Big Think

Joe Tuttle on January 16, 2008, 4:51 PM

Perhaps a practical question in regards to preventative justice: Does it still make sense to operate in a system that functions in retributive justice?
If your chief concern in preventative jurisprudence is that the offenders have no value to life, then how can ANY level of punishment be of significance? Although detainment may act as a deterrent to prevent future crime, it does not change the individual's ontology to a point where they do not wish to commit the crime, especially when they don't value their own lives.

This may be naive, but could restorative be a better framework to work under? I admit it would be hard to do, and many would see this framework as weak, but would it be more just?

Ian Sinistra on January 16, 2008, 7:06 PM

I don't know whether to agree or disagree with this guy. For the most part I must say I disagree because I do not see how any state (or entity of any form) is capable of so called 'preventive justice'. Also I am forced to think about a certain book, "1984" and the parallels between his preventive justice and Thought Crime. All and all I believe that we must face our death one day and living in fear of it is no way to go about; that's essentially what he's proposing endemic paranoia.

Matt MCKinlay on January 16, 2008, 8:28 PM

What systems are going to be put in place to ensure such a system is not open to abuse by the people/organisations which are going to enforce pre-crime?

Preventing criminal acts/terrorist acts is a good idea, but presently, we have a system where people are detained and put before courts for something they haven't done. Law enforcement organisations have to ensure they are acting appropriately when dealing with these people otherwise the system becomes draconian, seeking to disregard/destroy the rights of people who are merely suspected of being involved in something.

Here in Australia there have already been a couple of cases put before courts where the person involved has been acquited due to lack of evidence. This has only occured after the person has been arrested, detained for days/weeks, had their visa cancelled, their job taken away, their life in Australia changed forever, due to the suspicion of guilt.

A preventative state always sounds like a good idea however in practice it doesn't always work in the interests of the people it is supposed to protect.

Joe Tuttle on January 16, 2008, 9:51 PM

Perhaps a practical question in regards to preventative justice: Does it still make sense to operate in a system that functions in retributive justice?
If your chief concern in preventative jurisprudence is that the offenders have no value to life, then how can ANY level of punishment be of significance? Although detainment may act as a deterrent to prevent future crime, it does not change the individual’s ontology to a point where they do not wish to commit the crime, especially when they don’t value their own lives.

This may be naive, but could restorative be a better framework to work under? I admit it would be hard to do, and many would see this framework as weak, but would it be more just?

Levi Arellano on January 16, 2008, 11:49 PM

Wow! I've only watched, maybe, a dozen of these expert videos, but this was the most prevalent and lucid one yet! I think that Mr. Dershowitz hit a crucial point at the end by reminding us that happy people tend not to commit atrocious acts.
It's a common mistake to confuse Muslims with terrorists, just the same as it is to confuse an ethnic group or another with criminals. It's not race, religion or creed that leads a person to commit an atrocity; it is miserable circumstances. These are NOT animals, just as Mr. Dershowitz said in his metaphor, to be disabled before they can strike. Thusly, since we are dealing with humans, preventative action is a faulty concept. We were blessed with free will, and thus could always change our mind even if planning to commit an atrocious act. The right to be safe from a governmental intercedence ought to be as inalienable to our countrymen, as to any man on Earth.
I am at a loss on how to prevent a "suicide bombing" from a place bereft of hope. Except to say this: I do not think that an Iraqi will see our form of government, nor any act from our government as this "ray of hope" that they've been seeking.

Ian Sinistra on January 17, 2008, 12:06 AM

I don’t know whether to agree or disagree with this guy. For the most part I must say I disagree because I do not see how any state (or entity of any form) is capable of so called ‘preventive justice’. Also I am forced to think about a certain book, “1984” and the parallels between his preventive justice and Thought Crime. All and all I believe that we must face our death one day and living in fear of it is no way to go about; that’s essentially what he’s proposing endemic paranoia.

Matt MCKinlay on January 17, 2008, 1:28 AM

What systems are going to be put in place to ensure such a system is not open to abuse by the people/organisations which are going to enforce pre-crime?

Preventing criminal acts/terrorist acts is a good idea, but presently, we have a system where people are detained and put before courts for something they haven’t done. Law enforcement organisations have to ensure they are acting appropriately when dealing with these people otherwise the system becomes draconian, seeking to disregard/destroy the rights of people who are merely suspected of being involved in something.

Here in Australia there have already been a couple of cases put before courts where the person involved has been acquited due to lack of evidence. This has only occured after the person has been arrested, detained for days/weeks, had their visa cancelled, their job taken away, their life in Australia changed forever, due to the suspicion of guilt.

A preventative state always sounds like a good idea however in practice it doesn’t always work in the interests of the people it is supposed to protect.

Thomas Moe on January 17, 2008, 4:33 AM

If the state now is moving much more from reacting to violence to a proactive, preemptive, preventive mode, it should be discouraged. Legislation should deal with facts not predictions. That being said, I do believe some jurisprudential precedents may be found in the courts attempts to deal with threats and conspiracies. One hears of the occasional murder prevented by a police sting deflecting attempts to hire hit men. Security, in the long run, is an illusion(life is fatal), so consider carefully what you are willing to pay for it.

Levi Arellano on January 17, 2008, 4:49 AM

Wow! I’ve only watched, maybe, a dozen of these expert videos, but this was the most prevalent and lucid one yet! I think that Mr. Dershowitz hit a crucial point at the end by reminding us that happy people tend not to commit atrocious acts.
It’s a common mistake to confuse Muslims with terrorists, just the same as it is to confuse an ethnic group or another with criminals. It’s not race, religion or creed that leads a person to commit an atrocity; it is miserable circumstances. These are NOT animals, just as Mr. Dershowitz said in his metaphor, to be disabled before they can strike. Thusly, since we are dealing with humans, preventative action is a faulty concept. We were blessed with free will, and thus could always change our mind even if planning to commit an atrocious act. The right to be safe from a governmental intercedence ought to be as inalienable to our countrymen, as to any man on Earth.
I am at a loss on how to prevent a “suicide bombing” from a place bereft of hope. Except to say this: I do not think that an Iraqi will see our form of government, nor any act from our government as this “ray of hope” that they’ve been seeking.

Thomas Moe on January 17, 2008, 9:33 AM

If the state now is moving much more from reacting to violence to a proactive, preemptive, preventive mode, it should be discouraged. Legislation should deal with facts not predictions. That being said, I do believe some jurisprudential precedents may be found in the courts attempts to deal with threats and conspiracies. One hears of the occasional murder prevented by a police sting deflecting attempts to hire hit men. Security, in the long run, is an illusion(life is fatal), so consider carefully what you are willing to pay for it.

