Skip navigation

Tag Archives: United States Constitution

NSA Director Keith Alexander lied to the Congressional  House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI).  Why?

  •  The National Security Agency has acknowledged in a new classified briefing that it does not need court authorization to listen to domestic phone calls, a participant in the briefing said.
  • Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, disclosed on Thursday that during a secret briefing to members of Congress, he was told that the contents of a phone call could be accessed “simply based on an analyst deciding that.”
  • If the NSA wants “to listen to the phone,” an analyst’s decision is sufficient, without any other legal authorization required, Nadler said he learned. “I was rather startled,” said Nadler, an attorney and congressman who serves on the House Judiciary committee.
  • Because the same legal standards that apply to phone calls also apply to e-mail messages, text messages, and instant messages, being able to listen to phone calls would mean the NSA analysts could also access the contents of Internet communications without going before a court and seeking approval.

Congressional oversight committees or not the U.S. Department of Defense ‘s National Security Agency has determined that it has the right to spy on U.S. citizens without due process of law and with the consent of the Department of Justice and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) courts.

This violates the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment and Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

  •  Fourth Amendment

“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.”

  • Fourteenth Amendment Section 1.

Section 1. 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.”

While Federal Intelligence and Law Enforcement Agencies lie to Congressional Oversight Committees and American citizens, Edward Snowden continues to reveal accurate and incriminating allegations against  the United States Federal Government.

As charges of espionage are being leveled against Edward Snowden one has to wonder why charges of treason should not be leveled against the heads of the NSA, DOD, DIA, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the National Security Advisor.

I want to know why  the term ‘Militia’ in the 2nd Amendment of our United States Constitution has become a dirty word in our culture and politics. It is because of the 2nd Amendment that the Japanese Army refused to invade the Continental United States during World War II. The Japanese  Army was terrified that every home and dwelling would be bristling with guns to protect our country in a time of war. And they couldn’t have been more correct in their assessment. The State Militias were mobilized during WW I and WW II to protect our Homeland while our young and brave soldiers,  sailors, and airmen carried the war to our enemies’ very shores and boarders.

“The reserve militia or unorganized militia, also created by the Militia Act of 1903 which presently consist of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who are not members of the National Guard or Naval Militia.(that is, anyone who would be eligible for a draft). Former members of the armed forces up to age 65 are also considered part of the “unorganized militia” per Sec 313 Title 32 of the US Code.”

However, the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, provides for an unorganized militia of every able-bodied man and woman to be ready to defend the Homeland against any threat both domestic and foreign. This Amendment predates, and thus supersedes,  all Acts of Congress; especially the United States National Security Act, the establishment of the United States Department of Homeland Security, and the United States Patriot Act. Because the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution has never been amended by the tenants of the Constitution of the United States of America it supersedes all State and Federal laws and acts. The States are therefore empowered, under the Constitution, to organize militias to protect State’s rights as granted by the Constitution of the United States of America and to protect the principles set forth by the Declaration of Independence

“A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Article II Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States of America states:

“The President shall be Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in the executive Departments, upon any Subject on the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”

President John Adams, President Thomas Jefferson, and President James Madison make it perfectly clear in their communications that the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States is to guarantee each State’s individual rights to keep an unorganized militia which may be mobilized as an organized militia to protect the Constitution of the United States of America and to protect the sovereignty of each State and the United States of America as guaranteed by Article II Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States of America. That anyone, including the President, Vice-President, Executive Branch, Congressional Branch, or Judicial Branch of the United States Government may be considered as enemies of the “State”  if they exceed their powers as granted under the Constitution of the United States of America.

“And no law enacted by the Congress of the United States or the legislatures of said States shall supersede the rights of the citizens of these said States to form unorganized militias to protect and serve the Constitution of the United States to preserve our rights as stated in the Declaration of Independence.”

In order for the States of our Union to organize militias in a time of emergency it is imperative  each State guarantee a citizen’s access to any and all arms deemed necessary to meet the imperative threats for the security of said State’s citizens. The threat of individual rights and liberties in the United States has never been in greater peril from threats, both domestic and foreign. The growth and scope of the United States National Security Agency‘s powers to obstruct and invade our personal freedoms and privacy is unparalleled in our Nation’s history.

The States lost their rights of sovereignty when President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated  and the Union ceased being a Republic and the United States of America became the Federated States of America. The Federal Government was born and the States lost most of their rights as granted under the Constitution of the United States of America.

Then on July 26, 1947, President Harry S. Truman signed the National Security Act which stripped the States and individuals of most of their rights as granted under the Constitution. The Act was ratified by Congress on September 18, 1947 and enacted the formation of the Central Intelligence Agency from the newly formed Office of Special Operations, (the OSO evolved from the Army’s Office of Strategic Services and the Central Intelligence Group), as well as, the United States Air Force from the Army Air Corp as separate services. History tells us the National Security Act was signed by the President aboard Air Force One, nearly two months prior to the ratification of the Act by Congress. How could Air Force One exist nearly two months before the Act was actually ratified and officially created the United States Air Force?

