I'm interested in the modern state of affairs and the political forces that are driving our country toward the next transformation. It's a reinvention that certain groups and families have been patiently waiting for. Our social and political elites have been fighting with each other for control over the nation since the ink dried on the Constitution. This conflict has become indistinguishable from the bureaucratic trends faced by all governments to centralize power.

The conspiracy can be easily found. The people who run the institutions that regulate our country's economic prosperity and technological development have learned how to tap into the survival instincts of the bureaucracies they command. They've learned how to fully exploit the budgetary weakness in government. They've tried--and failed--to bring the U.S. private sector under their control. They've learned their lessons and applied them well. This open secret has been with us for quite some time. Today's elites may be on the verge of achieving what those who came before them could not.

All societies have within them a small group of privileged people who dream of total power. The conspiracy to deliberately centralize power in America is well documented. It's the end-game that has eluded modern conspiracy theorists. What will these people do with their newly expanded powers once they have them? What will happen to the rest of us when this conflict boils over? The alleged "New World Order" means many different things to many different people. Based on the events of the last 90 years, I'm ready to make my own guess.

After the American Revolution (1775-1781), but prior to the ratification of the U.S. Constitution (1789), the Federalists made themselves known. They were, and still are, the ultimate champions of centralized power in America. The Anti-Federalists, who championed State rights (limited Federal government), have never successfully mounted a defense against this drive for ultimate power. It can be argued that their influence has been in steady decline since the Civil War (1861- 1865).

I don't dispute the decline in Anti-Federalist power. Both sides in this conflict have given birth to many secret societies. The Federalists have had the benefit of secret societies that pre-date the American cause by a wide margin. None of the groups opposed to the concept of centralized power show any signs of benefitting from the secret societies they've created. I chalk this up to the vulnerability of their idealism and the shortsightedness of their planners.

Throughout our history, the truly political among us have instinctively known that long-term power can only be achieved through the development and meeting of long-term goals. In this case, the ends really do justify the means. Political victories here and now, such as those experienced by the Republicans between 1994 and 2004, do not increase the likelihood of dominating power in the future. The wealthy families, organizations, and secretive groups that have consistently practiced long-range tactics and planning are, without exception, the ones who make up the majority of today's conspirators searching for maximum power.

The "revelation" that most likely occurred to empower these elitists might have come during or immediately after the Civil War. No other conflict in our history has resulted in such a prolonged state of vulnerability in which the Federal bureaucracy could be tampered with. Only by experimenting with the nuts and bolts that held the Federal government together could the elites discover the budgetary weakness they'd need to manipulate present day events. Learning firsthand exactly how a bureaucracy seeks to fiscally expand and financially survive, these uncredited individuals also learned how to control the dependency that big governments breed in the populations they oversee.

It can be argued that Theodore Roosevelt was the last President in any position to resist the drive toward big government. It can also be argued that his actions sealed the fate of the Anti- Federalist cause. No matter how you slice it, the facts speak for themselves. By the end of World War I, a small number of people whom we will never know won the battle for control over the Federal budget. From this point on, the very notion of secrets within secrets necessary to hide this truth would be enshrined in the myths and legends of Federal civil service.

There is debate among historians and conspiracy theorists over the truth behind the stock market crash of 1929. Newspapers of the time opined that the Federal government had been "broken" once and for all. The assumption was that the burden of "real government" would fall to the States, which might not be able to handle that burden. The lack of effective policy-making by President Hoover in the aftermath of this crisis strongly suggests that the private sector meltdown was allowed to happen. It's worth noting that the apparent incompetence shown by George W. Bush in today's atmosphere of crisis follows a similar pattern of cause-and-effect.

Modern conspiracy theorists generally agree that the administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) marks an important turning point in the evolution of America's elite hierarchy. Post-war wealth and various political realignments ensured the supremacy of those individuals, families, and groups that had, over the previous 30 years, become the real government and the keepers of its fragile treasury. The next challenge appears to have been the establishment of a flexible program or timetable in which to covertly and overtly assert their desired authority.

