This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
When the Law Falls Silent
When the Law Falls Silent
By
Cognitive Dissonance
It was just a little more than a month ago that I posted “The Grand SCOTUS Facade” on Zero Hedge. If I may be so bold as to shamelessly quote myself, ”But if the supremacy of The Empire is threatened by external or internal forces those very same three governmental branches, either separately or in unison, will act to protect The Empire and its special interests………and the Constitution be damned if it gets in the way.”
In the very next paragraph I go on to declare,” For example in decades past the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) affirmed slavery in America and then approved by abstention Abraham Lincoln’s blatantly unconstitutional power grab from the states, only to rule against it after the Civil War had ended and the damage had been done. Incredibly they even ratified the corralling of US citizens of Japanese descent during WW2 and the taking of their property without compensation.”
I’ll be the first to admit that I love the warm and fuzzy feeling of having my bias confirmed. From my perspective, that of the so called fringe point of view, my confirming stroke usually comes from reading other like minded people who have reached similar conclusions following different paths. Rarely do I receive affirmation from the mainstream media nor would I expect to. One must read between the lines when perusing the state media for the actual intent and meaning behind the public propaganda.
So I was a bit surprised to discover that none other than U. S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was the latest to provide me with that deliciously naughty feeling I get between my toes when my confirmation bias has just been tickled. Thank you Justice Scalia. I won’t tell my wife if you won’t tell yours.
Its one thing to discuss among friends, neighbors and alternative media the potentially revolutionary idea that The Empire has no legal clothes. It’s another entirely when one of The Empire’s Supreme Court justices says it in his out loud voice. Wow! Clearly Justice Scalia is seated on the SCOTUS for life because no instrument of State who needs to be re-appointed, re-elected or just really interested in staying employed by the State would ever speak such truth to power.
What I find really interesting is the manner in which he delivered the bomb shell personal opinion, that of someone who was confirming what we all already know to be true. Duh……when push comes to shove isn’t it obvious the State has no legal clothes?
Replying to a question from a University of Hawaii law school student regarding the 1944 Korematsu v. United States Supreme Court decision that affirmed the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War Two, Justice Scalia is quoted as saying "Well, of course, Korematsu was wrong. And I think we have repudiated in a later case. But you are kidding yourself if you think the same thing will not happen again."
Ummm….actually Justice Scalia, it was the propaganda spouting system itself, personified by all the King’s horses and all the King’s men, who has been kidding me into believing that my “rights’ are supreme and will be held above all other interests because “We the People” hold these truths to be self evident.
Scalia went on to explain "That's what was going on — the panic about the war and the invasion of the Pacific and whatnot. That's what happens. It was wrong, but I would not be surprised to see it happen again, in time of war. It's no justification, but it is the reality."
That’s a relief. Just as long as my constitutionally protected ‘rights’ are unilaterally abridged by The Empire, then the rape upheld by The State’s Supreme Court Justice’s because of deliberate public fear mongering fanned by manufactured State propaganda in order to herd the population into cutting off their noses to spite my face….well, I’m down with that dawg. All good here bro.
The various mainstream press reports, all of which read nearly word for word as if quoting a press release, then go on to mention this little gem. “Scalia cited a Latin expression meaning, "In times of war, the laws fall silent."” Interestingly not one newspaper decided to name the actual Latin phrase, assuming I suppose that their readers would not care to know or that the assembled reporters repeaters didn’t understand the phrase and needed it explained to them by the students in the room. That phrase is “Inter arma enim silent leges”.
Thankfully there was a legal expert in the room (other than Justice Scalia of course) to interpret the words of the Supreme Priest who was clearly off his meds and once again mindlessly ranting in public.
The Associated Press informed us that “Avi Soifer, the law school's dean, said he believed Scalia was suggesting people always have to be vigilant and that the law alone can't be trusted to provide protection.”
Well, if you can’t trust the law who, or what, can you trust? After all aren’t we a nation of laws? Doesn’t the law apply to everyone, rich or poor, educated and ignorant? Am I to assume that this ‘mistake’ by the Supreme Court was comparable to the mistake I made last night when I sprinkled too much red pepper in the spaghetti sauce? Oops, sorry Mrs. Cog, my bad. Here, have some cold water to wash that mistake away.
