The "Illuminati"
2006-10-16 15:00:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by Snaglefritz 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Karl Rove
2006-10-16 21:55:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by misskate12001 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would say congress really because, they can vito whatever the President does. I mean they blame Bush for the war but Congress almost completly voted for it. They really could stop everything the president does. He's mostly just the face of America!
2006-10-16 22:01:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by hermionega 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Mc Donalds
KFC
Pizza Hut
2006-10-16 22:00:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by malcom 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Power brokers don't exactly allow their names to be known.
You have to understand first that people represent wealth. Human endeavor is the true wealth that is of most value in this world. Gold, property and other holdings are merely stored wealth, static wealth, it is not dynamic, it is not wealth creation. People create wealth.
The powers you can see are using their high visibility as chips in the game. The following they develop by means of influence, power and/or politics gets them a seat at the table, but the hand they play isn't very strong because they are limited by the very following that got them in the game. They have to keep their following happy, or at least duped, or they lose their place at the table.
Others at the table include banksters, royalty, dictators and religious figureheads. (If you want a hint, think closely about the "quartet" frequently discussed in the news. These four power centers combined represent a broad cross section of power and influence.)
The dynamic of the mix has changed over time. From the time of Constantine until the 15th century the catholic popes held influence over many heads of state. Britain broke away from Rome and formed a new center of influence that gained significant influence until the opportunity arose that allowed individuals to flee to "The New World".
With the insurgency in the colonies and elsewhere, representative governments began to place new players at the table.
The experiment that is communism has been relatively short-lived in the overall scheme of things, but communist governments still retain vast holdings in terms of both static and dynamic wealth, and, of course, a position of influence in world events.
The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 made it possible for banksters to transfer the value away from money to themselves without removing any of the money itself! Quite the trick. A full 96% of the value has been sucked out of the "dollar" since that time.
Whenever there's a war or disaster or crisis, money is created and loaned into the government's pocket and you and I lose value from the money we think we're "saving" in our 401k's and portfolios. Whenever you suspect a "crisis" or "war" was manipulated into existence, look no further than those who stand to profit the most.
The banksters have ridden high in the game so far, but their scam cannot continue forever, by definition it's a negative feedback system and destined to eventual collapse.
Now there are new players at the table. Islamofascist is the perfect term for these new players. They have risen from obscurity to a high profile in a very short time. They fit the definition of fascist very nicely, they control every aspect of human endeavor including education, politics, economics and religion in the areas where they exercise their influence, and they eliminate their opposition with ruthless bloody efficiency.
That's about all I can contribute in this venue. There's nothing you can study to learn about the powers that be, all print and electronic medium is the subject of diligent control techniques, and when the truth does accidently get out, it is ridiculed and marginalized until it seems absurd. There are many ways public opinion is shaped and herded.
Did you seriously think we need 74 alphabet soup agencies to look out for your well being? People in America are the most ethical and moral in the world, yet a greater percentage of its population are in prison (compared to any other country). You figure it out.
2006-10-16 22:00:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by s2scrm 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
The Wizard.
2006-10-16 22:00:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by * Deep Thought * 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
there's no SINGLE person at the top. It's a group that includes Bush's father, James Baker, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and a few others....all witht the same general interests.
2006-10-16 21:59:22
·
answer #7
·
answered by Brand X 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
i don't think anyone is at the top. mayors make statre rules. senetors are over mayors. then you have the small people in washington. til u get up to the president and then your back to the communites cause without votes he wouldn't be there.
2006-10-16 22:02:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by chad_27292 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well, we know it couldn't be someone who only has a few neuronal connections like Bush....so maybe Condi.
2006-10-16 21:57:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The FDA- they have way too much control!
2006-10-16 22:06:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 7
·
0⤊
0⤋