Such writs can be only interpreted because true-or false answers do not pertain to commands, wishes, conclusions, inferences, promises, verbal brilliancies, condemnations, etc.

And by whom? But, of course, by people who have composed them. Now, this is not a novelty.
Such laws have [un] written by robbers since probably ca. 10-15 k yrs ago.
Constitution or any writ or utterance for that matter is an interpretative writ.
It cannot ever be known- only interpretative.

Thus the structure of deceit appears simple. No need to go to school or any one to tell you how simple or ancient this structure is: Say anything. Only you know what you mean. Pay another to dig up your meanings out of the utterance.
And, presto, you are always right. Even if the next interpretation of the utterance wld differ s’what or lot, do not fear, the interpreter wld come up with exact meanings desired.

That’s why an american pol or prez cannot ever be wrong while in service of the ‘country’ [read, please, ruling class]. A prez can wage a second limited nuclear war and he’d be correct and i f need wld arise beatified for it.
He, self may later regret it or live in hell, but the ruling class paid him/her well for his services; so the ruling class wld tell him to shut up already?

A soldier may do wrongs in combat or peace, but s/he’s in lower category of service; thus, s/he may be punished in order to sooth the nerves of bigger wrongdoers! tnx

Why it matters: observe that in the US in 2003 millions of people took to the streets hoping that by vigorously protesting they could prevent a fullscale US attack/invasion of Iraq. Observe also that at present there are millions of US citizens politically active to demand redress from the policies of various branches of government.
Now look again and see erstwhile “leaders” of the anti-Iraqwar movement actively supporting the US occupation of Afghanistan, and their close allies in “progressive” circles promoting Obama’s bullshit “Healthcare Reform”.
We who have found our efforts to improve conditions in our local communities frustrated by the massive obstruction placed in our path by elements advertising themselves as “progressive” have been forced to study these elements, to try to discern whence they derive their power.
Like Sun Tzu said, Know Your Enemy. In politics it is important to be able to distinguish between Us, Them, and Confused/Wavering.
And to distinguish between major offensives and relatively minor activities.
Of course those with big investments in petroleum extraction sponsor and support all kinds of gangsterism and skullduggery on every continent, but most of this stuff is on a scale small enough to fly under the MSM radar and never become a topic of public discussion. What we need to concern ourselves with is the underlying causes of the major imperial militarist initiatives like PNAC and the now redesignated “war on terror”, its major thrusts
into Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, plus the current cold war (which may or may not turn atomically hot very soon?) against Iran.
If you don’t realize that the same power center which is beating the drums for a first strike on Iran also controls the so-called “Democratic Party” and its main constituent components right down to the local school board level, you remain doomed to waste your time and energy running round and round in the ratraces they have set up for you.
An obvious case that has recently come to light is CodePink (which I myself have been in the habit of referring to as ColdFink;).
The Art of Ruling is primarily the art of getting other people to rule THEMSELVES. Yes the perfection of Technology, of ever-slicker weaponry and militarist organization is vitally important– but Tricknology is more important still. Getting you to internalize the values and desires of your masters without being coerced: THAT is the real key to Empire. So help me Time Warner:)
Beware of MISLEADERS. Always remember Father Gapon.

i’m usually accused of being obsessed with the zios and find it refreshing to be able to write something without dragging them in. they are lurking there but not necessary to my overall argument here.

thanks for comment. will respond more fully at first oppty:)

The Treasury Department’s assistant secretary David Cohen
addressed the American Bankers Association on Monday.
Cohen implored the assembled executives to understand that
money laundering sometimes involves “good money being put to
bad use,” a standard the G7 Financial Action Task Force adopted
way back in 1989. Cohen outlined Treasury’s efforts to “detect, deter
and deny” money launderers access to the financial system by
naming and shaming “facilitators” from the Gulf petroleum producers
to Mexico. He also warned that there would be “reputational and legal
consequences” for banks that didn’t pull at the yoke of expanded
Treasury powers assumed under Executive order 13224 (PDF).

Audience members were visibly uneasy during camera pans. There
was little interest in questioning the Treasury’s new employee. Perhaps
with good reason. James G. Carr, the chief federal judge in northern
Ohio, recently ruled that Treasury was acting unconstitutionally when
it froze a US charity under suspicion of terrorist ties. US courts are only
beginning to weigh in on the vast new powers assumed by Treasury.
Until now there has been little visibility into its overseas activities.
Treasury maintains that the Bank Secrecy Act, a money laundering
law, empowers it to deny FOIA requests.

