If you bring up the Constitution one more time ...

I have known, or at least sensed, for a long time - decades by now - that something was not right with our government, with the way we as "citizens" are treated by the government, by courts, and other entities. It just does not hold up to what we suppose we have or are due under our Constitution.

I bought the book "U.S. of A. v U.S. -- The Loss of Legal Memory of the American State"
... and am studying it. There are at least two different "types" of "citizenship" in this country now: What most of us understand as the "original" and another under which we are subject to a corporate *United States* ( different from United States of America ) where we do NOT have Constitutional rights.

I will return later to attempt to explain that, but for now I will just add " ...that to secure these [Constitutional] rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; " [Declaration of Independence] - but the Constitution only applies in the United States *of America* - such a subtle difference, like not swearing an oath ...

Do you see pieces falling into place yet ? You will start looking for these differences, will you ?

In my view this matter is something we all need to get up to speed on as quickly as possible (those who are not already), whether ultimately we each agree separately to accept the "New Deal" or not. At least we need to be educated enough so as to be able to make our own individual choice.

I will tell you that the book appears to have been put together in some haste - for which I am offering my proofreading skills to help with their future publications ... and the book is expensive. Considering the importance of the subject, however, I busted my budget to get a copy anyway.

Elsewhere I have said our government responds as if corporate owned - so I am not totally surprised, and at the same time I am shocked, to find that our government now IS in essence a corporation. It is NOT the government created under the Constitution. Perhaps you, and others here, will recall as easily as I do, having heard in proceedings of some trial somewhere a judge saying something to the effect of:

" If you bring up the Constitution one more time, I will hold you in contempt. "

Our laws in this land are now so complex that no one - not even an attorney - can know them all. Attornies specialize in *areas* of law, such as Constitutional law, or contract law ... but most citizens have not much understanding of the law at all. Most of us do not know what is our actual relationship to government today - what are our duties to government, and what duties are owed to each of us by government at any level. Citizenship is a lot more than just "doing good deeds for others."

" Every July 4th, Americans honor the independence of our Nation with a renewed patriotic fervor that has reminded the authors of the Bicentennial celebrations of 1976. ... Looking around at the huge crowds gathered for the annual events, one might become aware that 99.99% of these people are not free ... in fact; the country has been conquered by the use of the corporation and the ignorance of such a fact.
...
" Freedom is a myth perpetuated by the real powers that control in order to avoid any major civil unrest. The myth is necessary to further the appearance of a voluntary submission to the "corporate, legislatively created, statutory, commercial enforcement system." It is commonly known as "Big Brother" or the "System." This System maintains the minds of most people within this myth, within the illusions that have been carefully crafted. " - p. 13


Say I am just "hearing what I want to hear" if you like, and time will tell if you are correct. Right now, I am consuming this book, and hope it will help me decide what I will do with the rest of my life : ) I hope some of you will read it soon too so we can talk about it.

One last thing: Accompanying the book purchaser receives
"The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation" on CD
- a large book in it latest version.

who owns YOU ... ?

A friend said this morning:

"Thank God our politicians protect most of us from evil on the whole."

He lives on the same planet I do - I think he does ...

Until this morning, I thought he was keeping up with current events.

What I would like to know is, if "our politicians" even have a whit of desire to "protect us from evil on the whole" ...

Where is the investigation ?

When will September 11, 2001 be investigated ?

When will the American people and the world be told the truth ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EymYwYc43iE&mode=related&search

I do NOT feel protected ... but I WILL be free !

I do not care to feel protected - I would rather be free.

How about you ... ?

http://www.911truth.org/
.

Unconstitutional

Hour-long documentary from Robert Greenwald – one of the most prolific and progressive producers in Hollywood – in conjunction with the ACLU. This new film, written, directed and produced by Nonny de la Peña, details the shocking way that the civil liberties of American citizens and immigrants alike have been infringed upon, curtailed and rolled back since 9/11 and the USA Patriot Act.

An hour long, but if you value your rights, worth every minute.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13176.htm

give me liberty or give me death ...

" Americans don't seem to care, but they should care - and care deeply. These are potential detentions of American citizens that can go on forever, according to the government, without judicial review, and without any charges being brought or trial conducted. The war on terrorism is a war without boundaries, belligerent nations and time limits. "

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20020821.html

The War They Wanted, The Lies They Needed

" The Bush administration invaded Iraq claiming Saddam Hussein had tried to buy yellowcake uranium in Niger. As much of Washington knew, and the world soon learned, the charge was false. Worse, it appears to have been the cornerstone of a highly successful "black propaganda" campaign with links to the White House

By CRAIG UNGER

READ V.F.'s PLAMEGATE COVERAGE

It's a crisp, clear winter morning in Rome. In the neighborhood between the Vatican and the Olympic Stadium, a phalanx of motor scooters is parked outside a graffiti-scarred 10-story apartment building. No. 10 Via Antonio Baiamonte is home to scores of middle-class families, and to the embassy for the Republic of Niger, the impoverished West African nation that was once a French colony.

Though it may be unprepossessing, the Niger Embassy is the site of one of the great mysteries of our times. On January 2, 2001, an embassy official returned there after New Year's Day and discovered that the offices had been robbed. Little of value was missing—a wristwatch, perfume, worthless documents, embassy stationery, and some official stamps bearing the seal of the Republic of Niger. Nevertheless, the consequences of the robbery were so great that the Watergate break-in pales by comparison.

