"Those who sacrifice liberty for
security deserve neither."
-- Benjamin Franklin
1. Email exchange
Time for Americans to
Admit That We've Had a
Sued Over 'Blatantly Unconstitutional Attack on Civil
Democracy – or Demarchy – the Solution?
to Be a Rogue Superpower
6. On the above sections
It still is the case
that sleeping remains quite
difficult for me. This also makes my life rather difficult, at
Anyway - and no, sleeping did not much improve, so far. Today there is a
first file, dedicated to the question what I am and to a good
lecture about methylfolate, that are probably neither popular.
There are also more Snowden Effects, as I keep calling them, simply
because it is mostly true, and they are in the present file: A
conversation with Edward Snowden, that got reported by Glenn Greenwald;
a radical piece that claims the U.S. has been subject to a coup; news
about several organizations sueing the NSA, mostly on Amendments
grounds; a quite theoretical question, about possible solutions; and a
piece on the superpower that the U.S. has lately become - it seems in
fact mostly because power corrupts, and absolute power coorrupts
absolutely, and not for any other real reason, including "terrorism"
1. Email exchange
First, a Glenn Greenwald article, that is not a great
shake, but is interesting, namely a report on an email exchange between
former GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey and Edward Snowden.
It is here:
The former Senator
starts his mail as follows:
And that seems to me to be
correct, and it is nice that a former Republican Senator says so.
Provided you have not
leaked information that would put in harms way any intelligence agent,
I believe you have done the right thing in exposing what I regard as a
massive violation of the United States Constitution.
For more, see the latest dotted link, where you will also see Snowden's
2. It's Time for Americans to
Admit That We've Had a Coup d’etat
The title of the present
section is not mine, but is the title of an article by Paul Craig
Roberts that I found on Alternet:
With the information I have
this is fairly original, though indeed Gore Vidal said similar things,
for quite a while also. It starts as follows:
And it ends like this:
The American people have
suffered a coup d’etat, but they are hesitant to acknowledge it. The
regime ruling in Washington today lacks constitutional and legal
legitimacy. Americans are ruled by usurpers who claim that the
executive branch is above the law and that the US Constitution is a
mere “scrap of paper.”
government is an illegitimate government. The oath of allegiance
requires defense of the Constitution “against all enemies, foreign and
domestic.” As the Founding Fathers made clear, the main enemy of the
Constitution is the government itself. Power does not like to be bound
and tied down and constantly works to free itself from constraints.
The criminals who
have seized illegitimate power in Washington cannot survive unless
truth can be suppressed or redefined as treason.
It's also strong stuff in
between, as you find out yourself by following the last dotted link.
If Americans acquiesce to
the coup d’etat, they will have placed themselves firmly in the grip of
What do I think about it? I agree more than not, but there is
little hope for a big and orderly change without millions seeing the
need, and I do not see those millions, neither at present nor
in the near future.
3. NSA Sued Over 'Blatantly Unconstitutional Attack on Civil
The following is
more feasible than the last article, at least now, and is by Andrea Germano on Common Dreams
This starts as follows
It also is quite rightly, in
my opinion, about these fundamental rights:
A diverse coalition of
groups represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has filed suit against the NSA
on Tuesday for its bulk, unconstitutional collection of Americans'
Among the 19 organizations
making up the broad coalition represented in the case, First
Unitarian Church of Los Angeles v. NSA, are Unitarian church
groups, gun rights groups, Greenpeace, the National Organization for
the Reform of Marijuana Laws, People for the American Way (PFAW) and
asserts that the plaintiffs' First, Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights
have been violated.
This is interesting, for it
should have a chance of being heard, and it may loosen up discussion, which indeed is sorely needed.
Is Democracy – or
Demarchy – the Solution?
The following article I found on Washingpon's Blog:
The question is both good and
highly theoretical. It is posed by a reader, and I list it to give you
a chance to make up your own mind - while knowing this probably will
not change much or anything.
