Anil Nauriya, who advocates before the Supreme Court of India, has added an important point (in the Comment section):
Regarding the arrest of a Consular official, the Vienna Convention requires that this may be done [in the case of a grave offence] “pursuant to a decision by the competent judicial authority”?
The question is whether even a PRE-TRIAL judicial warrant of arrest would be such a “decision”.
The focus in much of the discussion has been on the meaning of “grave offence”.
I would argue yet another aspect of the question : that the pre-trial arrest even of a Consular Official [without full diplomatic Immunity] is of doubtful legality and, in any event, had to be the subject of a pre-arrest hearing leading to a pre-arrest judicial decision on such liability for pre-trial and pre-indictment arrest.
Before such a pre-arrest hearing, all that the “competent judicial authority” could have done is to issue a summons and pass an order preventing the Consular official from leaving the US pending such a pre-arrest hearing.
The Deccan Herald reports that the UN legal office supports Khobragade’s claim:
” A United Nations agency has endorsed New Delhi’s claim that Indian Foreign Service officer Devyani Khobragade enjoyed full diplomatic immunity when she was arrested by the United States law-enforcement officials in New York on December 12 last.
The opinion of the UN Office of Legal Affairs (OLA) supports New Delhi’s argument that Khobragade enjoyed full immunity at the time of her arrest as she had already been accredited to the international organisation as a representative of India since August last year.
Khobragade’s lawyers have cited the UN OLA’s view in a court in Manhattan to counter the recent move by Preet Bharara, the US district attorney for southern district of New York, to dismiss New Delhi’s claim.
Stephen Mathias, UN Assistant Secretary General for Legal Affairs, on January 27 last wrote to India’s Deputy Permanent Representative to the international organisation conveying the UN OLA’s views on the issue. ”
He wrote that representatives of all members of the United Nations “to the principal and subsidiary organs of the United Nations and to conferences convened by the United Nations, while exercising their functions and during their journey to and from the place of meeting, enjoy the privileges and immunities set forth in Section 11 of the General Convention”.
Glad you picked this up.
I’d like to draw attention to a few considerations even apart from the UN immunities.
Regarding the arrest of a Consular official, the Vienna Convention requires that this may be done [in the case of a grave offence] “pursuant to a decision by the competent judicial authority”?
The question is whether even a PRE-TRIAL judicial warrant of arrest would be such a “decision”.
The focus in much of the discussion has been on the meaning of “grave offence”.
I would argue yet another aspect of the question : that the pre-trial arrest even of a Consular Official [without full diplomatic Immunity] is of doubtful legality and, in any event, had to be the subject of a pre-arrest hearing leading to a pre-arrest judicial decision on such liability for pre-trial and pre-indictment arrest.
Before such a pre-arrest hearing, all that the “competent judicial authority” could have done is to issue a summons and pass an order preventing the Consular official from leaving the US pending such a pre-arrest hearing.
This is independent of the issue of full diplomatic immunities arising from the UN assignments of the official concerned [both the prior temporary one and the subsequent permanent one]
Anil Nauriya,
Advocate, Supreme Court of India
Feb 12, 2014
Glad you picked this up.
I’d like to draw attention to a few considerations even apart from the UN immunities.
Regarding the arrest of a Consular official, the Vienna Convention requires that this may be done [in the case of a grave offence] “pursuant to a decision by the competent judicial authority”.
The question is whether even a PRE-TRIAL judicial warrant of arrest would be such a “decision”.
The focus in much of the discussion has been on the meaning of “grave offence”.
I would argue yet another aspect of the question : that the pre-trial arrest even of a Consular Official [without full diplomatic Immunity] is of doubtful legality and, in any event, had to be the subject of a pre-arrest hearing leading to a pre-arrest judicial decision on such liability for pre-trial and pre-indictment arrest.
Before such a pre-arrest hearing, all that the “competent judicial authority” could have done is to issue a summons and pass an order preventing the Consular official from leaving the US pending such a pre-arrest hearing.
This is independent of the issue of full diplomatic immunities arising from the UN assignments of the official concerned [both the prior temporary one and the subsequent permanent one]
Anil Nauriya,
Advocate, Supreme Court of India
Feb 12, 2014
UN is the other end of the dialectic.