Another question I have is “Why was the National Security Act signed by President Truman just twenty days after the Roswell UFO Incident?” What was so terrifying about the Roswell UFO Incident that the US Government felt a need to take such a Draconian action?

After 9/11 the USA Patriot Act was signed into law granting the Federal Government even more power while stripping States and individuals of more rights. The assault on our individual freedoms continue today as drones are used to spy on US citizens without due process as the U.S. strides closer to a police state.

While the Department of Defense, and its National Security Agency and Defense Intelligence Agency carry on domestic national spy programs on U.S. Citizens violating the Constitution of the United States of America and the Bill of Rights; the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation declares War on the White House, Director of National Intelligence, and the  Central Intelligence Agency.

The FBI investigation sanctioned by the Department of Justice of CIA Director General David H. Petraeus exposed his extra-marital affair which FBI officials identified as Ms. Broadwell leading to the immediate resignation of General Petraeus. The Department of Justice has now succeeded in removing one of very few military minds which has successfully protected this country from attacks by terrorists throughout the world.

The DOJ and FBI has succeeded in making this country far more vulnerable to terrorist attacks in the future by removing one our generation’s greatest military and counter-intelligence minds. They have also created a vacuüm which the DoD‘s NSA and DIA is all to willing to fill by increasing their violation of individual freedoms under the Constitution of the United States.

The White House, Director of National Intelligence, and the Congressional Senate and House Committees where caught totally by surprise by the charges levied against General Petraeus. The credibility of the entire Federal Law Enforcement, National Intelligence Agencies, and National Defense Agencies are now in question.

Many questions surrounding National Security need to be answered. First of all; Why did a Federal Agency not coordinate its investigation with all National Security Agencies since one of the most important Agencies was at the center of the investigation. This was the primary reason the Department of Homeland Security formed after 9/11. Yet all protocols to protect the citizens of this Nation were circumvented.

The damage done is enormous. The complete destruction and career of one of the United States most decorated military and counter-intelligence leaders over an extra-marital affair which employees, agents, and lawyers in the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation would not be able to deny themselves. Nothing was gained by this investigation while the interests of National Security have been highly compromised. The White House’s advisers and the President’s Cabinet will now be focused on what other nefarious investigations being conducted by the FBI while the DoD Agencies continue to violate the Constitution of the United States and the rights of private citizens with impunity.

But one thing which has become most prominently obvious. After investing hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in the Department of Homeland Security it  continues to flounder about with no real charter as an entity bloated of uncoördinated Federal Agencies and hundreds of billions of wasted tax dollars while providing no real services to this country or its citizens. The other obvious deficiency is the Department of Justices ability to effectively investigate and prosecute real national security threats to the citizens of this country.

The Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense need to be investigated by a joint Congressional National Security Committee to assess the charters of and necessity for some Agencies and possibly the existence of DHS as a Federal Government Entity.

The Federal Government of the United States believes that the United States Seal Teams are Federal Government Assets which are answerable only to the United States Department of Defense, National Security Council, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and President of the United States of America.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The members of all United States Military Departments and Agencies answer for their actions to “We the People”. The U.S. Government has assumed the mantle of the “Supreme Law of the Land”. Yet they have continually proven they do not have to answer to anyone but themselves, least of all to those who have given them the privilege to serve.

All members of Seal Team Six are National Heroes not U.S. Government heroes. They answer to, and only to, “We the People” whom they have given an oath to serve and protect under the Constitution of the United States of America. They will not be held accountable under oath to the Government of the United States of America under any legislative act concerning National Security unless the citizens of the United States deem they have violated their oath under the Constitution. All charges against Seal Team Six by the Department of Defense must be dropped immediately in the interests of National Security as the members of Seal Team Six are heroes of “The People”.

“We the People” have “a right to know” what our “Government” is doing in the interests of National Security to determine if said Federal Government Officials are acting in the best interests of the Nation under the Constitution. It is the people governed by the Constitution of the United States who determine what is in our best interests and those officials appointed U.S. Government officials which have not been elected to their offices by a popular vote and yet act as elected executives of the Government and feel unfettered by the Constitution of this country which guarantees the rights of all citizens who have elected their officials by popular vote.

“We the People” in order to form a “More Perfect Union” and not a “Federal Government” demand our U.S. Government to answer for its actions. If the currently elected Federal Government refuses to abide by the Constitution of these United States it is within our power to relieve them of their duties in any manner deemed necessary to return the Federal Government to operate under the tenants of the Constitution of the United States.

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.
%d bloggers like this: