Has there ever been anything vaguely close to this in this nation's history?

[frogcycle]

This takeover by deceit -

I don't recall a world-domination plank in the republican "platform" in 2000
I don't recall bush saying his idol was Attila the Hun


Certainly we have had peaceful "regime change" - FDR replacing Hoover comes to mind - but he was pretty much elected on the "New Deal" plan, wasn't he? Nixon lied about having a "secret plan" to end the war - well, he shaded the truth a lot. He did have a plan to escalate and probably thought it would work. He stretched the truth mightily and got elected with that lie, though. Johnson said "ah won't send Amurican boys to fight some asian war." I think in both of those cases a case could be made that they INTENDED to be truthful, then events overcame them and they reniged. But have we ever had anything even close to this level of duplicity in our supposed "democracy" - with government "of the people?" I wonder how much AG and the Dem party really understood about the PNAC during the election? Did they not take them on over it for fear of looking like wackos? Like Ross Perot claiming the mystery bad guys were disrupting his daughters wedding? Did they sleepwalk through this?

There is not a proscription in the Constitution against lying when running for office; I think our forefathers naively anticipated people of good will but with differing opinions. This is the Invasion of the Body Snatchers. They got their toehold by lying and masquerading sufficiently in the election to be close enough to steal it. Then they just simply marched to their own agenda, with no regard whatever for the fact that there are only a handful of them that actually believe in it.

This is a bloodless coup, pure and simple. They wormed their way in, then tore up the Constitution and said 'fuck all of you". Reminds me of the SNL skit where Jesse Jackson said "the question is moot - I get the car"

[Monkeyman]

1. Germany 1937

[frogcycle]

2. Agreed

The parallel is chilling. I said this nation's history, and I don't think we have even a near precedent. You're right though. That is an astonishingly close parallel.

[htuttle]

3. The best way to understand the current regime is to realize they are just like the mafia

What the mob does when it takes over control of a union (and it's pension funds, etc...), the Bush regime is doing to our nation. Except that the Bush Crime Family deals with billions of dollars -- the whole thing would, in fact, make John Gotti very jealous, were he still alive today.

Everything else -- the PR, the image building, the rhetoric -- is nothing but window dressing to cover the essentially criminal nature of their activities.

Oh, and instead of Michael Corleone running things, we get stuck with Fredo, too...

[chefgirl]

4. Not in this country

Not to my (admittedly limited) knowlege, frogcycle.

Ive been saying for six years now that this group in Washington is fully the most blatantly UN-American bunch to ever seize power in this country. They are bent on deconstructing our entire system of government, and reconstructing it into a manifestation of some fascist wet dream.

This, more than ANY other reason, is why I HATE George W. Bush and always will. Second to that is my hatred of the willing, and even smug, stupidity and complacency of Americans who voted for him.

Stolen, or not, he did get an unbelievably high number of votes, both in 2000 and 2004, and for that we should all hang our heads.

You're not alone, and you are absolutely right.

-chef-

[Lerkfish]

5. we became complacent about secrecy

as a population, we allowed the FBI, the CIA, the NSA to operate clandestine operations "for our own good".
Once we abdicted transparency, we allowed ourselves to be taken over. It was only a matter of time.

[blm]

8. That's the bottom line.

Well stated.

[stillcool]

6. I recently purchased a book..

titled "The Rich and Super Rich" by Ferdinand Lundberg, which lays out in a very concise and well-documented manner how this ball got rolling.The copyright of this book is 1968, but 30 yrs. earlier he wrote a book titled 'America's Sixty Families", which dealt with the same subject...inherited wealth, and how that wealth continues to multiply, and diversify with the assistance of legislation, and how this ruling class influences every aspect of American life. I'm always surprised to read articles that mirror current events, yet were written long ago. Any loose string I grasp in the fabric of current events travels back through time to it's familial roots in government and industry

Editorial on NSDD 138 <1984>

In 1984 it is appropriate to anticipate the latest newspeak of the Reagan administration. The most significant buzzword today is "terrorism," which term has effectively replaced "communist" or "subversive" in the jargon of the guardians of national security. After six years of building a national consciousness attuned to the issue of terrorism, however aberrantly defined through repetition of the word, the administration is playing the final cards in its hand.

