Incompetent FBI Stormtroopers Raid Address Vacated by Suspect Two Years Prior, Terrorize Renters

The incident occurred in March and is now the subject of a Fourth Amendment lawsuit.

The story is here.

If Senators Wyden and Udall Weren't Servile Cowards, They'd Tell America the Truth

And the rest of the slaves wonder in amazement at the senators' recent revelation discussed here that the Patriot Act is interpreted in a secret manner in order to hide from Americans their own government's routine violation of their Fourth Amendment rights:

"Today the American people do not know how their government interprets the language of the Patriot Act," [Senator] Wyden said. "Someday they are going to find out, and a lot of them are going to be stunned. Some of them will undoubtedly ask their senators: 'Did you know what this law actually did? Why didn't you know? Wasn't it your job to know, before you voted on it?' "

In an interview, [Senator] Udall said he wasn't even allowed to discuss details about the government's intelligence-gathering with fellow senators unless they go to a secure room in the Capitol designed to thwart eavesdropping.

Where is the real American who has the fire in the belly to tell the truth? The activists cower in fear, the senators cower in fear, everyone it seems is afraid and does NOTHING. Land of the free? What a joke.

Because none of you really believe in anything.

"Preserve, protect and defend the constitution, so help me God"? HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa!

Police in Austin, Texas, Deploy WASP to Reconnoiter Suspect's House

Story here in The Washington Post:

So the Texas agents did what no state or local law enforcement agency had done before in a high-risk operation: They launched a drone. A bird-size device called a Wasp floated hundreds of feet into the sky and instantly beamed live video to agents on the ground. The SWAT team stormed the house and arrested the suspect. ... Among state and local agencies, the Texas Department of Public Safety has been the most active user of drones for high-risk operations. Since the search outside Austin [in 2009] ... the agency has run six operations with drones, all near the southern border, where officers conducted surveillance of drug and human traffickers. ... In a 1986 Supreme Court case, justices were asked whether a police department violated constitutional protections against illegal search and seizure after it flew a small plane above the back yard of a man suspected of growing marijuana. The court ruled that "the Fourth Amendment simply does not require the police traveling in the public airways at this altitude to obtain a warrant in order to observe what is visible to the naked eye."

WASPs are made by AeroVironment, Inc.

You will have nowhere to hide from the tyranny, unless you stop it now.

Gabrielle Giffords' Democrats Promoted Libertarian as True Conservative to Divide Vote on her Right

The following excerpts come from the website of the Libertarian Party candidate, Steve Stoltz, whom the Democrat Party (yes you read that right) promoted in its literature as the true conservative running against the Democrat incumbent Gabrielle Giffords, shot in Tucson on Saturday, to bleed off votes on the right from the Republican challenger Jesse Kelly:

As a Libertarian, I am socially liberal, compassionate and humanitarian, but I am also fiscally conservative and principled.

The United States should have sound money that is backed by gold not the “monopoly money” of a fiat currency that is essentially counterfeited by the printing presses of the Federal Reserve which causes massive inflation.

As a Libertarian I believe that everyone owns their own body and can do ANYTHING they want with it, so long as they do not infringe upon someone else’s life/health, liberty or property (the 4rth amendment of the constitution says that people have a right to be secure in their person).

Government has no authority over the nature of a person’s consensual sexual relationships - even if they desire to engage in promiscuity and immorality.

The government has no right to tell a person what food they can eat, has no right to restrict their access to vitamin and mineral supplements, has no right to prevent a person from taking experimental drugs or getting medical treatments they feel will cure them of disease.

It is ironic that laws limit access to drugs, while the FDA has permitted poisonous/toxic substance like aspartame to be introduced into beverages.

Drugs like marijuana should be legalized, with increasing amounts of regulation and taxation applied to the more addictive drugs.

Society should lift prohibitions, but should regulate drugs the way alcohol currently is.

Lifting some drug prohibition could have a positive impact on national security.

Marriage is a legal contract protecting the rights of two individuals who decide that they want to live together and share property.

The state’s sole role is to enforce the property rights of the union, without placing stipulations on the nature of the union, whether it is between heterosexuals or homosexuals.    

The equal protection clause of the 14th amendment says that every US citizen shall enjoy the equal protection of the law.

Since no group should be given special treatment relative to over another, the military’s current policy of “Don’t ask don’t tell” is un-Constitutional, and should simply be reduced to “Don’t ask”.

