Excellent analisys, thank you !

I've seen a pattern that when someone lives in a country which has a
strong government / legal system / police force, the US will use pressure
through that legal framework if possible (exception is Russia where they
just don't care about US pressure). When someone lives in a "lawless"
country, one which has weak government, if the US military doesn't like
them they will not hesitate to pwn them with drones.

Your raising of the Ferguson murders is quite interesting because it runs
counter to this logic. I think the Ferguson murders are something that
the US empire has a strong interest in quickly stemming because there is
a risk that gun-toting psycopaths bent on establishing a "marter's legacy"
will form an informal alliance with the disenfranchised masses who see
dead cops as the lesser of two evils. This would be more difficult to
squash than a simple assasination market because in such a system there
is no central authority and no money changing hands, simply a tacit nod of
support from people who cannot and will not explicitly support murder or
take the risk of being charged as an accomplice or co-conspirator.
For a desperate psycopath with nothing to lose, a tacit nod of support
may be all it takes.




On 31/08/15 02:10, odinn wrote:
> > I've seen a lot of reporting on this. What occurred is unsurprising
> (if we assume that he was helping ISIS). It's entirely possible he
> simply became a horrible person helping ISIS, but that's not I want to
> write about. I'm not going to get into a whole "why was he helping
> ISIS or not" thing here, nor am I going to get into a debate about
> what some people like to call "laws of war."
>
> What should be concerning is that it's relatively easy for some
> ("three-letter agency" of "government X") to accuse someone of being
> associated with ("designated "terrorist group Y"") and thus make that
> someone immediately subject to ("law Z") ~ where that law either
> expressly contains a death penalty or a statement that the person is
> not afforded rights any longer at that point in the traditional sense
> (depending on the country, the law will be worded differently, but
> with the intention of the same end results). The end result to which
> I refer is that we'll see increasing numbers of people being dead by
> drone without any due process at all ~ in no small part because
> countries like the USA have abandoned due process anyway:
>
> In the detention and due process context (which I argue was the
> critical level at which failure to continue to uphold due process in
> essence meant at that point the state or its agents had clearly
> abandoned the system of law (or legal protections) upon which it
> actually relies):
> 1) http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/04/detention-challenge-denied/
>
> In a long post here (dated Sept. 8, 2014), I have argued that at the
> stage of the decision in Hedges v. Obama, the US government actually
> rendered the entirety of US law invalid. For my reasoning on this
> subject, please see:
> http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1s8t6v4
>
> In the death by drone context (by this point if it was not already
> apparent, it should be obvious that you can be killed in such a manner
> without due process even if you have done absolutely zero to harm
> anyone, and US courts will simply dismiss the cases:
> 2)
> https://www.aclu.org/cases/al-aulaqi-v-panetta-constitutional-challenge-
> killing-three-us-citizens?redirect=targetedkillings
>
> 3) One could also insert here any manner of ways in which the state
> kills innocent people, which have resulted in popular unrest, e.g.,
> Ferguson, etc.
> http://killedbypolice.net/
> In general, there is no recourse when this happens, or if an avenue
> exists in the courts it routinely results in dismissal of the case or
> a decision which exonerates the killer.
>
> The cumulative effect of these corporation-state decisions is that it
> turns people away from having any faith they might have had in the
> legal system as we know it. It's easy to say that we hate ISIS or
> that we think that the antiquated corporation-state model (US, UK
> being typical examples) are not desireable and are simply no longer
> solutions for the modern world; it's harder to find viable
> replacements for such systems because it takes a lot of work, but the
> answers are out there.
>
> Present day notions of governance, an observation:
>
> "The truth of the matter is that all things must eventually end. The
> modern state, lubricated by 1700s-era orts of Hegelian romantic
> nationalism, is no exception. Within this context, which has been
> carried forward from the 1700s to the modern day, the state attempts
> to assert a political legitimacy based primarily upon the concept of
> unity of a people within certain fictitious boundaries, which are
> primarily defended not through reason, but through violence and
> coercion (imposed upon those inside and outside the modern state's
> fictitious geographic boundaries). The notion of 'representation,'
> considered revolutionary and generally new and interesting at the time
> of the French Revolution, is now antiquated and does not provide an
> adequate framework for newer social and technological developments
> that have ensued well past the emergence of French constitutional
> monarchy and the United States of America in the period of 1776-1789.
> Indeed, by 1989, just 200 years after the beginning of the French
> Revolution, it was apparent that the notion of a strong, unified
> state, controlled by a leader or leaders that everyone would be
> required to follow, was (with more than a little finality) cast into
> doubt, and the notion of "citizenship" as something defined by the
> state was likewise in the early process of being discarded, as
> communities began to form online with the development of the internet.
> The notion that current systems of "government" should be preserved
> and maintained is nothing more than a desperate grasp at living in the
> past -- a past which we are now removed from by over 200 years!"
>
> Tim Patrick:
>> Wasn't he helping ISIS?
>>
>> On Sunday, August 30, 2015, psy <epsylon@???> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> http://www.csoonline.com/article/2976282/cyber-attacks-espionage/repo
> rts-ex-teamp0ison-member-killed-in-syrian-drone-strike.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM mailing
>> list: http://unsystem.net
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>
>
> - --
> http://abis.io ~
> "a protocol concept to enable decentralization
> and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
> https://keybase.io/odinn
> > _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>