Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Who Is Inside America's Trojan Horse?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
GuvWurld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-24-06 05:45 AM
Original message
Who Is Inside America's Trojan Horse?
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2006/10/who-is-inside-americas-trojan-horse.html

Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Who Is Inside America's Trojan Horse?
By Dave Berman

This post was inspired by attention given at Democratic Underground and elsewhere to Lou Dobbs's election integrity coverage on CNN.

Many of us know that the next "election," as with the last few, will not produce unanimous agreement about the results. Despite their political dominance, the regime in power has forfeited all of its credibility and can never again be convincing - of anything. So they don't try to have a believable election, instead drawing more power to themselves by dividing the public opinion over who really won.

Along the way to the "election," society must be primed for acceptance (think yellow cake and mushroom clouds, or leaked Diebold source code). In this case we are supposed to accept uncertainty (actually, inherent uncertainty is the most common thing we are choking on).

I realize it could seem uptight and possibly irrational to attack Dobbs, so I want to be clear that this is not what I'm about to do. Look at this series of reports he's done. It has surely raised the level of doubt about election results by multiple orders of magnitude. From my view that's a great thing. But Dobbs is not playing the role we really need, the one I choose for myself, that of advocacy journalist. Dobbs is informing his audience, occasionally showing some emotion. But, as far as I know, he is not using his precious air time to actively engage in creating solutions. Perhaps this is because he is trying his best, despite the occasional emotion, to be a straight-up neutral objective news person.

OK, nothing there that should seem like an attack, I hope. Maybe it even sounds like I'm cheering for him and appreciating his delivery of otherwise antiquated professionalism. That's what I'm hearing around me, actually, though its not where my analysis stops. I submit that Dobbs may be unwittingly contributing to the regime's overall effort to keep Americans divided. In this way, he is like a Manchurian Candidate. I have written about this paradigm before, in the GuvWurld Blog (in an essay that is also in my book, We Do Not Consent).

Many people in trusted roles in society behave in ways that are sympathetic to those controlling the regime's war of terror. Like many such people, Dobbs may have done this with the intention of doing the opposite. All Manchurian-like. What we have is a huge Trojan Horse in this country and inside are the Registrars for paperless DREs, airport screeners who detain babies and old ladies, teachers and principals who punish students for art or words criticizing government, police who regard peaceful protestors as terrorists, and many other groups central to the functioning of society. In these examples the people are mostly going to be acting in ways that society supports and encourages, despite the damage they cause. This is why the essay linked above is called We Are Being Set Up: The Manchurian Nation.

So by no means am I saying don't watch Dobbs, or don't put his segments out on the web. Just consider if he could possibly be filling the role I described, and whether so many others may be unaware of their own appeasement. Appeasement. This is a word we should own. The biggest appeasers in the world are the loyal corporate media and the tiny fraction of people who still give blind trust to this regime.

Now, if Dobbs were to start advocating for hand counted paper ballots, in a way intended to actually cause that to happen, I will be happy to be wrong here. If Dobbs uses his air time to organize masses in protest, you will know that I was the first to say I was incorrect. Shall we try to get him to do these things, to become the advocacy journalist we need? Maybe if you know him personally, but otherwise don't give away your energy hoping someone else will produce the results you seek. The energy is better invested in organizing on the local level where a united community can draw upon the enormous strength of People Power.

I believe we should challenge the legitimacy of our local governments. Such offices are occupied by politicians who currently have our implicit Consent to govern us. This Consent is not really being sought. It is instead being assumed because we allow it to be taken for granted. Local government is our last level of representation, after the federal and state bodies that have long since stopped listening to We The People. Not listening is the least of it, though, when you consider first the craven lawlessness and then the blatant harm done to the People by those claiming to be our protectors. If the local government will not actively resist and provide its own protection against these harms, their reticence might be seen as the mark of the Manchurian.

We simply cannot continue cooperating in a system where the power that (selectively) enforces law also has the ability to indefinitely detain us without regard to that law. The Constitution is our social compact. It has been rendered largely inoperative. To me that means the deal is off. If the fascists are going to behave like they're not bound by it anymore, what good does it do us to fearfully measure our actions within these now phony confines? I'm not looking for rules to break or suggesting we all get together to violate anyone's Constitutional Rights. I'm saying those rules and Rights only exist as part of a deal that has been broken and no longer exists. We have to stop thinking like we're playing the old game. This is a new game. Only it is no game at all. Peaceful revolution is necessary, NOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-24-06 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well
About this new game.....

It is played pretty much the same way as the old game, at least for the majority of folks. It is the game of "All Politics are Local".

The problem we have is that most people never even get on the field. They are merely by-standers, not even back-benchers, waterboys or ballgirls. Heck, most times they don't even pay attention. They seem lost.

If we can't get them to get on the field and play, then the majority of players will be those who have consistently bent over and took it up the...

That's who is on the field today. Those who are conditioned to accept the edicts from higher ups. Higher ups like Dobbs, et al.

We need new players. We need millions of new players.

You are a player, Guv, I'm playing.... Who else is player?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GuvWurld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-24-06 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Well said, BeFree
Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-24-06 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
3. Excellent and balanced observations on Mr. Dobbs' reporting.
It will be interesting to see how his series continues on after the election.

My hope is that he will be on the side of effective reform.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-24-06 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
4. K&R It's easy to forget that nothing can give us a reliable election NOW
it's inherently uncertain...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-24-06 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
5. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-24-06 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. KR This deserves to be widely read...one of your best efforts!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GuvWurld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-24-06 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Thanks autorank!
always glad to know my words resonate with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-25-06 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. "We do not consent" is a permanent part of my lexicon!!! Thank YOU!!!
...and of course the founding fathers and the Levelers, the Diggers ("True Levelers") of the English Civil War, and why not, Spartacus!!!

Its Haloween time. Lets scare them by all turning out to vote - everybody!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GuvWurld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-24-06 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
8. Kick (eom)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GuvWurld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-24-06 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
9. Kick (eom)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jcrowley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-24-06 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
10. Justice as principle
When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for a people to petition for redress against the political body that oppresses them and to assume among their rightful powers to which the laws of nature and of natures God entitle them, a decent respect to the underlying letter and spirit of the Constitution of the United States requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to seek remedy and reparations for injustices done against them, yet in their name.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all humans are endowed by their creator with an affinity for justice that is aggrieved when their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is preempted by deference to institutions and officeholders. That when they who derive their just powers from the consent of the Governed, yet act destructive of these ends, it is the peoples duty to seek their ejection from office and the institution of new officeholders in their place, so that great care to most likely effect the safety and happiness of the Governed is restored. All experience hath shown that humankind are more disposed to ignore the suffering of others or suffer evils unless pressed to action otherwise, than to right themselves against the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design of degeneracy and despotism, it is the peoples duty, to throw off such rule of law, and to rightfully provide new guards for their security.

---Such has been the patient sufferance of these petitioners; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to petition the Governed for redress of their grievances.

The history of the federal courts of law is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, leading to the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these petitioners. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

Officeholders of the federal judiciary have upheld a most unwholesome and improper law, detrimental to the public good, in dereliction of duty and in violation of oath of office as established by the Constitution.
The Constitution, ordained by need for commercial harmony among the states and a profound love of liberty, granted them lifetime tenure of office and assurance of continued compensation so that they might have complete independence from the agencies inclined to participate in passing bad laws.

They were granted powers, along with the legislative and executive, for the purpose of carrying into effect the objects disclosed in the Preamble -- to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

Though the Framers themselves were not immune to impaired judgment, and caused to be excluded large numbers of persons from being fully vested in the government by presumption of inferior capacity based on skin color, gender, or other unfounded considerations, this does not diminish the Framers aim toward human ideals as ordained in the Preamble.

Contrary to these ideals, officeholders of the federal judiciary have allowed false evidence to be used in the establishment of unwholesome and improper law, in violation of the standard of justice, giving their assent to acts of pretended constitutionality; using judge-contrived rule of law and term of art such as rational basis, they uphold prohibition, draconian penalties, and maladministration of the peoples resources, in excess of billions of dollars annually, by explaining, we have never required Congress to make particularized findings in order to legislate.

Contrary to these ideals, they have allowed severe criminal penalties without showing causation of harm for conduct made criminal by false evidence and thus have allowed the arbitrary exercise of federal power to supercede the preeminence of liberty over unnecessary and improper government action, permitting a bill of attainder, in practical effect, to which they explain--the relevant question is simply whether the means chosen are reasonably adapted to the attainment of a legitimate end.
Disregardful of their duty to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void and to keep the legislature within the limits assigned to their authority, they give deference to Congress and a presumption of constitutionality to their enactments, an unconstitutional and unconscionable delegation of duty, reconstituting the judiciary into an extra-executive arm operating in super-prosecutorial capacity against petitioners.
They have obstructed the administration of justice, by substituting the letter and spirit of the Constitution with judge-contrived rule of law based on depression-era economic case law to justify an aggressive police economy for the purposes of carrying on a war against people.

To pursue this policy of persecution they have allowed a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and pilfer their substance.

