Last night, I received all sorts of e-mails and social media trolling about my questioning the circumstances surrounding the bombing of Syria. I was told by a caller named Rita in Alabama that I was wrong for questioning military intelligence and the CIA about the allegations of Assad gassing of people in Syria.
I was also called a closet liberal because I stated that it appears the Deep State has compromised our president and that the media continues to beat down Donald Trump and will not let up until he is forced to do the will of the extremists that want war and unlimited power in their quest for establishing a New World Order.
Jokingly, I was expressing to one of my producers that what is happening to Trump is not unlike what happened to the guy on the airline flight that was beaten up and dragged off the plane just because he was unwilling to give up his seat to a United Airlines employee.
Trump has been beat up by the media and by some of his constituents because he has refused to crash the plane known as the United States of America. He refused to follow the globalists, or adhere to the agendas of the neocons and neoliberals. But like the airline passenger, there is a point where you reach a breaking point and on a video, you see him kicking and screaming with the people around him doing nothing but sitting in their seats not getting involved.
The video in which police and airport security maul a 69-year-old United Airlines passenger has been appearing all over the internet and on television. It is hard to avoid seeing it. While United Airlines has been chastised and boycotted for what happened, I have to pause and report what I feel is missing in the debate about what we are actually seeing.
The attack on the passenger David Dao is haunting in its casual brutality. It is as if we are now so used to this police state brutality that no one makes a move to stop it.
Dao’s heavily bleeding face and his cries of terror caused widespread uproar and a Twitter-led boycott of United Airlines, especially after United CEO Oscar Munoz issued a non-apology which thanked his staff for “always going above and beyond” and for following “established protocols”. The only euphemistic mention of the violence was made when Munoz apologized for having to “re-accommodate a passenger.”
This event indicates to me that our culture has become a mere bacterial culture and that we have bowed to corporate power and consolidation.
We can criticize and lament the brutality and we can say we are innocent bystanders, but now it is awful to witness brutality, wielding authority and people who stand idly by when a man is being brutalized.
The best we can do is gasp and record incidents on our smart phones.
When Dao was being brutalized on the flight, were there any passengers willing to intervene and pull the officers off of him? They knew he wasn’t a criminal – he was just a man that was chosen to forfeit his seat to a United employee because the flight was overbooked.
He did nothing wrong and yet the best the passengers could do was shout at the police who were forcing him off the plane.
Did anyone that witnessed the brutality want to volunteer and say that if the police are going to beat up his man, they will take the next flight?
He had nothing to hide he did nothing wrong and yet he was attacked by the police.
The “nothing to hide” argument has things backwards when it suggests that we are all worthy of suspicion until proven otherwise. Our system of justice treats us all as innocent until proven guilty. That applies in everyday life, when the government wants to spy on our daily activities and private conversations, as much as it applies in court. The state bears the burden of showing there is a good reason for suspicion, not the other way around. The refrain “nothing to hide” should not be a license for sweeping government surveillance.
Even if you think you have nothing to hide, you may indeed have something to fear. You might fear for yourself. The prospect of unwarranted government pursuit is terrifying. Or you might fear for our society.
Living under the constant gaze of government surveillance can produce long-lasting social harm: if citizens are just a little more fearful, a little less likely to freely associate, a little less likely to dissent the aggregate chilling effect can close what was once an open society.
After they dragged him off the plane, the media decided to drag him through the mud in order to justify the brutality aimed against him.
The Louisville Courier-Journal, after discovering Dao’s name, reported that he had been involved in a prominent criminal case in Kentucky in the early 2000s. They alleged that Dao was convicted of six felonies in 2004 after being accused of illegally prescribing painkillers to a patient in exchange for sex, according to state medical licensing records.
This has been policy for the media as of late – they decide to convict a person in the court of public opinion if they are publicly brutalized by the police. It wasn’t enough that he didn’t commit a crime, and that he was beaten and dragged off of a plane – he has to relive a past discretion that is supposed to be private.
But nothing is in a surveillance state.
It has always been the dirty move to take the spotlight off of the punishers and move it to the punished in order to justify brutal moves by the authorities.
Orchestrating smear campaigns are business as usual and are used to take the blame off of the corporate wolves and blame it on the stupid sheep.
Does his possible past have any bearing on the matter of his beating and abuse?
Of course not but the court of public opinion does not flinch and it does not forgive when it comes to matters of past transgressions.
Questions have inevitably started to be asked: who dug up those details about David Dao’s apparent medical misdemeanor or the gay sex he supposedly had with a younger man, and why? Did they even check that those details related to the David Dao who was dragged off Flight 3411 in Chicago? There is presently confusion about whether the man on the United flight was actually David Thanh Duc Dao, quite possibly another person entirely to David Anh Duy Dao, the man with the criminal records.
It’s unclear who did that digging and whether serious mistakes in accuracy were made, but there’s one thing any decent human being should be able to agree on: it doesn’t matter what David Dao did or didn’t do in his past, because none of it is relevant to whether or not he should have been left in hospital after boarding a flight home.
Acting like his history might make it “less bad” to beat him up is a dangerous position to take with serious consequences. Where, indeed, is the dirt-digging being done on the United staff, who handled everything so badly, or, the security team who caused Dao serious damage, or the CEO who acted so dismissively about the entire episode?
Dao’s crime was that he refused to comply with an order given by an airline.
Ponder for a moment the absurdity of those words outside of any context other than the prevention or management of an aviation emergency.