A simple study of various U.N., Trilateral Commission, and Council on Foreign Relations conspiracy theories suggests that there may have been some disagreement on this topic. The 1944 Breton-Woods agreement that started the World Bank suggests to me that the decision was made by the majority to achieve power by "mismanaging" the Federal budget. The many high- profile assassinations of the 1960s imply that at least one faction in this conspiracy of elites thought they could speed things up by using strong-arm tactics. My suspicion is that this element underestimated the extent of social disaffection caused by those deaths.

Attempting to break the private sector investment banking establishment in 1929 telegraphed the conspirator's next move. FDR's Treasury "reforms" during the Depression suggests that those in control of the Federal bureaucracy tried--and failed--to put the private sector economy on a leash. The crippling inflation of the 1970s may have been part of a scaled-down effort to try again. It may also have been a deliberate attempt by the conspiracy to see how far the economy could be pushed in a negative direction. Given the complexity of many recent events, this could have been a necessary experiment. It would explain the 1989 realignment of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and it's relationship to the World Bank.

The presidency of Ronald Reagan (1980-1988) saw the growth and justification of a large Federal deficit that allowed the conspirators to fully infiltrate more than just the bureaucracy. The intelligence community was finally at their mercy. There is some evidence to suggest that this may have been a genuinely required action on their part to preserve the integrity of their plan. In their failure to co-opt the FBI and CIA, they may have risked more than we know. For example, the death of CIA Director William Colby in 1987 appears to have been unnatural. There is a chance that FBI Director Louis Free was forced out in 2001 because he wouldn't go along with the program.

The stage appears to be set for an orchestrated rise to power that won't be an actual coup. The mechanism of choice appears to be an out-of-control Federal debt. Lessons learned from 1929 to the present may have convinced the conspirators that the private sector economy recovers too fast for their purposes. Frustrated Democrats in the 1930s were often frustrated by the slow pace of their "reforms." Republicans in the modern period now seem to be having the same "problem."

This conspiracy has been rewarded with its greatest gains in power and prestige during times of crisis. In each instance, the Federal agencies and their laws appear to be the weak link in the chain that ensures national survival. This is the ultimate conclusion of my study. The conspirators and their supporting organizations have a more limited reach than is generally believed. Most of them have their roots in the civilian economy, but the private sector turns out to be too big for them to control to the extent that they would like.

The Federal portion of the national finance ledger is a smaller target--one small enough to be dominated by those who make up the shadow government. Today's deficits are direct indicators of their goals, tactics, and desired outcomes. In the coming two decades, we should see this agenda unfold. In spite of the mistakes they've made, they're close to getting what they want.

Using the threat of financial failure as leverage, we can expect to see certain members of the conspiracy take a more active role in public life. Some will be people you've heard of. Many will not. The institutional forces that drive this hidden agenda will cause some members of civil service to be recruited. Others will simply be bullied into not bucking the trend.

The trend itself appears to have enough pent-up energy to do great damage to the country. Apathy in the civil service virtually guarantees that no senior supervisor or career politician will meddle in something that they see as beyond their control. Today's dominant leaders, dynasties, corporations, and secret groups are just waiting for the other shoe to drop. When the Federal deficit starts to collapse the government, they will send their representatives into the chaos with a plan to save us from the crisis they made.

I don't think it's an accident that we find ourselves in a decade of instability. If the shadow conspiracy that seeks to achieve ultimate power in the United States is going to succeed, it'll need a boost. The current state of affairs inside the U.S. suggests that the conspirators have near total control of our Federal bureaucracy. Even so, they are plagued with problems associated with the private sector.

I begin to think that recently positive economic growth in the private sector was not fully anticipated. The recent successes of the oil industry appeared to catch many by surprise. Although many alternatives come to mind, it seems that the elites who hoped for increased Federal failure might be victims of their own success.

In my book, "Politics & Patriotism," [ISBN 1933538325] I speculated that we'd still be at war in 2014. I'm ready to stand by that prediction. With such a resilient private sector economy to slow them down, it seems that the conspiracy may now need a long harsh war to achieve its goals. Recent events in the Middle East now suggest that war is imminent. It's not out of line to suggest that this war is being deliberately "created."