A few months after the robbery, Western intelligence analysts began hearing that Saddam Hussein had sought yellowcake—a concentrated form of uranium which, if enriched, can be used in nuclear weapons—from Niger. Next came a dossier purporting to document the attempted purchase of hundreds of tons of uranium by Iraq. Information from the dossier and, later, the papers themselves made their way from Italian intelligence to, at various times, the C.I.A., other Western intelligence agencies, the U.S. Embassy in Rome, the State Department, and the White House, as well as several media outlets. Finally, in his January 2003 State of the Union address, George W. Bush told the world, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Two months later, the United States invaded Iraq, starting a conflict that has killed tens of thousands of people, cost hundreds of billions of dollars, and has irrevocably de-stabilized the strategically vital Middle East. Since then, the world has learned not just that Bush's 16-word casus belli was apparently based on the Niger documents but also that the documents were forged.

In Italy, a source with intimate knowledge of the Niger affair has warned me that powerful people are watching. Phones may be tapped. Jobs are in jeopardy, and people are scared.

On the sixth floor at Via Baiamonte, a receptionist finally comes to the door of the nondescript embassy office. She is of medium height, has dark-brown hair, wears a handsome blue suit, and appears to be in her 50s. She declines to give her full name. A look of concern and fear crosses her face. "Don't believe what you read in the papers," she cautions in French. "Ce n'est pas la vérité." It is not the truth.

But who was behind the forgeries? Italian intelligence? American operatives? The woman tilts her head toward one of the closed doors to indicate that there are people there who can hear. She can't talk. "C'est interdit," she says. It is forbidden.

"A Classic Psy-Ops Campaign"

For more than two years it has been widely reported that the U.S. invaded Iraq because of intelligence failures. But in fact it is far more likely that the Iraq war started because of an extraordinary intelligence success—specifically, an astoundingly effective campaign of disinformation, or black propaganda, which led the White House, the Pentagon, Britain's M.I.6 intelligence service, and thousands of outlets in the American media to promote the falsehood that Saddam Hussein's nuclear-weapons program posed a grave risk to the United States.

The Bush administration made other false charges about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (W.M.D.)—that Iraq had acquired aluminum tubes suitable for centrifuges, that Saddam was in league with al-Qaeda, that he had mobile weapons labs, and so forth. But the Niger claim, unlike other allegations, can't be dismissed as an innocent error or blamed on ambiguous data. "This wasn't an accident," says Milt Bearden, a 30-year C.I.A. veteran who was a station chief in Pakistan, Sudan, Nigeria, and Germany, and the head of the Soviet–East European division. "This wasn't 15 monkeys in a room with typewriters."

In recent months, it has emerged that the forged Niger documents went through the hands of the Italian military intelligence service, SISMI (Servizio per le Informazioni e la Sicurezza Militare), or operatives close to it, and that neoconservative policymakers helped bring them to the attention of the White House. Even after information in the Niger documents was repeatedly rejected by the C.I.A. and the State Department, hawkish neocons managed to circumvent seasoned intelligence analysts and insert the Niger claims into Bush's State of the Union address.

By the time the U.S. invaded Iraq, in March 2003, this apparent black-propaganda operation had helped convince more than 90 percent of the American people that a brutal dictator was developing W.M.D.—and had led us into war.

To trace the path of the documents from their fabrication to their inclusion in Bush's infamous speech, Vanity Fair has interviewed a number of former intelligence and military analysts who have served in the C.I.A., the State Department, the Defense Intelligence Agency (D.I.A.), and the Pentagon. Some of them refer to the Niger documents as "a disinformation operation," others as "black propaganda," "black ops," or "a classic psy-ops [psychological-operations] campaign." But whatever term they use, at least nine of these officials believe that the Niger documents were part of a covert operation to deliberately mislead the American public.

The officials are Bearden; Colonel W. Patrick Lang, who served as the D.I.A.'s defense intelligence officer for the Middle East, South Asia, and terrorism; Colonel Larry Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell; Melvin Goodman, a former division chief and senior analyst at the C.I.A. and the State Department; Ray McGovern, a C.I.A. analyst for 27 years; Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, who served in the Pentagon's Near East and South Asia division in 2002 and 2003; Larry C. Johnson, a former C.I.A. officer who was deputy director of the State Department Office of Counterterrorism from 1989 to 1993; former C.I.A. official Philip Giraldi; and Vincent Cannistraro, the former chief of operations of the C.I.A.'s Counterterrorism Center.

In addition, Vanity Fair has found at least 14 instances prior to the 2003 State of the Union in which analysts at the C.I.A., the State Department, or other government agencies who had examined the Niger documents or reports about them raised serious doubts about their legitimacy—only to be rebuffed by Bush-administration officials who wanted to use the material. "They were just relentless," says Wilkerson, who later prepared Colin Powell's presentation before the United Nations General Assembly. "You would take it out and they would stick it back in. That was their favorite bureaucratic technique—ruthless relentlessness." "

More at:

- http://www.vanityfair.com/commentary/content/articles/060619roco02