NSA SPYING ON AMERICANS NEEDS TO STOP Supreme Court, KATZ v. UNITED STATES, 389 U.S. 347 (1967): a person has a constitutionally protected reasonable expectation of privacy; that electronic, as well as physical intrusion into a place that is in this sense private, may constitute a violation of the Fourth Amendment; that the invasion of a constitutionally protected area by federal authorities is, as the Court has long held, presumptively unreasonable in the absence of a search warrant -- However -- What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection...But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected Under our Constitution, it specifically, and unequivocally states that the United States Government is bound to the Supreme Law of the Land pursuant to Article VI: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. Furthermore, the 4th Amendment became -- Part of this Constitution pursuant to its ratification under the provisions in Article V. The purpose of that Amendment is clearly stated Under the Preamble, which states: in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added As required under our Constitution under Article VI: The Congress, The Courts, and The President, all swear an oath to our Constitution and by extension - to both Article VI and the 4th Amendment: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution. Now, the only thing the Government can defend itself with is that the supreme court has held that law enforcement may record the phone numbers that are dialed - thats it, nothing else. -- Supreme Court, Smith v. Maryland - 442 U.S. 735 (1979): The Court concludes that, because individuals have no actual or legitimate expectation of privacy in information they voluntarily relinquish to telephone companies, the use of pen registers by government agents is immune from Fourth Amendment scrutiny. Since I remain convinced that constitutional protections are not abrogated whenever a person apprises another of facts valuable in criminal investigations. Applying the standards set forth in Katz v. United States, 389 U. S. 347, 389 U. S. 361 (1967) (Harlan, J., concurring), the Court first determines that telephone subscribers have no subjective expectations of privacy concerning the numbers they dial. -- But as we all know, it is much more than the numbers [we] dial.....I guess if you give a dog a bone, they want the whole cow. Given these facts, it may become clear to you that the government has knowingly or ignorantly violated a basic right to privacy, that We the people created. Despite all of this, we have our Government, the Media, along with regular citizens calling people traitors for exposing these men and women who are at work to subvert the power of the People and pollute the Constitution with their deceptive tactics. You know, the constitution starts with We the People for a reason - not We the Government. If anyone is going to call someone a traitor, where does that label rightfully belong? “The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.” - Patrick Henry. If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. - Thomas Jefferson.
Posted on: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 09:58:31 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015