Friday, June 22, 2018
Text Size

Site Search powered by Ajax

How Do We Know When We are Living in a Police State?

senateBy Luke and Marti Hiken

One way of knowing if we are living in a police state is when criminal defendants do more time for lying to the police than they do for the crimes they allegedly committed.

Right-wing prosecutors can’t get juries to go along with their unsubstantiated accusations against everyone from Barry Bonds to Casey Anthony. Juries in both cases acquitted the defendants of the crimes they were accused of committing, but convicted them of lying to the police.
American atrocities throughout the world are so numerous that even the U.S. Justice Department is worried about the Texas refusal to comply with the Vienna Convention, wherein immigrants have a right to communicate with their consular offices prior to police interrogation. Texas’ refusal to recognize this right in any criminal case jeopardizes the protections that Americans need, particularly at this point, because of their criminal activity throughout the world. If Texas won’t allow Mexican defendants to speak with their consular offices, surely U.S. mercenaries and “military attaches” can expect comparable treatment. [1]
Anybody who speaks without a total grant of immunity to police, the military, or grand juries is a fool in this country. The state is quickly losing the ability to make the American people complicit in their crimes and depravity, so that all those in power have left is the sworn testimony of the police and military tribunals that “suspects” lied to them. At least it is becoming gruesomely obvious whom these lackeys are there to “serve and protect.”
Not since the notorious Madame Nhu of the puppet regime of South Viet Nam has there been such a corrupt, vicious symbol of female depravity. Today, our very own Hillary Clinton has surpassed the utter ruthlessness and cruelty of the classic Dragon Ladies of American racist comic books. The Secretary of Spite recently issued the most preposterous justification yet for using unmanned drone bomber airplanes on civilian populations in Somalia and Yemen: We are doing so in the “National Defense” because these countries pose a threat to U.S. citizens. [2]
Is there a human being in the entire world stupid enough to believe that Somalia or Yemen poses a serious threat to American security? Do those countries even have airplanes? Does Hillary and her Pentagon bosses truly believe that the masses of Somali horsemen are going to swim across the Atlantic and attack the shores of the Potomac.
No, of course not. The contempt that our military leaders have for the American people is so profound that they don’t even need to justify this unlawful slaughter of innocent civilians, all in the name of military corporate profit.
Hillary should simply run for president next term, and drop the lame “peacenik,” Obama. Why put up with a weakling like this president when she can “ride” General Petraeus-Betray-us, CIA head, home to victory? Why put up with weaklings when you have the strength of the despicable corporate oligarchs who spend their days murdering defenseless people throughout the world in America’s name?
Hillary’s entire political career has consisted of blindly following the most aggressive, rapacious policies of the military industrial complex, from NAFTA to Afghanistan. For, behind every trite speech about “peace” and “national defense” sits an arms manufacturer providing more weapons of mass destruction to sell to the monsters who wage war. 


[1] Medellin vs. Texas, 2008, 552 U.S. 491 (2008), the Texas Supreme Court refused to follow the Vienna Convention of 1963 on consular relations -- “A United States Supreme Court decision which held that while an international treaty may constitute an international commitment, it is not binding on domestic law unless Congress has enacted statutes implementing it or unless the treaty itself is "self-executing"; that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law; and that, absent an act of Congress or Constitutional authority, the President of the United States lacks the power to enforce international treaties or decisions of the International Court of Justice.” (Wikipedia)
[2] According to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s top legal adviser, deadly drone attacks are “consistent with its [the U.S.'s] inherent right to self-defense.” Inside Justice, March 26, 2011, “Legal Adviser Harold Koh Asserts Drone Warfare Is Lawful Self-Defense Under International Law,” see also Rick Rozoff’s article, 7-7-11, “Risk-Free And Above The Law: U.S. Globalizes Drone Warfare,”.

Marti Hiken is the director of Progressive Avenues. She is the former Associate Director of the Institute for Public Accuracy and former chair of the National Lawyers Guild Military Law Task Force. She can be contacted at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

Luke Hiken is an attorney who has engaged in the practice of criminal, military, immigration, and appellate law.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Subscribe via RSS or Email:

Will Trump Agree to Unify Korea Under Kim?

South Korean President Moon ...

Read More

Exposing Israel’s Self-indictments in Gaza Protests

In May 2018 Gaza demonstration...

Read More

King Donald

The president’s lawyers must...

Read More

Oval Office Apprentice

President Donald Trump has f...

Read More

Modern democratic states have no business with religion

The secularisation process bec...

Read More

Pence’s Hypocritical Speech to the OAS

In a speech this week to the...

Read More


Thanks to all of our supporters for your generosity and your encouragement of an independent press!

Enter Amount:



Login reminder Forgot login?


Subscribe to MWC News Alert

Email Address

Subscribe in a reader Facebok page Twitter page

Week in Pictures

Ramadan begins

2018 World Cup