@
Anil, yes, that’s an excellent point.
Why even go to the question of “grave harm” when there is no legality in issuing a warrant without a hearing in the first place?
As to “grave harm,” that might have been argued, if the prosecution had stuck with the “abuse” and “trafficking” charges, but they didn’t. They quietly dropped them and went only with visa fraud and lying to the government.
But that again poses problems.
If there was visa fraud, then the fraud was committed by Sangeeta Richard alone, or, at best, in cahoots with Khobragade.
But in that case, the charges for trafficking would have to be laid against the US embassy in India, which “trafficked” her! And that too after visa fraud was laid at her door, by Khobragade herself.
As to, abuse, I wonder what you would call “extortion” and “aggravated harassment” and “theft,” which are the crimes of which Sangeet Richard stood accused at the very time she and her family were being granted T3 visas?
I don’t think the GOI or Khobragade should be docile about this. These are very serious crimes and the GOI should extract its pound of flesh for them.
It is in no way in the American interest for criminal conspiracies to carry on in the State Dept.
American tax-payers are sick of it…
@Rajesh Raina.
Good point. I wonder if they laid a trap for the State Dept in some way?
@Rajiva.
Good cop UN, bad cop US.
Problem reaction solution. Trust me!
UN is the answer to all your problems. We will fix everything and everyone.
Yes. But, because that’s the dialectic, it doesn’t follow that the US is the good cop, either.
They are both just two faces of the Western elites.
That said, the sovereignty of states translates into decentralization, as long as the central banks are not controlled through money printing
Yes we will have a decentralized world so that every government is small, weak and unable to challenge our planetary government run by the UN.
There are two kinds of decentralization, in my opinion – one is good and the other is the UN-inspired one that will make world government easier.
The latter involves strengthening the sovereignty of sub-national states and integrating them into regional trading blocs, split off from the national level. Thus Tamil Nadu will be integrated into the SE Asian regional trading block and played off against the nation of India. Tamil Nadu has close ties directly with the US and Israel; nuclear plants are located there. It is a focus of investment and of NGO/church conversions.
To the degree that the sovereignty of the national govt restricts that development, it is an obstacle to the world govt.
Most of the secessionists fail to see that their goals fit in with the goals of the elites. Or they do see that and are happy with it. In other words, while pretending to fight world government – in order to attract the following of those genuinely opposed to it, they are actually just making money off of the movement and tricking it into the opposite direction from which it should go.
Sadly, many libertarian and leftist activists fit this category.
Hi. “R” is correct but only for one of the stages, the present stage. World government agenda is staged and evolving, and goes through break-make-break-make cycles in which real power is continually consolodated and aggreggated in to larger and larger centralization.
This happened over the past 100 years from the onset of WWI. From where I sit, I see that nation-states were necessary to create in order to break up the several large empires that the twentieth century inheritted. Illusion of soverign power was given to these new post-colonial nation-states but the central powers remained in the hands of those who controlled global money, global debt, and global narratives, such as, for instance what the world was subject to during the Cold War. The non aligned movement was in fact a controlled third choice made available to those not wishing to choose between the two Hegelian Dialectic. The world was craftily steered to maintain the peak of crisis conditions no differently than it is being done today. And so on….
Now nation-states are being weakend, yes some by the method “R” states, to be managed by supranational bodies in the interim, but the next stage is towards regionalization. it is documented by the rulers in their own handwriting. I am not making it up. Four large regions were/are planned, like the EU. The North American Union is another. The African Union and the Asian Union are the remaining two. Since we are still far away from that, smaller unionizing will be the natural baby-step in those regions under supranational control. It seems logical, if that agenda of Regionalization is to be pursued by these global power-brokers.
Here is a snippet of an interesting testimony from Mr. Norman Dodd which I documented in:
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/09/capitalist-conspiracy-world-government.html#Addendum
Norman Dodd speaks to the Regionalization Agenda in his testimony on “Regionalism” in 1978 before a committee created by the Illinois legislature.