Dr Doom on January 17, 2008, 10:13 AM

Preemptive mode? Was this type of "preventive measures" used by the Nazis? This kind of rationality does not stop at jurisprudence, but reaches into racial discrimination and frivolous debates of biological causes of crime or anti social behavior. The fact of the matter is that crime has and always be an element of society. There will be no measure to ensure peace or absolute order. This kind of rationality of "preventive measures" results in the aboloshment of CIVIL LIBERTIES! The result of this is a regeim which is a police state which reflects that of the Nazis.

Ross Billman on January 17, 2008, 11:57 AM

First they came for the Muslims
and I did not speak out because I am not a Muslim…

The rule of law is a social agreement made by the people and nothing more. The one thing that I feel Mr. Dershowitz was correct on is that when a person is not afraid to die they can do things that are unimaginable. So why must we cling to the illusion of safety? Because without fear no social agreement can stand; fear is the thing that binds us. Why not break the paradigm and instead make the agreement on mutual respect and desire to aid one another?

Sajid Mahmud on January 17, 2008, 12:25 PM

There would very little difference between a nation that prevents crimes by temporarity imprisoning someone before doing any wrong and a police state. It would be very hard to know when to stop this preventive mode. You absolutely cannot be certain that a crime will be comitted unless it is done. He could have a change of heart seconds before committing the crime, and would be innocent. So when does it become legal to "neautralise" a terrorist threat? When a group of people are packed with explosives and ready to go, when they're in a training camp, when they regularly attend the seminars of an extremeist preacher, or when someone who just happens to hang out with a group of people who happen to be very anti-west? In reality these distinctions are never so black and white. It is virtually impossible to ensure prevention and not compromise civil liberties. And this doctrine of prevention for terrorism will surely seep into other aspects of law, as it always does. Although it would seem far fetched now, if this doctrine of prevention did materialise you could pretty much convict a known junkie to be convicted of buying narcotics just for ringing the doorbell of a known drug dealer.
So instead of being disproportionately reactive to potential threats, why not be proactive and make sure these threats never materialise in the first place. Educate the potential terrorists, offer potential pedofiles therapy, help the poor so they
don't have to steal.

Joe Tuttle on January 17, 2008, 2:01 PM

SajidM12,
You make a valid point in regards to the balance that must take place between civil and criminal security, however your alternative of "educating" would be an exceedingly difficult task.
One can make the offer to give clinical support to someone who may commit a crime, but they probably won't take it. They believe their future actions are justified. All actions humans make are done to fulfill a need. If someone makes a criminal act or plan to, they believe that it is justified because the act fulfills one of these needs for them (revenge, venting anger, pleasure).
Although I agree that education and clinical help are substantially better justice than locking someone in a cell. I would pose a question to this thread: how can justice through education (transformative justice) be done without force? because you either force them into a place to get this help, which is another form of detainment that can be manipulated like in the statis quo, or you have to appeal to the "future criminal" that their mindset is flawed, which the criminal will argue back is reasonably justified.

Dr Doom on January 17, 2008, 3:13 PM

Preemptive mode? Was this type of “preventive measures” used by the Nazis? This kind of rationality does not stop at jurisprudence, but reaches into racial discrimination and frivolous debates of biological causes of crime or anti social behavior. The fact of the matter is that crime has and always be an element of society. There will be no measure to ensure peace or absolute order. This kind of rationality of “preventive measures” results in the aboloshment of CIVIL LIBERTIES! The result of this is a regeim which is a police state which reflects that of the Nazis.

Ross Billman on January 17, 2008, 4:57 PM

First they came for the Muslims
and I did not speak out because I am not a Muslim…

The rule of law is a social agreement made by the people and nothing more. The one thing that I feel Mr. Dershowitz was correct on is that when a person is not afraid to die they can do things that are unimaginable. So why must we cling to the illusion of safety? Because without fear no social agreement can stand; fear is the thing that binds us. Why not break the paradigm and instead make the agreement on mutual respect and desire to aid one another?

Sajid Mahmud on January 17, 2008, 5:25 PM

There would very little difference between a nation that prevents crimes by temporarity imprisoning someone before doing any wrong and a police state. It would be very hard to know when to stop this preventive mode. You absolutely cannot be certain that a crime will be comitted unless it is done. He could have a change of heart seconds before committing the crime, and would be innocent. So when does it become legal to “neautralise” a terrorist threat? When a group of people are packed with explosives and ready to go, when they’re in a training camp, when they regularly attend the seminars of an extremeist preacher, or when someone who just happens to hang out with a group of people who happen to be very anti-west? In reality these distinctions are never so black and white. It is virtually impossible to ensure prevention and not compromise civil liberties. And this doctrine of prevention for terrorism will surely seep into other aspects of law, as it always does. Although it would seem far fetched now, if this doctrine of prevention did materialise you could pretty much convict a known junkie to be convicted of buying narcotics just for ringing the doorbell of a known drug dealer.
So instead of being disproportionately reactive to potential threats, why not be proactive and make sure these threats never materialise in the first place. Educate the potential terrorists, offer potential pedofiles therapy, help the poor so they
don’t have to steal.

Joe Tuttle on January 17, 2008, 7:01 PM

SajidM12,
You make a valid point in regards to the balance that must take place between civil and criminal security, however your alternative of “educating” would be an exceedingly difficult task.
One can make the offer to give clinical support to someone who may commit a crime, but they probably won’t take it. They believe their future actions are justified. All actions humans make are done to fulfill a need. If someone makes a criminal act or plan to, they believe that it is justified because the act fulfills one of these needs for them (revenge, venting anger, pleasure).
Although I agree that education and clinical help are substantially better justice than locking someone in a cell. I would pose a question to this thread: how can justice through education (transformative justice) be done without force? because you either force them into a place to get this help, which is another form of detainment that can be manipulated like in the statis quo, or you have to appeal to the “future criminal” that their mindset is flawed, which the criminal will argue back is reasonably justified.

Moises P Ramirez on January 20, 2008, 5:30 AM

Alan,
I believe Richard Rorty (the american pragmatist philosopher) has a better metaphor. He said terrorists are like weather or sismic phenomena. We wouldn't jeopardize our civil rights because of such natural phenomena. We study them and figure out different sorts of preventive measures, but we would never stop having our liberties and rights.

Besides, terrorism in action resembles a war. So we should apply war jurisprudence to it, including intelligence and counter-intelligence capacities…

Taylor DAlton on January 20, 2008, 6:04 AM

I think that it is somewhat revealing how Dershowitz phrases that he is seeking "jurisprudence" to fit the current preventative state, as in adjusting the concept to fit the behavior; a sort of body-then-mind in that order kind of thing. If you look at Dershowitz's history, which is not a vague point of contention that I am bringing up, it is relevant: http://www.democracynow.org/2007/4/17/noam_chomsky_accuses_alan_dershowitz_of
You can see how Dershowitz issues apologetics for the Israel-atrocities side of the mutually atrocious situation over there to the point of trying to prevent a book from being published, as well as denying a recognized scholar tenure. "preventative state" indeed; Who prevents what and for what immediate purpose is the question unanswered, nay dismissed by Professor Dershowitz.

Moises P Ramirez on January 20, 2008, 10:30 AM

Alan,
I believe Richard Rorty (the american pragmatist philosopher) has a better metaphor. He said terrorists are like weather or sismic phenomena. We wouldn’t jeopardize our civil rights because of such natural phenomena. We study them and figure out different sorts of preventive measures, but we would never stop having our liberties and rights.

Besides, terrorism in action resembles a war. So we should apply war jurisprudence to it, including intelligence and counter-intelligence capacities…

Taylor DAlton on January 20, 2008, 11:04 AM

I think that it is somewhat revealing how Dershowitz phrases that he is seeking “jurisprudence” to fit the current preventative state, as in adjusting the concept to fit the behavior; a sort of body-then-mind in that order kind of thing. If you look at Dershowitz’s history, which is not a vague point of contention that I am bringing up, it is relevant: http://www.democracynow.org/2007/4/17/noam_chomsky_accuses_alan_dershowitz_of
You can see how Dershowitz issues apologetics for the Israel-atrocities side of the mutually atrocious situation over there to the point of trying to prevent a book from being published, as well as denying a recognized scholar tenure. “preventative state” indeed; Who prevents what and for what immediate purpose is the question unanswered, nay dismissed by Professor Dershowitz.

Carny Buckboard on January 20, 2008, 8:52 PM

Dershowitz reveals himself as one of the most dangerous men in the world.

"Particularly if the crime is a nuclear attack, a terrorist attack with biological weapons, with chemical weapons. Sexual predators running rampant. Drunken drivers killing people on our streets."

The last two examples belong with the first, why? Is there evidence that post-9/11 more and more drunk drivers are crashing or more sexual predators are running rampant? No. Perhaps these two examples are seeds to grow into populist campaigns to force through measures against the first example.

Dershowitz wants to punish people for what they have not done and call this pre-emption or proactive or preventive. Fine, call it what you want. I call it fascism. If somebody who is punished for what they have not done then does not do what you punished them for, is that success? Even if that person was not going to do it anyway?

We move from better let 10 go free than find an innocent guilty to "Better punish everybody rather than anyone go free."

This philosophy, such as it is, is the end of innocence, it is an attempt to manipulate human consciousness into a full embrace of the state as the sole regulator of mental hygiene. It is the logic of sacrificing all personal freedoms in order to receive the state-provided service of 'being kept alive' as Mitt Romney so elegantly formulated it.

I would, however, agree that applying preventive measures to POTUS 43 may have been an excellent idea, given the death and destruction that has arisen from his tenure.

Oh no, wait, this is for those 'enemies of the state' who are not part of the state apparatus itself. This is the thinking that will bring us The Party.

Carny Buckboard on January 21, 2008, 1:52 AM

Dershowitz reveals himself as one of the most dangerous men in the world.

“Particularly if the crime is a nuclear attack, a terrorist attack with biological weapons, with chemical weapons. Sexual predators running rampant. Drunken drivers killing people on our streets.”

The last two examples belong with the first, why? Is there evidence that post-9/11 more and more drunk drivers are crashing or more sexual predators are running rampant? No. Perhaps these two examples are seeds to grow into populist campaigns to force through measures against the first example.

Dershowitz wants to punish people for what they have not done and call this pre-emption or proactive or preventive. Fine, call it what you want. I call it fascism. If somebody who is punished for what they have not done then does not do what you punished them for, is that success? Even if that person was not going to do it anyway?

We move from better let 10 go free than find an innocent guilty to “Better punish everybody rather than anyone go free.”

This philosophy, such as it is, is the end of innocence, it is an attempt to manipulate human consciousness into a full embrace of the state as the sole regulator of mental hygiene. It is the logic of sacrificing all personal freedoms in order to receive the state-provided service of ‘being kept alive’ as Mitt Romney so elegantly formulated it.

I would, however, agree that applying preventive measures to POTUS 43 may have been an excellent idea, given the death and destruction that has arisen from his tenure.

Oh no, wait, this is for those ‘enemies of the state’ who are not part of the state apparatus itself. This is the thinking that will bring us The Party.

pi pipistro on January 21, 2008, 3:29 PM

From Orwell's 1984, through Minority Report, to Dershowitz's conjectures…
Thoughtcrime: the egg of Columbus, isn't it? Step by step, this way of making prevention a myth and/or panacea is aimed at trying and prevent any risk coming from our very existence (somewhat a risk, indeed, at least for planet Earth). Unfortunately this self overconfidence does not fit either to the precariousness of human kind or the awareness of being everything but perfect.

pi pipistro on January 21, 2008, 8:29 PM

From Orwell’s 1984, through Minority Report, to Dershowitz’s conjectures…
Thoughtcrime: the egg of Columbus, isn’t it? Step by step, this way of making prevention a myth and/or panacea is aimed at trying and prevent any risk coming from our very existence (somewhat a risk, indeed, at least for planet Earth). Unfortunately this self overconfidence does not fit either to the precariousness of human kind or the awareness of being everything but perfect.

Yomaira Navarrete on January 22, 2008, 6:26 AM

The argument Dershowitz makes doesn%u2019t seem realistic, because there is no way one can tell (with 100% accuracy) what a person might or might not do. Therefore trying to punish someone for what they might do, leaves room for mistake. This act can create more problems for the government than it would solve. Another thing to look at is the fact that everyone is different; so even if a person grow in the same environment as a terrorist does not mean they will do the same. As a result there is no possible %u201Cjurisprudence%u201D that can be created to fit the profile of all the people.

Yomaira Navarrete on January 22, 2008, 11:26 AM

The argument Dershowitz makes doesn%u2019t seem realistic, because there is no way one can tell (with 100% accuracy) what a person might or might not do. Therefore trying to punish someone for what they might do, leaves room for mistake. This act can create more problems for the government than it would solve. Another thing to look at is the fact that everyone is different; so even if a person grow in the same environment as a terrorist does not mean they will do the same. As a result there is no possible %u201Cjurisprudence%u201D that can be created to fit the profile of all the people.

baraca yo-bama on January 26, 2008, 3:14 AM

Throw away the Constitution. Throw away all religeon. Potential Dangers?? Preventative State?
Excess fear has caused Prof. Dershowitz to become insane. He has joined the ranks of the necon facist movement.
This is Nazi speak. Pure and simple. Lumping suicide terrorist's in with drunk drivers is insane. Does he propose rounding up the all the people in AA meetings (potential danger of drunk driving) and interning them indefinitely in concentration camps.
The good Prof. used to be a protector of civil liberty and the "idea" of innocent until proven guilty. No more, it seems.

baraca yo-bama on January 26, 2008, 8:14 AM

Throw away the Constitution. Throw away all religeon. Potential Dangers?? Preventative State?
Excess fear has caused Prof. Dershowitz to become insane. He has joined the ranks of the necon facist movement.
This is Nazi speak. Pure and simple. Lumping suicide terrorist’s in with drunk drivers is insane. Does he propose rounding up the all the people in AA meetings (potential danger of drunk driving) and interning them indefinitely in concentration camps.
The good Prof. used to be a protector of civil liberty and the “idea” of innocent until proven guilty. No more, it seems.

