We still are operating under the full force and effect of the FOURTH AMENDMENT. It has not been rep

That subject line got cut off. The last sentence is it has not been repealed.

AMENDMENT IV

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.

There is nothing legal about the wholesale collection of phone calls and electronic communications of Americans. There is a process that must be undertaken by the Congress. That hasn't happened. Only a bunch of unconstitutional legislation passed that has NOT been reviewed by the Judicial Branch.

Every single time someone tries to bring some of the garbage before the courts it has been ruled that the moving party did not have standing, or the government invokes "State Secrets" or "Special Privilege".

Case in Point:

US government invokes special privilege to stop scrutiny of data mining
Officials use little-known 'military and state secrets privilege' as civil liberties lawyers try to hold administration to account

Civil liberties lawyers trying to hold the administration to account through the courts for its surveillance of phone calls and emails of American citizens have been repeatedly stymied by the government's recourse to the "military and state secrets privilege". The precedent, rarely used but devastating in its legal impact, allows the government to claim that it cannot be submitted to judicial oversight because to do so it would have to compromise national security.

The government has cited the privilege in two active lawsuits being heard by a federal court in the northern district of California – Virginia v Barack Obama et al, and Carolyn Jewel v the National Security Agency. In both cases, the Obama administration has called for the cases to be dismissed on the grounds that the government's secret activities must remain secret.

Link

This is what they must do before trampling upon the Fourth Amendment:

What is the procedure to repeal an amendment to the US Constitution?

Constitution of the United States of America, Article V: The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article, and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of it's equal Suffrage in the Senate.

THis hasn't been done. So all of the secrecy and hiding behind the veils is all about the fact that what they have been doing is, ILLEGAL and UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

pay no attention to that man behind the curtain......

seriously, tho...it makes me sick knowing the NSA, or any other alphabet soup agnecy, can get away with this crap. it's none of their damn business what i say, what i read, who i talk to, where i am, what cheap, crappy motels i have to stay in, when i'm out on the road....and it damn sure isn't any of their business what i have in my possession. if they want to snoop around in anything, why don't they check their own garbage, first....hell...i bet at least half of the morons that work for those agencies have some seriously spooky skeletons in their closest...start with them.

Here is another hold over from the Bush Administration that the Obama camp still fought tooth and nail.

Obama Stands Behind ‘State Secrets’ in Spy Case

SAN FRANCISCO – Hours after the Justice Department announced it would limit its use of the state secrets privilege in new cases, the administration appeared before a federal judge here Wednesday and continued to invoke that defense in a closely watched spy case.

The litigation at issue, now five years old, tests whether a sitting president may bypass Congress and adopt a warrantless surveillance program, as President Bush did in the wake of the 2001 terror attacks.

“We need to protect information concerning the manner and methods by which we seek to detect and prevent a terrorist attack,” Justice Department special counsel Anthony Coppolino said Wednesday while arguing to a federal judge to dismiss the case on the basis of state secrets.

Link

This stuff has been going on for years. I will be back with more.

reply to post by GrantedBail


You are of course, making too much sense, therefore your arguments are invalid.

Only what "they" deem necessary is valid, any other argument, is brushed aside.

I have many times on these boards stated that we need to remove these idiots, all the while Obama got elected, AGAIN???!!!!

There is no hope for this once great and just country, as none of you will do anything but complain.

Many like myself have actively tried to do somthing about this, while everyone else sits at home on the couch and passes judgement, and once again, votes these same people back into power, and never take any personal responsibility.

I say screw it all, I give up, I am just gonna drink beer and watch it burn, because that is what you all want to happen, obviously.

Too bad......I actually served to help enforce this crap, I learned and tried to help cause change, too many only care about the Kardashians, or American idol et al.....