The operation of smearing by finding fault with the innocent until proven guilty is hardly limited to cases like this; it occurs across a range of issues, and often follows a similar pattern, with an indictment of the victim’s conduct in the incident in question, followed by a deeper investigation into their past.
This what you get in a police state where the surveillance infrastructure can cross reference names in a matter of seconds and human beings that thrive on gossip will send something to the media before the truth has a chance to be revealed.
An incident that took place in 2013 reminds me all too well of how a smear campaign is used to justify brutality where it isn’t warranted.
A car chase in Washington DC ended up in the execution style death of 34 year old Miriam Carey.
If you recall, I had expressed my anger and frustration over apologists who can make decadent public policy rationale that supports atrocities of the state. It now seems that there are a majority of Americans that call incidents such as these “heroic” and “honorable” even when the punishment does not fit the crime.
Miriam Carey was shot by police after she disregarded a checkpoint at the White House and then after a high speed chase was cornered south of the Capitol entrance. She then backed into a police car after weapons were drawn and fired. As she fled with her year old daughter in the car police cornered her again at 2nd and Constitution. That is when they fired a volley of bullets into the car and killed Carey.
The entire story reeked of barbarity and gross insensitivity, while the video recording of the incident demonstrated a macabre methodology that has persisted in the media as of late. That methodology claims that brute force is always “justified” and if there is a discrepancy with the public, the default position is to dig into the past of a “suspect” and find dirt on the person.
We have seen how whistleblowers are treated. Whistleblowers and journalists try to expose government criminality. However, the truth is they are outnumbered, out gunned, and when they are killed or silenced in some mysterious way, the media steps in and reports they have criminal records or that they were mentally ill and that we are to disregard any and all of their thoughts and research.
We then hear from unqualified observers that this justifies their elimination. We see in the court of public opinion that any and all skeletons in a person’s closet are justifications for rash judgments and condemnation. This is why it all has the feeling of a state-run witch hunt.
If the authorities say that a witch is a witch and they find a way to eliminate the witch, it creates a consensus satisfaction that the assumed threat has been neutralized.
The accusations and the criminal execution without trial or due process should be seen as suspect; however, in a time where fear and paranoia have gripped a nation, anything can sound like a threat. If the presumed threat is killed without reservations, it is called “heroic” or met with a justifiable praise for the killing of the “monster” in our midst.
The frightening result is a public that is unresponsive to these “witch hunts” or that condones the predatory state solution for the unwritten violation that persists in the nebulous cult of public safety.
The sad truth is that the very same systemic procedures that are carried out against those who are whistleblowers are now trapping and ensnaring average citizens. It most certainly is ensnaring the average citizen that is going through a personal crisis.
The authorities today have succeeded in creating a conditioned response of public malice to anyone who unluckily finds themselves in the cross hairs of police or public officials. The enemy of the state is anyone who questions the motives of the authorities.
The predatory agenda and the uncanny ability for the state to find witches in the woodpile are magnified by a media bias that paints the average citizen as an enemy or a victim. As your role as both enemy and victim, the authorities see to it that their ability to be judge, jury and executioner prevail. This contributes to a despotic governing process that most Americans deny exists.
It is “great sport” for the elite to see the people squirm in order to exploit and manipulate them to follow their whims. They now are blurring the lines of reality in order to create a consensus myth about the new direction of America.
The majority of Americans just follow the leader without questioning because they are cajoled into playing along. Some act like lemmings when the right emotional buttons are pushed.
Most Americans are far removed from the idea that our government could be anything but a benevolent father figure. This type of attitude is the breeding ground for all sorts of state socialist policies. This would have been case regardless of who was at the helm of the country. The socialist “daddy state” creep is not the product of an Obama administration it is the agenda of the New World Order.
The agenda is clearly to get you to give up. The agendas are being created to persuade you to become a monster, a monster that no longer has morality, or the desire to be human.
They want you to become a monster that no longer needs to pretend.
There is an old Latin quote attributed to Cicero that says “O Praeclarum Custodern Ovium Lupum?” meaning “What better protector of sheep than the wolf?”
It looks as if the old saying applies to where we are in the 21st-century because as I see it, the sheep no longer care that wolves are protecting them and somehow they feel that the wolves will go against their nature and not eventually eat what they have protected allegedly all this time.
In the world today, it is baffling to see that the politicians and leaders of the world are simply the wolves and we know they are wolves and yet they have managed to maintain an aura of respect.
It is also interesting to see how the dialogue of state socialism or a form of fascist socialism guised as nationalist unity is somehow blurred by the media and is never really pointed out by the statist talking heads that provide lies to protect the wolves whenever they make a calculated strike against a herd of sheep that the other herd does not approve of.
After all they are just sheep, following the wolves not even venturing a thought that there could be a calculated hit on them by the wolves.
In the modern political debate, we’re told that exit and choice are not acceptable, we are trolled and labeled if we criticize the way the government conducts its business. The labels, trolling, and the selection of a straw man or scapegoat is something that a lot of Americans do to avoid taking any blame for their behaviors that when witnessed from the outside appear to be complicit.
We are told we have democracy; we are guided by god that we should bow to authority in all forms. If things get bad, as things are now we are encouraged to wait for reform and have faith in the system.
We are also told that we should believe what the media tells us and not to question what the authorities tell us. When it comes to police state activity we are always told that if we have nothing to hide we have nothing to worry about.
We are told the police will not harm you if you are not doing anything wrong and that the surveillance state is here for our protection against criminals and terrorists.
When a government agency beats someone up or treats people in a way that most people regard as unjust or despicable, there is usually no recourse.
Worst of all is the fact that the government knows it has monopoly power and acts accordingly.