They have upheld legislation passed in places distant, proclaiming such constitutional by presumption, yet refuse to allow the details of the legislation, particularly the draconian penalties, to be disclosed to the citizen-juror, who sits in judgment, for the sole purpose of herding the citizen-juror into compliance with a legislated verdict.

Though the First Amendment recognizes that humankind does not live by bread alone, they have upheld federal preemption over personal sovereignty by prohibiting individual choice even though it is not the place of government nor is it possible to make the world fit only for a child.

Though the Fourth Amendment recognizes the right of the people to be secure against unreasonable searches, they have upheld urine testing, body cavity searches, strip searches, dog sniffs, pretext detainments, and SWAT force raids, in deference to legislators, US attorneys, law enforcement officers, prison officials and other policy makers or executives -- the poisoned fruit of these sanctioned standards being drug task force sweeps against children in schools and abuse as practiced at Abu Ghraib, Guatanamo, and countless American prisons.

They uphold state sovereignty so that the Fifth Amendment may be abridged to allow an individual to be twice put in jeopardy, by separate state and federal prosecutions for the same government pretended offense, but they deny state sovereignty, in states where prohibition has been lifted, in the name of regulating commerce.

They uphold government policy that is racist in origin and in practical application, violating equal protection under the laws.

They uphold warrants that have been issued on the basis of informants but the accused are not allowed to confront these witnesses against them.

They have upheld long term incarceration without basis in necessity for non-violent conduct among consenting adults and for conduct without causation of harm.

They have upheld long term incarceration without basis in deterrence enabling America to have the highest incarceration rate in the world, making mockery of the constitutional preeminence of liberty.

They have upheld mandatory minimum sentencing, imposing long term incarceration, million dollar plus fines and asset forfeiture, yet such mandatory sentencing policy has been suspended where relatives of legislative or executive officials have been involved.

They have upheld seizure of social security contributions and other federal returns, even though, in some cases, the forced payroll deductions in the government social security program long preceded enactment of the unwholesome law that allows these hard earned contributions to be confiscated.

Though the Ninth Amendment provides that the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people, they have by judge-contrived rule of law subjugated the presumption of liberty to their term of art fundamental right to deny and disparage all rights not deemed by them as fundamental.

They have refused to allow, in the name of commerce, laws passed by referendum for the accommodation of large segments of people, demanding these people should relinquish the right to self-determination, a right inestimable to them and formidable to totalitarianism.

They have allowed, by upholding unwholesome law in the name of commerce, for millions of individuals to suffer assault, battery, degradation, wrongful incarceration, deprivation of property, deprivation of liberty, and, in some cases, deprivation of life at the hands of government actors.

They have allowed, by upholding unwholesome law in the name of commerce, for precious resources of the people to be diverted to a police economy of federal agencies, task forces, informants, prisons, drug testing industries, and other related persons or operations that degrade rather than promote the general welfare.

They have allowed, by upholding unwholesome law in the name of commerce, for the constitutional preeminence of justice to be subjugated by rule of law contaminated with corruption and degeneracy.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered with repeated injury they direct us to write letters to Congress in cavalier disregard for the imbalance of power of petitioners when weighed against the influence of such special interests as pharmaceutical companies, law enforcement associations, prison guard unions, security industries and the like for nothing is more natural to men in office than to look with peculiar deference towards that authority to which they owe their official existence.

Too long they have been deaf to the voice of justice and blind to those ill humors, which the arts of designing men, or the influence of particular conjunctures, sometimes disseminate among the people themselves, and which (h)ave a tendency (t)o occasion dangerous innovations in the government, and serious oppressions of the minor party in the community. An officeholder of the federal judiciary whose character is thus marked by acts which may define dereliction is unfit to administer the constitutional trust.

We, therefore, humble petitioners appeal to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, and, in the name, and by the authority of good people everywhere acquiesce in the necessity, do hold those officeholders of the federal judiciary, who have upheld unwholesome law, unfit to sit and seek their ejection from office and forfeiture of their pensions, honoraria, gifts and other commercial gains of office in reparation for harm done by their failure to uphold their duty.

K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-25-06 01:51 AM
Response to Original message
12. Let's see if he's just softening up the crowd.

Coming out of the box swinging might not reach those who consume his journalism brand on a regular basis.

Of course there's the danger it'll morph into something less than we'd hope.

Look at what's left of the sixties.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GuvWurld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-25-06 02:05 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. you might be describing
false alternatives and/or false flag operations
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-25-06 02:28 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. I realize.

There's a lawsuit in Suffolk County, NY, challenging the notion that HAVA requires the scrapping of lever machines.

Horaay? I hope so.

Or is it a set-up?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 17th 2024, 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC