http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Karl_Rove

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore." He continued "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors … and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

I saw recently that there have been increasingly serious discussions about the CIA, what they are doing, and how much control citizens have over their actions. What most people are missing is simple perspective. What if you shift your perspective from one that believes that we are a "free country" where we have "democratic elections" to a perspective of a country that "does whatever it takes in the name of 'national security'"?

Do the actions of the US government over the past 50 years align with the wishes of a people who "love freedom and democracy" or do they align with the wishes of a small group of people who drive the country in the direction of their choosing based on "national security"?

Most people think that when there is a coup, that it looks like this: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x20tun0_general-zia-ul-haq-declaring-martial-law_news

What if, instead, it looks more like this: http://media.trb.com/media/photo/2011-11/264863940-21114236.jpg

What the events were leading up to this or why it "really" happened are not really relevant anymore. There is too much evidence of our own government's involvement in this murder to dismiss out of hand. The most succinct narrative is that JFK was not well-liked among those in the "intelligence-security" apparatus for various reasons and the only viable excuse there could possibly be for assassinating one's own president would be for "the greater good". "The greater good", in this case, has been renamed "national security".

And for the past 50 years, this excuse of "national security" has allowed these agencies to gain more power and control. The simple pretense is this: If we don't dominate someone else first, then they will try to dominate us.

Without going into volumes of detail, I think most people would agree that this singular, over-arching policy provides a better narrative to the history of the past 50 years than a narrative of a government for "freedom that is controlled by the people."

So, if you are still with me, then that is where we are at. A group of people staged a coup a long time ago and have endeavored to maintain and grow their power through this secretive "national security state" excuse that gives themselves unchecked power and accountability.

So what are you prepared to actually do about it? I saw a lot of suggestions about abolishing the CIA, but are you prepared to deal with the consequences?

Is Rex 84 a joke? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rex_84

Rex 84, short for Readiness Exercise 1984, was a classified "scenario and drill" developed by the United States federal government to suspend the United States Constitution, declare martial law, place military commanders in charge of state and local governments, and detain large numbers of American citizens who are deemed to be "national security threats", in the event that the President declares a "State of National Emergency".

We Americans like to think things like "that would never happen here" and dismiss the idea that our government does terrible things without investigating. Our need to feel like "the good guys" prevents us from taking an honest look at the types of activities we are [at most times forced] supporting. If voting actually worked, then the Obama presidency should have been a great success. Hope and Change were clearly desired by the people and we got none of it. Now that we are approaching another election year, this grand charade will be trotted out again to placate the masses.

So while we are allowed to influence whether Rod and Todd can get "legally married" or not (which is only a problem because of government in the first place), we are not allowed to have an opinion or influence whether we use military support to ensure BP/Exxon etc.. secure oil or other raw materials through covert coups and, many times, outright violence.

We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.-- William Casey, CIA Director

Is this just something that people say? In what context is it even okay for a CIA director to say such a thing and be deemed a suitable person to be the CIA director? If democratic elections are based on having an informed public, then what does it mean when there are systems in place to intentionally deceive the public and have them "vote" based on those deceptions?

Are there any moral limits that this group has? So what is next?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

False flag (or black flag) describes covert military or paramilitary operations designed to deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by entities, groups, or nations other than those who actually planned and executed them. Operations carried out during peace-time by civilian organizations, as well as covert government agencies, may by extension be called false flag operations if they seek to hide the real organization behind an operation. Geraint Hughes uses the term to refer to those acts carried out by "military or security force personnel, which are then blamed on terrorists."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/24/cheney-predicts-far-deadlier-attack-against-u-s-in-next-decade/

Cheney continued: "You can imagine what would happen if somebody could smuggle a nuclear device, put it in a shipping container and drive it down the beltway outside Washington, D.C."

http://www.mediaite.com/online/why-lindsey-graham-thinks-the-u-s-will-be-nuked/

“I believe that if we get Syria wrong, within six months, and you can quote me on this, there will be a war between Iran and Israel over their nuclear program,” Graham told a crowd in South Carolina. “My fear is that it won’t come to America on top of a missile, it’ll come in the belly of a ship in the Charleston or New York harbor.”

So what do you think that the people in control of these things are willing to do if they don't get their way? Do you think they are really beyond using a nuclear event to catalyze the next war?

http://benswann.com/president-obama-fires-high-ranking-nuclear-chiefs/

In an unprecedented move, reports of the Obama administration firing a second military commander of the U.S. Nuclear Weapons system have surfaced. These officers have some of the highest clearances you can get, and have been in charge of the nation’s most sensitive nuclear arsenals.

We already know they are willing to send our own young people off to die for their interests and have killed millions around the world in the name of "national security". Do you think that these people are just going to say "Oh well, I guess they figured out our scam... the jig is up!"? Or is it more likely that there are plans in place to maintain control should there be an event that threatens their power?

This not a kind and benevolent group of people that we are dealing with. I hope that, at the very least, I have offered some food for thought.