If Cohen and his AIPAC approved mentor Stuart Levey truly wish to
test their ability to fight the largest unaddressed remaining terrorism
motivator in the Middle East, they could score a “slam dunk” without
trampling on the Constitution or even leaving US shores. Since 1977
US nonprofit charitable corporations and individual donors have helped
launder $50-60 billion into illegal West Bank settlements, violating US
criminal statutes and Israeli laws. If Cohen wants to “name and shame”
the kingpins financing the construction that undermines the Obama
administration’s policy, he can start with bingo entrepeneur Irving
Moskwitz and diamond magnate Lev Leviev.

Full Post
http://pulsemedia.org/2009/10/16/treasurys-cohen-cracks-down-well-not-on-everyone/

I hope you have time to later to complete your argument. You clearly are providing a very interesting historical linkage which has been suppressed by the so-called “Left” who would rather shift attention solely upon the oil interests which I would guess historically Jews have played little to no role in thereby shifting scrutiny away from them.

The net affect of this misdirection has been to curtail analysis and to diffuse the confrontation of Zionism which in turn has led to an overall weakening of confronting white supremacy racism and Capitalism.

But I don’t have time to really explain everything I’ve discovered. The upper echelons of Imperial Governance are not transparent, it’s not easy to assemble reliable information in a form that will convince people who have an intellectual investment in thinking things work in a certain way.
No, the US expansionist/imperialist power structure did not, as a matter of fact, “simply get replaced one day with Zionism”. The process whereby the Zionist fraction of the capitalist class came to be able to dominate the policy-making process took place over several decades, with a marked accelleration after 1948 and an even more marked same after 1967. And the US capitalist power config that consolidated with the Civil War and the end of Reconstruction has not vanished, it’s just lost its undisputed hold as top dog.
When we consider Zionism in the US, we have to keep in mind Jewish Capitalist Solidarity, which was an important element in capitalism everywhere capitalism existed before Zionism became a widely discussed ideology. Consider the amazing coup pulled off by Nathan Rothschild in the 24 hrs after he learned Napoleon had been defeated at Waterloo until the British Gov’t got the news.
So there has always been a big Jewish element in capitalism, dominated at least since Waterloo by people whose outlook was Judeocentric chauvinism, perhaps best described as “proto-Zionist”?
But I have a medical appt & have to go.

But of course it’s open to dispute. It is here that the crux of the problem lies and we can’t simply push it away in one cavalier whish.

I think you are implying that Robert Rubin and Larry Summers are Zionists in the sense that their financial ideology is tuned to Israel’s well-being. I know you have not mentioned their name, but let’s just use them as the basis for a large cadre of Jewish financiers. It makes for a clearer discussion than coyness.

If this is the case then you need to connect the dots. I’ll admit that there are Zionist in the baronhood – like Howard Schultz of Starbucks, but he doesn’t run US policy even if you has more influence than you and me as part of the elite money class.

In the end, dan e, you have made no connection between Zionists in the US military complex.

If you said, Rahm Emmanuel is a Zionist situated in a high position within the Obama Administration and therefore there is pressure to support Israel/Zionist policies, I would say you have a clear point and one that lies squarely and unequivocally on Obama’s shoulders.

I think we both agree that the Zionist movement has been a force in US policy, mostly in the Middle East and more specifically with regards to Israel/Palestine. No one is questioning that, certainly I’m not.

But when we extrapolate this relationship to the overarching US foreign/domestic (tightly coupled) policies, I do think the case is being overblown. When that happens we no longer keep our eyes on the ball and start framing everything from a Zionist perspective. The legacy of US imperialism and it’s bases throughout the world and its endless conflict and wars did not simply get replaced one day with Zionism.

JJ. Toronto

I’ve read from a few here that “oil” or regional dominance is not the reason the US empire supports some 800 bases world-wide, and has been fighting endless wars either directly or through proxies for as long as most alive can remember.

It just seems to me the burden of proof, that these are about Zionism, must fall squarely on those who make the allegation. While not denying Zionists place in certain Middle Eastern (and perhaps African) military projects, I find it rather incredulous to think of that ideology as more than a confluent element with US centuries old manifest destiny and exceptionalism that has fueled the US Empire since it emerged after the enslavement of Africans, the genocide of the indigenous people in the North American Continent, and after the bloody Civil War of the mid-19th Century. With, T. Roosevelt and W. Wilson the stage was set and the march has been steady.

is the link to the most interesting version of the “war for oil” snowjob that I’ve seen in quite a while. To me the rehearsal of the historical record has some value since even though I followed the series of events when they were happening I tend to forget exactly who said what when.
Likewise Mr Wahlberg’s take has considerable merit, but to present an analysis of the “AfPak” aspect of the Bush/Obama global militarist offensive without mentioning the role of the Zionist Power Configuration is to expose yourself as a hypocrite:)