Liberty Has Lost Its Protection Paul Craig Roberts

Liberty Has Lost Its Protection

June 28, 2019 

Liberty Has Lost Its Protection

Paul Craig Roberts

July 4 should be a day of mourning.  The rights our ancestors fought for have been taken away.

Over the course of my lifetime there has been a fundamental shift in the attitude of the judiciary toward Constitutional rights.  I remember when guarding against any diminishing of constitutional rights was considered more important than convicting another criminal. There were cases in which the evidence needed in order to convict a person could not be collected, or used if collected, because it violated constitutional rights.  There are many instances of criminals walking free because police, prosecutors, and trials violated their rights.  Much of the unthinking public would be enraged, because judges let a criminal off.  The public were unable to understand that the judges were protecting their rights as well as the criminal’s.

This is an age old problem.  In Robert Bolt’s play, A Man for All Seasons, Sir Thomas More, Chancellor of England, is criticized for refusing to bend the law in order to better pursue criminals. Sir Thomas asks his critic, if I cut down the law in order to pursue devils, what happens to the innocent when authority turns on them?  This question formerly had a powerful presence in the courtroom.

Over the course of my lifetime, the emphasis shifted from protecting constitutional rights to seeing them as obstacles to law enforcement. In order to convict a single individual or class of individuals, precedents were established that set aside constitutional rights that protected everyone.  The judiciary began stripping away constitutional protections of the entire population in order that one more guilty person could be more easily convicted.

Larry Stratton and I have written about how law was transformed from a shield of the people into a weapon in the hands of government in our book, The Tyranny of Good Intentions ( https://www.amazon.com/Tyranny-Good-Intentions-Prosecutors-Constitution/dp/0307396061/ref=sr_1_4?crid=3MJ5WKAER6NZA&keywords=paul+craig+roberts+books&qid=1561671688&s=books&sprefix=Paul+Craig%2Caps%2C144&sr=1-4 ).  The “war on crime,” the “war on drugs,” the “war on child abuse,” the “war on terror” have destroyed the US Constitution by the death of a thousand cuts.

Hardly anyone wants a criminal to go free, but sometimes letting criminals go is the only way to protect our constitutional rights.  Formerly, it was clearly understood that protecting liberty was more important than punishing every criminal.  Almost every day John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute provides another example of our disappearing rights. See for example: https://mailchi.mp/rutherford/us-supreme-court-rules-that-police-can-forcibly-warrantlessly-carry-out-blood-draws-on-unconscious-drivers?e=c5472441ea 

Courts have used endless exceptions and special circumstances to chop down the protections provided by the Bill of Rights.  I would wager that most Americans see no problem in the Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling upholding the conviction of drunk driving in the case Whitehead discusses.  Indeed, if they knew about the case, they would be fulminating against the 4 justices who rose to the defense of the 4th Amendment as “liberal judges who want to turn criminals lose on society.”

Sir Thomas More’s warning in A Man of All Seasons has gone unheeded. Today the principle purpose of the US criminal justice (sic) system is to cut down our rights in order to secure convictions.  The practice has been so corrupting that today the US government routinely violates law, both its own and international, in pursuit of material interests. It is inconceivable to the neoconservatives that mere law should stand in the way of American hegemony or in the way of torture that can produce a false confession that serves some government purpose.  It is no longer possible to speak of American diplomacy as Washington relies entirely on threats, coercion, and controlled explanations. 

The America that is romanticized in 4th of July celebrations no longer exists.

More from Articles & Columns ↓

The Propaganda Ministry Known as “the Free Press” Paul Craig Roberts

The Propaganda Ministry Known as “the Free Press”

June 27, 2019 

The Propaganda Ministry Known as “the Free Press”

Paul Craig Roberts

As I have reported on many occasions, the presstitutes constitute not a free press but a Ministry of Propaganda for the government and ruling oligarchic interests.  Ben Norton explains that the New York Times gets permission from Washington before it prints a story:

The New York Times has publicly acknowledged that it sends some of its stories to the US government for approval from “national security officials” before publication.

He explains that CIA control and manipulation of the media has a long tradition, a tradition exposed by journalists who know:

Legendary journalist Carl Bernstein, a former Washington Post reporter who helped uncover the Watergate scandal, published a major cover story for Rolling Stone in 1977 titled “The CIA and the Media: How America’s Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up.”

Bernstein obtained CIA documents that revealed that more than 400 American journalists in the previous 25 years had “secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency.”