Might as well just enjoy the show, no good being the only idiot wasting your time trying to change it, nobody will listen or even contemplate any action the would actually work to force a much needed change.

reply to post by inverslyproportional


Don't be too hard on others. You are forgetting or are unaware of electronic voting machines that not only affect elections and propositions within the States but also affect the outcome of primaries and general elections.

All they have to do is get the local media going with the "polls" and what everyone "thinks" and "feels" and then deliver a electoral outcome that fits their narrative. I have watched it in California since 2004 after the Diebold tabulators were installed throughout the state.

You aren't gonna vote these fascists out. Never gonna happen. Two BILLION dollars were spent on the last presidential election. Who has that kind of money? Who is capable of going up against the machine??

Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

You aren't gonna vote these fascists out. Never gonna happen. Two BILLION dollars were spent on the last presidential election. Who has that kind of money? Who is capable of going up against the machine??

We The People

Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

Don't be too hard on others. You are forgetting or are unaware of electronic voting machines that not only affect elections and propositions within the States but also affect the outcome of primaries and general elections.

All they have to do is get the local media going with the "polls" and what everyone "thinks" and "feels" and then deliver a electoral outcome that fits their narrative. I have watched it in California since 2004 after the Diebold tabulators were installed throughout the state.

You aren't gonna vote these fascists out. Never gonna happen. Two BILLION dollars were spent on the last presidential election. Who has that kind of money? Who is capable of going up against the machine??

Money is not a factor, ignorance is.

No matter the amount of adds, Obama should have lost by miles. He won because people are too stupid not to lie to themselves, they want to believe, even as the truth smacks them in the face.

They live in the land they see on TV, where only the good guys get TV adds, so the fact X guy has so many, means he is the best guy.

"The People" are nothing but idiot sheep, let them burn, they are begging for it, hell they even vote the guy back in, that is actively burning it down right in front of them, because he says," no, no, I am only going to burn part of your house, so we can save the good part."

While never even thinking about the fact, they shouldnt be burning it at all.

Once again, let it all burn, I have beer, I Will take care of my family no matter what, I just feel bad for all the sheople, they think it is a fleecing, when it is a slaughter.

reply to post by GrantedBail


" Every single time someone tries to bring some of the garbage before the courts it has been ruled that the moving party did not have standing, or the government invokes "State Secrets" or "Special Privilege". "


You can Thank the Traitorist George W. Bush and the 9/11 False Flag for that . The Patriot Act Gave the Goverment the Power to Overide the Constitution all in the Name of Protecting the American People from the Boogeyman ie , Imaginary Terrorists . Is it No Wonder it has come to this Now ? The Excuses of National Security , Executive Priviledge , The Right to Know , All in the Name of the BIG LIE to CONTROL All of U.S..........

reply to post by GrantedBail


I agree. I have been upsetting some friends but I think that all of government (R & D) has been violating the 4th.

I know how this administration and the previous has justified it. I have done my reading. But finding justification for a criminal act doesn't make a criminal act any less criminal.

reply to post by inverslyproportional


You missed the point. Let me put it to you another way: Almost every state has no voter-verifiable audit trail. Whether those e-vote machines are used in the precinct or statewide with tabulators.

What that means is that we have no way of verifying the vote. Get it.

So the monied interests that own the media that tell us how everyone thinks and feels according to the "polls" well they just turn around and fix the voting machines to match what the monied interests want.

Get it??

You tell me how California didn't legalize marijuana for personal use?? That was a no-brainer. Then 10 days before the election Arnold signs a decriminalization law into affect. 10 days later, Marijuana bill doesn't pass. That stinks.

Also Prop 37 last election, labeling GMOs. You tell me how that didn't pass?? Oh, I see, the defeat was credited with the last minute media push. Puhleese. Everyone was down with labeling GMO.

Here's a perspective on the current situation from Daniel Ellsberg -

Edward Snowden: saving us from the United Stasi of America

Since 9/11, there has been, at first secretly but increasingly openly, a revocation of the bill of rights for which this country fought over 200 years ago. In particular, the fourth and fifth amendments of the US constitution, which safeguard citizens from unwarranted intrusion by the government into their private lives, have been virtually suspended.

The government claims it has a court warrant under Fisa – but that unconstitutionally sweeping warrant is from a secret court, shielded from effective oversight, almost totally deferential to executive requests. As Russell Tice, a former National Security Agency analyst, put it: "It is a kangaroo court with a rubber stamp."

www.guardian.co.uk...

Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

You missed the point. Let me put it to you another way: Almost every state has no voter-verifiable audit trail. Whether those e-vote machines are used in the precinct or statewide with tabulators.

What that means is that we have no way of verifying the vote. Get it.

So the monied interests that own the media that tell us how everyone thinks and feels according to the "polls" well they just turn around and fix the voting machines to match what the monied interests want.

Get it??

You tell me how California didn't legalize marijuana for personal use?? That was a no-brainer. Then 10 days before the election Arnold signs a decriminalization law into affect. 10 days later, Marijuana bill doesn't pass. That stinks.

Also Prop 37 last election, labeling GMOs. You tell me how that didn't pass?? Oh, I see, the defeat was credited with the last minute media push. Puhleese. Everyone was down with labeling GMO.

Correct on all counts.

Your not understanding my point, it is those same tax paying voters that aloud this to take place, because they are too busy with fakebook etc... to pay attention.

Everyone with a brain knew that the E voting machines are a fraud. Most folks couldnt care, as long as American idol is on, and fakebook still works.

"The People" have made this happen, through not caring, and not paying attention, until now, they all know it is messed up, yet still say how great Obama is, while he is destroying the entire country around them.

They are oblivious, and they are so, of their own free will.

They want to be coddled and taken care of, they dont want to think for themselves, they are as complicit as those actually doing these things.

"The People" are the problem, they coundnlt care, or be bothered to take control, as they are happy handing the reins off to anyone who will take control for them, because it is easier, and they are lazy.

reply to post by inverslyproportional


I am not sure how long you have been politically active but after the 2002 midterms when there were returns like 18180 in about 30 precincts in South Carolina and Texas, people started going sideways. I can't remember the exact number but it was identical. You want to learn about our corrupt voting system go to Bradblog or verifiedvoting. These people have been on the ground since before midterms 2002.

Senators and Congressman were contacted, repeatedly. No one did anything. They acted like it was a conspiracy theory or they didn't know what people were talking about. They all know.

Look there really is a "shadow government". One that they dare not speak of. Our "elected" representatives carry their water.

Isn't there a definition of what constitutes appropriate grounds for invocation of state secrets, or exdcutive privilege? I'd be very surprised if there wasn't even a shred of "this can't be used to cover personal responsibility for criminal activity" or something like that. How can one legally dispute the legality of the use of the state secrets defense? (Recognizing that you may need access to evidence not available outside of the domain of kangaroos. .. but remaining hopeful.)

reply to post by inverslyproportional

Might as well just enjoy the show, no good being the only idiot wasting your time trying to change it, nobody will listen or even contemplate any action the would actually work to force a much needed change.

That's how your country got where it is bud. Don't play into the game. They WANT you to think everyone is apathetic, they WANT you to believe change is never coming. Look around you, look at OWS and the various other groups that have propped up in the past few years. Your country is anything but apathetic.

Here's the thing tho, and it's a tough pill to swallow. Those morons, you know, the ones who don't think exactly how you want them to, and didn't vote the way you wanted them to..... their opinions and votes count too. They might not see eye to eye with you, but that hardly makes them morons.

no sir, only people who decide to not take part at all are the morons, there is no "voting for the wrong guy" there is only "voting" and "not voting".

The Bush Administration has sought to dismiss cases concerning these two programs at the pleadings stage, arguing that the cases raise legal claims that can neither be proven nor defended against without the disclosure of important state secrets that could jeopardize national security.7 District courts have split on the issue of whether these two programs involve state secrets,8 and although the Supreme Court has denied review in one Extraordinary Rendition case9 and one NSA wiretapping case,10 many cases are still heading for appellate review.11
The state secrets privilege dates back to the early 1800s,12 but the Bush Administration is using the privilege in new ways by seeking to dismiss entire categories of cases in hopes of keeping information regarding Extraordinary Rendition and NSA wiretappings confidential.13
But information regarding the two programs is getting out in other ways,14 illustrating that the Bush Administration’s frequent use of the privilege in entire categories of cases is not having its intended effect. Instead of keeping information regarding these two controversial programs out of public access, the Bush Administration is drawing more attention to the programs by its refusal to cooperate with the plaintiffs in these cases.15
Attention concerning these two programs is growing as media reports remain steady16 and more cases challenging the programs are filed.17
Three factors strongly suggest that by asserting the state secrets privilege in cases concerning these two programs, the Bush Administration has failed to keep information about the programs secret. First, information regarding Extraordinary Rendition and NSA wiretapping has been widely reported in the news media,18 forcing the Bush Administration to admit to the existence of both programs.19 Second, by filing complaints, plaintiffs are able to bring attention to these two programs and the alleged constitutional violations taking place. snip

linkreply to post by CrikeyMagnet


The precedent is the Reynold's case:

Supreme Court recognition in United States v. Reynolds[edit]
The privilege was first officially recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States in United States v. Reynolds, 345 U.S. 1 (1953). A military airplane, a B-29 Superfortress bomber, crashed. The widows of three civilian crew members sought accident reports on the crash but were told that to release such details would threaten national security by revealing the bomber's top-secret mission.[1][2][3][4][5][6][10][11] The court held that only the government can claim or waive the privilege, but that it “is not to be lightly invoked” and that there “must be a formal claim of privilege, lodged by the head of the department which has control over the matter, after actual personal consideration by that officer.”[1] The court stressed that the decision to withhold evidence is to be made by the presiding judge and not the executive.[1]
In 2000, the accident reports were declassified and released, and it was found that the assertion that they contained secret information was fraudulent. The reports did, however, contain information about the poor condition of the aircraft itself, which would have been very compromising to the Air Force's case. Many commentators have alleged government misuse of secrecy in this landmark case.[12]
Despite this ruling, a case might still be subject to judicial review since the privilege was intended to prevent certain, but not all, information to be precluded.[1

Having posted all of that, the bottom line is that the States Secrets privilege is being abused and being used to circumvent the Constitution. The Bush admin had this down. And the Obama admin grabbed the football and is running with it.

You can't challenge the constitutionality of these "laws" because they are not about to reveal their legal interpretations.

It is sheer madness.

Originally posted by GrantedBail

AMENDMENT IV

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.

Ok, who defines what is, in this case, 'unreasonable'?

You or them? If they define this as 'reasonable' then they can, surely?

Even better if they say 'it's reasonable and we don't need a warrant' they can bypass this entirely?

Or am I reading it wrong?

reply to post by khimbar


What the fourth amendment is all about is this:

You cannot be stopped, or searched, or have your home invaded, or have your personal papers gone through without a warrant.

A warrant may only be issued upon "probable cause". That means they have to believe and convince a magistrate that you are breaking the law. A judge is the only one that can issue a search warrant.

Look further ahead into the future and put this into context.

Earlier this year the Govt was on the Offense, making attacks against rights like those protected by the 2nd and 1st. Spreading disingenuous propaganda to manipulate the weak minded masses into hating freedom, etc.

Now look where we are just a few months later?

The govt is on the Defensive constantly now. They are under assault from the masses of pissed off people everywhere.

A huge pendulum swing in just 6 months or so.

This to me means the people at least have partial power left over their own opinions and what they post on the internet. Which is a good sign.