Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Have we always been pawns in a game?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
oregonjen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-03-07 10:23 AM
Original message
Have we always been pawns in a game?
I can't articulate this the way I want to, but have we always been pawns in the game of Democracy? Was it really a dream to think that all men are created equal?
I'm so tired of both parties thinking of the good of the party, instead of the good of the people. If they have a sworn duty to uphold the Constitution, why not uphold it? Why not impeach if that is what the law says? It's always calculated in regards to how it will affect the party instead of doing what's right.
People are dying in this little game of politics. Do the Dems really think that their political careers are more important than anyone elses basic right to life? Does power really make a human change that much? It's sickening to think we elected people that cannot uphold our Constitution and stop the power and greed that have taken over our country. Is the need to control the world's important finite resource, oil, really more important than peace and prosperity for all? Are the Dems in agreement to take control of it? Is the big experiment of Democracy over, has it always been a game?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
soothsayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-03-07 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
1. If the US was ever soveriegn, that ended in 1947 or maybe 1949 at the latest.
Edited on Mon Sep-03-07 03:47 PM by soothsayer
In 1947, the National Security Act created the National Security Council, the Central Intelligence Organization (CIA) and consolidated the US military into one entity, the Department of Defense (DoD). One of the issues that remained unresolved from the creation and operation of the CIA was the extent to which its budget and intelligence activities would remain a secret. According to Article 1, sec. 9, of the US Constitution, “No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.” This constitutional requirement conflicted with the need for secrecy concerning Congressional appropriations for the CIA. The solution was for Congress to pass legislation approving the secrecy over the funding mechanisms used for the CIA and its intelligence related activities. The necessary bill was passed with great haste and minimal debate causing considerable concern among those few Congressmen brave enough to openly challenge the constitutionality of the Act. <3> Congressman Emmanuel Celler of New York voted for the bill but protested: “If the members of the Armed Services Committee can hear the detailed information to support this bill, why cannot the entire membership? Are they the Brahmins and we the untouchables? Secrecy is the answer.” <4> Celler, like the majority of Congressmen, passed the CIA Act very much like the wealthy father viewed the birth of an illegitimate child, appropriate care would be taken to provide for the child, but there would be no official admission of patrimony and the responsibility that entails.


The 1949 CIA Act comprised additions to those sections of the 1947 National Security Act that dealt with the creation of CIA. The 1949 CIA Act gave a Congressional stamp of approval to the creation of a ‘black budget’ as the following sections make clear:

… any other Government agency is authorized to transfer to or receive from the Agency such sums without regard to any provisions of law limiting or prohibiting transfers between appropriations . Sums transferred to the Agency in accordance with this paragraph may be expended for the purposes and under the authority of sections 403a to 403s of this title without regard to limitations of appropriations from which transferred. <5>

This section meant that funds could be transferred from the appropriations of other government departments earmarked for specific tasks, “without regard to any provisions of law”. For example, a Congressional appropriation earmarked for housing subsidies to low-income workers by Housing and Urban Development (HUD), could be legally transferred either to the CIA for covert intelligence activities or through the CIA to a DoD associated intelligence agency for a classified program. Thus HUD employees might find that their relevant housing programs were lacking the necessary funds for relief efforts even though Congress had appropriated these funds for this purpose. Any HUD official unfortunate enough as to enquire into the location of the missing funds would be deterred from pursuing the issue, and if these officials persisted, they could be summarily dismissed, and then exposed to a variety of CIA activities to silence them. <6>
much more http://www.american.edu/salla/Articles/BB-CIA.htm

This also seems to be when the US started using drug money to fund things, too. Once the gov allowed itself to fund itself secretly and in direct violation of our consitution and laws, we the people were no longer in charge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-03-07 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
2. I've been studying Virginia colonial history for a little while now..
Edited on Mon Sep-03-07 04:10 PM by Virginia Dare
started out as a genealogy project, and now it's sort of a hobby. At any rate, I believe that we are indeed pawns in a game, and always have been. If you go deep into the roots of our history, if you study the players, if you study how our history evolved over time, it becomes pretty apparent as to what we're all here for, and why it was necessary for a constant influx of immigrants aka cheap labor, as well as 200 years of keeping African slaves. This was the price of our freedom. Give us your tired, your poor, yada yada, so we can work you to death!

Having said that, I think a truly brilliant group of men nurtured our insurgency and eventual Independence from sovereign England, and I think they gave us some great building blocks for governing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissMarple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-03-07 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Good points. There is no sugar daddy looking out for us.
The Constitution gives us an edge, but only if we use it. That is one reason I have trouble getting all enthusiastic about any one individual running for President. America needs a bit of shake up, we are over due for one. And the "media" has always been somewhat less than ideal, IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blues90 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-03-07 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
4.  from a different point of view
In politics we have always been pawns in a game of wars . The US used the poor and the slaves to build this country and now they continue to use who that are left and those who have been downsized .

Also there are those in many corporations that have always used the people as pawns in their game to reach the top , to be number one and when they reach that point they toss all the used people aside and bring in the fresh lower paid crew .

If it had not been for the workers none of these corps would have been possible , we made them and they broke us without conscience .

They are not in the business of spreading the wealth .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC