Judges and Dedication

Now in the finale of this series on the American judicial system, let me first mark my dedication to Subrahmanya Vedam who served 43 years in a US prison on a wrong conviction. His only fault seems to be being close to a mleccha with a limited lifespan or "akala mrutyu". You can read all about him online and the sham trial that took place in 1983. It should raise a sky-high stink about the American judicial system which, like vaccines alleged to be causing autism, serves the few who are mighty or privileged.

None can guarantee that a similar conviction won't happen ever again, but we can agree it all depends on the judges. Because in the jury system, the judge interprets the law and decides on the punishment called incarceration after deferring the fact finding and sifting to the jury. It is like a college professor delegating his tasks to teaching assistants and reserving the grading part to himself. So often we hear the college professors and judges in the same line as they have similarities such as tenure and independence from close scrutiny.

You can surmise by now what I am going to say about the judges applying for professors as well. They both are elevated to the highest pedestal of a foundation that sits on a fragile framework of trust and reward. You might have heard of American professors inviting foreign students to study in their universities knowing fully well that the students pay their way for an OPT visa that enables them to work off campus. Neither the professors nor the judges have anything to do with OPT directly, but as you will find out they are conspirators in a strange way. Before an OPT can be issued, the professors have to give passing grades to the foreign student. If a student on OPT has to be deported for any reason, it has to be done by a judge. As simple as that!

The mainstream media paints the federal judges as either subservient to republicans or democrats based on their ascendance or in parlance nomination. Of course, they would never agree to subservience, but statistically speaking their judgements often reflect the puppet masters' wishes. The professors, on the other hand, depending on federal grants for their research activities, naturally, have to tow the party lines. The hue and cry about the vaccines causing autism is all about research and data that has been generated or gathered to fit a narrative of total control on nature vis-a-vis disease.

If you go through the thesis of Prof. Salk, who developed the first vaccine ever to prevent the spread of Polio by injecting de-activated polio virus, you will find that some percent of the people may have a reaction or worse die from them. It is like 6-sigma in a factory making advanced electronic chips where one in a million chips fail quality checks because of human error. Similarly people administering vaccines could be responsible for some of the adverse outcomes. Just like the economists tell you to follow the money, follow the germs and you will get the answers.

The judges believe they hold the ultimate wisdom about the law of the land. When you have legislators who pass a law on the value of pi, as they had done in Indiana a long time ago, you will have to appoint judges who agree with them. Any judge who says pi is an irrational number that can't be boxed in a finite value will have to look for a job in the real world, not in the citadels. Judges being elected in progressive communities like legislators are reflective of this sentiment.

Like some professors of the private institutions, the judges might say they are self-funded and not smooching from the taxpayer troughs. While this seems laissez-faire we have instances of professors faking data to promote the sponsors like in highly contested pharmaceuticals and electronics operating on patents. And judges bending backwards to please the cartels or organized criminals. In India this is called kickbacks such as when they found bags of currency in a Supreme Court advocate's guest-house. The grand jury system in the US is supposed to take care of this, but that is for another day.

However, we can talk about an Arizona judge relieving herself in stupor. The mainstream media dumbed it down by saying it is her husband's fault. The judge ended up resigning unapologetic as she is appealing to, shall we say, a higher calling! We shouldn't say all judges are alike and apply the same standard of jurisprudence. Some are sharp, others need prompting and almost all of them are witless.

With those few words, I rest my case.

Regards