The military should not expel a member who has already proven they can do the job merely because that person has identified himself/herself as homosexual.

I believe the government must respect the 2nd amendment, and place absolutely no restrictions on gun rights.

Although I am totally opposed to violence, I find it amazing that those who would place restrictions over a private citizen’s access to guns also seem to place blind faith in the integrity of the police, merely because they are agents of government.

Social security ... The system should be restructured so that younger persons invest in a privately held account, the way the government originally sold it.

I do not believe that it is moral for a wealthy person to hoard their wealth without trying to use it to help people.

[I]t doesn’t make sense for the government to document illegal aliens.

I do not believe that illegal aliens who give birth in the United States should instantly be granted citizenship (i.e. “anchor babies”).

I don’t believe illegal aliens should enjoy special access to entitlements relative to US citizens.

[W]hile it might be unfair for the children of illegal aliens who don’t pay property tax to receive a free education in US school systems, they nonetheless fall under the same category as the children of US citizens who receive a free education because their parents rent and don’t pay property tax.

The illegal alien problem is a multi-faceted social problem that can’t be solved merely by erecting a fence.     

Female reproductive rights/abortion – I am pro-choice.    

The focus of the military should be primarily to defend the nation’s borders against invasion.

As a Libertarian, I believe that in order for anything to be regarded as a crime, there must be a victim.  Civil fines for traffic violations that do not result in an accident or property damage or personal injury, and merely raise money for the state represent victimless crimes.

3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals Defends Fourth Amendment on Cellular Info

A federal appeals court on Wednesday rejected the Obama administration’s contention that the government is never required to get a court warrant to obtain cell-site information that mobile-phone carriers retain on their customers.

For more on the ruling against the Obama administration, which wants to spy on you without a warrant, just like the Bush administration did, go here.

6th US Circuit Court of Appeals Defends Fourth Amendment on Email

“The government may not compel a commercial ISP to turn over the contents of a subscriber’s e-mails without first obtaining a warrant based on probable cause”, the appeals court ruled. The decision — one stop short of the Supreme Court — covers Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee.

So, how about all that email the NSA has already illegally read?

Read more on the story at Wired.com here.

TSA Represents Danger to America, Says Roger Cohen

Roger Cohen for The New York Times says a word here on behalf of the Fourth Amendment, and seems to see in Homeland Security and the TSA an incipient threat to our American way of life:

The unfettered growth of the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA represent a greater long-term threat to the prosperity, character and wellbeing of the United States than a few madmen in the valleys of Waziristan or the voids of Yemen.

America is a nation of openness, boldness and risk-taking. Close this nation, cow it, constrict it and you unravel its magic.

There are now about 400 full-body scanners, set to grow to 1,000 next year.


The trouble is, Roger Cohen has commented half-approvingly (here) that the large-scale targeted killings of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan have been "more eloquent than words," killings made possible by the use of predator drones, which, before long, Homeland Security and the TSA might very well use here at home to invade the privacy of the American people as surely as do these scanners.

Consider that the very same predator drone used by the military was already tested out of Fort Drum over northern New York in the summer of 2009 to evaluate its utility to law enforcement, according to this story. Not a year later five such drones are on active duty flying missions over America's southern and northern borders for US Customs and Border Control, as reported here by TheHill.com. The technology for drones has advanced so rapidly that their size is down to 3' in diameter and they are virtually silent, meaning they are becoming increasingly attractive to law enforcement. Three examples of law enforcement use of drones in 2006 and 2007 have been discussed here at The Rutherford Institute. Obama has been described as "in love" with the things.

The airport scanners represent only one element of the new national security state Obama and his surveillance enthusiasts Janet Napolitano and John Pistole want to erect in America. They are equally eager to install thousands of cameras all over the country, and they are funding them. Security check points are going to spring up everywhere if they get their way.

We'll see how eloquent people think all this is when the government comes looking for Roger Cohen and other American citizens with a complete portfolio of your movements and associations in hand, matched to your naked image.

Representative Ted Poe (TX-2) On Unreasonable Search and Seizure

Quoted in TheHill.com, here:

"There is no evidence these new body scanners make us more secure. But there is evidence that former Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff made money hawking these full body scanners."

