Skip navigation

Monthly Archives: February 2012

It would seem the Department of Justice’s FBI‘s violation of civil rights has no limits as the Agency issues an RFI for a tool that can monitor social network data to identify and assess potential threats to the U.S. Please see the article at URL

The FBI has begun searching for a tool that will allow it to gather and mine data from social networks like Facebook, Twitter and blogs to access data and identify potential threats to the U.S.  This means they will be monitoring your and my Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google+, Microsoft Live, Yahoo, eBay, Craigslist and other profiles, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of blogs like this one to determine if we are a threat to the security of the U.S.

I challenge the Obama Administration, U.S. Congress, Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Defense, and the Supreme Court of the United States to justify their position to have the authority to threaten the security of our privacy as citizens of the United States of America and residents of the States, territories, and commonwealths under the Constitution of the United States of America and the Declaration of Independence of the Colonial Continental Congress?

With the Department of Defense‘s National Security Agency spying on all international communications including those emanating from and to the United States, including its territories and commonwealths, the Department of Defense has exceeded its authority to spy on US citizens, enterprises, corporations, businesses, foundations; and non-profit, philanthropic and religious organizations.

My paramount question is “Is the Government of the United States more interested in protecting its own security than the security of the Peoples of these United States, Territories, and Commonwealths?”


The Rise of the Homeland Domestic spy planes, hover spy drones, and very small, even micro spy bots industry is growing in use in the United States. These spy planes, drones, and bots are being used by domestic law enforcement agencies and private enterprises to spy on US citizens without any guidelines, regulations, or restrictions from Federal Authorities including the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security.

The fact that Federal, Domestic, and private institutions can spy on US citizens without limitations is a violation of your right to privacy under the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights.

” The Supreme Court has ruled that there is a limited constitutional right of privacy based on a number of provisions in the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments. This includes a right to privacy from government surveillance into an area where a person has a “reasonable expectation of privacy” and also in matters relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing and education. However, records held by third parties such as financial records or telephone calling records are generally not protected unless a specific federal law applies. The court has also recognized a right of anonymity and the right of groups to not have to disclose their members’ names to government agencies.”

“The Ninth Amendment has generally been regarded by the courts as negating any expansion of governmental power on account of the enumeration of rights in the Constitution, but the Amendment has not been regarded as further limiting governmental power. The U.S. Supreme Court explained this, in U.S. Public Workers v. Mitchell 330 U.S.75 (1947): “If granted power is found, necessarily the objection of invasion of those rights, reserved by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, must fail.”

It is important, when discussing the history of the Bill of Rights, to realize the Supreme Court held in Barron v. Baltimore (1833) that it was enforceable by the federal courts only against the federal government, and not against the states. Thus, the Ninth Amendment originally applied only to the federal government, which is a government of enumerated powers.

Some jurists have asserted that the Ninth Amendment is relevant to interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Justice Arthur Goldberg (joined by Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justice William Brennan) expressed this view in a concurring opinion in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut (1965):

The Framers did not intend that the first eight amendments be construed to exhaust the basic and fundamental rights…. I do not mean to imply that the …. Ninth Amendment constitutes an independent source of rights protected from infringement by either the States or the Federal Government….While the Ninth Amendment – and indeed the entire Bill of Rights – originally concerned restrictions upon federal power, the subsequently enacted Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the States as well from abridging fundamental personal liberties. And, the Ninth Amendment, in indicating that not all such liberties are specifically mentioned in the first eight amendments, is surely relevant in showing the existence of other fundamental personal rights, now protected from state, as well as federal, infringement. In sum, the Ninth Amendment simply lends strong support to the view that the “liberty” protected by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments from infringement by the Federal Government or the States is not restricted to rights specifically mentioned in the first eight amendments. Cf. United Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75, 94-95.

Subsequent to Griswold, some judges have tried to use the Ninth Amendment to justify judicially enforcing rights that are not enumerated. For example, the District Court that heard the case of Roe v. Wade ruled in favor of a “Ninth Amendment right to choose to have an abortion,” although it stressed that the right was “not unqualified or unfettered.” [6] However, Justice William O. Douglas rejected that view; Douglas wrote that, “The Ninth Amendment obviously does not create federally enforceable rights.” See Doe v. Bolton (1973). Douglas joined the majority opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court in Roe, which stated that a federally enforceable right to privacy, “whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals stated in Gibson v. Matthews, 926 F.2d 532, 537 (6th Cir. 1991) that the Ninth Amendment was intended to vitiate the maxim of expressio unius est exclusio alterius according to which the express mention of one thing excludes all others:

[T]he ninth amendment does not confer substantive rights in addition to those conferred by other portions of our governing law. The ninth amendment was added to the Bill of Rights to ensure that the maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius would not be used at a later time to deny fundamental rights merely because they were not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.”
“Bill of Rights (and 14th Amendment) Provisions Relating to the Right of Privacy
Amendment I
(Privacy of Beliefs)
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.Amendment III
(Privacy of the Home)
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.Amendment IV
(Privacy of the Person and Possessions)
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.Amendment IX
(More General Protection for Privacy?)
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.Liberty Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
No State shall… deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,
without due process of law.”

 It is obvious that Federal, State, and Domestic Law Enforcement Agencies, as well as, “private commercial and other institutions” are using aerial spy devices to spy on US citizens and State residents without due process of law.

It has come to my attention as of late that Federal, State, and municipal law enforcement officers and county sheriffs and marshals are using Homeland Security guidelines to suspend and violate the US Constitutional and State Constitutional Rights especially of the homeless.  When I use the term homeless I am not referring to illegal aliens. I am referring to US citizens who were, at one time, residents in various States. The State Constitutions are provided for by the US Constitution as specified in the following quote …

The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, part of the Bill of Rights, provides that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The Guarantee Clause of Article 4 of the Constitution states that “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” These two provisions give states the wide latitude to adopt a constitution, the fundamental documents of state law.”

Please note the phrase in the quote “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”  Please focus on the caveat at the end of the quote “, or to the people.” This is of extreme importance when understanding  the premise for forming the United States under “The Declaration of Independence“. The Declaration of Independence begins with the first paragraph …

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

The formation of a new government was justified in the next paragraph …

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Now “The Declaration of Independence” is not the law of the land but it has been referred to our Nation’s foundation for the Nation’s justification for existing. “The Constitution of the United States of America” is not justification for the formation of a National government but instead is a living and breathing document for the rule of law, with equality and justice, as protected and limited by the will of the people! This is explained in the following quote from “The Declaration of Independence” …

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

This brings us to the plight of the homeless. Since most of the homeless are US Citizens and former residents of States, Territories, and Common Wealth(s) have rights under the Constitution of the United States. The US Constitution begins with the following paragraph …

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

This introductory paragraph of the US Constitution states the ultimate objectives of the US Constitution Articles, Bill of Rights, and Amendments. However, recent guidelines released to Federal, State, County, and Municipal law enforcement agencies by Homeland Security have outlined particular behaviors that threaten the National Security of the United States. These Guidelines were posted …

On January 31, 2012, the Department of Homeland Security’s Behavioral Science Division pointed to the following as indicators of potential terrorism (please note – as you review the list – that some indicators are conservative, some are liberal and some are bipartisan):

  • “Reverent of individual liberty”
  • “Anti-nuclear”
  • “Believe in conspiracy theories”
  • “A belief that one’s personal and/or national “way of life” is under attack”
  • “Impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)”
  • “Insert religion into the political sphere”
  • “Those who seek to politicize religion”
  • “Supported political movements for autonomy”
  • “Anti-abortion”
  • “Anti-Catholic”
  • “Anti-global”
  • “Suspicious of centralized federal authority”
  • “Fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”
  • “A belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in … survivalism”

Given that most Americans fall into one or more of these categories, the powers-that-be can brand virtually anyone they dislike as being a terrorist.

Indeed, judges and prosecutors discuss conspiracies every day, and federal and all 50 state’s codes include specific statutes addressing conspiracy, and specifying punishment for people who commit conspiracies. (But surely judges, prosecutors and legislators are not terrorists.)

And Public Intelligence notes:

A flyer from a series created by the FBI and Department of Justice to promote suspicious activity reporting states that espousing conspiracy theories or anti-US rhetoric should be considered a potential indicator of terrorist activity. The document, part of a collection published yesterday by Public Intelligence, indicates that individuals who discuss “conspiracy theories about Westerners” or display “fury at the West for reasons ranging from personal problems to global policies of the U.S.” are to be considered as potentially engaging in terrorist activity. For an example of the kinds of conspiracy theories that are to be considered suspicious, the flyer specifically lists the belief that the “CIA arranged for 9/11 to legitimize the invasion of foreign lands.”

Law enforcement has used this as a premise for homeless people roundups for suspicion of being public nuisances; urban blight; suspicion of burglary and shoplifting; suspicion of drug abuse and dealing; alcoholism; under the influence of illegal or prescription drugs; mental disorders; squatters on public, private, and government properties; building disease ridden shanty villages; free-loading; panhandling; lewd and harassing behavior; abusing church or religious care institutions for shelter and feeding of the poor; and community undesirables.

Most of these law enforcement sweeps and roundups have violated homeless citizen rights under the US Constitution. In the United States, the civil liberties are guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the religious civil rights. Whereas the First Amendment secures the free exercise of religion, section one of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits discrimination, including on the basis of religion, by securing “the equal protection of the laws” for every person:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution preserves the following rights …

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution preserves the following rights …
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
The Eight Amendment to the United States Constitution preserves the following rights …
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
These civil rights should be protecting the homeless from shanty village sweeps destroying, confiscating, and dumping belongings without due process. The homeless should be protected from roundups, held in custody, and busing to relocation areas without due process. As well as, sweeps and expulsion from church services for the poor for sheltering and feeding during any religious services especially from Friday night to Saturday night and on Sundays during the Jewish and Christian Sabbaths.

Mitt Romney just won the Florida Republican Primary and low and behold Donald Trump jumps into the spotlight to endorse the Republican Candidate. Like this is a big surprise! Donald Trump has been cooling his heels on the sidelines until he was sure Mitt Romney could win a big primary.  Mr. Trump thinks his endorsement will catapult Mitt Romney in future primaries while on his way to the Republican National Convention. If I were Mitt Romney I would steer clear of Donald Trump. Mr Trump is a cut-throat businessman fashioned in the mold after the Robber Barons of the latter part of the 19th Century who pillaged and exploited this country, devastated by the Civil War, to plunge it head-long into the industrial age leaving death, misery, pollution, and destroyed lives in their wake.

The Age of the Robber Barons began in the Northern States during the Civil War when immense fortunes were being amassed and the Revenue Act of 1862 was passed. After World War I by 1918 the Internal Revenue Service had become a growing and influential agency. With the Civil War unprecedented growth 0f the Munitions Industry; Steel Industry; Coal and later Petroleum Industry; Railroad Industries; Construction Industries; Manufacturing; Banking and Financial Markets, and after the turn of the century the Auto Industry; and Electrical Power Industries; were followed by the beginnings of the Aerospace Industry. After World War I big business and Federal Government neglect for regulating Banking and Financial Markets and Industrial exploitation and pollution lead to the Great Depression and Prohibition. The Depression and Prohibition lead to lawlessness and violence on an unprecedented  scale. During this time the Federal Communications Commission was established

The answer to these problems was the growth of Federal Government spurred on by the advent of World War II. The Depression, Prohibition and World War II caused the creation and/or growth of the FBI, BATF, Department of Justice, War Department (later renamed to the Department of Defense), State Department,  and other Executive Branch Cabinet Agencies. After World War II the Cold War contributed to the continued growth of the DOD, Pentagon, Military, FBI, and the establishment of the CIA. The growth of Telecommunications and Aerospace Industries caused the creation of the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Transit Administration of the US Department of Transportation, as well as the National Security Agency.

With the growth of the manufacturing and carbon based energy pollution and the Nuclear Power Industry the Environmental Protection Agency and Nuclear Regulatory Commission were created.

The Drug Enforcement Agency was formed in 1973 to combat the growing threat of illegal drugs and smuggling operations. The US Customs Service established in 1789 split into the Customs and Border Protection Agency and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency in 2003 under the Department of Homeland Security and Transportation Security Administration was established in 2002, after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison established the Democratic Republican Party which was later renamed the Republican Party. The Republican Party was formed to keep the National Government from growing into a large Federal Government Monolith. However, Robber Barons like JP Morgan, Andrew Carnegie, John and William Rockefeller, Andrew Mellon, Charles Schwab, Leland Stanford, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and Donald Trump have done more to create big government than any other factions, parties, or organizations.

%d bloggers like this: