Skip to main content

View Diary: The Patriot Act Is Being Used Against Us (231 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  bravo (37+ / 0-)

    for voicing the truth about the Patriot Act, which together with the presidential declaration of emergency on 9/11 (not revoked) have become our new de facto Constitution.  As long as that legislation prevails (and we need to question our leaders about what kinds of rotten personal compromise led them to hold their noses and pass this legislation), normal Constitutional questions are rendered irrelevant in light of this legal monstrosity.

    One critic claims the Patriot Act is verbatim translation, in great part, of the restrictive laws of Stalin.  As an artist resigned to become Wall Street word processor (an "outsourced" laborer among the top investment banks of the world) when the bottom fell out of the art market during the first Bush administration, I can assure you that the Patriot Act was not written immediately AFTER 9/11.  Someone had been working on the text of the Patriot Act for ages.  

    Yet we need to question the real source.  With apologies to anyone who read this excerpt/comment anywhere else, I would give the floor to a former Republican "visionary" who honed the Nixon campaign - Kevin Phillips, who wrote American Dynasty in response to his concerns about a dynasty in the Bush family - we need, as a so-called democracy trained to think in terms of "left" and "right," to take a closer look at the aristocracy which has ALWAYS prevailed in US history.  Sometimes, as with stolen elections, aristocratic rulers use a public sense of democracy to conceal their true animus and doings.

    To fail to see their linkage throughout US history is to fall for the illusion that we have a "war" in Iraq, rather than a generations-long effort to be enriched in the middle east by the same family.  To fail to identify them is to allow them to cloak themselves in the ignorant mass doings of the so-called "right."

    Take it away, Mr. Phillips:

    In the United States, as we will see, the twentieth-century rise of the Bush family was built on the five pillars of American global sway: the international reach of U.S. investment banking, the emerging giantism of the military-industrial complex, the ballooning of the CIA and kindred intelligence operations, the drive for U.S. control of global oil supplies and a close alliance with Britain and the English-speaking community. This century of upward momentum brought a sequence of controversies, albeit ones that never gained critical mass--such as the exposure in 1942 of Prescott Bush's corporate directorship links to wartime Germany, which harked back to over-ambitious 1920s investment banking, the Bush family's longtime involvement with global armaments and the military-industrial complex (that latter was big enough by 1961 that President Eisenhower warned against it) and a web of close connections to the CIA, ones that began decades before George Bush's brief CIA directorship in 1976. Threads like these weigh may not weigh heavily on individual presidencies; they are many times more troubling in a dynasty.

    To tell the tale [of the] Bushes as "our not-quite-royal family..." ...the Bush royal connections documented in Burke's Peerage and elsewhere have nourished the self-image of both chief executives. However, the founding father of the Bush clan was not a Bush, but a Walker--George H. Walker, for whom both the 41st and 43rd presidents are named...  If Samuel P. Bush made money and connections in World War One, which he did, Walker made more of each. Afterwards, he was wooed in 1919 by Averell Harriman to run a derring-do set of investments cobbled together in the postwar political maelstrom of 1920s Germany and Russia. Over two decades, father-in-law Walker helped steer Prescott Bush to the top of what became the Brown Brothers Harriman of mid-century--rich, full of Yale Skull and Bonesmen, London-linked, politically influential and intimately wired through several of its top partners to the postwar birthing of the CIA...  During the first half of the 20th century, the United States had evolved its own version of "permanent government" akin to the British one. Although peaking from the 1920s through the 1950s, its influence lingered, to George H.W. Bush's critical advantage.

    One subsection [of Phillips' book] focuses on World War Two and the enlargement and mutation of the early military-industrial complex, including the absorption of Germany-savvy U.S. business elites into the OSS, CIA and kindred agencies in the 1940s. George H. Walker, Prescott Bush, Brown Brothers Harriman and their Yale and Wall Street colleagues were important movers and shakers... Another... looks at the first three generations of Bush dynasty--from Samuel Bush, George Walker and Prescott Bush through George H. W. Bush--and their involvements with the national security establishment. Too little attention has been paid to the strong connections developed between the Bush family and the CIA many years before George H. W. Bush ran it. Under George W. Bush, the CIA has become more powerful than ever...  

    ...Texas presidents now have launched the last three U.S. wars: Vietnam, the Gulf War of 1991 and the 2003 war to overthrow Saddam Hussein. The last two reflect a unique set of circumstances. They are the first pair of U.S. wars to be fought by father-and-son presidents, in part arising out of a misconceived U.S. arms build-up for Iraq undertaken by the father. They also reflected a two-generation Texan pre-occupation with U.S. Middle Eastern and Caspian oil interests. "The War of the Texas Succession" is a geopolitical as well as family-based concept.