Bernstein wrote:

“Some of these journalists’ relationships with the Agency were tacit; some were explicit. There was cooperation, accommodation and overlap. Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services—from simple intelligence gathering to serving as go‑betweens with spies in Communist countries. Reporters shared their notebooks with the CIA. Editors shared their staffs. Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors without‑portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested in the derring‑do of the spy business as in filing articles; and, the smallest category, full‑time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad. In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements of America’s leading news organizations.”

Virtually all major US media outlets cooperated with the CIA, Bernstein revealed, including ABC, NBC, the AP, UPI, Reuters, Newsweek, Hearst newspapers, the Miami Herald, the Saturday Evening Post, and the New York Herald‑Tribune.

However, he added, “By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc.”

These layers of state manipulation, censorship, and even direct crafting of the news media show that, as much as they claim to be independent, The New York Times and other outlets effectively serve as de facto spokespeople for the government — or at least for the US national security state.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51828.htm 

Udo Ulfkotte, an editor of the German newspaper, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Explained in his book, Gekaufte Journalisten (Bought Journalism), that no significant journalist in Europe is free of CIA influence. The English language edition, Journalists For Hire: How The CIA Buys The News, has been suppressed. A few copies managed to escape destruction.  Two are currently available on Amazon, one for $910.99 and one for $1,994.99.

As I have often reported, in the “Western democracies” truth is suppressed and controlled explanations are put in its place. Western peoples are largely unaware of the agendas of the national security state and ruling elites.  People in all walks of life serve these agendas without knowing it. Those who try to inform them are usually dismissed as “conspiracy theorists.”  Obviously, there can be no democracy when the electorate is kept in the dark.  

Journalists for Hire: How the CIA Buys the News

a book by Udo Ulfkotte

(our site's book review)

Dr. Udo Ulfkotte, Former CIA Propagandist

Dr. Udo Ulfkotte, a former editor for the German main daily newspaper, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), has first hand knowledge of how the CIA and German Intelligence (BND) bribe journalists to write articles free of truth, facts, and with a decidedly pro-Western, pro-NATO bent or, in other words, propaganda. In his bestselling book Bought Journalists ("Gekaufte Journalisten"), Dr. Ulfkotte explains in great detail the workings of the US and NATO’s propaganda campaign and how a lack of compliance with it, on the part of a journalist, can cost a career. Dr. Ulfkotte also provides a wealth of names! Journalist for Hire: How the CIA Buys the News is the English translation of Dr. Ulfkotte’s bestselling book.

Udo Ulfkotte

Corruption of Journalists and Major News Outlets by the CIA Is Routine, Accepted, and Widespread in the Western Media

Dr. Ulfkotte says the corruption of journalists and major news outlets by the CIA is routine, accepted, and widespread in the western media, and that journalists who do not comply either cannot get jobs at any news organization, or find their careers cut short. We've established this claim as fact in many places. See Conspiracy Theory in America (Discovering America), Mass Control: Engineering Human Consciousness, Propaganda, Finks: How the C.I.A. Tricked the World's Best Writers, and Freedom of the Press—an American Delusion.

DANSK -- Manlio Dinucci -- « KRIGSKUNST » -- EU i Pentagons atomstrategi

« KRIGSKUNST »

EU i Pentagons atomstrategi

af Manlio Dinucci

ENGLISH ESPAÑOL FRANÇAIS  ITALIANO NEDERLANDS PORTUGUÊS 

ROMÎNA TURKÇE

Nato forsvarsministrene (Elisabetta Trenta, Femstjernebevægelsen, for Italien og Claus Hjort Frederiksen, for Danmark) var indkaldt i Bruxelles 26. og 27. juni for at godkende den nye "afskrækkelses"strategi over for Rusland, som har været beskyldt for - uden nogen som helst beviser - at have overtrådt INF traktaten. Dybest set betyder det, at de vil rette sig ind efter USA, som ved den definitive udtrædelse af traktaten 2. august forbereder at opstille jordbaserede mellemdistance atommissiler (med en rækkevidde på mellem 500 og 5.500 km) i Europa, som ligner dem fra 1980'erne (Pershing II og krydsermissiler), som blev fjernet (sammen med Sovjets SS-20'ere) i overensstemmelse med traktaten underskrevet i 1987 af præsidenterne Gorbachev og Reagan.