On April 3, President Reagan secretly issued National Security Decision Directive 138 outlining new policies in the administration's fight against "terrorism." Details of the secret Directive were first exposed in the April 15 Los Angeles Times, although indications of its existence could be gleaned from the April 4 Washington Post report of a speech by Secretary of State George P. Shultz to the Trilateral Commission the night before. Shultz stressed the need for "preemptive actions" to stop "state-supported terrorism," and called for a "bold response" to a problem he saw exemplified by the bomb attack that killed 241 U.S. Marines at Beirut airport last October. (Predictably, he saw no need to mention the 2,000 Nicaraguans killed by the CIA's contras or the more than 30,000 Salvadorans killed by the military dictatorship the U.S. arms and trains.) At the moment Shultz was telling his audience about the serious questions raised in a democracy responding to terrorism, he was fully cognizant that his boss had preempted public debate on the subject by unilaterally signing NSDD 138 earlier that day. The cynicism of this administration knows no bounds.

NSDD 138

Even sketchy details of the new Directive, as described in the L.A. Times, were chilling. It approves of preemptive strikes against terrorists as well as reprisal raids. Both concepts, of course, are highly illegal—nearly incomprehensible—in the realm of domestic law enforcement. The document also approves of the creation of FBI and CIA paramilitary squads for anti-terrorism actions, and the Defense Intelligence Agency is authorized for the first time in its history to use intelligence agents. A Joint Special Operations Agency has been created under the Joint Chiefs of Staff to coordinate military counterterrorist units in each service. Although the Directive stops short of authorizing assassinations (purportedly banned in 1981 by Executive Order 12333), it does authorize preemptive and retaliatory strikes which could kill not only their targets, but innocent bystanders as well. The Directive contains a "dubious morality," one "senior administration official" conceded.
http://covertaction.org//content/view/171/75/

"Never‑ending Flow: The Afghan Pipeline"

By Steve Galster <1988>

While revelations of Reagan's covert war in Nicaragua continue to dazzle the American public, a far bigger and more complex covert program has gone relatively unnoticed in Afghanistan. After nearly nine years of covert involvement, the U.S. has poured over $2 billion into the Afghan war, far more than the total amount that has gone to Nicaragua, Angola, and Kampuchea combined. In fact, the estimated amount of money "lost" in the Afghan pipeline by the CIA's own estimates easily exceeds the total amount of U.S. support that has gone to the contras.

Congressmen who strongly opposed contra aid have not only supported Reagan's covert war in Afghanistan but have teamed up with Reagan Doctrine advocates to expand the administration's program. Whereas the war in Nicaragua is now the "bad" war, Afghanistan has from the start been viewed as the "good" war, and as the rebels call it, a "holy" war or jihad. Thus, with their broad base of support and their strategically placed war below the Soviet border, the Afghan rebels have earned the forefront position in President Reagan's global strategy of "rollback" and billions of dollars in CIA support.http://covertaction.org//content/view/164/75/

Iraq: the Struggle for Oil
By James A. Paul
Executive Director, Global Policy Forum
August, 2002 (revised December, 2002)
Oil Companies in Iraq: A Century of Rivalry and War (November 2003)
Oil in Iraq: the Heart of the Crisis (December, 2002)
The Iraq Oil Bonanza: Estimating Future Profits (January 28, 2004)
http://www.motherjones.com/news/dailymojo/2004/10/10_504.html?welcome=true
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/2002/08jim.htm

[blm]

7. Be aware of HOW they did it - by securing most media outlets and voting machines.

It will continue in SOME form, the aggressive fascism of BushInc or the friendly face fascism enabling of TeamClinton who assisted in the coverups during their terms - it will continue till WE work en masse to expose it.

We have to start RESISTING secrecy and privilege. It's OUR nation and OUR world, dammit!

http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html