"[T]he populace is giving up more rights in the name of alleged security. These body scanners are a violation of the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures ... There must be a better way to have security at airports than taking pornographic photographs of our citizens, including children, and then giving apparent kickbacks to political hacks."

You rock, Ted.

Arrogant Flight Attendants Want Special Treatment On Enhanced Pat-Downs

But your choice is to get scanned virtually strip-searched or groped, that's it, against your 4th Amendment rights.

Calling enhanced pat-downs by the TSA "invasive," Deborah Volpe, Vice President of the Association of Flight Attendants Local 66 in Phoenix, says they want a different "crew pass" procedure for flight attendants and pilots, according to a story here from ABC15 in Phoenix:

"We don't want them in uniform going through this enhanced screening where their private areas are being touched in public."

"They actually make contact with the genital area."

"They've already contacted the ACLU."

"We just feel this pat-down is a little much."

If it's a little much for you, isn't it a little much for anyone? What makes union members so special?

Want to crash the TSA? November 24 is National Opt-Out Day. Refuse the scanners. Make them feel you up. And make sure to film it and upload it to YouTube.

Pass the word: optoutday.com.

Nat Hentoff Worries We Are Ignoring Obama's Gutting of the Fourth Amendment

Nat Hentoff is justifiably worried that Tea Partiers have ignored the threat posed by Obama to the Fourth Amendment:

Insofar as the tea partiers will continue to be an influence on the Republicans – having already been instrumental this year in re-electing some – I have not, as I've reported, seen much concern among them about our vanishing privacy (though I admire the tea partiers declared devotion to the Constitution).

Perhaps when the drones start scanning you in your own home you'll wake up, but by then it may be too late.

Read Nat Hentoff at The Village Voice here, or The Richmond-Times Dispatch here, or at World Net Daily. His latest on the Fourth Amendment for the latter appeared here.

Z Backscatter Vans Caused Snarled Truck Traffic in Atlanta This Week

According to this source, vehicles equipped with the same scanners now being deployed in airports to provide full body scans were tested by Homeland Security and the TSA in Atlanta this week at a weigh station on I-20.

More than 500 Z Backscatter Vans have been produced so far for use abroad by the military and at home by the regime, according to the report.

This story from September 28th did not identify the scanners as backscatter vans, nor does the photo provided in the story show a van which looks like the rolling surveillance unit depicted in this post.

Do you feel secure in your person, house, papers, and effects, against unreasonable search and seizure? Where is the probable cause, and where is the warrant issued by a judge, describing the particular place to be searched, and the particular person and the particular thing? Your Fourth Amendment rights are being shredded before your eyes.

The Original "Party of No"

The Bill of Rights:

First Amendment: Congress shall make no law . . ..

Second Amendment: . . . the right . . . shall not be infringed.

Third Amendment: No soldier shall . . ..

Fourth Amendment: The right . . . shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue . . ..

Fifth Amendment: No person shall . . ., nor shall any person be subject . . ., nor shall be compelled . . ., nor be deprived . . ., nor shall private property . . ..

Seventh Amendment: . . . no fact tried . . . shall . . ..

Eighth Amendment: . . . shall not be required . . . nor . . . imposed . . . nor . . . inflicted.

Ninth Amendment: . . . shall not be construed . . ..

Eleventh Amendment: . . . shall not be construed . . ..

Twelfth Amendment: But no person . . . ineligible . . . shall be eligible . . ..

No doubt written by "nattering nabobs of negativism".

House Healthcare Bill Nullifies 3rd, 4th and 5th Amendments

The Truth About the Health Care Act

Michael Connelly, Constitutional Law Attorney

(See http://michaelconnelly.viviti.com/ for a bio on Michael Connelly)

Well, I've done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business, and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the government.

However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people, and the businesses they own.

The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with! I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access, by the appointees of the Obama administration, to all of your personal healthcare and financial information, and personal information from your employer, physician and hospital: a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution, which provides protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.

If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed acceptable to the Health Choices Administrator appointed by Obama, there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a tax instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. There is nothing in the Health Care Bill that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax; which deprives us of property without the due process of law.

Three amendments out of the original ten in the Bill of Rights, are effectively nullified by this Health Care Act. Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution." If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway, I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.

For those who might doubt the nature of this threat, I suggest they consult the source, the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.

Michael Connelly, Retired Attorney

Constitutional Law Attorney

Carrollton, Texas