I can give you my take: I am not for either - and demarchy is the
selection of the rulers by a lottery, by the way - and my own reasons
(and I have not voted since 1971, so it is a fairly strong conviction)
to not much believe in either are mostly but not only the stupidity of
the average folks.
But then one cannot change this: They mean well, mostly, but they are
mostly deceived and taken in, and often
get victimized, and that's that.
So let me say this: It would be nice if, for once, a real
democracy could be tried, but it mostly does not exist, and hardly ever
existed, except perhaps very formalistically (by the mere stipulation
that if only all adults can vote, all the harm will be undone, by the
For more of my own ideas, which would make some sense, see my
But once again: These are all
mostly fruitless ideas, and the main reasons they are almost bound to
bear no fruit are that there just are not enough intelligence and good
will (and you need both, to make a positive difference) - which
indeed also is a problem for any kind of government.
5. How to Be a Rogue Superpower
Finally, there is this, from Tom's Dispatch, which is
about the fourth sign in this Nederlog that some things may be changing
in the U.S., though I personally do not know in which direction:
This is by Tom Engelhardt and
starts as follows:
This is an interesting and
well considered piece, and one of its points is how little is really
known, about the present U.S., which is mostly due to the collaboration
of the vast majority of "journalists".
It’s hard even to know
how to take it in. I mean, what’s really happening? An
employee of a private contractor working for the National Security
Agency makes off with unknown numbers of files about America’s
security state on a thumb
drive and four
laptop computers, and jumps the nearest plane to Hong Kong.
His goal: to expose a vast surveillance structure built in the shadows
in the post-9/11 years and significantly aimed at Americans. He
leaks some of the documents to a columnist at
the British Guardian and
to the Washington
Post. The response is unprecedented: an “international
manhunt” (or more politely but less accurately, “a
diplomatic full court press”) conducted not by Interpol or the
United Nations but by the planet’s sole superpower, the very government
whose practices the leaker was so intent on exposing.
And that’s just for starters.
Thus, here is a part on a report in the New York Times - that did not
at all spark anything, which it clearly would have, 15 or more years
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as the FISA court, was
once mostly focused on approving case-by-case wiretapping orders. But
since major changes in legislation and greater judicial oversight of
intelligence operations were instituted six years ago, it has
quietly become almost a parallel Supreme Court, serving as the
ultimate arbiter on surveillance issues and delivering opinions that
will most likely shape intelligence practices for years to come, the
At most moments in
American history, the revelation that such a secret court, which never
turns down government requests, is making law “almost” at the level
of the Supreme Court would surely have caused an outcry in Congress and
elsewhere. However, there was none, a sign either of how powerful
and intimidating the secret world has become or of how much Congress
and the rest of Washington have already been absorbed into it.
Quite so. And again,
I have no solutions, but this is a really good piece about some very
major problems, that only can be undone, it seems to me, by having another
government based on other principles, than - at least - the
present and the previous U.S. governments, who mostly created the
problems, although the roots are diverse, deep, and some go back to the
But then: How to change this? I do not know.
On the above sections
I have only quoted small
parts of the files I link, but I'd like to make one remark:
The radicalism in most of
the articles is not my doing. I found it, and I selected it,
and it does seem new to me, or at least somewhat new.
It's not unprecedented - Gore Vidal comes to mind, who has
said similar things for quite a while (see also here and here) - but it seems to me rather
new to see the same or similar things from various and different
Also, I do not know what to think about it, and that is at least in
part because I have been a radical all my life, and do not have much
faith in most movements. And I have no idea what the future will bring,
although I fear it will not be much good.
Then again, this is only to indicate my own view, that will not make
any material difference, as indeed is the case for nearly everyone's
ME/CFS (that I prefer
to call M.E.: The "/CFS" is added to facilitate search
is a disease I have since 1.1.1979: