The notion of State Crimes Against Democracy was the foundational reason for the Declaration of Independence as well as the later Constitution of The United States.
The declaration was a diagnosis of a mental problem the government of England had developed.
The soon-to-follow Constitution was the original effort at a cure for the governmental sickness that had grown to the point of abusing the populace by denying civil rights, while at the same time exhibiting an imperialistic empire mentality toward the rest of the world.
It had gotten so bad, in the England that our forefathers left, that the law there had become "the King can do no wrong" (see also post explaining another myth "the Queen has no legs" here).
That mentality is manifesting itself within the United States following 9/11, and will continue to be spread by the main stream media, a lackey of concentrated power, unless and until the subject of State Crimes Against Democracy (SCAD) is well understood:
The first step toward SCAD detection and prevention is facing up to the nature and magnitude of the threat. Recently, many mainstream scholars and journalists have concluded that American democracy is becoming increasingly corporatist, imperialistic, and undemocratic ...
However, mainstream authors have seldom considered the possibility that authoritarian tendencies in American politics are being systematically engineered by top-ranking civilian and military officials. Rather than thinking in terms of high crimes, their diagnoses have blamed abstract institutional weaknesses or isolated failures of leadership.
In contrast, the upshot of the foregoing analysis is that SCADs are surface indications of a deeper, invisible level of politics ... in which officials at the highest levels of government use deception, conspiracy, and violence to shape national policies and priorities.
(State Crimes Against Democracy, quoting American Behavioral Scientists, February 2011, Vol. 53, No. 6, page 818). Concerning 9/11 and the official Bush II Commission's report, journalists and scholars have not been properly focused:
The ellipses of due diligence riddling the official account of the 9/11 incidents continue being ignored by scholars of policy and public administration. This article introduces intellectual context for examining the policy heuristic "State Crimes Against Democracy" (SCAD) (deHaven-Smith, 2006) and its usefulness for better understanding patterns of state criminality of which no extant policy analytic model gives adequate account.This article then introduces papers included in this symposium examining the chimerical presence and perfidious legacy of state criminality against democracy.
(SCADs of Inblot Denial, quoting American Behavioral Scientists). The American rebellion was against the behavior of an imperialistic king who was generating what behavioral scientists call Ruling Group Mind:
Research on TMT and SJT strongly suggests that defending the current U.S. political system and its prerogatives post-9/11 requires individual and collective denial to block out any and all information undermining the government's account of 9/11 and hence the archetypal image of "America Under Attack." When a particular mindset governs the collective consciousness to promote a particular agenda, such as the U.S. government's account of 9/11 parroted by the mainstream media without judicious investigation, the result is what McMurry (2007) refers to as a "ruling group-mind" (RGM) ...
(State Crimes Against Democracy - 4, citing the Journal of American Behavioral Scientists). Are we becoming the place where "the king can do no wrong" on certain issues we do not like to face?
Lets start with the question: "Why did the king who can do no wrong violate federal law (NFPA 921) by destroying the evidence?", as pointed out by Fire Chief Bill Manning, editor of Fire Engineering Magazine in January of 2002?
There are various architects and engineers who travel around the world to talk about, for example, what happened to "Building 7" (a.k.a. "Building What?"), on 9/11/01.
They often mention that an extremely high percentage of professionals in their discipline, who when confronted with the evidence these engineers offer, change their minds.
In recent times international treaties and international law have described wars of aggression as illegal.
When something is mutually declared to be illegal internationally amongst the nations, that means, among other things, that it is poisonous to the harmony of human communities on our good planet Earth.
If a fruit is poisonous as it naturally occurs, then the tree it comes from is also naturally poisonous.
By extension, if the current "endless wars" ongoing are poisonous to our natural reputation in the world, is our foreign policy not likewise poisonous?
Posts on Dredd Blog have incessantly pointed out how hopelessly addicted to oil civilization has become.
For example, see A Closer Look At MOMCOM's DNA - 2, a post which shows clearly that oil products are in you, on you, and around you at all times.
Our attitude toward our oil addiction is one of acceptance, but the following video describes our attitude toward war to show how a link between oil and war can end up seeming to be so appropriate to "our" security:
The lyrics to the following song can be read here:
Most main stream U.S. media journalists think it is wrong to even ask certain questions about the Bush II Commission that prepared the "official" 9/11 conspiracy theory and report.
That official report tells a story about planners in Afghani caves who together with 19 mostly Saudi Arabian menconspired together (the very definition of conspiracy theory) to damage the Pentagon as well as destroy two buildings in Manhattan, N.Y. in 2001.
But millions of questioning citizens, including members of the Commission itself, do not rely on that report alone, because too many experts have stated on the record that the Bush II Commission made colossal omissions following their short investigation which produced a technical report that also contains obvious mistakes:
In 2006, The Washington Post reported ... "Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission ..."
(Salem News, emphasis added; Washington Post). Unfair mainstream U.S. journalists tend to give "equal time" to every story under the sun, except the version presented by architects, engineers, and others who raise science based counter points to support their analysis.
We have pointed out, by quoting psychologists, sociologists, and professionals in related disciplines who have analyzed this behavior of U.S. journalists, and who have thereafter concluded that the 9/11 denial by U.S. journalists is a danger to the security of the populace, because it abandons the purpose of the fourth estate, better known as the free press (see here, here, here, here, and here).
Journalists in other nations, who lost people on 9/11 too, are more open minded, so they tend to be able to cover both sides of the story more freely and fearlessly.
Nevertheless, some U.S. journalists will present the news about the skeptical architects, engineers, and others who have amassed challenges to the Bush II Commission's report: Journalists, educators, and government have not stopped evils on this planet, so blind faith in them in place of self determination has consequences such as this:
Despite more than a dozen international conventions banning slavery in the past 150 years, there are more slaves today than at any point in human history. Slaves are those forced to perform services for no pay beyond subsistence and for the profit of others who hold them through fraud and violence.
(Time Magazine, emphasis added). A while back Dredd Blog quoted Aldous Huxley who saw this coming:
“There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution.”
(Glory Daze, emphasis added). When the questioning of government explanations of reality goes away freedom goes away with it.
Fear is known to have the capacity to paralyze the mind to such a degree that it cannot function in an unbiased manner.
Previous posts on Dredd Blog addressed the psychological impairment done to journalists and scholars by the events on 9/11/01 and the directly related wars that followed.
In the series State Crimes Against Democracy (SCAD), we covered those issues as revealed in crisp, clear quotes from a scholarly behavioral journal which focuses specifically on those fear based behavioral dynamics that to this day are plaguing journalism and government in America, both still swirling in the long wake of 9/11 events.
We have perused the subject in many ways, including not only the quoting of shocking statements from professional publications specifically dedicated to the behavioral impairment we call fear, and other such impairments, but also including contemplation of the very structure of the brain itself, isolating the very brain component where fear is known to flow.
So, each day beginning 9/4/11 up to and including 9/11/11, Dredd Blog is doing posts that deal with the questions and concerns millions of people around the world still have about the Bush II Commission and their 9/11 report, which started the ongoing controversy.
We are doing this series because journalists in the main stream media tend to give "equal time" to every story under the sun except the opposing view of 9/11 events.
Therefore, in proper journalistic tradition, Dredd Blog will present the counter points raised by various expert professionals who are unabashedly contrary.
It is the scholarly thing to do, in as much as a university in Canada is doing the same thing during this time frame (see Toronto Hearings).
A university professor of 30 years tenure is interviewed in the short clip below:
In yesterday's post the architect Les Young explained that their only concern is to find out the truth of how the buildings, WTC-1, WTC-2, and WTC-7, on 9/11/01 came down, not to determine who did it.
That requires an independent professional Commission, unlike the original committee.
That new group composition needs to include an independent professional fire and explosives investigation team.
Who did the activities that brought the three skyscrapers down is for another type of authority, a team of detectives, to determine.
Each day from 9/4/11 up to and including 9/11/11, Dredd Blog is doing posts that deal with the questions millions have about the Bush II Commission 9/11 report.
Each day from today up to and including September 11, Dredd Blog will do posts that deal with the questions millions have about the Bush II Commission that explained the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about 9/11 (according to the Bushies).
On the other hand, the original skeptics, the families of 9/11 victims who started the "9/11 Truth Movement", cite the lies about Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, lies about Iraq being involved in 9/11, and other news as a cautionary tale about the dangers of unquestioned belief in the Bush II version of anything, including 9/11.
Journalists give "equal time" to every story under the sun except the 9/11 story, therefore, in proper journalistic tradition, Dredd Blog will present the counter points raised by various expert professionals.
The notion of State Crimes Against Democracy was the foundational reason for the Declaration of Independence as well as the later Constitution of The United States.tendencies in American politics are being systematically engineered by top-ranking civilian and military officials. Rather than thinking in terms of high crimes, their diagnoses have blamed abstract institutional weaknesses or isolated failures of leadership.
and its prerogatives post-9/11 requires individual and collective denial to block out any and all information undermining the government's account of 9/11 and hence the archetypal image of "America Under Attack." When a particular mindset governs the collective consciousness to promote a particular agenda, such as the U.S. government's account of 9/11 parroted by the mainstream media without judicious investigation, the result is what McMurry (2007) refers to as a "ruling group-mind" (RGM) ...
There are various architects and engineers who travel around the world to talk about, for example, what happened to "Building 7" (a.k.a. "Building What?"), on 9/11/01.
We have been doing this series to reveal or review some of the links between the peak of oil and the peak of the oil wars.
Most main stream U.S. media journalists think it is wrong to even ask certain questions about the Bush II Commission that prepared the "official" 9/11 conspiracy theory and report.
In yesterday's post the architect Les Young explained that their only concern is to find out the truth of how the buildings, WTC-1, WTC-2, and WTC-7, on 9/11/01 came down, not to determine who did it. 