De store europæiske magter, som er mere og mere splittet inden for EU, omgrupperes i NATO under amerikansk kommando for at støtte deres almindelige strategiske interesser. Ved FN-mødet afviste selvsamme europæiske union - hvoraf 21 af dens 27 medlemmer er en del af Alliancen (som også UK er, selvom de forlader EU) - det russiske forslag om at fastholde INF traktaten. På et spørgsmål af en sådan vigtighed bliver den europæiske offentlige mening bevidst holdt i en tilstand af uvidenhed af deres regeringer og de store medieselskaber. På denne måde bemærker vi ikke den tiltagende fare, som truer os alle - den øgede mulighed for, at vi en dag måske lider under brugen af atomvåben.

Dette bekræftes af det seneste strategiske dokument fra de amerikanske væbnede styrker, Nukleare Operationer (11. juni), skrevet under ledelse af præsidenten for de forenede stabschefer. I betragtning af at "vores atomstyrker giver USA kapacitet til at forfølge vores egne nationale mål", understreger dokumentet, at de må "sprede sig, være fleksible og anvendelige" i forhold til "flere forskellige modstandere, trusler og sammenhænge". Til trods for russiske advarsler om, at brugen af selv atomvåben med lav sprængstyrke ville igangsætte en kædereaktion, som kunne føre til en stor-skala nuklear konflikt, begynder den amerikanske doktrin at orientere sig på basis af et farligt begreb - "fleksibilitet".

Det strategiske dokument bekræfter, at "amerikanske atomstyrker giver os midlerne til at anvende styrker over for en lang række mål ad gangen og med de midler, som bestemmes af præsidenten".  Disse mål (specificerer det samme dokument) er i virkeligheden valgt af efterretningstjenesterne, som evaluerer deres sårbarhed over for et atomangreb og også kalkulerer effekterne af radioaktivt nedfald. Brugen af atomvåben - understreger dokumentet - "kan skabe betingelserne for afgørende resultater. I særdeleshed ville brugen af atomvåben fundamentalt transformere slagets gang ved at skabe de betingelser, som ville gøre det muligt for kommandørerne at vinde konfrontationen".

Atomvåben ville også gøre det muligt for USA at "berolige deres allierede og partnere", som med tillid til disse våben "ville opgive tanken om at eje deres egne atomvåben, og dermed tage del  i USA's mål, som er ikke-spredning".

Dokumentet angiver imidlertid, at det ville gøre det muligt for "USA og visse udvalgte NATO allierede at have fly, der kan bære både atom- og konventionelle våben". Det er en indrømmelse om, at fire lande i EU, som officielt er ikke-atomvåben besiddende - Italien, Tyskland, Belgien, Holland - og også Tyrkiet, med overtrædelse af ikke-spredningsaftalen, ikke blot opbevarer amerikanske atomvåben (B-61 bomber, som fra 2020 vil blive erstattet af de mere destruktive B61-62), men også er parat til at bruge dem i et atomangreb under Pentagons kommando.

Alt dette holdes hemmeligt af vores regeringer og parlamenter, tv og aviser, med den skyldige tavshed hos størstedelen af politikere og journalister, som ikke desto mindre dag efter dag gentager, hvor vigtigt "sikkerhed" er for os italienere og andre europæere i unionen. Den vil åbenbart være garanteret os af den amerikanske opstilling af andre atomvåben.

Manlio Dinucci

il manifesto, 25. Juni 2019

Oversættelse: MV

«DICHIARAZIONE DI FIRENZE»

Per la creazione di un fronte internazionale NATO EXIT in tutti i paesi europei della NATO

DANSK DEUTSCH ENGLISH ESPAÑOL  FRANÇAIS ITALIANO  NEDERLANDS
PORTUGUÊS ROMÎNA SLOVENSKÝ SVENSKA TÜRKÇE РУССКИЙ СРПСКИ  

TUR -- Manlio Dinucci -- Pentagon’un nükleer stratejisinde Avrupa Birliği

Pentagon’un nükleer stratejisinde Avrupa Birliği

yazan Manlio Dinucci

ENGLISH ESPAÑOL FRANÇAIS  ITALIANO NEDERLANDS PORTUGUÊS ROMÎNA

NATO Savunma Bakanları (İtalya - Elisabetta Trenta, Türkiye – Hulusi Akar), kanıt sunulmaksızın İNF anlaşmasını ihlal etmekle suçlanan Rusya’ya karşı yeni « caydırıcı » önlemlerin alınmasını onaylamak üzere 26 ve 27 Haziran tarihlerinde Brüksel’e çağrıldılar. İşin özünde, 2 Ağustos’ta anlaşmadan nihai olarak geri çekilen, Avrupa’da karada konuşlu, 80’li yıllardakine benzer (Pershing II ve seyir füzeleri) ve 1987 yılında devlet başkanları Gorbaçov ve Reagan arasında imzalanan anlaşmayla imha edilen (Sovyetlerin SS-20’leriyle birlikte) orta menzilli (500 ila 5 500 km arası) nükleer füzeler konuşlandırmaya hazırlanan ABD’nin arkasında saf tutacaklardır.

