It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The End of The United States: The Bush Administration Plan

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+101 more 
posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 08:39 PM
George Bush, and the policies attributed to him and his administration, are part of a sweeping conspiracy designed to bring about a chain of events that will eventually topple the United States of America and hasten the planned approach of a unified global government. While my theory would certainly be an intricate proposition deserving of an epic amount of verbiage, I will endeavor to explain my position through a series of concise statements designed to inspire your input and discussion.

A Predisposition For a Costly War

While intended to be highly humorous, the line from the movie "Princes Bride" is exceptionally accurate and in this case, apropos: "Never get involved in a land war in Asia." Based on the widely available historical record, we know that this president began his administration with an intent to find reason to invade Iraq. Long before the events of 9/11/2001, the administration made it clear to high-level staffers that Saddam Hussein was in the cross-hairs.

Fabricated Rationale For a War Known to be Costly

All but the most staunch Bush apologists recognize that the rational for an Iraq war was at best misrepresented, and at worst a fabricated series of intentional lies. While unserviceable weapons of large-scale-destruction (I hesitate to use "mass-destruction") were indeed discovered rotting way in long-forgotten caches, we now know that Saddam's claims of WMB were mere Arabic posturing. Learned scholars of the region desperately attempted to inform Bush, to no avail, that the words of Hussein were hollow.

No scholar of the history of war and military strategy of the region would dare conceive of a plan to invade and occupy the region. This is why the Gulf war stopped short of an invasion and occupation. This is why a career civilian (Rumsfeld) was selected to devise the war strategy. As we will see later, the strategy was designed to fail.

Setting The Stage: A Plan For Subprime Failure

During the rule of the Bush administration, the difference between between prime and subprime mortgages (or mark-up) plummeted from 2.8 percent in 2001 to 1.3 percent in 2007. And the total number of subprime loans created jumped from 9% of all mortgages in 1996(*) to 20% in 2006(*). The number of loans dramatically jumped because the risk premium required to issue these loans dramatically dropped.

Despite widespread concern and gloomy forecasts related to such a large amount of high-risk debt, the administration and the Federal bank enabled broad securitization(*) of these incredibly high risk mortgages into pools of "mortgage-backed securities" or MBS. This strategy made it possible to spread the staggering risk, repackaged as securities, throughout the world economies like a plague of capital-eating viruses.

As the plague spread and high-risk capital became cheap, the inevitable run on real estate occurred and prizes soared as speculators extended themselves and low-income buyers financed 105% of their home purchases. The volatile stage is set with a superabundance of high-risk no-equity debt on trillions of dollars of over-priced property.

The Deft Timing of A Catastrophe

Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz recently postulated that the Iraq war cost the U.S. fifty to sixty times more than the Bush administration has admitted or predicted. He further postulates that the war is the primary reason for the subprime banking crisis and resulting global financial crisis.

While the esteemed Mr. Stiglitz is indeed looking in the correct direction, he's not adjusting his perception to consider conspiracies, and thus, not prepared to see the obvious -- the unimaginably costly war and timing of the subprime financial crisis were expertly manipulated to coincide for maximum global collateral damage.

The Brilliant Strategy of a Globalist

Much has been speculated about the globalist posture of the Bush Administration. As conspiracy theorists, we've witnessed the expansion of the "North American Free Trade Agreement," the baby-steps toward the Amero, unthinkable immigration policies for a conservative, his remarks that the "Constitution is just a piece of paper," the endorsement of North American integration in the Guantajuato Proposal, and the creation of the North American Competitiveness Council. Also, we conspiracy theorists have recognized the global government agenda of the so-called "NeoCons" and their chess-like strategy to sacrifice short term losses for the ultimate win.

The End of it All

Economic estimates of the total cost of the war in Iraq have exceeded two trillion dollars (Stiglitz & Bilmes). The war is a failure, because it was designed to fail. The brokers of power were more interested in organizing colossal financial mismanagement and waste than actual strategic results.

Economic estimates of the global impact of the subprime crisis exceed one trillion dollars in banking write-downs alone -- this figure does not factor in global loses from MBS failures, foreclosures, lost consumer savings, and lost property values which could add further trillions to the total. The brokers of power were more interested in stealthily distributing unprecedented financial risk than promoting home ownership for consumers.

It is my position that those within the administration who plot such conspiracies, planned these two financially catastrophic events to culminate in a crescendo of staggering uncertainty and catastrophic economic failure late this year, precisely as the 2008 election approaches. The weakened government soon to be in transition will inevitably overreact with an ill-conceived financial "bail out" effort, causing the end of this nation as we know it -- a sacrificed rook in the global chess game of domination.

(typo correction)

[edit on 2-3-2008 by]

posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 09:58 PM
Yes but most people would agree this NWO conspiracy transcends this administration itself. Presidents come and go but the march toward global totalitarianism goes on. Pinning it all on the Bush policies would be taking a narrow perspective of the bigger picture.

posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 10:01 PM
reply to post by Shar_Chi very true it gos back before daddy was the head of the cia right

posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 10:05 PM

Originally posted by Shar_Chi
Yes but most people would agree this NWO conspiracy transcends this administration itself. Presidents come and go but the march toward global totalitarianism goes on. Pinning it all on the Bush policies would be taking a narrow perspective of the bigger picture.

Indeed. However, one cannot ignore the fact that the tactics to hasten the financial bankruptcy of the country have occurred under this administration, and have been timed to present maximum damage during the next.

posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 10:37 PM
Pres. Clinton signed the GLBA into law which is a big reason for the financial crisis we are in today. Not long before he left office I might add also.

I do agree with most of what you are saying, but pinning it on "Bush" makes it sound sound like you are playing partisan politics. Truth is it is transcends both parties and yes the real fun is about to begin, after Bush leaves office.

[edit on 2-3-2008 by zephyrone]

posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 10:40 PM
First off excellent thread, starred and flagged. Secondly, I was wondering what the real consequences will be if this is indeed what is happening. I agree that the blunders of this administration are just too large and too many to be ignored. The chances that it all is one big coincidence seems a bit hard for me to swallow.

So what does it all mean though? What will the consequence be for the average American? Will we simply be trading one tyrannical ruling party for another with a continued reduction of rights and representation? Or will it be something more severe? I can see it happening, I just can't really get my mind around the ramifications of what the end goal is and what that means to me. I firmly believe that the people are helpless to stop the powers that be from carrying out their plans. We are all pretty much along for the proverbial ride. I know there are some idealists out there who are disgusted from my apathy, but I really think it is more of a realistic view of things as opposed to an apathetic view.

I think that the people who should be most worried could possibly be the Canadians in this scenario. If the PTB intentionally bring about the collapse of the US to usher in the North American Union, I could see that as more of a stealthy way of simply grabbing up Canada and Mexico thereby acquiring their resources. The average American will have a hard time dealing with the loss of their sovereignty and their new job market could potentially look a lot different due to increased competition, but I think the real goal is for the elitists to have easier access to Canadian and Mexican resources.

Again, nice topic. It just makes me wonder what the landscape of the world will look like 20 years from now.

posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 10:45 PM
One way or another America has hit the wall and is now flipping down the front strait, waiting to come to a smoldering halt in the infield. That is where the next globalist steps in to go ahead and hook us to the tow truck and call it a day.

Welcome to the era of an U.S.Aless world of U.N. nanny state, supertaxation/global communism.

That is unless there is a whole hearted violent revolt against the perps of this global NWO scheme.

I have faith people, we can do it. Max out your credit cards on ak-47's and ammo. Lets take our country back!!!!!

posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 10:52 PM
reply to post by

This is an incredibly well-thought-out post! Should be required reading.

There are 'conspiracy theories', and then there are REAL conspiracies happening right under our noses!

I'm on a holiday to Europe this summer....for two weeks...wonder if there will be a country to return to.....guess I should pack all my stuff, just in case.

posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 11:18 PM
No matter if it happens in 10 years, 50 years, 100years or 1000years. It wouldn't matter if you want it to happen or not. The Earth is going to have a one world goverment.

posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 11:28 PM
reply to post by kennethmd

A One-World Government, eventually, will and should happen. The issue here is WHO will be 'Governing'???

This is postulated in the context of an acknowledgement that Humans are not the Masters of the Universe.

But, we are fighters, at the core...and rallying together, if there some threat to our species existance, should be understood.

posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 11:40 PM

Originally posted by kennethmd
No matter if it happens in 10 years, 50 years, 100years or 1000years. It wouldn't matter if you want it to happen or not. The Earth is going to have a one world goverment.

If we survive that long. And if we survive even longer...
no matter if it happens in 10 years, 50 years, 100years or 1000years. It wouldn't matter if you want it to happen or not. The Earth is going move BEYOND one world government.

posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 02:18 AM
reply to post by Shar_Chi

That is an interesting idea, Shar....

I would like to see a planet that had a unified voice...but how will that be accomplished?

posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 03:47 AM
Some facts here, but a whole lot of jumping the gun.

Things to consider:

1. A world government is not profitable. The 'us' and 'them' mentality is what ultimately drives a whole pyramid of industries with defense, the needs of a national government, and competition as the capstones. It is with seperation and alienation that humanity is made far more easily controllable than would otherwise be. It has always been about deception through carefully managed ignorance.

2. Eight years of a painfully inept Bush Administration does not by itself constitute evidence of a vast interconnected plot executed from day 1 to damage the U.S. economy beyond repair and force evenutal world government. Quite often mismanagement and corruption is simply that. I would lean towards rationalizing the human nature aspects of these failures, than postulizing some kind of elaborate theory that attempts to make more sense of the whole disturbing mess.

3. The national debt may be ballooning out of control but don't be fooled. The oil markets and the petrodollar assures that every dollar 'lost' on this war is safely returned back to America. It may not be back in the hands of the federal government or the average american, but it is indeed held by American corporations - notably the ones who are making record profits as we speak. Politicians do not waste money on wars if there isn't profit to be made. Myths like these need to be dispelled. There is no bankruptcy going on aside from that of the middle classes.

posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 04:01 AM
reply to post by SteveR

Maybe it's not so much a 'one world government' as it is a small number of 'regional mega governments' ala Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia of Orwell's 1984. There can still be an 'us versus them' situation for the masses that way, while the people at the very top secretly just play the game without really believing in the propaganda they produce.

posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 04:05 AM
reply to post by Beachcoma

My thoughts exactly. Even in a one world government, it would be easy to create an enemy simply through the use of propaganda. Look at the war on terror. It isn't targeting any specific nation and it could easily be the model of the fear generating war of the future.

posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 04:16 AM
I've stopped believing in the compulsory nature of government altogether. Well, yes I suppose we do need it while humans rediscover the value of ethics, but after that, government is no longer required to facilitate co-operation and consensus between individuals... government will become obsolete. And if we don't rediscover the value of ethics, then we won't make it much farther than a crude NWO scenario.

posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 04:33 AM
reply to post by Shar_Chi

Have you seen anything that would lead you to believe that mankind is capable of rediscovering ethics? If anything, mankind seems to be devolving in my opinion. I really do believe that without a government, it would be absolute chaos and anarchy. The will of the people who don't care about their fellow man is far stronger than the will of the "good" people. The power that the government now holds would be taken by whatever criminals or thugs would be willing to take it.

I definitely see a government less future as more of a "Mad Max" scenario than a "Garden of Eden" type of utopia. Never underestimate mankind's propensity to do evil.

posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 05:20 AM

Originally posted by Karlhungis
Have you seen anything that would lead you to believe that mankind is capable of rediscovering ethics?

Well, I did... without peer encouragement, media reinforcement, or being sponsored by some dungheap thinktank, fraternity or scholarship. So I know it is possible. If every member of this website rediscovered the value of ethics, then things could get interesting indeed. Aye, not likely, but theoretically possible.

Originally posted by Karlhungis
I really do believe that without a government, it would be absolute chaos and anarchy.

Anarchy isn't really a problem if people abide by common ethics. It is a loosely defined concept with many possibilities.

I can't stress enough how our collective failure to recognise universal ethics is ultimately to blame for EVERYTHING that is going wrong for humanity. Yes I did emphasise the requirement of ethics for the above to be a positive experience rather than mad max scenario. I'm well aware it is not likely to happen, but it is always possible...

"War is over, if you want it..." - Lennon

posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 08:44 AM

Originally posted by SteveR
There is no bankruptcy going on aside from that of the middle classes.

Ah yes, just those pesky middle classes filing bankruptcy and the middle classes make up um, what, 90%+ of this country.
Yep no economic crash, nothing to see here, America is AOK
as long as our top 1% are taken care of we are doing fine...

posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 09:00 AM
reply to post by SEEWHATUDO

The one thing I would add to that involves our collective definition of the "middle class." Having a middle class implies that there are three distinct classes: Upper, middle, and lower. I have trouble with this categorization of wealth, and prefer that we call it what, I believe, it is; Us v. Them.

There is no middle class, but rather a more pronounced gradation of wealth in the lower class. It is quite literally Upper v. Lower, perhaps not 1% v. 99%, but I'm not going to claim to know where to put the cut off line between the two classes. Now, surely, many many folks have it much "worse" than others within the lower division, but creating false categorizations such as lower, middle, and upper divides us in places where unity could give us more strength in struggle.

Too much attention is paid to this nebulous middle class in status quo political discussion, and, as such, this phenomenon has spread into the radical / alternative discussion. If we're going to bring a serious and sustained critique of the current system, we must be united as one large struggling people against the monolith of wealth, power, and apparatus that makes up the ruling class.

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in