by Neil R. Miller
© 1995, 1996, 1998 Internet Posted: October 18, 1996; Posted at this web-site October 16, 1998
New: "On The Importance of Voting" October 30, 1998
Note (October 16, 1998)
Contents
Introduction - Summary (October 19, 1998)
The Barons and the Forest Women (1996)
Mid-Century Germany (1996)
McCarthy and the Progressives (1996)
In 75 Words or Less (August, 1998)
Up to Date (August, 1998)
Added - August-September, 1998 (September, 1998)
"How You Tell" (October 16, 1998)
next previous top
Note: This file was originally written for an Internet mailing list some two years ago. It is an expansion of the idea presented in the "Four Crimes" *.gif chart, which was written on January 1, 1995, originally distributed by mail to about 30 recipients in May, 1995 and first posted at this site in August of that year.
It was designed to show that the entire Republican Party generated scandals, are an age-old, and transparent plan for ever more voluminously perpetrating massive crimes with full impunity by identifying the most alert witnesses to those crimes, charging them - the witnesses - with the crimes, and in so doing, eliminate all possibility of their own exposure.
What I find so astounding, is that after all these years, and all these centuries, the plan still seems to work like a charm.
The fact that the victims of, and the targets of these crimes never seem to catch on in time, and that this impunity technique remains fully operational, after hundreds of years (at least) of repetition, is certainly one of the greatest tragedies of all history.
The reason that the technique works so flawlessly, again and again, with ever more destructive effect, has to do with the fact that these 'frame-ups', 'stings', and manipulated 'set-ups', themselves attack the cognitive processes in the population at large.
People mistakenly think that the victims are those being unjustly accused, however, in fact, the real victims of the original crimes, which are being misattributed to the accused, is the public at large.
Some of the dynamics of how this destruction of the cognition of the general public works, via these manipulations, are elucidated in the main body of the '92 Summary paper elsewhere at this site.
As it is now 1998, it perhaps would be appropriate to update this paper with the current round of manipulations, but I am hoping that the reader can simply make the extrapolation for themself. After all, this sort of thing goes on all the time, not just in the large famous cases, but in everyday life as well.
And until the entire dynamic is publicly exposed for the fraud that it is, it will go on again and again and again and again and again. If it's never exposed, this planet will entirely unnecessarily die of it.
At any rate, for now, I'm just posting the original 1995-96 paper, unedited, as it was written for that mailing list two years ago, in 1996.
Introduction - Summary (1996, 1998)
From the earliest days of the Clinton Administration, there has been a kind of background theme running among Republicans in congress and in the mass media claiming that there has been some sort of dishonesty on the part of Mr. Clinton.
I wondered about this from the start, as there was no such unrelenting drumbeat regarding Mr. Reagan or Mr. Bush, nor the 1996 Republican candidate for President, Mr. Dole.
But the Reagan Administration, among many many many other things engendered the S&L theft of a trillion dollars, the secret sale of arms to Iran, and his administration's import of massive amounts of cocaine to the US, even while overtly posturing as a great patriot, a protector of the little guy, and a vigilant anti-drug warrior.
All that was well reported to and even, reported in, the back pages, in the mass media, and amounting to massive crimes of dishonesty against the state and the American people.
Mr. Bush's rather blatant manipulations - certainly reported, but never harped upon in the headlines - in deliberately engendering the Gulf War, and Mr. Dole's well known and almost boastful propensity for all kinds of shady campaign contributions, among many other such deceits, caused no such pounding away in headlines, so the question arises as to why Clinton Administration personnel were repeatedly hauled before congress again and again, right from the start, usually on the smallest of pretexts - and only pretexts at that.
What was that all about, and why does the theft of a trillion dollars get dismissed, while the tiniest - and usually unsubstantiated at that - pretexts are cause for headlines trumpeting (inaccurately) dishonesty. Why is that?
I've heard the expression "where there's smoke, there's fire", and while I'm not a big fan of metaphors, especially when discussing serious political issues, I just have to note about this one that the metaphor says nothing about who the arsonist is.