Jen Something on January 28, 2008, 4:14 PM

What about war profit? Voting fraud? Treason? 9-11 investigations? Secret Society Presidents? Anthrax investigations?

You are on record as a double speaker. Caught in your own web. Welcome to your future.

Dearest Prudence GFY.

JMO

Jen Something on January 28, 2008, 9:14 PM

What about war profit? Voting fraud? Treason? 9-11 investigations? Secret Society Presidents? Anthrax investigations?

You are on record as a double speaker. Caught in your own web. Welcome to your future.

Dearest Prudence GFY.

JMO

David Sketchley on January 29, 2008, 3:22 AM

What this extremist fails to explain is that his idea of what he calls the %u201Cpreventive state%u201D, is fascism. He tries to dress it up in fancy Orwellian language but he's a fascist and he's talking about bringing in fascism.

He defends torture, collective pnishment, and would prefer there was no free speech (except for him and his chums of course & as is demonstrated in his so far successful attempts to control scholars in the US, specifically if anyone dares breach the truth about the crimes of the Israeli state).

He's also a plagiarist as Norman Finkelstein has so ably demonstrated in Beyond Chutzpah %u201CHe not only plagiarized, but he plagiarized from a certifiable hoax,%u201D said Finkelstein.
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=3

He's also a liar according to The Jewish daily The Forward's Kathleen Peratis, partner in the New York law firm Outten & Golden and trustee of Human Rights Watch:

"In a 2004 speech at the University of California, Berkeley, Alan Dershowitz said: "I support Israel because I support gay rights. Recently, a progressive congressman, Barney Frank from Massachusetts, worked with me and Israel to grant asylum for 40 Palestinian gays." Alas, not a word of this is true…So what exactly was Dershowitz talking about? His email reply to my email query was, %u201CThe reference to working with Barney Frank is incorrect. Barney Frank told [me] the story.%u201D"
http://www.forward.com/articles/for-gay-palestinians-tel-aviv-is-mecca/

The only reason he gets away with what he says? His Harvard pedigree gives his dishonest ramblings academic and mainstream credibility.

David Sketchley on January 29, 2008, 8:22 AM

What this extremist fails to explain is that his idea of what he calls the %u201Cpreventive state%u201D, is fascism. He tries to dress it up in fancy Orwellian language but he’s a fascist and he’s talking about bringing in fascism.

He defends torture, collective pnishment, and would prefer there was no free speech (except for him and his chums of course & as is demonstrated in his so far successful attempts to control scholars in the US, specifically if anyone dares breach the truth about the crimes of the Israeli state).

He’s also a plagiarist as Norman Finkelstein has so ably demonstrated in Beyond Chutzpah %u201CHe not only plagiarized, but he plagiarized from a certifiable hoax,%u201D said Finkelstein.
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=3

He’s also a liar according to The Jewish daily The Forward’s Kathleen Peratis, partner in the New York law firm Outten & Golden and trustee of Human Rights Watch:

"In a 2004 speech at the University of California, Berkeley, Alan Dershowitz said: “I support Israel because I support gay rights. Recently, a progressive congressman, Barney Frank from Massachusetts, worked with me and Israel to grant asylum for 40 Palestinian gays.” Alas, not a word of this is true…So what exactly was Dershowitz talking about? His email reply to my email query was, %u201CThe reference to working with Barney Frank is incorrect. Barney Frank told [me] the story.%u201D"
http://www.forward.com/articles/for-gay-palestinians-tel-aviv-is-mecca/

The only reason he gets away with what he says? His Harvard pedigree gives his dishonest ramblings academic and mainstream credibility.

Jen Something on February 27, 2008, 9:45 PM

AN S.O.S. TO AMERICA, GET TO A LIFEBOAT

By Greg Evensen

February 27, 2008

SOURCE: http://www.newswithviews.com/Evensen/greg25.htm

I have waited an extra week to see if the following letter would generate any response from those in authority over us. I have been grievously disappointed, but not at all surprised. To the hundreds of you who so graciously and forcefully responded, all I can offer you is deep gratitude for your efforts. We collectively made our last best try.

No one can say we did not do our best. The result was predictable but necessary, at least in my view, because what follows in the next few weeks and months will be so difficult for this nation as to be nearly indescribable. I pray to God Almighty that I am wrong about this, but I fear not. The United States of America is collapsing from within at an accelerating rate, at every level, and from every corner of a decayed foundation in Washington, D.C. The rest of the house—no matter how sturdily built—will fall as well. NO ONE will escape.

This letter is the result of your messages and is the communication that was forwarded to every member of Congress, the President, and as many state county board associations as we could locate. I sent one to the UN Secretary-General, the Federal Reserve Chairman and the Justice Department. It has taken almost three weeks and it may well have been for absolutely nothing, but I believe it was a necessary component to justify whatever comes. Here is what I sent out.

February 2008

To: The President of the United States
The Congress of the United States
The Justice Department of the United States
The United Nations Secretary-General
The Chairman of the United States Federal Reserve System
The 50 State%u2019s County Board Chairmen

Greetings:

On behalf of American citizens invited to submit their concerns and suggestions to all of you, and the several hundred that responded, I ask only that you contemplate once again, the serious nature of our present national dilemma and regard these ideas with all of the serious responsibility that they require. This is America, advising you our representatives, or to the other named parties exerting heavy influence over the affairs of this nation. Please consider carefully your response to these matters and the ultimate effect your action or inaction will have on the future of the American people.

These statements are given in no particular order or preference. They represent the deepest, most heartfelt positions held by our fellow citizens.

* Hold all sworn representatives or officials to their oath of office.
* Secure all of the borders from all illegal entries.
* Return to a Constitutional Republic form of government.
* Eliminate all forms of emergency government now in place.
* Eliminate maritime or other non-constitutional law and its current use.
* Control the runaway u201Chealth industry%u201D and the corrupt deception of pharmaceuticals. Eliminate the FDA, allow testing by the CDC.
* Withdraw permanently from the United Nations. Require the UN to leave US soil immediately. Reject any form of world governance.
* Reaffirm the original constitution as the supreme law of the land.
* Reaffirm the Bill of Rights as unassailable, untouchable natural law. The second amendment allows for unrestricted possession and carry of weapons at any time in any place by anyone (citizens restricted to 18%u2014voting and military induction age) not adjudicated as mentally/emotionally unbalanced or felons convicted of a crime of violence.
* Absolutely close our borders with any force necessary to do so.
* Repeal NAFTA, WTO, or other trade related agreements harmful to US industry and reject any North American Union efforts.
* Eliminate the Federal Reserve System immediately, revoke its charter.
* Eliminate the Internal Revenue System. Tax according to the Constitution%u2019s allowable requirements. Stop the illegal forced collection of taxes from the American worker.
* Eliminate US participation or support of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.
* Bring home US troops from around the world, place them on borders.
* Drill for and use our own oil in America, off-shore and in Alaska.
* Declare all lobbying at any governmental level by private industry as illegal, a felony.
* Require recognition of the unconstitutionality and illegality of the 14th 16th and 17th amendments. Full repeal of all legislation since 1913.
* Enact a 3x amount import tax on all products formerly created within the US.
* Create an %u201Centry test%u201D for newly elected politicians to prove they can pass a constitutional exam with a 95 or better score.
* u2022 Plan A%u2014Eliminate and prohibit all executive orders. Plan B——Require Congressional consent or rejection for all executive orders issued within 10 days of a President%u2019s signature.
* Complete disqualification for an office holder if he/she is a past or present member of any lobbying group, international banking or commerce entity or groups calling for the surrender of US sovereignty such as the Council on Foreign Relations, the US State Dept., etc.
* Create a tariff system that works and that would require all products originating out of country to pass safety measures and pricing standards protective of this nation%u2019s manufacturers and this nation%u2019s workers.
* Convene grand juries in all 50 states to oversee the legality and constitutionality of any/all legislation passed since 1913.
* Declare that corporations are no longer %u201Cpersons,%u201D have only granted privileges and do only what their charters permit. If they fail their charter obligations they may be permanently revoked within 30 days.
* All public contracts paid for with %u201Ctax%u201D money are competitive bid only. No exceptions
* Create Neighborhood Watch Militias in communities wanting them.
* Articles of Impeachment filed for every politician or judge found in violation of his sacred oath of office or violation of jury protections.
* Find, prosecute, deport and criminalize every illegal in America. Don%u2019t say it can%u2019t be done. The government can find anyone, anytime. They ignore illegals. Armed forces border security.
* No monopolies of any kind, break up monster corporations.
* Allow a set time for immunity and require all judges, politicians, military leaders and attorneys to confess treason and be barred from office. If they refuse, indict and imprison for life if found guilty.
* All gun control laws are null and void. Gun-makers immune from frivolous suits.
* Immediate cessation of all work on the North American Union corridor. All secret N. A. Union agreements void.
* Eliminate the Homeland Security Act.
* Eliminate the Patriot Act.
* Eliminate all federal agencies not specifically authorized in the Constitution.
* Eliminate all law enforcement agencies not authorized in the Constitution. Let the states cover security and legal matters.
* Forbid local law enforcement duties to any federal agencies or the US military under ALL circumstances. Let the states handle the issues.
* Require all judges at all levels to inform juries of their constitutional rights and duties. One time failure is grounds for removal from office.
* Reduce the size and budget of the federal government by 80 without exception. States should adhere to the same standard.
* Return the federal government to its constitutionally allowed mandates, authority and limited scope.
* Eliminate the %u201Ccorporate%u201D status of the United States.
* Return complete autonomy and sovereignty to each of the 50 states.
* Eliminate %u201CUS citizenship%u201D as created by the 14th amendment.
* Return all citizens to sovereign state flesh and blood human beings.
* Reject any and all attempts to inflict GPS and informational bio-chips on all citizens. Criminalize anyone who attempts to require their use.
* Require and allow the free exercise of public acknowledgements of God anywhere, anytime and in all things public and private.
* Eliminate all influences, requirements or taxing authority of any international bodies upon American citizens. Criminalize all agencies or individuals who %u201Cauthorize%u201D foreign troops or international laws from being forced upon citizens of this nation at any level by any agency.
* Eliminate all secret intelligence gathering agencies and the Pentagon. Turn all such duties over to a select panel of generals and civilians answerable directly to the American people for accountability and actions taken.
* Term limits at all levels of government. One six year term for President, two four year terms for Congressmen, two five year terms for senators, the same for state representatives and governors, and five year reviewable terms for Supreme Court judges. Eliminate federal courts at all levels except for Appeals. Same for the states.
* Eliminate the national debt by decree. Return to constitutional coinage and value. All banks to be local. No fractional banking, that practice is a felony—lifetime in prison. No credit cards of any kind.

This represents the top 50 recommendations, frankly demands, by the segment of the population taking the time to submit them. Although they are distilled from hundreds of statements, many of them repeated in one form or another by scores of people with the same concerns, they are very serious and should be taken as such.

Unfortunately for the American people, this election cycle is frightening in its potential. Those anointed to run by their respective parties represent a minority of Americans who have a subversive and destructive agenda waiting to be forced upon us by every manner of unconstitutional authority. That is why this has been sent to you. The American people, that is, those who know the deep, sacrificial history of this nation and its Godly roots, will not long endure any more suffering at the hands of authorities who have given over to the lusts of absolute corrupted power. They have spoken. I encourage you with all due respect to listen to what they have to say. To do otherwise, is to invoke and justify the American nation to challenge your authority and act upon the provisions found in the original Declaration of Independence dealing with such institutional tyranny.

True freedom, the desire for absolute liberty and unwavering support of this nation%u2014as it was instituted—requires that this letter be sent. I beg you to re-examine your positions in regard to this petition, seek change and remedy for it, and join with us in a brilliant renewal of our nation. On behalf of true American Patriots, I serve as their messenger and remain,

Most sincerely,

Gregory L. Evensen

There it is. We have done our best. Thank you so much for allowing me to send your deepest concerns to our governmental representatives. Pray that they will accept this with an open mind and heart. We could have done no less. We will give them time to respond. We will continue to prepare as the situation demands. You should use all of your resources and abilities to look ahead, clearly and with a strong heart. We will continue knowing that God is in control. Live your life true to your beliefs and fearing nothing that will come your way. S.O.S. stands for %u201CSave Our Souls.%u201D It is the message of a doomed vessel. It is followed by orders to retreat to lifeboats. The final call is to abandon ship. The S.O.S. has been given, fellow patriots, this letter is our lifeboat call. I will not abandon our ship just yet. There is one final call. We will muster to its bugle as the door of reason closes by the heavy hand of tyranny. May this be our rallying cry of resistance to that evil day. Freedom, America, now and forevermore…….

Edward C on March 5, 2008, 5:01 PM

In all times in History and in all countries you'll always find people complaining about Politics and Religion.

This is a waste of time.

Just focus on yourself, improving your life, your health, your relationships and eliminating your own hipocrisy. If you do all these things then your world becomes beautiful and you attract like-minded people wherever you may go…

(And if you wrongly goto Jail for a little while – make the most of the situation – you can now focus on yourself with daily reading then exercise)

Please visit my other Ideas for the process of becoming internally free :-)

Edward C on March 5, 2008, 10:01 PM

In all times in History and in all countries you’ll always find people complaining about Politics and Religion.

This is a waste of time.