CIA director Porter Goss resigned on May 4 (2006). If we take his departure at face value, it seems likely that our ability to gather intelligence and commit espionage in the Middle East is impaired, or non-existent. At this point, I'm ready to argue that the "devolution" of American intelligence agencies has been happening over the last fifteen years has been deliberate. In addition to backing up my general thesis, it suggests that our leaders have gone out of their way to make us blind in that part ofthe world.

Are they trying to start a fight by maintaining a deliberately weak stand while goading our enemies? I think so. This would be in keeping with what we know about the start of U.S. involvement in World War Two, Korea, and Vietnam. In the modern scenario, it seems clear that today's "management style" revolves around a gross over-extension of the Federal budget to keep and sustain that apparently weak stance.

We've got a lot to be distracted with. Each time we turn on the t.v. or pick up a newspaper, we're bombarded with problems of high gas prices, and the threat posed by unchecked illegal immigration. It's worth noting that in spite of all this, we see no signs from Congress that our leaders intend to reign in their bad spending habits. If anything, we should expect to see more fiscal mismanagement from Washington...because...Federal tax revenues have been going up at a fast pace for the last three years.

Congress is about to go in to Summer recess. The smoke screen of "issues" they've laid before us will dissipate just enough to allow them to re-focus our attention on the House and Senate elections that we should all pay attention to in the Fall. As they come back from Summer break, look for the first order of business to be an increase in the Federal debt ceiling. Reasons? Hurricane damage, fuel problems, and war fighting. Every source that I can find suggests they will raise the debt limit by a full trillion dollars.

IMO It seems to me that our best protection against these “conspiracies” is education. For these conspiracies to succeed requires a naïve, illiterate population. It would also require a conspiracy between big business and government. Even though business and government are constantly trying to manipulate each other the government’s greed and indifference to businesses needs will always keep them apart. Capitalism is by its very nature an immunizing force against an all powerful government. Money, by no means, equals power over government. Bill Gates would be a great example in that the richest man on Earth appears to have no power to influence government and its impact on his business. Only his ability to purchase the services of the best legal minds and the government’s inability to openly defy its own laws keep the government at bay.

I see the fall of the Soviet Empire as a direct result of allowing its population to acquire too much knowledge and wealth. In the effort to win the “Cold War” the Soviet government was forced to educate its people to a level that made blind obedience to authority an impossibility to achieve. Once the general population realizes how much power it wields; governmental control becomes an impossibility. Now we see Putin trying to turn the tide in the other direction. I do not think he will succeed in this generation as the population he is trying to control has lost much of its fear and are far more likely to rebel successfully. They have also embraced capitalism and the rewards that come with it. As long as the memories of standing in line for hour after hour just to get a loaf of bread remain fresh they will not be a population that is easy to control.

Now China is heading down the same path. Capitalism has a strong foothold and its people are becoming more enlightened. Unless something interferes with this the current form of government in China can not hold on for much longer.

This all brings me to the underlying conspiracies you are speaking of. To get the ball rolling in the right direction would require a dramatic change in the course of world events. We are clearly headed for a war that is beyond any other in the human experience. Some clever collaboration and manipulation could set off this powder keg at any moment. Everyone is preaching hate of some sort and the recent riots and marches around the world would be a good indicator that the wheels have been set in motion. Even more important than what or who is the cause is how it can be stopped. If it can be stopped?

In my book, "Politics & Patriotism," [SBN 1933538325] I do talk about the ways we can exploit the vulnerabilities of this conspiracy.

Here is just one example:

In the short run, the planners have a hard time with grass-roots reformers. Local officials are harder to reach because of the way current campaign finances are run. We should expect to see this flaw in their plan corrected by some time in 2012. It'll be done under the guise of Federal campaign finance reforms. In the mean time, we can make the most of this by running candidates for local office that aren't beholden to big interests.

The families and organizations that mastermind this conspiracy do everyting at a macro level just now. It's all big picture stuff. They've got to break the existing Federal system before they can enact the "reforms" that will let them have access to smaller bureaucracies.

Let's take a look at one possible scenario:

Big oil is currently lobbying Alaska's legislature very hard. They've already bought off the governor and sabotaged the natural gas contract that was hoped for by so many. You'll note that this "failure" is in the best interest of the Federal government. Even so, it's still possible for State-level patriots to stop what's coming. As the legislature moves in to special session, it's going to be hard for Federally-approved influence peddlers to stop the PPT bill that could come...if...the various members of he House and Senate can avoid the threats and temptations set before them by people behind the scenes.

I'm sure this is an obvious problem to the people who have so much at stake, but every conspiracy has its limits. It's up to us to figure out what they are, and act accordingly.

From now on, we have to assume that any terrorist attack on U.S. soil was allowed to happen. this conspiracy runs too deep to suggest any thing less. This can happen any number of ways. The formula of deliberate mis-management would suggest that we will see the intelligence community become under funded over the next ten years.

It's worth noting that the CIA is soon to be run by an active duty military officer. Ifthis appointment goes through unchallenged, we should expect to see more active duty officers quietly moved in to lesser intelligence oversight roles. For more on this, you can read my thread, "future of the posse comitatus."

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
From now on, we have to assume that any terrorist attack on U.S. soil was allowed to happen. this conspiracy runs too deep to suggest any thing less. This can happen any number of ways. The formula of deliberate mis-management would suggest that we will see the intelligence community become under funded over the next ten years.

It's worth noting that the CIA is soon to be run by an active duty military officer. Ifthis appointment goes through unchallenged, we should expect to see more active duty officers quietly moved in to lesser intelligence oversight roles. For more on this, you can read my thread, "future of the posse comitatus."

Excuse me justin but can u tell me whether yr post is in any way relating to what i said or do you see it as its a war against americans only?

And anything an outsider says is irrelevant!

Fact is that america is being used as the example to rest of world, seen as the land of the free , and if your not free what chance the rest of world have!

All because of complacency and ignorance


SouLJa

SouLJa: Actually, I'm still looking in to your suggested theory. I'm not that familiar with European football, so I'm doing a lot of reading. There's a lot of conspiracy theory out there that suggests that the world cup may see a terror attack. It takes time to get through.

Americans are not infowlable. If you do a little homework, you'll see that I am quie critical of the Bush administration in other places on the internet. The question you're asking here is not a simple one to asnwer. Based on what I know at this point, there's a chance that any terror attack at or near the world cup could be aimed at European or Internationalist interests.

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
SouLJa: Actually, I'm still looking in to your suggested theory. I'm not that familiar with European football, so I'm doing a lot of reading. There's a lot of conspiracy theory out there that suggests that the world cup may see a terror attack. It takes time to get through.

Americans are not infowlable. If you do a little homework, you'll see that I am quie critical of the Bush administration in other places on the internet. The question you're asking here is not a simple one to asnwer. Based on what I know at this point, there's a chance that any terror attack at or near the world cup could be aimed at European or Internationalist interests.

correct me if im wrong but i think u are missinterpretting where i feel the terror attacks will come from.

meaning domestic not foreign, an internal affair. cia fbi fema maybe in conjunction with mi6

SouLJa

I'm trying to look at your question from two different angles. At this point, I don't see anyting on the net that backs up the suggestion of a U.S. intelligence agency "allowing" something bad to happen at the world cup, but, as I've learned...

You'll find a lot on ATS that suggests that U.S. intelligence and law enforcement may allow the next terror attack (where-ever it comes from) to get through. European football is not very big in the States, so I doubt that it's enough of an event to warrant anyone taking action on U.l.S. soil during that event.

The closer we get to the November elections, the more likely it is that the bush administration might like to see some small terror action go through on domestic soil. If that happened, you'd see an immediate turn-around in the fortunes of the Republican party.

That doesn't mean I want any of that to take place. I would prefer to see no more terror attacks in this country for the rest of my life.

It's worth noting that Congress is about to come back session. Rather than grapple with the most vital issues at hand, the GOP has decided to steer off course and deploy a smoke screen. You may not ever find a more direct and deliberate effort to mis-manage the government in to paralysis than this.

Instead of tackling immigration, the Republicans have decided that what we appear to need more than anything else ust now is a pair of ammendments to the U.S. Constitution. One will ban the burning the of the national flag, and the other will ban homosexual marriage.

I'll grant you that that both of these are hot-button issues for certain segments of the society, but it should be clear that this is a staged fight. The leaders of the House and the Senate do NOT actually want a resolution to these problems. They just want a justifiable "means" to jam up the system.

It's worth noting that Democrats have done this is the past, when they too wanted to make us look the other way. Both sides in this debate already know what they're going to say. They are counting on the fact that we've all head it before. they want us to be fed up and ignore them.

I bring this to your attention because its a direct and deliberate unambigious example of my theory.

I’m still fascinated by the nearly complete lack of WMD’s in Iraq. I believe they were once there and I’m not sure that I believe they could have been moved unnoticed considering the state of satellite surveillance. Maybe some could slip under the radar, but all of them??? I have nothing to base this upon but gut instinct. What if they were all found in a huge stash just prior to a national election? Either this year or in 2008. More likely 2008 as it is a far more important election. It seems to me it would assure a victory for the Republican candidate or at least enhance the chances of a win. It would explain their absence and would be a tool of infinite value to the Republican campaign. It might also explain why the Bush administration showed so little concern about the issue up front.

It would also play well as a precursor to an actual invasion of Iran as the US populace would be swayed in that direction. Particularly if the find were on a commonly used route to and from Iran and right on or next to the border. These missing WMD’s would then make perfect sense and qualify as an act of political genius. Both in guaranteeing a win in the race for the White House and in opening the gate of public opinion to allow an attack of Iran.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I’m still fascinated by the nearly complete lack of WMD’s in Iraq. I believe they were once there and I’m not sure that I believe they could have been moved unnoticed considering the state of satellite surveillance. Maybe some could slip under the radar, but all of them??? I have nothing to base this upon but gut instinct. What if they were all found in a huge stash just prior to a national election? Either this year or in 2008. More likely 2008 as it is a far more important election. It seems to me it would assure a victory for the Republican candidate or at least enhance the chances of a win. It would explain their absence and would be a tool of infinite value to the Republican campaign. It might also explain why the Bush administration showed so little concern about the issue up front.

Saddam Hussein was on old school street fighter. He came up through the ranks using some fairly sophisticated tactics of deceoption. The first rule of street fighting is camouflage. Look more dangerous than you really are, and you'll get to pick your fights.

During that period when Hanse Blix was investigating WMD's in Iraq under U.N. authority, Saddam never once missed a chance to feed Mr. Blix a false picture of the situation. Public domain sources strongly suggest that Saddam bribed the Iranians to put off the possibility of an invasion while his country was under sanction. The price? During the first Gulf War, it was his air force. During the period of sanctions that followed, it was his nuclear program.

Sneaking the hardware across the border wasn't hard. As we now know, it cost Saddam many millions of dollars to perpertate a grand hoax on the U.N., which the Americans bought in to. During the period of sanctions, Syria allowed their border with Iraq to go "unmanaged." The price? Saddam's active bio-chemical program. It's very spendy to keep any WMD program alive, and Saddam knew this. The cost to fool the West was small, but the benefits were, in his mind, very large.

With hindsight, it now seems clear that Bush was willing to bet on the accuracy of the U.N. fidings. He didn't need to find working WMD programs. He just needed to find mothballed labs that could've been reactivated at any time. I think that everyone who mattered in Washington was convinced that they'd find that much. That seems to be the only reason why the CIA would put their credibility on the line.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
It would also play well as a precursor to an actual invasion of Iran as the US populace would be swayed in that direction. Particularly if the find were on a commonly used route to and from Iran and right on or next to the border. These missing WMD’s would then make perfect sense and qualify as an act of political genius. Both in guaranteeing a win in the race for the White House and in opening the gate of public opinion to allow an attack of Iran.

It is within the range of possibility that U.S. intelligence sources have already gathered the physical proof needed to show that Iran now posesses nuclear technologies that once resided in Iraq. Given the current diplomatic situation with Iran, it may only be a matter of time 'til U.S. diplomats are given the go-ahead to play that card.