I have to note that often, when I've heard this expression, it comes from a (metaphoric) arsonist, who lights a fire, and then blames the person's trapped inside as the (again, metaphoric) arsonist, all the while repeating over and over again, "where there's smoke, there's fire, where there's smoke there's fire", and the listener is supposed to never consider that the person sounding the alarm just might be the person responsible for the (metaphoric) smoke and fire. It just amazes me just how automatically people fall for this stuff.
As it turned out, in all the investigations of Mr. Clinton (and Mrs. Clinton), from 1993 all the way to 1998, the massively strenuous investigations, constantly paraded in the headlines, hammering away at that dishonesty theme, Mr. Starr couldn't find one single instance of dishonesty to present to the congress. That astounds me.
I mean, it is my impression that the powers that be trust no one - the media and the corporate donors trust no one who doesn't demonstrate at least a little dishonesty.
They are so steeped, up to their eyeballs in deceit and dishonesty themselves, that, at least it's been my impression, that they don't allow anyone who they can't get something on to get that far, to achieve that much power.
But apparently Mr. Clinton did indeed manage to serve as governor in Arkansas for years, and won the presidency while remaining one of the most honest influential persons in public life anywhere.
I guess Mr. Starr, in his inability to find any affairs of state, or financial affairs to report about in the Starr report, after all those years, after all those depositions, after all those subpoenas, after all those millions and millions of dollars, proved that pretty decisively.
So the question is, why so many people, especially curious to me, people who call themselves progressives, were so anxious to join in the five year long "where there's smoke there's fire" drumbeat emanating from the Republicans and the media regarding Mr. Clinton.
I mean, integrity certainly is important but it seems clear to me that, certainly as public figures go, but even generally speaking altogether, Mr. Clinton is one of the most honest people anywhere.
So why the big drumbeat? It does seem to be true, that they finally got something to get him on, but it took huge manipulations, secret recordings, massive lies on the part of the prosecutors, things no citizen would ever tolerate being the target of.
But the whole six years of constantly pounding away, all of the manipulations taken together, and all they could find was a personal matter, something between him and his wife. Certainly not an affair of state, by any stretch of the imagination.
I mean, again, integrity certainly matters a lot. So, since Mr. Starr himself proved so decisively that Mr. Clinton has a far stronger measure of integrity than just about anyone in a high position of power and influence, so why are people so prepared to allow the incredibly, massively deceitful Republicans to return to control of congress.
And what are the consequences of turning a blind eye to this manipulation; what are the consequences to the general public, particularly for persons of the cooperative and progressive persuasion, falling for the massive Republican deceit in this matter, and sitting on their hands, as if they don't notice that it is the Republican congressman - and the mass media - who have been proven their own deceitfulness, and who have proven Mr. Clinton's high integrity.
In fact, when these sorts of manipulations result in the triumph of the manipulators, and the frame-up of the principled person or persons, the result is generally a catastrophic increase in disintegrity throughout all levels of life throughout the whole nation.
If the Republicans get away with this - and so many people seem to be prepared to allow it to be by staying home on election day, similar set-ups, frame-ups, and manipulations at all levels of life will, it is my guess, skyrocket - in families, in offices and workplaces, and in all manner of circumstances, locally, regionally, and everywhere.
There are, tragically, dishonest manipulators in this world - people who live by the creating of false impression, by rumor, by fabricating of, or setting up a deceitful circumstance, and, with those crocodile smiles, then pulling the old "where there's smoke there's fire" routine.
How many people reading these words have seen someone - a fundamentally honest person - entrapped, set up, stung. You're not supposed to notice that; the manipulators call you "paranoid" if you notice - that's part and parcel of the sting - but how many people have seen it done?
How many people have been targets, or escaped by a hair? How many people are more comfortable when the manipulators triumph, and identify with them, and how many are relieved when they are ousted from power, and from their ability to continue such manipulations?