Just focus on yourself, improving your life, your health, your relationships and eliminating your own hipocrisy. If you do all these things then your world becomes beautiful and you attract like-minded people wherever you may go…

(And if you wrongly goto Jail for a little while – make the most of the situation – you can now focus on yourself with daily reading then exercise)

Please visit my other Ideas for the process of becoming internally free :-)

Vakil Schmolivitz on March 10, 2008, 3:20 PM

I don't see how we can remain the free, individualistic society I was raised to believe we are if we become a 'preventative state'. I would rather risk the tiny chance that I fall victim to terrorism (I live in DC, so I appreciate the risk) than live within a police state.

Vakil Schmolivitz on March 10, 2008, 7:20 PM

I don’t see how we can remain the free, individualistic society I was raised to believe we are if we become a ‘preventative state’. I would rather risk the tiny chance that I fall victim to terrorism (I live in DC, so I appreciate the risk) than live within a police state.

Steven Sturdevant on March 14, 2008, 4:14 AM

Well Professor, yo certainly stirred up the crackpots and self promoters with this one.

I'm not going to give you much credit for any brilliance here because what you say is painfully obvious… and inevitable. Many of the problems of today were predicted by Desmond Morris 40 years ago. Anyone with any thought other than of him/her self would see the absolute inevitability of loss of freedoms and more control over a runaway criminal element in a runaway population.

But, I will give you credit for the guts to say this to a nation obsessed with celebrities and MP3s. What do you say to an adult who watches steroid saturated drone beat the hell out of each other on the football field and the phony arenas of "Professional' wrestlers? What can you say to a culture who's "favorite" Google searches are topped by Paris Hilton?

Congratulations. But don't hold your breath for any positive changes.

t rasa

Steven Sturdevant on March 14, 2008, 8:14 AM

Well Professor, yo certainly stirred up the crackpots and self promoters with this one.

I’m not going to give you much credit for any brilliance here because what you say is painfully obvious… and inevitable. Many of the problems of today were predicted by Desmond Morris 40 years ago. Anyone with any thought other than of him/her self would see the absolute inevitability of loss of freedoms and more control over a runaway criminal element in a runaway population.

But, I will give you credit for the guts to say this to a nation obsessed with celebrities and MP3s. What do you say to an adult who watches steroid saturated drone beat the hell out of each other on the football field and the phony arenas of "Professional’ wrestlers? What can you say to a culture who’s “favorite” Google searches are topped by Paris Hilton?

Congratulations. But don’t hold your breath for any positive changes.

t rasa

Jen Something on March 22, 2008, 4:03 PM

Dearest Prudence…..



RICO suit filed against ABC, MSNBC, FOX, CNN, CBS, The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine, The Chicago Tribune, The Miami Herald and The San Diego Herald-Tribune.



Clarence Malcolm

What the public needs to understand is that FOX, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC and the other established mainstream " mass media"/news sources [see definition @ Wikipedia. org] are perpetrating criminal fraud (via omissions, distortions and outright lies) and a deliberate censorship of Dr. Ron Paul in 2008 Presidential race%u2014with malice and aforethought and evil intent to control the 2008 presidential elections. This is an outrage and “We the People” need to organize against this dangerous plot and TAKE ACTION by filing “class action” criminal charges and civil suits against the owners and executives of these news sources. This illegal censorship is not only harming Americans because they wield the power to control the outcome of elections via the quantity and quality of the news coverage they provide the candidates; it constitutes an unAmerican and antiAmerican criminal enterprise; not to fail to mention a violation of the first amendment/freedom of the press. These accused individuals%u2014the elitist media executives%u2014exercise monopolized and Fascist-control over media/news sources with intent to get the candidate preferred by them elected while simultaneously wrongfully hiding and/or playing down the true facts, popularity and success of the Ron Paul campaign.

















Please spread this message and let’s get criminal charges and a class action lawsuit executed against this dangerous organized crime syndicate identified as the present mainstream media outlets which are collaborating in a RICO [ Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961-1968; reference: www. ricoact. com] conspiracy to censor Dr. Ron Paul and control the outcome of the 2008 Presidential Election. This is definitely “RICO” if it can be shown that any of the accused media executives have donated money to any of the other presidential candidates, directly or indirectly! The accused individuals herein have wrongfully utilized their outrageous MONOPOLY over the media across America to injure Dr. Ron Paul and his millions of supporters; all Americans, in fact. These accused individuals need to go to prison upon conviction. They need to be criminally prosecuted and have their personal assets seized. They need to have their Federal FCC licenses revoked for participating in this criminal conspiracy. Help us spread this felony information far and wide. Let’s get these elitist outlaws criminally prosecuted and civilly sued.

-

-
I’ll get the ball rolling right now with my sworn affidavit, a criminal complaint:
Gage County
State of Nebraska
SWORN STATEMENT
I, Clarence Douglas Malcolm, a private criminal investigator, working with retired FBI Division Chief, Ted L.


Gunderson [ ">www. tedgunderson. com] hereby swear under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of Nebraska and the United States of America that I have obtained personal and imputed knowledge that known and yet unknown owners, executives and employees in the established mainstream media including but not limited to ABC, MSNBC, FOX, CNN, CBS, The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine, The Chicago Tribune, The Miami Herald and The San Diego Herald-Tribune and, in fact, nearly all (if not all) news sources which have become monopolized by a few wealthy class individuals who are intentionally and with evil intent acting as co-conspirators in perpetrating crime and the unlawful censorship of Dr. Ron Paul; and, these same individuals are participating in an illegal conspiracy rising to the level of RICO to control the outcome of the 2008 Presidential Elections. The level of felony crime, corruption and conspiracy victimizing Dr. Ron Paul and the America people in these 2008 Presidential event is unprecedented in the history of the United States and needs to be investigated and prosecuted without further delay. The conspirators know they have a duty to the public to impartially cover all news worthy “news” but have colluded to create an uneven playing field favoring select candidates while ignoring or virtually disregarding Dr. Paul and others.


-
I am a bona fide Federal and State victim-witness to this crime along with countless millions of other defrauded Americans. The media owners and executives who are involved in this illegal monopoly, RICO racketeering and conspiracy include but are not limited to: David Rockefeller , Edgar Bronfman, Rupert Murdoch, Sumner Redstone and Ted Turner . Known and other yet unknown individuals working in collaboration with or for these media barons including but not limited to executives, legal consultants, representatives, news personnel and employees who are%u2014more likely than not%u2014actively involved in this felony crime and conspiracy and who should also be arrested and investigated for their participation. I also formally accuse these individuals of treason against the people of the United States of America%u2026pursuant to Ted Gunderson’s extensive research and other information we have obtained%u2026who individually and collectively%u2014more likely than not%u2014possess evil intent to overthrow the United States Republic form of government and our hard-won national sovereignty as established by our founders and for this diabolical purpose they have used their tremendous wealth, power, influence and illegally monopolized control over this nation’s media/news sources to facilitate this criminal conspiracy. For example, as documented in the February 9, 1917, United States Congressional Record wherein it was announced in pages 2947- 2948 that J.P. Morgan interests had bought 25 of America ‘s leading newspapers and inserted their own editors in order to control the press . Ted Gunderson has proof that this conspiracy has tremendously escalated and expanded into all other media/news sources since that time. Moreover, Ted Gunderson has meritorious information which has led him (and others including me) to believe that these conspirators and their cohorts have controlled past elections through the felonious manipulation of electronic voting machines.



Further, I hereby formally accuse the Republican and Democratic Parties via known and yet unknown members%u2014having membership in the Counsel on Foreign Relations, an organization I believe I can easily prove to be a subversive unAmerican and anti-American criminal organization via rogues therein%u2014of actively participating with evil intent, directly or indirectly, in the aforementioned felony crime and conspiracy in willful collaboration with the accused aforementioned outlaws in the mass media.


I have acquired much evidence to prove my meritorious criminal allegations. Moreover, henceforth, any public officers, employees and/or contractors who become aware of these felony allegations and information who refuses, neglects or otherwise fails to perform their duty to uniformly enforced the rule of law pursuant to this formal criminal complaint shall be deemed by this Federal/State victim-witness to be co-conspirators in said felony crime. I reserve my right to citizen arrest all accused felons herein named and their accomplices, cohorts and co-conspirators.


-
Executed this 26th day of August, 2007, with intent that an immediate criminal investigation be initiated and that all accused criminals and their cohorts be arrested and prosecuted pursuant to clearly established law bearing in mind that “no one is [supposed to be] above the law” regardless of how powerful, rich or well-connected they are.


Mark: Clarence Douglas Malcolm, Federal and State Victim-Witness.


justiceranger@mail. com
www. 1-free-dvd. com
www. tedgunderson. com
-
PUBLIC NOTICE: Please help us publicize this formal criminal complaint across the internet .



After reading this affidavit/felony presentment, if anyone believes it to be true, they (“you”.. have the right to copy it and affix your own name as an affiant. We need tens of thousands of Americans who are “victims-witnesses” to the aforementioned accused criminals/enterprises to join us in our formal criminal complaints and to become co-plaintiffs in a historic class action lawsuit. Below is Ted Gunderson’s criminal complaint via affidavit to show you how easy it is to execute your own presentment. After executing the same or similar felony complaint via affidavit “you” also will have the right to citizen arrest the accused felons.


Gage County
State of Nebraska
SWORN STATEMENT
I, Ted L.





Gunderson, a retired FBI Senior Special Agent in Charge [ www. tedgunderson. com], hereby swear under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of Nebraska and the United States of America that I have obtained personal and imputed knowledge that known and yet unknown owners, executives and employees in the established mainstream media including but not limited to ABC, NSNBC, FOX, CNN, CBS, The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine, The Chicago Tribune, The Miami Herald and The San Diego Herald-Tribune and, in fact, nearly all (if not all) news sources which have become monopolized by a few wealthy class individuals who are intentionally and with evil intent acting as co-conspirators in perpetrating crime and the unlawful censorship of Dr. Ron Paul; and, these same individuals are participating in an illegal conspiracy rising to the level of RICO to control the outcome of the 2008 Presidential Elections. The level of felony crime, corruption and conspiracy victimizing Dr. Ron Paul and the America people in these 2008 Presidential event is unprecedented in the history of the United States and needs to be investigated and prosecuted without further delay. The conspirators know they have a duty to the public to impartially cover all news worthy “news” but have colluded to create an uneven playing field favoring select candidates while ignoring or virtually disregarding Dr. Paul and others.


-
I, too, am a bona fide Federal and State victim-witness to this crime along with countless millions of other defrauded Americans. The media owners and executives who are involved in this illegal monopoly, RICO racketeering and conspiracy include but are not limited to: David Rockefeller, Edgar Bronfman, Rupert Murdoch, Sumner Redstone and Ted Turner. Known and other yet unknown individuals working in collaboration with or for these media barons including but not limited to executives, legal consultants, representatives, news personnel and employees who are%u2014more likely than not%u2014actively involved in this felony crime and conspiracy and who should also be arrested and investigated for their participation. I also formally accuse these individuals of treason against the people of the United States of America%u2026pursuant to my extensive research and other information I have obtained%u2026who individually and collectively%u2014more likely than not%u2014possess evil intent to overthrow the United States Republic form of government and our hard-won national sovereignty as established by our founders and for this diabolical purpose they have used their tremendous wealth, power, influence and illegally monopolized control over this nation’s media/news sources to facilitate this criminal conspiracy. For example, as documented in the February 9, 1917, United States Congressional Record wherein it was announced in pages 2947- 2948 that J.P. Morgan interests had bought 25 of America ‘s leading newspapers and inserted their own editors in order to control the press. I have proof that this conspiracy has tremendously escalated and expanded into all other media/news sources since that time. Moreover, I have other meritorious information which has led him (and others) to believe that these conspirators and their cohorts have controlled past elections through the felonious manipulation of electronic voting machines.



Further, I hereby formally accuse the Republican and Democratic Parties via known and yet unknown members%u2014having membership in the Counsel on Foreign Relations, an organization I believe I can easily prove to be a subversive unAmerican and anti-American criminal organization via rogues therein%u2014of actively participating with evil intent, directly or indirectly, in the aforementioned felony crime and conspiracy in willful collaboration with the accused aforementioned outlaws in the mass media.



I have acquired much evidence to prove my meritorious criminal allegations. Moreover, henceforth, any public officers, employees and/or contractors who become aware of these felony allegations and information who refuses, neglects or otherwise fails to perform their duty to uniformly enforced the rule of law pursuant to this formal criminal complaint shall be deemed by this Federal/State victim-witness to be co-conspirators in said felony crime. I reserve my right to citizen arrest all accused felons herein named and their accomplices, cohorts and co-conspirators.



Executed this 26th day of August, 2007, with intent that an immediate criminal investigation be initiated and that all accused criminals and their cohorts be arrested and prosecuted pursuant to clearly established law bearing in mind that “no one is [supposed to be] above the law” regardless of how powerful, rich or well-connected they are.



Mark: Ted L. Gunderson, Federal and State Victim-Witness.


tedgunderson@email. com
www. tedgunderson. com
www. 1-free-dvd. com
-
COMMENTS by Clarence Douglas Malcolm. As the private criminal investigator for Gunderson & Associates Professional Investigations I am amazed at how effectively the American public has been dumbed-down, especially with regard to any knowledge of Law, the Federal Constitution, their respective State constitution and common law maxims. The American Bar Association has succeeded quite well in monopolizing this knowledge for the exclusive financial benefit of their powerful private “special interest group.” This is why some people cannot recognize how felony crime and conspiracy is afoot by the mainstream mass media moguls to injure Dr. Ron Paul and the American people. The elistist “billionaire boys club” of corporate media barons%u2014only a few in number%u2014have effectively MONOPOLIZED the entire mass media/news service industry for the benefit of their wealthy “social class” and they control the outcome of all elections in this nation with the tremendous power they enjoy via this outrageous and illegal MONOPOLY which definitely violates the letter, spirit and intent of our anti-monopoly and anti-trust laws!!! Everyone who has read the criminal complaint executed by Ted Gunderson and me need to go study a few definitions from any good law dictionary (e.g.






