Fighting Crime With Crime
Why our heroes don’t need to wear masks, capes, or leap from buildings in a single bound.
Every newsletter on MYLIFEplus25 is public and free to everyone, but we ask for your support. Please consider becoming a patron now to help fund our ongoing legal efforts that dare to speak truth to power. This isn't journalism, it's activism! And these efforts are only possible through the support of good people just like you who believe that change is possible.
Please take a moment to subscribe to my podcast on one of the following channels:
Apple Podcasts:
Google Podcasts:
https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy81NThjMWE5MC9wb2RjYXN0L3Jzcw==
Spotify:
And follow me on Twitter here: Follow @lifeplus25
Thank you and I hope you enjoy today’s post.
—
When we think of crime fighters we might think of fictional characters from the Marvel Studios or DC Comics universes. Or maybe we think of our favorite rogue cops or operatives from cinematic blockbusters like Lethal Weapon, Bad Boys, or the more recent Fast and Furious franchise. The oldest reference to “crime fighter” that I've been able to find dates back to the 1920s from J. Edgar Hoover’s G-men, or perhaps from the Justice League from Marvel. From there they inevitably became our childhood heroes.
Wonder Woman, Superman, and Batman are to this day universally popular and cross-culturally known. Many of us still possess vivid memories of the dangerous stunts and acrobatic feats both attempted and achieved with capes, masks and a false sense of invincibility. These were exceptional beings providing a much-needed service to society. Their counterparts or nemeses were always the obvious villains, those out to cause imminent harm to the good, law abiding citizens of our small but growing worlds. We overlooked the fact that our idolized heroes were also criminals. Or, if the term “criminal” seems like too harsh a term for the good intentions at the base of their efforts, then, at the very least, we can agree that they were operatives working outside or extra-officially above the law. Actually, not so different from how our government fights crime on the international stage – espionage, vigilante-style arrests, torture, imprisonment and sentences without due process – or the general way in which unelected state operatives independently determine what constitutes “criminal” in any given situation or moment in time. The unofficial message through action being: in order to fight crime one must be unhindered by the burdensome limitations of the law.
Rogue Cops spraying Protestors Source Anarchist agency.com
Essentially a working truth being reinforced daily by the not-so-secret actions taking place throughout the highest echelons of the federal government. Long before the National Security Agency (NSA) was the center point of our collective ire we were regularly inundated with ample reasons to hate the CIA, FBI, or the DEA for their secret missions, illegal arreses, and general disregard for the sanctity of life. Things like torture, kidnappings, and sanctioned hits were always re-packaged for public consumption as “necessary efforts to combat (insert terrorism, drugs, criminality, or some other perceived threat).” All of which presented us with the underlying question of how to deal with government agencies and programs that operate outside the system of checks and balances established by the Constitution.
The very question recently addressed by John W. and Nisha Whitehead in a piece published by the Rutherford Institute is one we need to confront for a myriad of reasons:
How do you hold accountable a government that lies, cheats, steals, sidesteps the law, and then absolves itself of wrongdoing?
Unfortunately, the tragedy of 9/11 was coöpted by immoral actors who sought to instill illegal government activities such as mass- surveillance, torture, and murder on the international stage and, domestically speaking the militarization of law-enforcement all under the pretext of “keeping us safe.” Where National Security went from being a concept or goal to an excuse for the improprieties and horrors that were implemented at Gitmo and countless other blacksites around the world.
Prisoners in Guatanamo Bay: Source Ahora.cu
What our government has essentially said through the creation of every secret agency, blacksite, weapon, experiment, or surveillance program that operates beyond our reach or knowledge is that the rule of law is a quaint notion for academia or propaganda, but certainly not for the real world of geopolitical affairs. Law, they would have us believe, like accountability, is burdensome and unnecessary. What is necessary, however, is maintaining the illusion that the rule of law is sacrosanct. Which explains why there is never a shortage of politicians willing to preach on the need to protect our way of life through any means necessary. The argument being that these efforts are necessary to ensure that the light of our liberties never dims domestically.
Yet, a closer look at the behaviors being tolerated from actors in law- enforcement show the same unwillingness to be subjugated to oversight or the rule of law, something that is very much happening domestically. Recent events present us with countless examples of vigilantism, abuses of power, corruption, and in general, rogue officers and operatives repeatedly emulating the very vigilantism we see on the big screen or stage of international affairs. The message being, that in order to fight crime they must be allowed to operate outside the confines of constitutional guarantees for suspects, or the rule of law for all.
Bat Symbol : Source scifistockerexchg
Basically, they want the same deference as Batman since they essentially see themselves as providing the same service. The problem, however, aside from the obvious fact that both the fictional superhero and the real life agent need to seriously commit to therapy, is that real life plotlines are not written with protagonists with impeccable morals and unwavering character. The reality of our criminal justice system is a flawed operation where who you are seems a lot more relevant than what you may or may not have done. A system that rewards arrests and convictions over adherence to the rule of law or, for that matter, truth. And because of which the remedy before us is what it has always been: transparency, oversight, and a firm adherence to our Constitution and the rule of law. Something politicians are hesitant to voice as crime is once again a hot topic for voters.
—
You are currently on our free public list, for the full experience click here to be a subscriber and have full access to all posts.
—