Do people really want to return a repulsively manipulative Republican congress to power? Do people really feel safer when such manipulations triumph, and thus, set a triumphant example for dishonest set-up artists at all levels of life?
Apparently after five years, thousands of hours of thoroughly brutal testimony, thousands of subpoenas, millions and millions of dollars, they finally entrapped Mr. Clinton into one deceit regarding one thing in his personal life.
That whole set of circumstances, in my opinion, quite literally proves, I think self-evidently, the highest integrity.
I mean, I presume the man is holding military secrets which he must sometimes mislead about - the same with certain diplomatic maneuvering.
And in the course of meeting some two hundred thousand people, I presume that here and there, there are things that are not entirely straightforward. But it looks to me like there is no one in public life, and certainly no one in corporate. financial, or media life, with a record as honest as his.
I have no special information regarding Mr. Clinton; I don't know anyone who has spoken to him, or anyone who knows anyone who has any connection to him, or to the Democratic Party for that matter. I am (involuntarily) almost a hermit-like person, and I don't watch, nor have a television, and rarely - almost never - check in with any form of mass media (see bibliography elsewhere at this site, for what I do check in with). I write as a citizen from a far distance.
But I do consider myself something of an expert on the matter of integrity in life. Indeed, exactly what honesty is, and why it matters so very very much, politically, socially, and in every other way, is a major, central focus of the research that I do.
And I have reached the conclusion that there is no one in America who would be more pleased than William J. Clinton, were the entire dishonesty dynamic dissolved forever.
And, even more important, there is no one in this country who would be more terrified, of an arrest of the whole dishonesty dynamic, than the current Republican congress and other Republican Party office holders.
The Republicans live by dishonesty, in all things, from the highest levels of their ideology, all the way down the line. It is their stock in trade. And that is NOT the case with Democrats, liberals, and progressives.
That is precisely why the Republicans need to frame-up and entrap Democrats and leftists - in order to justify their own, the Republican's own all-pervasive dishonesty!
By the very nature of the reactionary and right-wing ideology, it is the Republicans who think they stand to gain when dishonesty triumphs,
and it is by the nature of the liberal and progressive ideology that the liberal and progressive idelogy stands to gain the most when dishonesty altogether is arrested. And Mr. Clinton, and the Republicans both know that full well.
In the following explanation, this matter of dishonest perpetrators framing up the most alert and honest witnesses to the perpetrators' own crimes illustrates something of the current dynamic, as it appears again and again in history.
I take just four famous examples, of the thousands possible; indeed the whole history of labor's struggles, the struggles of third world people's, of women, of indigenous persons, and indeed all persons fighting for a better life is replete with this sort of dynamic.
Here I'll just mention the frame-ups of the forest women in medieval Europe, the Jews in mid-century Germany, the progressives by the right-wing in the US in the 1950's era McCarthy days, and a quick mention of the propaganda of the military and the death squads in Latin America over the last three decades, which embodied the exact same dynamic.
While these are historical examples, when we read about them in books, we can't help but wish (I do anyway) that we could crawl into a time-machine, and warn the population in advance. We wonder (again, I do anyway) at their inability to see, before it is too late.
But, as it turns out, there is often a present circumstance, often as gripping and as telling. In a few short weeks or days, these Republican Party manipulators will be up for election. To be here now, is, for me, a little like being in that very time machine.
Those who delight in the victory of manipulators will (manipulatively) urge, by whatever hidden means, Democrat voters to stay home.
But for those who feel safer, stronger, more confident, when deceitful and dishonest manipulators are ousted from power, for those who feel that a more honest 'body politic' is directly in their own mental, social, political, and whatever else interest, such persons will urge everyone to Vote, and Vote Democrat this November.
Again, what follows are but four examples of the above dynamic, four famous examples from history.
And God help us all.
The Barons and the Forest Women
This whole matter of framing the most principled persons on the charge of committing the sort of crimes that the accusers/perpetrators themselves commit on the very grand scale, goes back a long time.
