Miami Police Trash 4th 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.

~ Fourth Amendment, U.S. Constitution

 

"Miami police announced Monday they will stage random shows of force at hotels, banks and other public places to keep terrorists guessing and remind people to be vigilant."

 

"Deputy Police Chief Frank Fernandez said officers might, for example, surround a bank building, check the IDs of everyone going in and out and hand out leaflets about terror threats."

~ Miami Police Take New Tack Against Terror, BREITBART.com

 

Here's the question: Do you have a right to privacy when you're in a public space, such as a hotel or a bank? Can you tell law enforcement that since you've done no wrong, since their cause is unreasonable, and since they're on a random show of force to "shock" and "awe" potential terrorists you do not wish to give up your right to be secure in your person and your right to privacy?

 

Lets face facts, here. This stunt by the Miami police department is nothing more than a police-state fear tactic designed to intimidate the general population. It's goal is to scare the citizenry into an eternal state of fear. Lets call a spade a spade. They're nothing more than terrorists, themselves. Can you imagine being in a McDonalds getting lunch when all of a sudden three APC's screech to a stop in the parking lot. Their back doors fly open and out storms a couple dozen shock troops. They surround the McDonalds, rifles trained on the doorways and any poor soles who happen to be in the parking lot. Once they feel they have the building surrounded and secured, they order you to interlace your fingers above your head and file out of the building one at a time.  In the parking lot, they pat you down, check your ID, and then hand you an anti-terrorism pamphlet. It notifies you that this was only an exercise. Until this point, you had no idea what was happening. Your heart was pounding in your ears because you were so scared. You had no idea if shots were going to be fired or if you'd be caught in the crossfire. You didn't know if you were going to live or die. You had no control. I don't know about you, but I'd be mad as hell!

 

Propaganda Matrix has a good article taking the ACLU to task on their giving the Miami police a pass on it's abusive actions by saying, "[its] more effective and more consistent with the Constitution."

 

Miami Model: ACLU Shysters Stab America In The Back Again
In response to the news that Miami police were going to conduct random sieges, checks of ID's and patrols of buses and trains, the ACLU stabbed America in the back again by shrugging their shoulders and stating that the new measures did not violate anybody's rights.

Awash in a Sea of Corruption

Is it me or is our government run by a bunch of crooks? Yahoo! News carried an article about Rep. Cunningham taking bribes from defense contractors.

[Calif. Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham's] plea comes amid a series of GOP scandals: Rep.     Tom DeLay of Texas had to step down as majority leader after he was indicted in a campaign finance case; a stock sale by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is being looked at by regulators; and Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff was indicted in the CIA leak case.

Our government seems to be awash in a sea of corruption. It's only a matter of time before it collapses. I certainly hope those identified in his 33 page guilty plea are charged, too. How can Americans ever hope to straighten out our wayward country if the persons we've elected and entrusted with the task of looking out for our best interests are so easily purchased. It is my opinion that this type of activity is more common than we think. This event serves as more evidence that special interest groups (including lobbyists) should be banned from the political process.

Federalist No. 58 and Redress of Grievances

NOTE: The following is a copy of an email I sent to We The People organization. They're an organization that is attempting to petition our government on four key issues. They're promoting and using the motto, "No Answers, No Taxes." in an effort to send their message. The group believes they have the right to withhold taxes until government answers them. I decided to post the email here to get comments from you...

Presented for your consideration:

While reading and researching for an article I'm writing about early U.S. history, I came across the following passage in the Federalist Papers that reminded me of your adventures with our federal government. I thought I'd pass this quotation on for you to see. While I'm positive that you've read this at some point in your research, I thought that it could not hurt to shed light on it. (One can never know for certain if you're aware of it.) In Federalist No. 58, James Madison wrote,

"The House of Representatives cannot only refuse, but they alone can propose, the supplies requisite for the support of government. They, in a word, hold the purse, that powerful instrument by which we behold ... an infant and humble representation of the people gradually enlarging the sphere of its activity and importance, and finally reducing, as far as it seems to have wished, all the overgrown prerogatives of the other branches of the government. This power over the purse may, in fact, be regarded as the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and salutary measure." (Emphasis added.)

It seems that Madison intended that the peoples' representatives would have the power to withhold moneys from the federal government by voting down or against any spending bills put before them, when tasked by their constituents via a petition for redress of grievances. To support this power, the first amendment made to the Constitution of the United States contained a restraint on Congress that it "shall make no law ... abridging ... the right of the people ... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I don't claim to be a great scholar, but, if asked, I would have to conclude that the people of the several states would need to instruct their state representatives to cut off the funding of the federal government until it responded to their petitions. I have to think that since the Constitution of the United States is a compact between the several states, you may be out of order by directly withholding moneys from the federal government. From what Madison wrote, it appears that you would need to task your state representative to vote against spending measures that support the federal government. Doing this directly may have you over-stepping your bounds. (The House of Representatives ... alone ... supplies ... the support of government.) Individually, your efforts would be daunting, but uniting your voice with the voices of other Americans throughout our country, your cause being just, would effectively shut down the government until it responds to your petitions.

If any of this holds water, one would have to conclude that the proper course of action would be to ask the people of the several states to task their state representatives, via petition, to vote against the supplying of support for the federal government until their petitions were addressed. If state representatives refused to cooperate, they would need to be replaced. Logic dictates this course of action in a representative form of government. People vote with their feet, people vote with their dollars, but when it comes to the federal government, people vote with/through their respective state representatives.

Debt will be the Death of the American Empire

Debt. There is probably nothing else that will destroy a nation faster than rampant debt. But, what is debt, you ask? To put it simply, it is spending today what you promise to pay back tomorrow. It's leveraging your future income against your present outgo. It's the exact opposite of having a savings account. At this time in American history, we have negative savings. According to a report on Personal Income and Outlays at the Bureau of Economic Analysis: "Personal saving -- DPI less personal outlays -- was a negative $32.0 billion in September, compared with a negative $158.0 billion in August." Americans can now boast to their grandchildren that we thought it wise and prudent to carry more debt, as a whole, than to have in our savings accounts. But, we're not the only ones on a spending spree. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, stated in his article at LewRockwell.com: "The budget bill fails to address the root of the spending problem -- this belief that Congress continually must create new federal programs and agencies. However, with the federal government's unfunded liabilities -- Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid -- projected to reach as much as $50 trillion by the end of this year, Congress no longer can avoid serious efforts to rein in spending."

Rep. Ron Paul casts a light on the question that few dare to ask. Namely, how are American Taxpayers ever going to be able to repay the trillions of dollars that were borrowed against them? It boggles the mind to try and imagine how much money we're responsible for repaying. According to a statement made by The United States Treasury Bureau of Engraving and Printing, if you had 10 billion $1 notes and spent one every second of every day, it would require 317 years for you to go broke. Conversely, if your government spent $10 billion, it would take you 317 years to pay it back if you could earn $1 per second, or $3,600.00 per hour. That, of course, doesn't leave you any money to purchase food, clothing, electricity, housing, etc. The good news is that you're not alone in repaying all that money. Right now, there are about 132 million working Americans to help you pay it back (see here on page 5 of the report). Take the $10 billion in the above example and divide it up amongst the 132 million working Americans and each is to repay $75.76. But, Mr. Paul is throwing around a figure of $50 trillion. That's going to be a little harder to repay because it works out to about $378,787.88 per person. Just to make this an even more ominous number to deal with, the Social Security website reports the new National Average Wage Index is $35,648.55 per year (or $17.82 per hour). So, with our "real-life" numbers, we can see that we will each pay off our personal liabilities in about 10.6 years. I don't know about you, but I'm going to be pretty hungry if I have to wait over 10 years before I can afford to feed myself!