“Soifer said it's good to hear Scalia say the Korematsu ruling was wrong, noting the justice has been among those who have reined in the power of military commissions regardless of the administration.”
Ok! So am I to assume that Scalia is one of the good guys? Too bad there are eight other Justices who could form a majority to confirm that my death or internment at the hands of The Empire was lawful and righteous at the first sign of public fear and panic in response to a (highly likely) false flag attack or similar State sponsored provocation.
"We do need a court that sometimes will say there are individual or group rights that are not being adequately protected by the democratic process," Soifer said.
Is Soifer talking about the Supreme Court that is supposedly immune to public, governmental and corporate pressure and is ultimately tasked with protecting my ‘rights’ above all else? You mean to say that not only the law, but the arbiters of the law, might not actually uphold my rights because of public, governmental or corporate pressure? Say it ain’t so Soifer, say it ain’t so.
Another source provides an additional quote that did not seem to make it into the mainstream media’s ‘repeating’ of Scalia’s soon-to-be-regretted comments. Of note was Scalia’s interpretation of the function of the Supreme Court of the United States.
“"The function of the court is not to keep the other two branches (legislative and executive) in line; that's not what we're for. We're there to stop harm to individuals," Scalia said.”
Interesting observation Justice Scalia, considering you just admitted that your colleagues from 1944 failed to do precisely that when the law fell silent in the face of government warmongering which in turned fanned the flames of public panic and blatant political and racial scapegoating. And I might add, a government which is doing the same thing during today’s “Global War against Terrorism” by condoning Guantanamo, extraordinary rendition, extralegal killings/executions, death by drone etc.
I suspect Scalia was following the time honored tradition of politicians, despots and scalawags everywhere and speaking ‘for local consumption’. After all, he was speaking in Hawaii to a group of young adult law students, some of whom likely have family, friends, and possibly even distant relatives who were actually interned or deported during that wonderful experiment in truth and justice for all (except of course for US citizens of Japanese descent) during World War Two.
Let me quote from Josh Blackman’s blog. “Having an independent judiciary that, even in times of war, can check the other branches, is the last line of defense. This is the point Jackson’s concurrence in Youngstown conveys. ““With all its defects, delays and inconveniences, men have discovered no technique for long preserving free government except that the Executive be under the law, and that the law be made by parliamentary deliberations. Such institutions may be destined to pass away. But it is the duty of the Court to be last, not first, to give them up.””
Got that Justice Scalia? Let me repeat that just in case you were busy confirming your own bias. “But it is the duty of the Court to be last, not first, to give them up.”
Of course the above “Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.” opinion by the 1952 Supreme Court was speaking about the actions of the President “to avert a nationwide strike of steel workers in April 1952, which he believed would jeopardize national defense” by issuing an Executive Order to seize and operate the steel mills.
By the time the Executive Order was overturned by the SCOTUS, a scant two months later, the intent of the order (to avert a strike) had been accomplished and no personal liberties or ‘rights’ had been completely trampled in the process. So it is safe to say that the SCOTUS ruling was a ‘safe’ decision that could be presented as maintaining the facade of ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’ without actually encumbering or dissuading The Empire from its relentless pursuit of cronyism and expanded power.
I often say that the true measure of a society is how well it takes care of its weakest citizens. I shall amend that to say that the true measure of a society is how well it adheres to its own laws, which were supposedly put in place to protect its weakest citizens, during times of political stress or war.
The facade that constitutes the ‘belief’ that America adheres to a higher standard in all things American, including “The Law of the Land”, is not just crumbling, but wasn’t real to begin with…..except of course when it was convenient to those who held, and presently hold, the true power in America these days, the financial/military/corporate powerhouses including the mega banks and their idiot savant, the Federal Reserve.
02-15-2014
Cognitive Dissonance
Introducing a portal into the mind of Cognitive Dissonance. www.TwoIceFloes.com
- advertisements -
One thing that amuses me somewhat, is the "fact" that the US President Barrak Obama is touted as being a "Constitutional Lawyer".
I am not a US citizen nor do I live in the US, but I was educated (partly) there and I did spend much time studying the Constitution, the Preamble and much of the surrounding creative documentation, letters, commentaries etc.
It is my considered opinion that Obama is no more a "Constitutional Lawyer" than my dog.
Law? Republic? Are you kidding me? You have a President that passes "laws" at the stroke of his "computerized pen".
He has passed "Laws" that authorizes killing, torturing, incarceration of US citizens (as well as us foreigners) for life without ANY legal recourse, the droning of US citizens, and proclaim that he can do anything he wants.
Okay: Define "Law"
Clearly, the terms "Republic", "Law" and "Constitution" have no real meaning and are at a minimum in the USA (and elsewhere), duplicitous and are consistent with "Economic Theory" found clearly (stark) to mean, nought but "Political Expediency".
As @DavidPierre says above "Mafia Law", well, researching the meaning and origination of the hill hiding Mafia (from the conquering, armed gangs of barbarian knuckle dragging invaders) one could easily suggest to your readers (I suspect that you already have grasped the full implications of the collapsed former Constitutional Republic known as the United States of America) that those "barbarian knuckle dragging invaders" have captured Washington DC and have full control of both Houses of your former government, the military and enjoy the loyaties of your former elites and all their entrails dressed in consensualized bottled suits.
Question, if I may, please? To me the USA game of capture is over so is there any real advantage in prolonging the pretense that your "Constitution", "Law" and former "Republic" mean anything at all, ad nauseum?
The "law" has not fallen silent, it has been re-defined as the 'political expedient stroke and fancy of the computerized presidential pen' under the direction of the Highest Order of the Banker Gods.
@ Cognitive Dissonance Always appreciate your work.
Ho hum
There's a difference between lawful and legal.
Worth doing some reserch on.
The problem is that those in power have stolen the system and now use it for their own ends.
Unjust laws should be ignored, whenever feasible.
Here is the Constitutional justification for your assertion. http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-02-15/when-law-falls-silent#co...
Yes, we must continue to support government skrools untill we get up to 51% in the following survey,
1 In 4 Americans Thinks The Sun Goes Around The Earth, Survey SaysScott Neuman
NPR
February 15, 2014
A quarter of Americans surveyed could not correctly answer that the Earth revolves around the sun and not the other way around, according to a report out Friday from the National Science Foundation.
The survey of 2,200 people in the United States was conducted by the NSF in 2012 and released on Friday at an annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Chicago.
To the question “Does the Earth go around the Sun, or does the Sun go around the Earth,” 26 percent of those surveyed answered incorrectly.
Full article here
scotus, job description: a lawyer (mostly) who has dirty laundry, and is blackmail bait, will rule as told. helpful if :sociopathic, grandiose, and self important. must be able to construct rulings which are multi page obscure, dense with wordy circular reasoning, where one sentence would have worked. life time appointment, full benefits, security provided. ideal candidate is a jewish women lesbian, muslim convert, of mixed parents, with little beauty and worse wardrobe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6jBK1ZV-qs
Video was worth the time, I learned something. The word revolve does not appear in the survey, instead the words go around (spiral like) were used to maximize comprehension. Don't worry you 26%, you too can achieve congressional status along with congressman Hank Johnson (lower quartile). If astronomy is too hard maybe geography is your ticket.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNZczIgVXjg
NEA all the way.
The solar system is a system with masses interacting gravitationnally in a fairly stable manner.
In an idealised system, two gravitationally bound masses will rotate around their common centre of gravity.
Given the relative masses of the sun and earth, and ignoring all other matter in the solar system, the difference is negligable
Maybe consider that gravity/mass is only one small part of a much bigger reality.
Considering that electricity/plasma, a much bigger functional part of the universe, will help clarify how in reality it actually interacts.
Thunderbolts of the Godshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AUA7XS0TvA
Given that most bodies have very little to zero electric charge, how can electromagnetic forces act on them?
Electromagnetic forces cannot overcome gravity - look at black holes.
They can, it seems radiate due to quantum mechanical effects on virtual particles (Hawking Radiation) but even light (the most familiar electomagnetic phenomenon) is bound by gravity.
another video of the spiral motion of planets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jHsq36_NTU
DP, have you seen Mr2Tuff2's latest magnetohydrodynamic experiments?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG1tDnvCo84
cool stuff, though still trying to wrap my noggin around it.