When the capitalist barons of the middle ages crowded the cities, without a thought to clean water or anyone's health, and therein directly engendered the bubonic plague, throwing three quarters of the population into an unending, unspeakable terror and torture, while killing the other quarter entirely; they, the Barons, the perpetrators then identified the most alert witnesses to the crime, the healers, the forest women of Europe, who were the indigenous people of the continent, named them as the perpetrators! Called 'em "witches", can you believe that??!!! And tortured them to death for the capitalist Barons' own crimes, by the tens of thousands (at least). And of course, hiring the "Church" [of satan] to do the dirty work.
The Barons, who were the perpetrators, hired the "church" to torture to death the witnesses to the crimes, the forest women, on the charge that the witnesses to the crimes, the forest women, the innocent, helpful parties, on the charge that they were the perpetrators of the crimes.
next previous top
Mid-Century Germany
It's still going on, strong as ever . . . an old trick, the old, right-wing 'one two'; it still works, to this day. In this century, when the capitalists of that very same Germanic land, alongside their US, British, and French cohorts; when they all decided to kill off the entire working class of Europe (WW1), by the millions, in order to stop that working class from making a continent-wide, world-wide, communist revolution, when the capitalists decided to kill that working class off before they could make that revolution, well, the losses in Europe were astounding. Pain, anger, rage . . . on the grand scale . . .
Whether it's the women (forest women) or the men (WW1 soldiers), in both cases it is ripping out and brutally destroying the very soul of the continent, for generations, sometimes even centuries to come.
But this WW1 was not enough for the modern-day barons, the capitalists - five million of the strongest, healthiest, most principled working men, the cream of any potential positive European movement, killed by torture in the trenches, and still, communist revolution was still alive, certainly in the Soviet Union, and the communist idea itself, the schema, the plan, still alive throughout Europe.
So The Great War was not enough for the 'great' financiers and capitalists of Europe and the US . . . they hadn't quite finished off all cooperative-society type progress . . . the only really efficient way to kill egalitarian revolution is to seek out and kill, everywhere, the most alert witnesses and potential witnesses to the crimes of the capitalist perpetrators. By convincing the public that the great crimes of the capitalists were being committed by the witnesses to the crimes. Et voila, W.W.II.
The most alert witnesses? Of events in Europe? Who could that be? The intellectuals? The Jews? The culturally indigenous people with the most long-term, depthful worldview? (the Jews being the earliest cultures of modern Europe). The most non-violent persons? Indeed, anyone at all who might instinctively be helpful to persons who were in difficult situations, anyone who had that instinct - those were the ones who the capitalists feared could expose them, those were the alert witnesses and potential witnesses . . . that's who the capitalists and their Nazi puppets went after, specifically: the intelligent, non-violent groups and individuals - persons who could discern accuracy from inaccuracy, principle from corruption, persons with some broad knowledgability and depth of awareness . . . that's who the capitalists/nazis were and, always, are, most scared of, always . . .
They figure, 'Kill them off, kill off the most alert witnesses to the big, background capitalist crimes, and kill off the most likely potential witnesses as well. And then, with most of the alert witnesses gone to the world, the barons, financiers, capitalists can then bleed the whole world to death undisturbed, with impunity, and never get caught!' Et voila . . .
I think it was expected that the killing squads and gas chambers of WWII, would silence the cooperative uprising, the communist revolution really, once and for all . . . or at least, for generations to come . . .
The point is this: all the crimes that the nazis ever charged the Jews with, were all true charges . . . all those crimes had been committed and were being committed, the ones that Hitler described were being committed, just as Hitler said they were. And those crimes were every bit as ugly as he said they were. It was all every bit as ugly as that profoundly ugly man portrayed them to be. Moreso. He got the crimes right; he was right about that, in letter and spirit. Neither he nor anyone could ever be emotional enough to actually portray the horror of the crimes to the European peoples but he managed to speak some of the tone of how bad these crimes were.
