the basis of his argument, the point I pulled for here was a supporting point.

I havn't found it too taxing on the grey matter yet.

[PatrickHenry]

This is copyright 1994, so it doesn't include the events of the last ten years. The analysis is still accurate in my opinion: http://www.constitution.org/shad4816.htm

It is becoming increasingly apparent to American citizens that government is no longer being conducted in accordance with the U.S. Constitution, or, within states, according to state constitutions. While people have recognized for more than 150 years that the rich and powerful often corrupt individual officials, or exert undue influence to get legislation passed that favors their interests, most Americans still cling to the naive belief that such corruption is exceptional, and that most of the institutions of society, the courts, the press, and law enforcement agencies, still largely comply with the Constitution and the law in important matters. They expect that these corrupting forces are disunited and in competition with one another, so that they tend to balance one another. Mounting evidence makes it clear that the situation is far worse than most people think, that during the last several decades the U.S. Constitution has been effectively overthrown, and that it is now observed only as a façade to deceive and placate the masses. What has replaced it is what many call the Shadow Government. It still, for the most part, operates in secret, because its control is not secure. The exposure of this regime and its operations must now become a primary duty of citizens who still believe in the Rule of Law and in the freedoms which this country is supposed to represent. <snip Restoring Constitutional Governance The restoration of constitutional governance need not require a violent revolution, and we should avoid violence if possible. It can be brought about in much the way it happened in the Soviet Union. This involves several elements: (1) Exposure ("glasnost"). The Shadow Government, even more than the old Soviet regime, depends on secrecy. Uncover it and it loses most of its power. We need to end black budgets, require the declassification of most classified documents, especially those pertaining to UFOs and aliens, and adopt and enforce sunshine laws to require full disclosure of not just meetings and agreements among officials, but also among major organizations of all kinds which may exercise an undue influence on political decisions. We must also require independent audits of all such organizations. (2) Restructuring ("perestroika"). We need to enforce strengthened anti-trust laws to break up large enterprises into many competing firms, not just two or three, and forbid interlocking directorates, beginning with the broadcast media and the press. Intelligence and law enforcement agencies need to be broken up into several competing ones, which can serve as effective checks on abuses by one another. (2) Infiltration and defection. We need to get patriots inside key organizations and encourage insiders to become patriots. The most important are military and law enforcement organizations, whose members must be conditioned to come over to the side of the people if there is a confrontation. We must also provide effective protection for whistleblowers. (3) Harassment. Lawsuits. Liens. Freedom of Information Act requests. Surveillance of principals. Local prosecution of federal agents. (4) Local organization and publicity. Revive the constitutional Militia on the Swiss model<12>, set up independent investigation teams, alternative newspapers, talk radio, alert networks. We need to inform the public on what is happening, and to reach those who now are all too willing to trust the government to protect them. (5) Civil disobedience and nonviolent resistance. Protest demonstrations. Tax protests. Defiance of unconstitutional laws. Refusal of juries to convict.<13> (6) Armed resistance. This must involve non- provocative, but firm, defense of persons from illegal abuses, and exclusion of illegal governmental actions from local areas, county by county, state by state, with insistence on constitutional compliance. (7) Transition plan. The oligarchy cannot be expected to come up with a plan for an orderly return to constitutional governance. The process must be conducted carefully, to avoid a disastrous collapse.<14> We will need some constitutional amendments, to make legal some of the things the national government can do best. The government needs to end budget deficits and acquire the stock of the Federal Reserve.<15> Conclusion The myth is that World War II ended with the defeat of fascism, but what really happened is that fascism got a grip on those fighting it, and is becoming increasingly pervasive and powerful. As it grows, it will induce a reaction, the outcome of which will be a final confrontation. We can all hope that the confrontation will not be a bloody one, and that it will be resolved while we still have time to solve our other pressing problems.

[Young]

Great Article PH!

[PatrickHenry]

Rense published this about what defines fascism: http://www.rense.com/general37/fascism.htm

The 14 Defining Characteristics of Fascism...

click the link to see if you think any of it may be applicable to USA, 2005...
Or gr8fuldaniel posted them here: Is It Fascism Yet?

[incka]

At first I would dismiss claims of a shadow US government as conspiracy theories, but after researching into it does not just seem crediable, but extremly likely that it is, and it does seem that it's aims are to take away the freedom of the people. There is so much evidence for it using 'Problem-Reaction-Solution' to pass through authoritarian bills, and it's not something done by just the democrats or republicans, they are effectivly the same party because of this.

[caspian88]

I would say that there isn't, because I haven't really seen any evidence for its existence. If someone could prove stuff to me, then perhaps I'd sign on, but until something can be proven, it doesn't exist.

[PatrickHenry]

Proof is not what we do here, caspian. Debate is the presentation of evidence. We have no subpoena powers and our testimony from witnesses is not under oath. But there is incontrovertible evidence that there is some sort of a Shadow Government, even if it is to be utilized only in times of crisis. Many things exist that cannot be proven in a court of law. Prove love.

Prove either the existence or non-existence of God. One of those propositions is the correct one, but proving it is another matter, isn't it? So what we are limited to here is presenting evidence. Some of us have our minds closed on uncomfortable subjects. To consider them creates too much internal stress.

Don't feel obligated to investigate this line of inquiry if you find it distressing. There are plenty of hopeful things to focus on...