AB içerisinde gittikçe daha çok bölünen Avrupa’nın büyük güçleri, ortak stratejik çıkarlarını desteklemek için ABD komutası altındaki NATO içerisinde yeniden bütünleşmektedirler. Aynı Avrupa Birliği –ki 27 üyesinden 21’i İttifak’a dahildir (AB’den çıkan Birleşik Krallık’ın parçası olduğu gibi)– Birleşmiş Milletler’de, Rusların İNF anlaşmasının muhafazasına yönelik önerisini reddetmiştir. Böylesine önemi bir sorun hakkında Avrupa kamuoyu, hükümetler ve büyük medyalar tarafından kasıtlı olarak bilgisiz bırakılmıştır. Böylece bizi tehdit eden büyüyen tehlikeyi algılayamamaktayız: bir gün nükleer silahların kullanımı noktasına gelmemiz olasılığı artmaktadır.

ABD Genelkurmay birleşik Komitesi Başkanı yönetiminde yazılan, ABD silahlı kuvvetlerinin son stratejik belgesi Nuclear Operations (11 Haziran) bunu teyit etmektedir. « Nükleer kuvvetlerin ABD’ye kendi ulusal hedeflerine ulaşma imkanı sağladığı » aşikar olduğuna göre, belge bu kuvvetlerin « çok çeşitli rakiplere, tehditlere ve bağlamlara » göre « farklı, esnek ve uyarlanabilir » olmaları gerektiğini vurgulamaktadır. Rusya, düşük güce sahip tek bir nükleer silahın kullanımın dahi büyük ölçekte bir nükleer çatışmaya yol açabileceği konusunda uyarıda bulunurken, ABD doktrini tehlikeli bir « esneklik » kavramı temelinde hareket etmektedir.

Nükleer silahlar bunun dışında ABD’ye, bu silahlara güvenerek « ABD’nin nükleer silahların yayılmasının önlenmesi hedeflerine katılarak kendi nükleer silahlarına sahip olmaktan vazgeçen » müttefik ve ortaklarına « güvence verme » imkanı vermektedir.

Bu arada belge « ABD ve seçilmiş bazı NATO müttefiklerinin, nükleer ya da konvansiyonel silahlar taşıyabilecek şekilde çifte yetenekli uçakları muhafaza edeceklerine » işaret etmektedir. Bu şekilde, Avrupa Birliği’nin nükleer silahların yayılmasının önlenmesi anlaşmasını ihlal eden, resmi olarak nükleer olmayan dört ülkesinin –İtalya, Almanya, Belçika, Hollanda– ve Türkiye’nin, sadece ABD nükleer silahlarına (2020 yılından itibaren daha da ölümcül olan B61-21’lerle değiştirilecek olan B61 bombaları) ev sahipliği yaptıklarını değil, ama bunların Pentagon komutası altındaki bir nükleer saldırı sırasında kullanılmaya hazır hale getirildiklerini de kabul etmiş olmaktadır.

Bütün bunlar, bize her gün, « güvenliğin » bizler, yani İtalyanlar ve Birliğin Avrupalıları için ne kadar önemli olduğunu sürekli olarak yineleyen, hükümetler ve parlamentolar, televizyon kanalları ve gazetelerde, siyasetçilerin ezici çoğunluğunun suç ortağı sessizliği içerisinde görmezden gelinmektedir. Bu « güvenlik », bize Avrupa’da başka nükleer silahlar konuşlandıran ABD tarafından temin edilmektedir.

il manifesto,25 Haziran 2019

Manlio Dinucci

Çeviri
Osman Soysal

Kaynak
Il Manifesto (İtalya)/VOLTAİRE İLETİŞİM AĞI

«DICHIARAZIONE DI FIRENZE»

Per la creazione di un fronte internazionale NATO EXIT in tutti i paesi europei della NATO

DANSK DEUTSCH ENGLISH ESPAÑOL  FRANÇAIS ITALIANO  NEDERLANDS
PORTUGUÊS ROMÎNA SLOVENSKÝ SVENSKA TÜRKÇE РУССКИЙ СРПСКИ