    The real war is the war for the understanding of the people of the US - a conflict between history vs. propaganda, between the peoples' self-interest vs. supply-side rape of the world.

    "Stonemason" has nothing to do with "Freemasonry." We build architecture with stone.

    by stonemason on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 07:37:31 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  afterthought (11+ / 0-)

      just 226 years ago the Revolutionary war was fought with Britain.  We are taught that the US won.

      One of the core issues was "taxation without representation."

      We may need to question how free we are of British rule.  Witness the cherished English crown pedigree of the family chronicled above.  Whose lineage is Tory, who dominated among other things the opium dealings in China, and perhaps the armaments industry going back for generations.  I have not yet discovered deeper diggings than Phillips', and someone please let me know if you find more.

      Remember, the Tories were not trusted in the early history of the US on account of their enmeshment with the British crown.  Early on it was a scandal.

      Now our very money is controlled by the Fed, who are not a federal entity.  It was ruled in the 1980's that the Federal Reserve was a private corporation.  It consists of nine banks, only two of which are US (Chase and Goldman Sachs, I believe).  Over the past couple of centuries the Fed has charged interest to the US public on the issuance of money.  Every time they print more paper, they charge interest to the US taxpayer.  Look at the national debt of nearly 9 trillion, and almost HALF is a couple hundred years' worth of interest due to the FED.  No kidding.

      At a minimum the British found a way to soak the new colonies post-"independence."  I can't see us as independent of the Crown (most of the Fed banks are in England and the families who own them are even related to the British royalty) in light of this financial disgrace.  

      Maybe they laugh up their collective sleeves at the US as an off-shore debt peonage project?  More and more it looks like that.

      Talk about "taxation without representation..."  Independent, really?

      "Stonemason" has nothing to do with "Freemasonry." We build architecture with stone.

      by stonemason on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 08:47:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Taxation and Tea (7+ / 0-)

        One of the core issues was "taxation without representation."

        It was a combination of "taxation without representation"  and taxation designed to give great leverage to one of the first multi-national corporations at the direct expense of struggling local businesses. The East India Company had received a HUGE tax break on its tea, while the colonists had been hit hard with a MASSIVE tariff on the same commodity. As a result, the livelihood of many of the small businesses run by colonists was directly threatened. It was the proverbial last straw, and led to the Boston Tea Party.

        Beware the everyday brutality of the averted gaze.

        by mataliandy on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 10:00:48 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  heheh (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mataliandy, viscerality, greenearth

          the Boston Tea Party, of course, was not a terrorist plot... </snark>

          one has to wonder if things didn't vastly improve for the royal coffers post-revolution, what with their influence in all things corporate, banking and the FED.

          Makes me think that a British flag would more appropriately be flown over the White House with this crew still there (where's Abbie Hoffman when you need him)...

          "Stonemason" has nothing to do with "Freemasonry." We build architecture with stone.

          by stonemason on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 12:54:31 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  hey, why did you troll rate me? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:


            Just curious what you disagree with in my comment.

            (-7.25, -6.41) We at Daily Kos must demand more of our country and of our political representatives.

            by Pescadero Bill on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 01:42:52 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  whoa pescadero bill!!!!!!!!! (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              greenearth, blueoasis

              I meant to rec you!!!!!!!!

              Going to that comment to reverse it.

              What the ???????

              I've been getting knocked offline a lot, happened about then.

              I am so sorry,

              "Stonemason" has nothing to do with "Freemasonry." We build architecture with stone.

              by stonemason on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 02:50:50 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  That's cool. (0+ / 0-)

                Thought maybe I was offending somehow.

                Peace stonemason.

                (-7.25, -6.41) We at Daily Kos must demand more of our country and of our political representatives.

                by Pescadero Bill on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 06:02:00 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  wha??? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Pescadero Bill

                  Offending?  I hit the button to rec you because you were saying exactly what I thought.  The frog in the slowly boiling pot...  and thank you for your comment again.

                  Aw rot, I have never yet TR'd one person here (I don't do dogpiles and so usually there are enough TR's by the time I see them), and the last thing I would do is TR someone with your perception.  Still feel like a bum even though I had no clue.

                  Peace to you, I know I would be ticked off if it happened to me.  

                  "Stonemason" has nothing to do with "Freemasonry." We build architecture with stone.

                  by stonemason on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 06:33:49 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site