Actually the attitude of creating special exceptions to the rule of law and adherence to principles is very old. Go back and look at how the legal system of the day handled those charged with witchcraft. Can you detect any difference between that and the treatment of those charged with terrorism? All of these matters come to the desire of those in power to have totalitarian control, regardless of the society's principles.

Benjamin Franklin warned about this when he wrote, "Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety". To which we may certainly add that those give up essential liberty temporarily are certain to lose it permanently.

The key point that you have made is that the contemporary, mainstream press is an empty suit without any core principles, just crass pecuniary interests. Freedom of the press was established so that those in power could be held accountable, so that liberty could be preserved. But meaningful freedom of the press requires a commitment to determine what is factually true. The mainstream media seem to profess the attitude that this is impossible to know; when it appears more likely that they prefer that no one really knows because it might impinge on access or profits. I saw elsewhere that media revenue is sharply down, and that the media look forward to political ad revenue pumping up profits during the next election cycle. This is a golden goose for the media which they will do anything to protect, and their timidity about disturbing it is destroying the republic.

There is far more at stake in all of this. The public must be vigilant about this to hold the media moguls and politicians to account.

This is the direct consequence of a corrupt pay to play system of electing public officials. Only the voices of those who fund political campaigns are heard and heeded. That this runs against the larger interests of the Untied States as a whole matters not to the obsequious officials who only care about the funds for their next election campaign. It is common knowledge that AIPAC has a number of wealthy members who give the maximum legally possible to political campaigns and media commercials based only on their single issue of interest -- Israel. AIPAC is a formidable lobby working against US interests.

George Washington warned about this kind of special interest pleading by domestic supporters of foreign interests in his farewell address. Historically, many republics have been fatally undermined by blind obedience to special pleading from narrow interests who hold the key to winning office, but whose methods and goals undermine the foundations of the society. Look who was most supportive of Bush the Younger's policies of: torture, invading Iraq, overthrowing governments, extraordinary rendition, domestic NSA spying, and other nefarious acts, all of which subverted the Constitution. It was especially supported by the neoconservatives, AIPAC, and Christian Zionists. For the politicians so suborned, they subverted the Constitution they were sworn to protect. Remember the role of the mainstream media in promoting all of this.

The US started behaving less like a republic and more like a corrupt oligarchy when the pay to play system began back in the 1870's. There have been some loophole filled reform efforts. The US is bankrupting itself financially, politically, culturally, and morally by continuing these policies. Once the US is bankrupt, the ability of to support any foreign project or entity will be at an end. Right now, the pumping of money to prop up the banking and investment business has created so much credit and cash, that the stage is set for hyperinflation in the future. This has the potential to render the US dollar worthless both domestically and internationally.

It would be nice if US politicians actually cared more about the long term viability of the US than about their own reelections. If they did, they would reform the campaign finance system, to end the pay to play system that is destroying the country. I doubt the ability of anyone in Washington to accomplish reform because they are creatures of the corrupt system that must be reformed. It is most likely that any serious reform effort will have to originate outside Washington, from either the public or the states.

For the supporters of Israel, it appears to be based on the assumption that the United States will always be able to support Israel; an assumption I find fallacious. The blind supporters of Israel are craven, but not stupid. They know that the US may be greatly diminished as a world power in as little as a few years, so perhaps this is a case of achieving what is possible while they still have influence over the government in Washington. Eventually there will be a conflict in Washington over this. The general public will not always support the misuse of precious resources to support foreign interests once the domestic situation becomes dire. This sets up an eventual collision course between the public who choose the politicians and the politicians’ financial backers.