Will we ever be able to pay off the money that Congress has signed our names to? Probably never. The interest alone on our national debt of over $8 trillion will eat us alive. So, what's the point, you ask? The point being made here is that we have got to stop our elected government officials from borrowing us into eternal serfdom. The above examples illustrates exactly why our founding fathers tried to guard against indiscriminate spending. They knew it would not take long for the people to spend themselves, directly or indirectly, into oblivion. After the Roman Empire fell, historians said that it was partially to be blamed on her rampant debt. The historians will say the same of our fall, too. Except this time, they will say that we didn't have the sense to learn from the lessons of history.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Happy [late] Thanksgiving! I was going to post this last night; but we lost power and phone right as I was ready to send it. I did manage to save it, though...

The Mayflower Compact

 

In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the Loyal Subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord, King James, by the Grace of God, of England, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, e&. Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia; do by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the Presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid; And by Virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the General good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In Witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape Cod the eleventh of November, in the Reign of our Sovereign Lord, King James of England, France and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini, 1620.

 

History behind the Mayflower Compact

 

The Mayflower Compact was signed on 11 November, 1620, on board the Mayflower which was at anchor in Provincetown Harbor. The Mayflower Compact was drawn up after the London and Leyden contingents started factionalizing, and there were worries of a possible mutiny by some of the passengers.

 

The primary argument was over the fact the Pilgrims were supposed to have settled in Northern Virginia, near present-day Long Island, New York. Northern Virginia was governed by the English. But if the Pilgrims settled at Plymouth, there would be no government in place there. The Mayflower Compact established that government, by creating a "civil body politic". In a way, this was the first American Constitution, though the Compact in practical terms had little influence on subsequent American documents. John Quincy Adams, a descendant of Mayflower passenger John Alden, does call the Mayflower Compact the foundation of the U.S. Constitution in a speech given in 1802, but he meant in principle more than in substance. In reality, the Mayflower Compact was superseded in authority by the 1621 Peirce Patent, which not only gave the Pilgrims the right to self-government at Plymouth, but had the significant advantage of being authorized by the King of England.

One Can Only Dream...

Here's something I'd love to read someday (soon, I hope)... but probably won't:

 

Article 1

RESOLVED, That Richard M. Nixon George W. Bush, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment to be exhibited to the Senate:

ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT EXHIBITED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE NAME OF ITSELF AND OF ALL OF THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AGAINST RICHARD M. NIXON GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, IN MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT OF ITS IMPEACHMENT AGAINST HIM FOR HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS.

 

ARTICLE 1

 

In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prevented, obstructed, and impeded the administration of justice, in that:

 

On June 17, 1972 March 20, 2003, and prior thereto, agents of the Committee for the Re-election of the President executive branch of the United States Government committed [an] unlawful entry of the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, District of Columbia invasion of the sovereign State of Iraq, for the purpose of securing political intelligence stability in the Middle East Region, possibly for the benefit of the State of Israel. Subsequent thereto, Richard M. Nixon George W. Bush, using the powers of his high office, engaged personally and through his close subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or plan designed to delay, impede, and obstruct the investigation of such illegal entry invasion; to cover up, conceal and protect those responsible; and to conceal the existence and scope of other unlawful covert activities.

 

The means used to implement this course of conduct or plan included one or more of the following:

1. making false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;
2. withholding relevant and material evidence or information from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;
3. approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counseling witnesses with respect to the giving of false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in duly instituted judicial and congressional proceedings;
4. interfering or endeavoring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, and Congressional Committees United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence;
5. approving, condoning, and acquiescing in, the surreptitious payment of substantial sums of money for the purpose of obtaining the silence or influencing the testimony of witnesses, potential witnesses or individuals who participated in such unlawful entry invasion and other illegal activities;
6. endeavoring to misuse the Central Intelligence Agency, an agency of the United States;
7. disseminating information received from officers of the Department of Justice of the United States to subjects of investigations conducted by lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States, for the purpose of aiding and assisting such subjects in their attempts to avoid criminal liability;
8. making or causing to be made false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States into believing that a thorough and complete investigation had been conducted with respect to allegations of misconduct on the part of personnel of the executive branch of the United States and personnel of the Committee for the Re-election of the President, and that there was no involvement of such personnel in such misconduct: or
9. endeavoring to cause prospective defendants, and individuals duly tried and convicted, to expect favored treatment and consideration in return for their silence or false testimony, or rewarding individuals for their silence or false testimony.