Spiral motion of planets.....
Ho hum....
If I get to define the frame of reference, then the whole universe revolves around me!
If you get to define it, it likely revolves around you.
It's the 'frame' that's the problem.
Mr2Tuff rocks! He gave me some great pointers for the design of the ginormous faraday cage I am working on. Brilliant and very nice guy. :-)
Did you see his experiments on S0's Feb. 13th News (at the 1:00 mark) on dendritic patterns carved by electricity in the lab?
oh yeah, i bet you could walk out in the woods right now and find at least half dozen similar patterns in a hour or so.
as above, so below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuPl_8o_j7k
Volume of a Sphere, How to get the formula animation
DP's dps
I don't know what is ailing my steam driven PC today.
Maybe it's the Medication I've been drinking to shake this damn flu?
http://www.awa.dk/whisky/jameson/jamesonl.jpg
May I take exception to your comments on "WHISKY" Sir (which may be the cause of your health and discomfort?
Only the Scots create "WHISKY"
All the other producers "make" whiskey.
and there is a huge difference between the verbes "to make" (which can be unmade) and "to create" which is humanly impossible (but we who have the genes of the Scots, are not entirely human, but indeed, Gods in potential:).
And, Whisky be the nectar of the Gods.
And you Sir, are drinking ...?
in best spirits,
Ho hum
I agree.
Anything that will eat haggis is not entirely human.
I guess I'm not entirely human then.
What does this say about people who eat McD's??
Ahem,
The word whisky (or whiskey) is an anglicisation of the Gaelic word uisce/uisge meaning water. Distilled alcohol was known in Latin as aqua vitae ("water of life"). This was translated to Gaelic as Irish: uisce beatha and Scottish Gaelic: uisge beatha="lively water" or "water of life".
With a licence to distil Irish whiskey from 1608, the Old Bushmills Distillery in the north coast of Ireland is the oldest licenced whiskey distillery in the world.
But it really came from the Monks and then to Ireland and Scotland.
Now then, I call that religion; Oh Aye, indeed laddy.
;-)
Aye Mate, but the monks had no children. drink is for before the kids arrive, and after they are 15. Mixing them together gives you devilish reactions to small things.
"...LAW..."
There aint' no LAW except for the Mafia LAW of the JUNGLE in the Untied States of ASSASSINATION!
1890s-ongoing:
The era of the robber barons begins in deadly earnest.
The great fortunes of the Rockefellers, the Harrimans, the Mellons, the Goulds, the Carnegies and the other members of the U.S. ruling class along with the lesser fortunes of their lackeys and front men, which will soon include the Bush family and the Dulles brothers, are acquired through a mix of criminality, conspiracy, utter ruthlessness, murder and the bribery and outright ownership of politicians of all stripes.
It is all driven by an unquenchable greed for money and power and delusions of racial superiority.
"The few who understand the system,
will either be so interested in its profits,
or so dependent on its favors
that there will be no opposition
from that class,
while on the other hand,
the great body of people,
mentally incapable of comprehending
the tremendous advantages..
will bear its burden without complaint,
and perhaps without suspecting
that the system
is inimical to their best interests."
Rothschild
So true, so true that quote. As I've said before and I'll say it again. Democracies are few and far between and don't last long, why? We are looking at it, the rule of the powerful and the acquesence of the majority to their rule. We will go down like any other democracy in the past.
Welcome back DavidPierre. Apparently the rumor that you had been bundled up and extraordinarily rendered to Bagram Airfield for 'aggressive questioning' was incorrect?
Glad to see your 'Habeas corpus' petition to the Supreme Court was ruled on in your favor. Ain't the Supremes grand? :)
By the way I was going to end this piece with that very quote by Rothschild, but didn't want to distract from my rant.
After 44 years of studious exile I doubt they will even find my carcass to render.
I like your little video of your property @ your new blog site.
Your land is so much more hospitable than the islands and mountains of BC. One has to practically crawl up my backyard on hands and knees through 2' feet of snow to the Douglas Fir forest of +100' trees.
All the best
DP
Sounds like a nice spot