incremental criminality

Submitted as comment to: "AUMF, Never-Ending War, and America’s ‘Instruments of Tyranny’", here slightly revised.

Consider 'incremental criminality;' as soon as anyone gets away with some crime, limits start dropping off; the same or new perpetrators will repeat - and most likely extend - the un-remedied = now 'acquiesced-to' crime. (Due to often 'arbitrary' law, I define crime as anything which harms; i.e. lies, cheating, theft and/or murder.) The public has been systematically propagandised (= conscious manipulation of public opinions (US + quislings and coerced, mostly 'Western')); since latest Bernays' observation of how well the risible 'war to save democracy' meme worked. 'Naturally,' as the lie-cloud (pushed-propaganda paradigm) took hold, the rest of the crimes followed, each step easier than the previous. Two of the first (very!) *visible* steps in the US war on the USSR took place on "on August 6 and 9, 1945, respectively." Shortly thereafter, LeMay: "Over a period of three years or so, we killed off — what — twenty percent of the population of Korea," and such massacres continued (on various 'killing fields') through April 29, 1975 and beyond. Then 'catastrophe' struck (mostly for the M/I/C/$4a†-plex); the DDR-wall fell in 1989, and the USSR started to wither away. (Speaking of walls, the same sort of mass-murder for spoil was occurring other-where, behind an 'iron wall;' also ongoing, un-remedied and 'Nuremberg-class,' keywords: Pre-UNGA181 Palestine, Zionists = aliens, aggressive invasion.) Then on 9/11, the loss of the USSR as visible enemy was rectified. (What luck? - thinking cui bono, at least for the M/I/C/$4a†-plex - and just who 'believes' in luck?)

There are a couple of problems with the Glaser article; hopefully 'only' due to something like faulty sub-editing, say:

"would evaporate" could/should read "would *be* evaporated" - thnx Newton's 1st; no change without some force.

"much less apt to grant" assumes that the electorate may have some control; *not so* in our 'Western' sham democracies. (Proof = misled electorate(s), false-dichotomy two-party system, often bipartisan = *totally* un- & anti-democratic since there is *zero* effective choice, and when elected, many/most 'representatives' work *against* the 99%+ interests.)

Not so BTW, "Al-Qaeda’s unlikely success on 9/11" ignores any possible 'cd' component (= 'controlled demolition'). Anyone who asserts/accepts that steel-framed buildings can be symmetrically felled by jet-fuel fires a) defines their stance, b) their audience and c) their credibility. 'Yes,' planes crashed, 'yes,' WTC 1 & 2 burned, but *all 3* (WTC 1, 2 & 7) collapsed 'straight down;' 1 & 2 from the crash-sites, spitting fire & neatly-cut girders, and 7 from the bottom, all partly, at times fully, in 'free-fall' mode. The only way that can happen is if support suddenly vanishes - by explosives, say - simply no part of any plane-crash scenarios. As for passports surviving such an inferno unscathed, fluttering down practically into someone's hands - well, pure Hollywood-script, some might say.

The Zenko/Cohen para identifies some of the tyrant-cabal (what I call the M/I/C/$4a†-plex = military, industrial, Congress (US-speak for parliament); $ = banksters, 4 = 4th estate = MSM+PFBCs, 'a' = academia incl. think-tanks, † = the churches), and one of their eternal modi operandi = scare the subjects shitless, then promise to save them.

As a corollary to Newton's 1st, it's not what they say, but what they do that counts. What the ruling tyrant-cabal does is mass-murder for spoil; they won't stop unless forced to stop.