Note that Norman Dodd’s statements reflect the context of his time and for the United States, which was during the period of the Cold war — but Regionalism is very much the agenda, and that can only happen when the soverignty of nation-states is further eroded piece-meal so that each now dependent nation is compelled into that Regional aggregate by the necessity of survival and mutual benefit. It is all orchestrated and sold to the public through crisis creation and “Problem reaction solution” as is also perceptively noted by “R” in his comment above. We cannot lose sight of the Hegelian Dialectic which is the principal modus operandi to orchestrate world government in baby-steps, and the Agenda 21 which is only one of the legal methods being employed to achieve some other aspects of the global governance agenda.
Excerpt from Norman Dodd:
Mr. Dodd: […] Now, the second experience that I would like to share with you… oh, and incidentally, it is the Ford Foundation’s grants which are responsible for the formulation of this idea of regional government, and also the idea that given regional government, we must, in turn, develop and accept and agree to a totally new Constitution which has already been drawn up, as was mentioned just a few minutes ago. [previous testimony] […]
Rep. Lucco : Fine. You’ve answered my question. Now, another thing. You took us back to 1908, and I came on the scene in 1912, about the time of the Balkan Wars, which you alluded to, and World War I. Now, today, and you said that we actually created — or “they”, whoever “they” are – actually created the situation of a war. Now that we have the…
Mr. Dodd : Wait, now. You deserve to know who the “they” are.
Rep. Lucco : I was going to ask you that.
Mr. Dodd : The “they” in this instance are the Trustees. . . were the Trustees of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. They were men who were prominent lawyers in New York; men like Nicholas Murray Butler, the head of Columbia University; also, and subsequently, Allen and Foster Dulles, as attorneys — that caliber of gentlemen.
[CDR Note: “Global Tyranny …Step by Step”, by William Jasper, quotes Allen W. Dulles from a UN booklet, Headline Series #59 – New York: The Foreign Policy Association, Sept-Oct, 1946- page 46… “There is no indication that American public opinion, for example, would approve the establishment of a super state, or permit American membership in it. In other words, time – a long time – will be needed before world government is politically feasible… This time element might seemingly be shortened so far as American opinion is concerned by an active propaganda campaign in this country…”]
Rep. Lucco : Then I’m trying to collate what you are talking about — 1912 — with 1978, the meeting at Camp David, the problems in the Middle East, the Sino-, or Chinese-Russian situation–are they now getting us ready for a third world war?
Mr. Dodd: My answer to that, sir, is that they have set forces in motion, and these forces cannot help but culminate in World War III. I happen to personally believe that it is possible to prevent it from working out that way, but I’m alone in my beliefs.
Rep. Hudson: Apparently you’re not alone, Mr. Dodd. […]
Rep Hudson : Mr. Dodd, I have one question. You mentioned a proposed new Constitution, or federal charter, for this country, sort of waiting in the wings, you might say.
Mr. Dodd : Yes.
Rep Hudson: Is that the one… I have heard tell of a Tugwell type. Is that the one you refer to?
Mr. Dodd : That’s it, sir.
Rep. Hudson : Thank you. All right, well, thank you very much, Mr. Dodd. We are grateful for your being here.
End Excerpt
Here is a link to learn more about What is Hegelian Dialectic:
humanbeingsfirst.wordpress.com/hegelian-dialectic-what-is-it/
and What is Agenda 21:
humanbeingsfirst.wordpress.com/agenda-21-for-dummies/
Thank you
Zahir Ebrahim
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
@Zahir. Another example of the Hegelian Dialectic here. Secessionist vs Regionalization movements. The NAU, EU, African Union etc will be used to consolidate only the police forces, currency and justice systems. But people will be very unhappy with regionalization. See the angry reactions already in EU. Problem, reaction, solution. When the regionalization has served its purpose to unify the trade rules, laws, currency and police then the hegelian opposite, the secessionist end will be offered as the solution. Small independent countries, ruled by puppets and people who think they are independent but are actually slaves to the global corporations. The UN will be using a lot of drones so that the puppets keep paying global carbon taxes, to prevent pseudo global warming. Research recent secessionist movements in US, start with the state of Vermont and see who is behind these and you will not be surprised. Best Wishes.