At any rate, the point here is that, certainly according to what I've figured out, Hitler was, in fact, speaking accurately about actual all-Europe crimes being committed.
The only difference was, like with the barons and the "church" of the middle ages, the actual perpetrators were the accusers themselves, in this case, Hitler himself (as he was well aware); and in the WWII case, the main perpetrators, the puppeteers, were Hitler's, and the nazis' own, close, constant hand-to-shoulder-backers, namely, those very same capitalists; direct descendants of the barons of the middle-ages.
In the modern age, the capitalists (US, UK, Fr. Ger. etc.) used the Germans (Hitler, the Nazis) to kill the witnesses to the capitalists' own crimes, charging the witnesses with those crimes. And blaming the innocent witnesses (the Jews) for the exact, precise things that the capitalists themselves were doing to all Europe!
Like in the middle ages, the capitalists, the perpetrators were hiring a middle-man (that is, instead of the "church", this time it was the nazis) to kill off the witnesses (the forest women, and later the Jews), by torture specifically, and by the millions, and doing it by charging those most alert witnesses and potential witnesses with the capitalists' own crimes.
And what of the medieval charges against the forest women? What of the crimes that the 'witches' were charged with? All true crimes - as grotesque and heinous as they come, in fact all true, the work of the devil incarnate, sure enough, just like they said, in the letter and spirit of the term 'devil incarnate', big time . . . One thing those monsters did is they accurately documented the crimes . . .
Except, the forest women were innocent and intelligent and healers, and in a position to expose the criminals (the barons), and were therein in a position to stop the crimes. Which is why the actual criminals, the capitalist barons, were desperate to murder those forest-women-witnesses, by the tens of thousands, at least.
McCarthy and the Progressives
Well, even closer to home . . . in the last months of W.W.II (this next sentence [only] is the subject of Christopher Simpson's "Blowback"; Harvard, 1988): in the last months of W.W.II, and for a few years thereafter (1945, '46, '47, etc.), large numbers of Nazis, that is, long term officials of the German National Socialist Party (Nazi Party), under the now deceased Adolf Hitler, and thousands of especially brutal and loyal soldiers of that German Party, were secretly brought into the United States by confederates in the US corporations and the Truman government, imported into high positions in the American body politic, brought into the corporate, financial, scientific, and academic world, and into Truman's government; especially into secret and powerful Conspiracy Idiot Agencies, key influential portions of which, they took full command.
Well! It was (is) quite a scandal? I mean with millions of W.W.II veterans still walking around, and newsreels all around of concentration camps and the millions tortured to death, you'd think it would be pretty scandalous to have large numbers of card-carrying, bona-fide, indeed, central Nazi officials suddenly running agencies that have the most profound influence over the American political psyche. Gee. Why did we have to live with this formal Nazi ideology injected into our heads for fifty solid years before anyone writes the book on it? Gee. Why didn't anyone expose it at the time? I wonder why?
Well, actually, there were quite a few people in an excellent position to expose it. It's just that some people were not paying intelligent attention at the time.
When you think about it though, the person who accurately exposed the alien and demonic infiltration and take-over of our most influential national institutions, was Joe McCarthy. His charges were all true, in letter and spirit. There was indeed, an alien, foreign, evil conspiracy, infiltrating our government, and our body politic, that indeed was corrupting our government, our democracy, our traditions, our nation, and our people in grotesque ways. And sure enough; that formal, alien infiltration has persisted ferociously, to this very day. A long term, fatal to billions world-wide, skew, that should have been arrested then, needed to be arrested then.
What McCarthy did, was he accurately identified the crime, but he then substituted in, instead of the actual perpetrators, he substituted in the names of the most alert witnesses, progressives in government, and intellectuals, writers, and academics, the ones who could expose those crimes, charged them as communists, and thus shut them up and closed them down with terror and fear.
Like the Barons of medieval times committing the crimes and blaming the forest women witnesses, and like the mid-century capitalists of Europe committing the crimes and blaming the Jewish and other alert witnesses, in this more recent case, it was McCarthy's own backers that were the perpetrators; the nazis themselves and their protectors in US corporate, academic, and government life were the perpetrators. It was the Nazis, McCarthy himself and his card-carrying formal, Nazi backers who were injecting and protecting this evil, grotesque, demonic, satanic, death dealing and insanity dealing, and repulsively alien ideology into the highest levels of American influence.
And who were the witnesses to the horror of this massive Nazi "injection" to the head of our nation? Who were the closest witnesses and potential witnesses? Who would they be? Can you guess? Who was in the best position to expose the Nazi takeover of the American political psyche? Could it be? Why, none other than . . . Liberals in the State Department. Who would have a better, more authoritative, and more alarmed, birds-eye view of this alien and satanic takeover!
And, additionally, others throughout government and academia who might happen to have an actual brain in their head; they too would have to be chilled - or killed. And of course, also the most brilliant of the literary and performing arts world. And anyone who would be especially sensitive to a nazi-like shift in the winds. Chill or die.
The old, reliable right-wing formula stays the same. Commit the crime - in this third case, inject an evil, conspiratorial, alien, corrupt infiltration into the highest levels of national influence, namely, a couple of key, bona fide SS divisions, straight from the front - then, publicly identify the crime of evil infiltration, then identify the most likely witnesses, namely liberals, a.k.a. 'progressives' or communists, and then, charge the witnesses with the crime in all its grotesqueness. It's a formula, an age-old formula, tried and true. It astounds me that this formula remains so well hidden.
In the 'McCarthy' case execute a couple of Jews in the electric chair, (just 7 years after Auchwitz, talk about chill factor), and you make your point.
And viola . . . no one breaths a word connecting this horrific crime of evil, alien infiltration of our national body politic, and its consequent billion deaths throughout the Southern Hemisphere (for openers); no one connects that to its actual perpetrators, McCarthy's own backers.
In fact, in the case of the forest women, we're supposed to think "oh, ha ha", "tsk tsk", just a bunch of superstition, a "misunderstanding".
But, oh no; that's not the way it was. No superstition, no misunderstanding. It was conscious design on the part of the capitalist barons, and a massive, misattributive deception regarding who the perpetuators were.
But we're supposed to think "there was no big, Europe wide plague/crime in the first place", no killing of witnesses to that bigger crime, what crime, I don't see any crime . . . the plague? what's that? oh that; that was God's doing . . .
If you have eyes to see, it's kind of like the old cliché about the "good cop/bad cop" routine. The "bad cop" kills you out of hand. But the "good cop" makes you a deal . . . if you promise to testify that there was no big crime plague/crime in the first place, that burning the women was all just from silly superstition, if you promise to spout that alibi, then they promise to stop killing you. That's sort of the (right-wing) liberal deal; the "plea bargain", so to speak.
With the nazis, the postwar approach was that you had to agree that it was all about "race", not about any quashed attempt at egalitarian revolution. No no they insist. Hitler "just" didn't like Jews. Race. That's all.
In 75 Words or Less
So, what's new? This whole formula is a tired, centuries-old formula, repeated like a sing-song litany.
. . . forever.
Up to Date (1996)
So, that brings us up to date. Here we have the President, Mr. Clinton, being charged as the perpetrator of a shady, Reagan-era Savings and Loan deal.
Integrity counts. Big time. It does it does. To most everyone. I, at least, am sure of that, anyway.
Now let's look at this. According to me:
1. First you commit the crime.
1a. The Republicans deregulate the banks, and then, them and their backers loot the nation's hardest working retirees for a trillion dollars through the Savings and Loan channel.
2. You denounce the crime.
2b. The Republicans denounce the stupendous and horrifying corruption in government and throughout American life that allows such things to happen. "I'm shocked! Shocked!" But with a straight face and in real life.
3. You identify the witnesses and potential witnesses.
3c. The Republicans, the perpetrators, figure that The Democrats, the liberals, and Clinton administration types generally are the most likely to understand and articulate just who the perpetrators (the Republican Party and backers) of this trillion dollar theft actually are.
4. You announce that the witnesses committed the crimes.
4d. Remember that trillion dollars? Well it's "Now Revealed (headlines) that Clinton was the shady Savings and Loan guy". "Whitewater Proves It!"
5. You eliminate the witnesses.
5e. You attempt to roast the witnesses out of the White House on the charge that they, the articulate witnesses to the crime are the perpetrators.
6. You do a plea bargain.
6e. You get the witnesses' survivors to promise to eschew all charges against the perpetrators, chalk it all up to "the past", "what's done is done", etc.
7. You now ferociously go after even bigger and better game, unhindered by alert and intelligent witnesses.
I do appreciate Mr. Clinton's enormous ability to raise the level of major conversations to that of political issues rather than lower-level 'charges' and countercharges. The enforced lack of a good "sorting out" process, regarding conversational conventions among the general population, precludes the general public being able to distinguish and figure out just what is going on, both regarding large political issues, as well as the regarding more local circumstances.
So Mr. Clinton is presumably right, as best I can tell, to handle these matters the way that he does. But the charge/countercharge conversation is also important, if not for Mr. Clinton to engage in, certainly for responsible observers and voters to figure out about. And engendering that figuring-out process, is, of course, the primary purpose of the project that is this web-site.
Integrity? My point is, that when a right-winger raises the charge of a high crime, chances are that crime was actually committed, and they are probably understating just how horrible and heinous that crime is. However. In almost all cases, or in all cases, it is the right-wing accuser who has committed the crime, or, more likely, is poised to commit, or is committing, a much much much greater one.
Added - August-September, 1998
It is my contention that every single one of the charges, and I do mean EVERY SINGLE ONE, that the Republicans have levied against Mr. Clinton and related parties, EVERY SINGLE ONE, has indeed been committed, in spades, by the Republicans and to a vastly greater degree than the charges that the Republicans are making.
The Republicans are accurately naming the crimes that are actually being committed, but in this case, they are severely under-stating them.
They identify the most alert and most intelligent witnesses to those crimes, namely, The Democratic Party in general, and The President and Mrs. Clinton specifically.
And they charge the witnesses with their own crimes.
For better or worse, I have no television, and don't read mass-media newspapers or magazines, and do not have the financial resources to develop a social life, so I am not too aware of the daily news, and am just not familiar enough with the current 1998 case to know what the charges are, but at this point, the pattern is so thoroughly routine, that it is entirely reasonable to simply presume this to be the case. When I hear right-wing forces charging a liberal or a leftist with a crime, I have learned that that very activity, or type of activity that is charged, is being perpetrated on the grand scale by the right-wing accusers. The reader is, of course, most welcome to look at the record to see if I'm correct.
Perhaps, from what little I know, I could say, maybe, something like, that the charges fall under the general heading of "criminally and deceitfully corrupting the helpful and legitimate processes of government and of law".
I think it's safe to say - would anyone disagree? - that the Republicans have done that. Indeed, it's their stock in trade. Actually, in fact, it's what they always promise and boast about in their campaigns - destroy public government by any means necessary. That has long been their official campaign slogan, hasn't it?
So, are they doing that? Has Mr. Clinton done that? Are they charging Mr. Clinton with that very crime, which Mr. Clinton has NOT committed, but which they themselves have committed?
The whole purpose, the whole strategy of the Republicans, is to themselves operate in the most deceitful and corrupt way possible, and then to set-up, or frame-up, the most principled persons on that very charge of deceit. Their clearly and publicly stated purpose is to discredit public government altogether, get rid of it, because, corruptionists that they are and that they represent, they feel they can only operate if governance is most hidden.
It is the Democrats who want public government, who want open, popularly elected government. It is the Republicans who fear open, public government, because it is the whole Republican Party ideology which crumbles absolutely in the clear light of day. Hiddenness is their only recourse. So for that, they feel they must destroy public government, by charging the Democrats, by charging those who champion public government, with their own, the Republican's own crimes of deceit.
It seems to me that the Republicans have set up a 'sting' operation to charge Mr. Clinton, in my opinion perhaps the most principled person in a high position of influence anywhere, with their own crimes of extreme deceit, and disintegrity.
Mr. Clinton does NOT and has NOT "criminally and deceitfully corrupted the helpful and legitimate processes of government and of law and the public interest".
The Republicans HAVE DONE, and DO "criminally and deceitfully corrupt the helpful and legitimate processes of government and of law". And do so as a proudly and loudly stated, overt matter of overt promise and "principle".
So what's new?
next previous top
"How You Tell"
When RIGHT-WINGERS make political charges against cooperative persons, it is a cardinal rule that those charges are fully accurate, and probably massively under-stated, but those they identify as the perpetrators, are, in fact, the principled witnesses to the crime.
It is also certain that they themselves, the right-wing accusers, have committed those very crimes that they identify, and much worse, and on a much grander scale. But vastly more important, such charges by right-wing forces are almost always, or, more likely always a prelude to the commission of such crimes, on a vast and all pervasive scale.
I get the feeling it's a major rule of history. I wonder if they teach about that rule in History, Political Science, Psychiatry, or Criminology classes at the major universities? Obviously they don't, but it would seem to me that such should be common knowledge among the entire population
So. How is this to be very grave and extremely consequential dynamic to be approached?
This entire dynamic, must be publicly exposed. People generally, and in the immediate case, the electorate must be able to, first, recognize, that often, when a great crime is committed, the perpetrators will identify the witnesses to the crime, will identify those that are likeliest to expose the crime, and identify those alert witnesses to the crime as themself the perpetrators.
Other observers then, the general public, must become familiar with this dynamic, and understand that it is to be expected that principled, alert witnesses will be charged with the perpetrators' crimes, for the very purpose of allowing the perpetrators to deceitfully operate with impunity.
However, as it stands now, the witnesses don't themselves dare to accurately accuse the perpetrators, because the general public has been conditioned to react against "two groups, who are both accusing each other of the same thing."
This is why the "accuse the witnesses" technique works so well. People have been conditioned to say "well, if they are both saying the same thing (each accusing the other of the same crime, say, 'disintegrity', violence, theft, or whatever), then, if they are both saying the same thing, they must both be the same. Again, that is what the perpetrators count on. That is why the technique of the perpetrators accusing the witnesses works so well.
And, for sure for sure, each time the perpetrators (in this case, the Republicans) succeed in demobilizing popular opinion from understanding the frame-up or entrapment of the alert witnesses, very large-scale, massive crimes - on a very very very grand scale - are sure to follow.
As best I can tell, the plan now, is to get Democrat voters to stay home, keep a large Republican presence in Congress, and then delete Mr. Clinton altogether, and then delete Mr. Gore in turn, put Mr. Gingrich in charge, and, then, well, what followed Weimar? I mean, does Mr. Gingrich remind anyone of another petty little man - petty little puppet - from earlier in this century? Think I'm crazy? Well, I happen to know for a fact that I'm not crazy. I, of course, could be wrong - but think again on this one.
True, the corporations running the mass media may not allow it to go quite that far, but for sure for sure, that is, and has been all along, the current Republican Party plan. And, depending upon just how much of the public's intelligence and ability to discern and figure they think they need to destroy, well, they may well indeed allow it to go that far. But that is the Republican Party plan. Or so it seems to me.
The Perpetrators and The Witnesses
by Neil R. Miller
© 1995, 1996, 1998
next previous top
next previous top
next previous top
next previous top
A tired old formula, but, tragically too, tried and true. So anyway, what's new?
one at a time, by the thousands, by the millions, whatever it takes . . .
to shut them up for awhile . . .
you get to keep doing the original crime, more and more,
for decades, or centuries to come, or . . .
or until the pattern is recognized, arrested, and replaced . . .
next previous top
next previous top