A Top Secret America - hidden from public view

[NinjaPuppy]

Totally agree with you Craig. I didn't want to bring religion into the arena as it takes too many forms. The connection between religion and government is exactly why I totally gave up on my patriarchal, monotheistic religious teachings. Especially since religion tends to use a fire and brimstone attitude of instilling fear. Fear is just another way to control the 'unwashed masses' and fleece them of their money. History has shown us that there have been too many popes who have ruled kingdoms in the name of God, mixing the best of their personal two worlds for control over entire civilizations. (Hopefully 'civilizations' is the correct word here as I mean it as the same as kindoms/villages/cities and/or countries. What a political or governmental situation could not control with laws, a church would do with fear.

As for a "decorum vs. the more dramatic modes of expression", decorum is sooooo overrated. But I sure do hate anything dramatic. I prefer a no nonsense, upfront approach. Especially when I'm expected to vote for a political candidate. To quote SCEPCOP: "NOTHING exists that we don't know about, so there are no "fantastic" secrets that are being kept from us." I would actually have to agree with that statement eventhough SCEPCOP was being facetious. There really are no fantastic secrets that are being kept from us because every danged political candidate lies through their teeths during their campaign. We are continually subjected to having to choose the lesser of two evils, rather than the best person for the job. Only those who conform to the agenda of those in power can rise to the top. It's not a hidden agenda either. We all know they are a bunch of slimeballs, the next one worse than his/her predicessor to make sure that the little guy never gets a slice of that tasty pie they dangle like a carrot. Yes, every once in a while, they throw us a 'wildcard' candidate that they can control completely to look good in front of the cameras (think Reagan) so that the next slimeball looks like a bargain and we all jump on the bandwagon in their propaganda mission for whatever BS they are selling that year.

[NinjaPuppy]

I guess I should now go sit on my front porch and wait for the black sedans to line up in front of my house. I'd hate to think that I cost the American taxpayers money for them to 'find me'.

[Scepcop]

You all should see this film "Invisible Empire - NWO Defined". It explains the shadow government and features Mark Dice and Edward Griffin.

[Scepcop]

[Scepcop]

So true Ninjapuppy, from the time that we are born, we are always controlled by someone or a group of people, whether it's parents, schools, government, media, etc. It's always control, control. Yet we are told the opposite, that we are a free country and live in "the land of the free". It's double think and mind control. At the core, you are told one thing and done another. At the core, actions and words don't match. I hate that. It makes me sick. Lies, lies, lies.

[Scepcop]

[ProfWag]

[NinjaPuppy]

[really?]

[Arouet]

[Craig Browning]

Arouet

Ok, I have some issues with how this is worded, but lets accept that the proposition is: If you are perceived as a genuine threat or as a "problem" that you will either be 1) kidnapped (and presumably killed), 2) killed in a manner made to look like an accident, or 3) be publicly painted as a deluded fool (presumably in a dishonest manner). Ok, how is this proposition defended?

Ok, I have to comment on this in that there IS a plethora of evidence that supports every one of these scenarios, most especially item #3 in which one is painted to be a nut-job and what you offer is “quack-science” This is one of the JREF & CSICOP organization’s favorite dodges but you find it echoed in how certain government agencies operate as well, including the CIA, FBI and now Homeland Security (a.k.a. American Gestapo… trust me on this “prediction”) You will likewise see this same bias within the “scientific” and “academic” communities. Just look at the contentions around Global Warming/Climate Change and how big business has deliberately tainted and diluted the facts shared by researchers NOT dependent on “industry” based income/sponsorship, etc. (I’m not saying that some of this research isn’t biased; there are too many profiteers jumping on this bandwagon to not be so).

Ok, here's where the fallacies start. The proposition is that people who attempt to expose this government corruption are dispatched with or otherwise nullified. However, when presented with some examples of some very high profile people with large followings who are doing just that and apparently suffering no harm, rather than consider this to be evidence AGAINST the proposition, the OP invokes Special Pleading. 1) they haven't done enough damage yet - this effectively renders the proposition unfalsifiable - any case where measures are not taken can be explained away by this. 2) they are dupes who have been fed false information and serve some secret government use. Again this renders the original proposition unfalsifiable, and is also an argument from ignorance.

This is just a rephrasing of the previously stated views and thus, the answer is more or less, the same. While there are instances of “highly placed”/politically potent individuals don’t seem to suffer the negatives noted previously, you will find that they do loose influence and depending on whose toes they step on, could lose more at a quicker rate. They are not however, untouchable and unless they know how to play “the game” within the social-political arena, they will come to know a great deal of censure. Frequently this proves to be a slow-boat when it comes to persons of “high” standing, allowing them the opportunity to back-peddle. Again, we can see this in various situations IF we choose to look into such things.

Same thing with these examples. Rather than use the Jones and icke cases to consider it less likely that these three folks were assassinated by the "establishment", the OP is confirmed and rather than ask "does this make it less likely that JH, MLK and BJ were assassinated by the establishment, the question is simply asked why those three were picked for assassination and not Jone and Icke.

While I agree with the idea of not leaning too heavily on the Icke theories I do have to point out that the U.S. Government isn’t too abashed at removing problems. We have (unofficially) done this many times at home and abroad even though the official story is that we don’t do such things. If we didn’t, we’d really not need our own professional hit-men on payroll.

It is well known that Hoover had many personal agenda when it came to everyone from the Kennedy family and Martin Luther King to persecuting his own i.e. transvestites/homosexuals, etc. He kept more files and infringed on more rights of American citizens than any previous director but, he set a standard for such infringements that literally deprives all Americans of genuine privacy in today’s world. The expansion of these antics coming to us via the Patriot Act and invention of the Department of Homeland Security (which was attempted before {see:}… a strong-arm asset for the ultra-conservatives such as we caught a glimpse of during the Bush, Jr. reign of terror & debacle.

Churchmen would tell you that the best trick the devil every played on man was convincing us that he doesn’t exist. This is exactly how any covert/secret society/conspiracy element would operate that’s just plain logic and what magic fans would refer to as “misdirection”… a very common tool used at the military/intelligence level by ALL governments via misinformation programs, double-agents, etc. When the façade is properly set, it would be difficult to prove it a house of cards.

[Arouet]

Craig,

The points I was making was more about the argument structure than of the veracity of the proposition. I was focusing on the the logical fallacies in the post.

[Arouet]

[Craig Browning]