@Zahir. Another example of the Hegelian Dialectic here. Secessionist vs Regionalization movements. The NAU, EU, African Union etc will be used to consolidate only the police forces, currency and justice systems. But people will be very unhappy with regionalization. See the angry reactions already in EU. Problem, reaction, solution. When the regionalization has served its purpose to unify the trade rules, laws, currency and police then the hegelian opposite, the secessionist end will be offered as the solution. Small independent countries, ruled by puppets and people who think they are independent but are actually slaves to the global corporations. The UN will be using a lot of drones so that the puppets keep paying global carbon taxes, to prevent pseudo global warming. Research recent secessionist movements in US, start with the state of Vermont and see who is behind these and you will not be surprised.
http://vermontrepublic.org/the-small-nation-manifesto/
Very plausible, “R”. Thanks. And tt even makes logisitcal and administrative sense to have small municipalities flying their national flag, but nothing else is their own. Not the treasures under their soil, nor the laws on their books. Just like how the mafiosos divide up the territories among themselves. The false sense of patriotism could even be maintained when these “Secessionist” boundaries are drawn on the naturally divisive lines among peoples.
Best wishes,
Zahir.
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
@R, Zahir
Thanks. I agree that the “secessionist” movement is controlled.
Kirkpatrick Sale is a proponent of secessionism, from the left-lib perspective.
A little research shows some interesting lacunae in Sale’s writing on such seminal events as the 1960s student radical movement
http://mindbodypolitic.com/2013/11/10/the-cia-carl-oglesby-and-business-international/
The only thing on this planet that the globalists fear today a little bit is the true US government. That is why so many generals of the US military were made to resign. They have to be kept on their leash. That is why female soldier recruitment is at an all time high. It is easy to harrass officials by a sexual harassment case.
The commander in chief has all along had a birth certificate leash round his neck, facing immediate dismissal if he steps outside the line.
But inspire of all this the real US govt is still their nightmare. So US will go. The sentence has been written. But not before the rest of the planet has been set right. We are surely living in interesting times. If you are aware of what is going on, you are a true Deva, a one in a million who has managed to survive the intense brain washing going on all around.
There is nothing much you can do to change anything, just stay under the radar and use the force of mantras.
Mantras are a few words uttered by saints that have the power to change the universe.
Mantras are short, just a few words or sentences.
A mantra of few words chosen and spoken correctly can bring on a tsunami.
Say a few words.
Say a mantra.
R1.
@R
I do believe that.
I once cured myself of a severe depression by
reciting the Ave Maria continuously for a week.
Not a mantra, but it acted like one.
Also the Orthodox prayer, until a Hindu astrologer told me to stick with Hare Ram or Ave Maria, since the Orthodox prayer focused a little too much on the sinfulness of the sinner…
If it is a force, words chosen and truthful, your blog is a mantra. If it is force, words chosen, true and shining like the sun, every comment is a mantra.
R.
How true.
That’s the reason I don’t buy the argument that “major media presence” actually helps. I think in order to appeal to that many people in that kind of forum, you have to dilute or shade what you are saying. The medium kills the message.
That is why all the major activist keep quiet at crucial moments, as Zahir has masterfully and exhaustively documented.
In that way (mass activism) one loses spiritual power and even as one sways large numbers of people, one may be coming down to their level, rather than raising them up to one’s own understanding.
It’s not necessarily so but that is the danger.
By sticking to saying what you have to say and not tailoring it to the audience, you may offend and be censored in many ways, but the words end up attracting people or energies of a similar type.
This is my belief.
Or, perhaps it is wishful thinking…
Still, in the last few years, many strange coincidences and inexplicable synchronicities suggest to me that this teaching is true.
Hello. I just wanted to expand on “R”‘s statement: “The only thing on this planet that the globalists fear today a little bit is the true US government.”
I used to believe that. I used to believe that the American public wanted it too and only they could make it happen. In fact, when I started attending protest marches in San Fransisco in 2002 with my children and wife, I had the following belief which I even noted in the Preface of my maiden book in 2003 right after the ubiquitous FBI had come calling to my home searching for terrorists under my bed (and what transpired is in Part-1 of the book):
Begin excerpt
This is the premise behind my book. That once knowledge will come to the good people, the American public will not choose to remain (willfully) ignorant. It is only a matter of showing them the blood on thine hands that “all the perfumes of Arabia” will not wash off, and for them to accept it – beyond the expected initial denial (see Plato). Once that realization sets in, then all the chains in the world, invisible or not, will not hold them – as they fill the streets of America to take their country back. This is my expectation, my hope, and I fear the only hope for mankind in the short term. The American government must be reined in from visiting further ‘justice’ upon other defenseless nations. There just isn’t another choice. Since there are no rivals internationally that can dare impose their will upon the American empire. It is only the conscionable American public who must impose its democratic will upon the American empire.
