49 replies to this topic

[stocks]

Centralization and Sociopathology

Concentrated power and wealth are intrinsically sociopathological by their very nature.

Sociopaths/psychopaths excel in organizations that centralize power, and their ability to flatter, browbeat and manipulate others greases their climb to the top.

In effect, centralization is tailor-made for sociopaths gaining power. Sociopaths seek power over others, and centralization gives them the perfect avenue to control over millions or even entire nations.

Those ensconced in highly concentrated centers of power (for example, The White House) are in another world, and they find it increasingly easy to become isolated from the larger context and to slip into reliance on sycophants, toadies (i.e. budding secondary sociopaths) and "experts" (i.e. apparatchiks and factotums) who are equally influenced by the intense "high" of concentrated power/wealth.

Increasingly out of touch with those outside the circle of power, those within the circle slide into a belief in the superiority of their knowledge, skills and awareness--the very definition of sociopathology.

Even worse, the incestuous nature of the tight circle of power breeds a uniformity of opinion and ideology that creates a feedback loop that marginalizes dissenters and those with open minds. Dissenters are soon dismissed--"not a team player"-- or trotted out for PR purposes, i.e. as evidence the administration maintains ties to the outside world.



http://www.oftwomind...zation5-13.html

[voltaire]

Centralization and Sociopathology

Concentrated power and wealth are intrinsically sociopathological by their very nature.

Sociopaths/psychopaths excel in organizations that centralize power, and their ability to flatter, browbeat and manipulate others greases their climb to the top.

In effect, centralization is tailor-made for sociopaths gaining power. Sociopaths seek power over others, and centralization gives them the perfect avenue to control over millions or even entire nations.

Those ensconced in highly concentrated centers of power (for example, The White House) are in another world, and they find it increasingly easy to become isolated from the larger context and to slip into reliance on sycophants, toadies (i.e. budding secondary sociopaths) and "experts" (i.e. apparatchiks and factotums) who are equally influenced by the intense "high" of concentrated power/wealth.

Increasingly out of touch with those outside the circle of power, those within the circle slide into a belief in the superiority of their knowledge, skills and awareness--the very definition of sociopathology.

Even worse, the incestuous nature of the tight circle of power breeds a uniformity of opinion and ideology that creates a feedback loop that marginalizes dissenters and those with open minds. Dissenters are soon dismissed--"not a team player"-- or trotted out for PR purposes, i.e. as evidence the administration maintains ties to the outside world.



http://www.oftwomind...zation5-13.html

Exactly.

Watch Oliver Stones "Untold Truth about the USA".

The military industrial complex is the USA's greatest danger as Eisenhower spelled out.

It's NOT the administration one needs to fear.

The danger comes from the war mongers.

In 240 years from independence the USA has only managed 20 years without war.

That is so sick.

No wonder it is besieged from all sides.

[stocks]

Paul Begala is a political consultant, commentator and was an advisor to President Bill Clinton.

"Stroke of the pen. Law of the Land. Kinda cool."
(Source: The New York Times, July 5, 1998, referring to executive orders.)


http://en.wikiquote....iki/Paul_Begala

Edited by stocks, 07 June 2013 - 10:46 AM.

[stocks]

Glenn Greenwald on the government’s abusive, manipulative exploitation of power to punish whistleblowers

Like puppets reading from a script, various Washington officials almost immediately began spouting all sorts of threats about “investigations” they intend to launch about these disclosures. This has been their playbook for several years now: they want to deter and intimidate anyone and everyone who might shed light on what they’re doing with their abusive, manipulative exploitation of the power of law to punish those who bring about transparency.

That isn’t going to work. It’s beginning completely to backfire on them. It’s precisely because such behavior reveals their true character, their propensity to abuse power, that more and more people are determined to bring about accountability and transparency for what they do.

They can threaten to investigate all they want. But as this week makes clear, and will continue to make clear, the ones who will actually be investigated are them.

The way things are supposed to work is that we’re supposed to know virtually everything about what they do: that’s why they’re called public servants. They’re supposed to know virtually nothing about what we do: that’s why we’re called private individuals.

This dynamic – the hallmark of a healthy and free society – has been radically reversed. Now, they know everything about what we do, and are constantly building systems to know more. Meanwhile, we know less and less about what they do, as they build walls of secrecy behind which they function. That’s the imbalance that needs to come to an end. No democracy can be healthy and functional if the most consequential acts of those who wield political power are completely unknown to those to whom they are supposed to be accountable.



http://www.aei-ideas...lowers/#respond

[Rogerdodger]

FISA Court Has Rejected .03 Percent Of All Government Surveillance Requests

Since men are not angels, we need safeguards to protect our rights from both men and the governments they control.
In 1978 the FISA court was ostensibly empowered for that very purpose.

"Each application for one of these surveillance warrants (called a FISA warrant) is made before an individual judge of the court."

"If an application is denied by one judge of the court, the federal government is not allowed to make the same application to a different judge of the court."
The American journalist James Rosen's warrant request was denied by 2 different judges, before a 3rd judge finally issued a warrant.

But suppose one would illegally wiretap a FISA judge, (or even the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, i.e. General David Petraeus) find out embarrassing or criminal behavior on his part and then suggest that he rule on a particular case in your favor, with an implied threat of disclosure of his malfeasance? What affect might that have on his "judgement"?


FISA Warrants: Safeguard... or cover for criminal activity?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. -James Madison, The Federalist Papers

Edited by Rogerdodger, 10 June 2013 - 05:07 PM.

[Rogerdodger]

FBI Director Testifies He Doesn't Know Who's Leading Investigation in IRS Case...

The idiot defense:
The idiot defense is a satirical term for a legal strategy where a defendant claims innocence by virtue of having been ignorant of facts of which the defendant would normally be expected to be aware. Other terms used for this tactic include "dumb CEO defense," "dummy defense," "ostrich defense," and "Sergeant Schultz defense."

Schultz: I see NOTHING! I know NOTHING!

In the real world Idiots loose their jobs.
In Washington, they get elected.

Edited by Rogerdodger, 14 June 2013 - 09:27 AM.

[stocks]

The Sickening Snowden Backlash

It's appalling to hear the Washington bureaucrats and their media allies trash Edward Snowden as a traitor, when it's our leaders and the NSA who have betrayed us. Whether one supports or opposes the NSA spying programs, Snowden has done a public service by exposing them and igniting a debate about government surveillance that even the president says he welcomes.

Hell hath no fury like the Washington establishment scorned.

By refusing to play this role, Snowden has been called a "traitor" by House Majority Leader John Boehner. Sen. Dianne Feinstein called the leaks "an act of treason." The fury among the protectors of the status quo is so great that you have longtime Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen smearing Snowden as a “cross-dressing Little Red Riding Hood.” The New York Times’s David Brooks lamented that Snowden, who put himself in peril for the greater good, was too “individualistic.” It seems that he wasn’t sufficiently indoctrinated to blindly worship the establishment institutions that have routinely failed us. Brooks argued that “for society to function well, there have to be basic levels of trust and cooperation, a respect for institutions and deference to common procedures.”

This is backward. It’s the institutions that need to demonstrate respect for the public they allegedly serve.

When one major institution (the Washington media establishment) so seamlessly partners with another (the U.S. government) in trashing a whistleblower, it’s not hard to understand why Americans might be jaded.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper blatantly lied to Congress about the activity of the NSA, and there seems to be no ramifications. Yet the Washington establishment wants to put Snowden in jail and throw away the key for telling the truth. We are told to blindly respect an institution that persecutes whistleblowers for leaks of overclassified government information while watching the Obama administration’s leaking of secret government information to aggrandize the president during his reelection campaign. So, please tell us more about how we should have more respect for our institutions.


http://www.thedailyb...n-backlash.html

[Rogerdodger]

REPORT: FBI hasn't contacted a single tea party group in its IRS probe...

[voltaire]

REPORT: FBI hasn't contacted a single tea party group in its IRS probe...

The IRS is correct in targeting groups.

In Australia the tax body targets different groups from time to time.

It might be taxi drivers one time, building contractors the next etc. Resources are limited and targeting is just efficiency.

Political groups claiming tax exempt status for propaganda is illegal. Its supposed to be for "education in welfare" or the like. A big abuse.

All corporations, unions and bodies with anonymous donors should be banned from advertising, donating etc.

Citizens United is a travesty. Corporations are people! Really! Yes they are a "unit" from an economic point of view (still treated differently) but they are non voting.

The former don't vote and so should be constrained.

Tea Party groups have been mostly constructed by the likes of the Koch Bros and their past organisations.

The Koch Bros have tried to buy the political system in the past and looked undeterred.

It seems the aim now is to make the US citizens paranoid.

After 911 the US tried to claim it wasn't scared by terrorism.

Yet, what we see is furious attempts to head off "the mouse that roared" and citizens paranoid about it all.

Seems the terrorists might have won, and the US and its citizens and the right wing groups have helped them.

So make up your minds.

You want liberty or you want protection?

You can't have both.




Sadly many Tea Partiers don't realise how they are being used.

[Rogerdodger]

Well... Who called this one?

CLAIM: Top judges, generals, politicians wiretapped...
“They went after–and I know this because I had my hands literally on the paperwork for these sort of things–they went after high-ranking military officers; they went after members of Congress, both Senate and the House, especially on the intelligence committees and on the armed services committees and some of the–and judicial,”

"But suppose one would illegally wiretap a FISA judge, (or even the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, i.e. General David Petraeus) find out embarrassing or criminal behavior on his part and then suggest that he rule on a particular case in your favor, with an implied threat of disclosure of his malfeasance? What affect might that have on his "judgement"?

FISA Warrants: Safeguard... or cover for criminal activity?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. -James Madison, The Federalist Papers"

Edited by Rogerdodger, 20 June 2013 - 11:04 PM.