Black’s Law Dictionary) including: “monopoly”%u2026"conspiracy"%u2026"fraud"%u2026"RICO" (organized “racketeering”..%u2026then%u2026they may begin to understand how diabolical and damaging the controlled media has become.



-
There is really no such thing as “free press” because it is owned by persons all belonging to the wealthy class of our society in America and they have an agenda%u2026AS THEY ALSO HAVE THE POWER TO MAKE OR BREAK PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES by how much coverage they provide them and by the quality of coverage provided. We need to take a hard look at what’s happening with Dr. Paul%u2014at how these mass-media-moguls are controlling the outcome of elections in America . Look at the lies, the distortions, the OMMISSIONS and the boldface lies they perpetrate. This is not only unethical, immoral, unfair, unAmerican and antiAmerican, it is criminal and it constitutes a very real and intentional conspiracy against Dr. Paul and the American People who want fair and unbiased reporting.


-
The News Services have a moral duty to be impartial, ethical and honest in their reporting because the public has an continuing interest in the “news worthy” news they report. Ron Paul’s remarkable success in several straw polls deserves the same national publicity that Mitt Romney received when he purportedly won the Iowa Straw Poll. The opposite is happening, however, with regard to Ron Paul. He’s being wrongfully CENSORED. Dr. Paul would definitely win the Republican nomination were he given the same special coverage afforded to Elitist-preferred lackeys: Romney, Guilliani and Hillary. The conspiracy is intended to promote the candidates PREFERRED by the media moguls (who establish the internal corporate policies for their respective media services) and ignore the candidates they least favor. This is a terrible fraud against the American public who stupidly or unwittingly trust the news services to be honest and impartial%u2014a blind trust for the most part. I feel sorry for those individuals who lack the insight and intelligence to recognized how the present corrupt media establishment is RIGGING and, in fact, powerfully CONTROLLING the outcome of U.S. elections. It is truly operating as a criminal enterprise.


RICO requires two or more predicate acts perpetrated in violation of federal law with a property nexus and involving two or more individuals acting in conspiracy to perpetrate the criminal acts. So, how is Ron Paul’s property rights being violated? C’mon%u2026think%u2026 he’s applying for a job along with 9 [or whatever # it is now] other candidates on the Republican side%u2026and that job is going to pay over $200,000 per year, the presidents salary!!! This is the “property” nexus. The media moguls are providing preferential treatment and financial support to those candidates who will promote their financial interests and agenda. A media conspiracy exists to deprive Dr. Ron Paul of his fair opportunity to acquire the “position” he is seeking within the “federal corporation.” That’s enough for now. Wake Up! %u2026and come to grips with the fact that America is a nation of corporations, by corporations and for corporations%u2014benefitting Wall Street/Banking Interests%u2026and Dr. Paul is a threat to this “establishment” because he does not hide the fact that when he becomes president he is going to put “We the People” FIRST%u2026rather than last as the present situation exists.

Steven Sturdevant on March 23, 2008, 6:42 AM

If Big Think is going to amount to anything at all, it needs to monitor the posts and remove the screaming, propagandist, conspiratorial crap like that just posed, for the second time by Warrior13. There are plenty of places for those with severely arrested development to pontificate. They don't need to be wasting space here. Where do you report this crap?

Steven Sturdevant on March 23, 2008, 10:42 AM

If Big Think is going to amount to anything at all, it needs to monitor the posts and remove the screaming, propagandist, conspiratorial crap like that just posed, for the second time by Warrior13. There are plenty of places for those with severely arrested development to pontificate. They don’t need to be wasting space here. Where do you report this crap?

Susan Wetenkamp-Brandt on June 2, 2008, 2:03 PM

The people commenting on this idea don't seem to get the general drift of his discussion… he's not saying that a "preventative state" is such a good idea, but rather recognizing the fact that there already IS a preventative state, and the legal system needs to catch up to that reality. The fact is that we are already doing this sort of thing (registration for sex offenders, Git-Mo, etc.) and that the courts don't know how to react. Nor, for that matter, do "We the People" seem to know how to react. We don't want sexual predators living in our neighborhoods, and we don't want terrorists blowing up our train stations, but neither do we want to live in a "preventative state". So what do we do? At present, it seems we do nothing, just sit back and let the gov't do what it will, and be silent. That doesn't seem like much of a plan.

The prof here is not saying that this "preventative state" is such a great solution, but that so far no one has come up with a better one. The people and the courts need to catch up with reality and get thinking about these issues and try to shape the future of jurisprudence in regards to preventive justice. If we don't get involved, it's clear that we'll just end up with a "preventive state" whether we like it or not.

Susan Wetenkamp-Brandt on June 2, 2008, 6:03 PM

The people commenting on this idea don’t seem to get the general drift of his discussion… he’s not saying that a “preventative state” is such a good idea, but rather recognizing the fact that there already IS a preventative state, and the legal system needs to catch up to that reality. The fact is that we are already doing this sort of thing (registration for sex offenders, Git-Mo, etc.) and that the courts don’t know how to react. Nor, for that matter, do “We the People” seem to know how to react. We don’t want sexual predators living in our neighborhoods, and we don’t want terrorists blowing up our train stations, but neither do we want to live in a “preventative state”. So what do we do? At present, it seems we do nothing, just sit back and let the gov’t do what it will, and be silent. That doesn’t seem like much of a plan.

The prof here is not saying that this “preventative state” is such a great solution, but that so far no one has come up with a better one. The people and the courts need to catch up with reality and get thinking about these issues and try to shape the future of jurisprudence in regards to preventive justice. If we don’t get involved, it’s clear that we’ll just end up with a “preventive state” whether we like it or not.

David Wynn on July 5, 2008, 9:44 PM

Maybe it's just me, but I thought what he said about lions was important.

Yes, we could build a cage or kill the lion, but did anyone think about why the lion would be attacking us in the first place? Particularly if the alternative is to trade freedoms for securities (the equivalent of building a cage around ourselves rather than the lion), shouldn't we consider the lion's motive and perhaps give him some meat if he's hungry?

David Wynn on July 6, 2008, 1:44 AM

Maybe it’s just me, but I thought what he said about lions was important.

Yes, we could build a cage or kill the lion, but did anyone think about why the lion would be attacking us in the first place? Particularly if the alternative is to trade freedoms for securities (the equivalent of building a cage around ourselves rather than the lion), shouldn’t we consider the lion’s motive and perhaps give him some meat if he’s hungry?