In all of this, Richard M. Nixon George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore Richard M. Nixon George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

 

Waiting for adoption by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.

---

Article 2

 

Using the powers of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposed of these agencies.
This conduct has included one or more of the following:

1. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposed not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.
2. He misused the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secret Service, and other executive personnel, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue electronic surveillance or other investigations for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; he did direct, authorize, or permit the use of information obtained thereby for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; and he did direct the concealment of certain records made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of electronic surveillance.
3. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, authorized and permitted to be maintained a secret investigative unit within the office of the President, financed in part with money derived from campaign contributions, which unlawfully utilized the resources of the Central Intelligence Agency, engaged in covert and unlawful activities, and attempted to prejudice the constitutional right of an accused to a fair trial.
4. He has failed to take care that the laws were faithfully executed by failing to act when he knew or had reason to know that his close subordinates endeavored to impede and frustrate lawful inquiries by duly constituted executive, judicial and legislative entities concerning the unlawful entry into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee, and the cover-up thereof, and concerning other unlawful activities including those relating to the confirmation of Richard Kleindienst Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General of the United States, the electronic surveillance of private citizens, the break-in into the offices of Dr. Lewis Fielding use of known forged documents and other erroneous intelligence, and the campaign financing practices of the Committee to Re-elect the President fixing of intelligence and facts to support the policy of war with Iraq.
5. In disregard of the rule of law, he knowingly misused the executive power by interfering with agencies of the executive branch, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Criminal Division, and the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, of the Department of Justice, and the Central Intelligence Agency, in violation of his duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

In all of this, Richard M. Nixon George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore Richard M. Nixon George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

Waiting for adoption by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.

 

---

 

Article 3

In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon George W. Bush, contrary to his oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has failed without lawful cause or excuse to produce papers and things as directed by duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives on April 11, 1974, May 15, 1974, May 30, 1974, and June 24, 1974 United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and willfully disobeyed such subpoenas. The subpoenaed papers and things were deemed necessary by the Committee in order to resolve by direct evidence fundamental, factual questions relating to Presidential direction, knowledge or approval of actions demonstrated by other evidence to be substantial grounds for impeachment of the President. In refusing to produce these papers and things Richard M. Nixon George W. Bush, substituting his judgment as to what materials were necessary for the inquiry, interposed the powers of the Presidency against the lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, thereby assuming to himself functions and judgments necessary to the exercise of the sole power of impeachment vested by the Constitution in the House of Representatives.

In all of this, Richard M. Nixon George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

 

Wherefore, Richard M. Nixon George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

 

Waiting for adoption by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.

 

...it's a little shaky in spots, but you get the point!

Protesting Without a Permit

This morning Yahoo! News carried an article about Cindy Sheehan resuming her anti-war protests. While reading the article, I ran across this sentence:

Those arrested got $50 tickets and authorities charged them with protesting without a permit.

Immediately my blood began to boil. How free are we if we have to ask the very entity that we intend to protest against for it's permission to protest against it? If the government didn't like the message the protesters were trying to send, could they be silenced by simply denying their permit to protest? I think so. We are not "free"... we haven't had unrestricted liberty for quite some time. I don't think this is quite what Patrick Henry had in mind when he said, "Give me liberty... or give me death!"

Official Announcement: New Government Seal

                             

Official Announcement:

 

The government today announced that it is changing its emblem from an EAGLE to a CONDOM because it more accurately reflects the government's political stance.   A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks, and gives you a sense of security while you're actually being screwed.

 

Damn, it just doesn't get more accurate than that!