In purely practical terms, the U.S. doesn't have to do anything more than wait for the Iranians to actually build a bomb. Like North Korea, the Iranians may not carry out an underground verification test. Both sides are aware that things change real fast if the Iranians explore a test-grade weapon.

My speculation is that U.S. inspired "action," whatever it is, will not be taken until the next President is in office. It's just going to take that long for things to pan out. the current streategy seems to be a deliberate mis-management of the crisis 'til it boils over.

Thanks very much. I used your link to read the Paul Gaubatz article. It's really quite unnerving to think of what could happen to a person in his position. For the most part, conspiracy theorists are speculators. Every now and again, some of us get it right. That's "uncomfortable" to the people in power, who don't feel like they can afford to take chances.

To some extent, I feel quite fortunate. I don't have his profil,e and I don't have access to the same kind of media that he does. I'm just a very small fish in a larger pond. Even so, I did publish and it is possible for my work to be noticed by the wrong people. After much thought, it was a risk that I decided to take.

Logic dictates that it would be dangerous to speculate on the motives of any government. In any counrry, there will always be a corrupt element. As the world economy continues to evolve, "globalization" virtually ensures that this trend towards shadow governments will continue. In all cases, these unknown persons will always look with disfavor on anyone who can predict their plans.

More and more people are asking me about how I feel regarding my personal safety. I choose to take this as a sign that more and more people are reading my work. I don't actually think I will dissappear, or perish under questionable circumstances. In the unlikely event that this does happen, it will only cause somebody else to take my place.

It would seem to me the more you publish and the more visible you are the safer you would be. I don’t know how many other sites you’re active on but I’d think the more the better. Imagine the attention if someone like Coulter were to have an unfortunate incident. Being outrageous seems to be the best way to get attention unfortunately. If you ever do receive a threat I’d think it would be imperative to immediately talk about it anywhere and everywhere.

You make a good point, Blaine. I chose to represent my work as Fiction, just to be safe. The only people who will really know what's total fact are the ones most directly involved in what happened to me. Like many conspiracy theorists before me, I had an "event" occurr that put me on this path.

I'm not bitter about it anymore. My phone may have been tapped just once, but that's the worst I've tasted to date. The fact is that I am harmless compaired to persons like Paul Gaubatz. Scroll up and see two posts back, and you'll know what I mean. In it's own way, it would be funny if my "experience" did contribute to my success as an author.

As time passes, it is becoming more and more obvious to anyone who cares to look that our government does not have ourbest interest in mind. Those of us who kick this stuff around are having the same sorts of confabs that the colonists in 1770's America did. I imagine that many of today's conspiracy buffs would feel quite cozy in a Boston pub, circa 1775.

I struggle to accept theories like this because it sounds so far out there. I'm only 20, but when I discuss anything remotely close to this with my friends, they call me crazy and actually defriend me. Everyone I bring this up with thinks it's ridiculous, and then they give me counter arguments that make me think I really am crazy.

I love everything you're doing, and if I had to pick one way or another, I'd side with you.

Originally posted by Glooper23
I struggle to accept theories like this because it sounds so far out there. I'm only 20, but when I discuss anything remotely close to this with my friends, they call me crazy and actually defriend me. Everyone I bring this up with thinks it's ridiculous, and then they give me counter arguments that make me think I really am crazy.

I understand your position. You did put your finger on something important, and you may not know it. You did you the word "theory." The fact that you can make that destinction is important. It's normal for people to discuss any subject in terms of "what they know." You'll find that what they are really doing is deliberately keeping their minds closed to alternatives.

It's not easy to be a critical thinker, and it is even harder to be open-minded. The fact is that most of us have a burning need to just be right. When YOU end up talking about things that don't conform to their world view, they'll put you off to avoid having to do the extra brain work.

If I myself had not run in to these things, I would never think to talk about them. I would not be a published author, and I would certainly be doing someting else other than typing this message. That's how easy it would be to simply ignore it. As long as the career politicians in any country don't impact your ability to live your life, they can get away with literal bloody murder.

It's only when your ability to go to work and come home without being molested gets impaired that you ever even think to question these things. When government becomes so intrusive that you have no choice but to think about that these things, "theory" starts to become "fact."