The only “earthly” power at the moment that can immediately checkmate the “godly” ambitions of the Washington Neocons and their Zionist and Evangelical Christian allies in their nefarious agendas to transform the world for their own corporate, hegemonic, and crusading interests, is the awakened peoples of America.
Their time to act is now, when it is still possible for them to legally protest, when they still retain their constitutional rights, when the Patriot Act 2 has not yet been passed, and when martial law has not yet been imposed. Only they can bring to bear the pressure to which the White House responds. It is only in their consideration that the monopolar superpower in the world today cannot see body bags. Otherwise the Neocon planners would have no problems with body bags – a necessary evil they would argue, just as they argue today that a lifetime of war has now become a necessary evil, their “World War IV”. They certainly couldn’t care less for other people’s bodies – which don’t even get to be put in bags – just thrown about in lorries like dead cattle, or completely decimated at the altar of the Daisy Cutters. These images though conveniently hidden from the American public, are seen world wide. Why keep the American public chained prisoners in the cave of ignorance? Precisely because of the fear of their potential awakening and fighting back to reclaim their People’s Democracy. This is also the only way for the Americans to truly become safe from “evil-doers”
End excerpt
But ten years later — no one fcking cares!
Like Lila, sometimes I wonder why am I bothering. And the fable of the songbird which I noted in another comment on this website, keeps me going.
There is no such thing: “The only thing on this planet that the globalists fear today a little bit is the true US government.”
What is “true US government”? The record is clear, from Wounded Knee to Afghanistan to Iraq. 9/11 is not an abberation, it is the norm.
Please spare me this “true US government” abstraction. It looks good in story books, and for saluting the flag which begins in kindergarten in the United States. When I left engineering to pursue full time parenting, I started as parent volunteer in my children’s elementary school. And there I witnessed how the fiction of “good America” is fed to the kids. The result is seen in the ubiquitous United We Stand with empire. Even the US constituition was rigged at the very inception. I only understood how to analyze it after studying “Cracks in the Constituition” by Lundberg – a book that remains out of print and also found only with great difficulty in public libraries.
But you are right on, “R”, and also Lila, on keeping the faith — and it is always different strokes for different folks. Whatever works for you….
Thanks. This is a great conversation — after a long time I think I am chatting with adults 🙂
Best wishes.
Zahir Ebrahim
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
@ R.4 me 2@5
@Zahir @R
“True US govt” – do you mean, R, patriots in the army?
The patriot movement?
Ala Brandon Raub?
If you dig behind the Raub story, you will not like what you find.
Raub was a multi-level silver marketer. He was connected to the silver-bug community.
Some names I’d stumbled on before popped out when I dug.
I shoveled dirt back into the rabbit hole and just said to myself, “controlled opposition.”
I didn’t name names. Those names…some of them…are known to me from previous research.
Now what do I do? If I keep calling everyone “controlled opposition,” it is a no-brainer that someone will call me that too, and worse, with all the power and wiliness of their vast marketing networks.
In a contest between a lone blogger and a vast network, who will win? It is a shouting match. The loudest shouter wins.
So if I wish not to lose entirely, then I must keep my mouth shut and sing “he’s a jolly good fellow” when the latest “hero of liberty” or “patriot” is foisted on the dumb and dumber public.
After all, who am I? A foreigner…a brown-skinned immigrant…
Like it or leave it. So says the man on the street.
Well I do neither and it must grate on the locals.
If I were them, I dare say it would grate on me too.
After all, I should be grateful for the freedom to speak here.
To become irrelevant and marginalized is still better than being beheaded.
Or is it?
Are our heads worth so much to us? Shouldn’t we trade them in at this point?
By denying dissidents the honor of being carted off to jail or beheaded or shot, doesn’t the government deprive them of the moral force that actually might overturn a system of unjust power?
@Z,R
Cracks in the Constitution:
http://www.amazon.com/Cracks-Constitution-Ferdinand-Lundberg/dp/0818402792
From a review:
5.0 out of 5 stars Not a Sacred Book, May 2, 2013
By
John Bonanno (Hiram, Maine USA) – See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
Amazon Verified Purchase(What’s this?)
This review is from: Cracks in the Constitution (Hardcover)
Anyone with an interest in the fraudulent nature of our Constitution should read Ferdinand Lundberg’s great book, “Cracks in the Constitution.”
Some things I learned:
“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.” -Article VI
This convoluted sentence which is Article VI in its entirety, dictates that just about anything the government does is the “supreme Law of the Land” “any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” Which means that some congressman’s pork spending bill when passed has equal gravity as the Constitution itself! Every Executive Order is the Supreme Law of the Land. Every rule and regulation written by bureaucrats as the result of any law becomes the Supreme Law of the Land. And all of that legal verbiage is automatically Constitutional.
Aside: [I know there are those who will say that the above quote refers to the “Constitution” of “any State” and not the glorious and holy federal Constitution. That argument is a red herring because it misses the point. All laws are automatically considered Constitutional. This Section is ambiguous for a reason. The men who wrote this document were intelligent and skilled with language to a degree beyond most of us who are the products of what passes for education in our era. They knew laws would be passed in Congress that would fail to be in compliance of the Constitution. That is exactly what they wanted or they would have not been ambiguous about “Constitution” and simply would have written “Constitutions or Laws of any States to the contrary notwithstanding”. Furthermore, laws are to be merely “in Pursuance” of the Constitution. Something which pursues something is not required to catch it. And the fact remains that it has been long accepted that any cockamamie law passed or executive order or federal rule or act of the federal corporation becomes indeed “the supreme Law of the Land.” until ruled otherwise. Our Constitution, in effect, is thousands of volumes long. No human being can begin to understand it. It is a playground for lawyers bent on mischief.
The Constitution is a fraud with several technical outs that make the Bill of Rights a joke. The technicalities favor the government. This sacred document says a lot of pretty things in the Bill of Rights but it allows the government to go its sleazy way “notwithstanding.”
Not only that, Dear Birthers, the Constitution never defines “natural born Citizen” and there are many who define that holy state as falling on the child of a citizen of the United States notwithstanding (to use a constitutional term) that child’s place of birth. The argument against Obama essentially rests on English common law that reckons “natural born Citizen” on the father’s status (not American, in Obama’s case) rather than either parent or both parents or the mother’s status (undeniably American). This is why Birthers never so much as gave a thought to the fact that John McCain was born in the Canal Zone, which was not and is not part of the United States, since his father was a Citizen of the good old USA, and an Admiral too, as opposed to an African leftist. So all this energy spent on proving that Obama isn’t a natural born Citizen is a royal waste of time based on a misunderstanding of the Constitution (perhaps thinking it is some kind of an unerring holy document from God and Jesus, representing a kind of higher morality) and an archaic sexist interpretation of “natural born Citizen.”
The Constitution, in effect, allows anything to the government! This is why the Supreme Court can rule any damn nonsense they want (Bush v. Gore, corporations are people too) and see any damn thing in the Constitution that comes into their heads. Also, you may not know that the Constitution gives Congress the power to pass laws that are exceptions to review by the court, simply by indicating so on the law. That means Congress could pass a law doing anything in the world (like make ID chips mandatory, make dogs citizens, declare themselves royalty, anything!), tag it an exception to review by the Supreme Court and it would be permanently legal. (Read Article III, Section 2, paragraph 2 very closely if you don’t believe me.) Isn’t that wonderful? The Court can see anything in the Constitution it pleases and the Congress can hoist a finger to the Court whenever they want. So now you know that the problem is not with the Congress, the President, or the Court. The problem is inherent in the Constitution itself. How do you like this sacred silly putty document now? adapted from my blog […]
Lila:
I haven’t read this book and feel I now must do so asap.
Relatedly, in Language of Empire..
I came to the conclusion that the US system deliberately empowers lawyers to an unparalleled degree and that law and lawyers are a signal part of the problem.
True , real etc., Govt for the people, by the people.