Feds can violate the Constitution.
A federal judge, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker is dismissing lawsuits accusing the government of teaming with the nation’s telcos to funnel Americans’ electronic communications to the National Security Agency without warrants.
Read More http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/#ixzz0dT80LRTT
“[I]njuries that are shared and generalized —— such as the right to
have the government act in accordance with the law —— are not
sufficient to support standing.” Seegers v Gonzales, 396 F3d 1248,
1253 (DC Cir 2005).
Accordingly, these actions must be, and hereby are,
DISMISSED with prejudice. The various other grounds advanced by
the Unites States are not ruled on herein and form no part of the
basis for this order. Judgment shall be entered against plaintiffs
in both actions.
The Supreme court gives corporations unlimited rights to bribe
congressmen and Courts are blocking citizens from stopping illegal government
VERY DANGEROUS PRECEDENTS.
Paradigm read: The letter of the US law does not meet generally
accepted standards of Justice.
More on the Law Suit:
FBI Broke Law Spying on Americans’ Phone Records, Post Reports
The FBI and telecom companies collaborated to routinely violate federal wiretapping laws for four years, as agents got access to reporters’ and citizens’ phone records using fake emergency declarations or simply asking for them.
The Obama administration retroactively legalized the entire fiasco through a secret ruling from the Office of Legal Counsel nearly two weeks ago.
Read More http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/01/fbi-att-verizon-violated-wiretapping-laws/#ixzz0dV9WnlAW
The question becomes how far the US people want the FBI to go in pursuit
of terrorist that would use WMD when they get them.
As a boy I remember the FBI pre-Hoover disclosures Days.
Never wanted to be a Junior Gman, but I did join Captain
Midnight and got a decoder ring. Loved it till I got my first
secret message, "Drink Ovaltine" a secret commercial Uggh.
It was a huge disappointment.
But back then most people really did believed in the FBI.
The current FBI paradigm is focused on results.
And they want the agents to do everything to get
those results. If an FBI agent gets caught breaking the
law the FBI will prosecute them, so the unspoken rule
is if you break the law don't get caught, just don't
embarrass the Bureau.
And in a world of non-state actors willing to use
WMD, FBI's is a survival paradigm that will make sacrifices
of individuals to try protect America.
The Bureau's Armour has gotten dirty and rusty
at times. Nixon is a good example.
The FBI knew he was a crook, committed felonys.
And didn't arrest him, that would make an interesting
movie, The Gov. can't be arrested if they are on their
way to a Gov. meeting, or something like that.
So if the FBI had gotten a secret arrest warrant for
Nixon and executed it while he was on vacation say,
would the FBI have sent one man in relying on the
force of the rule of law to make the arrest?
Or surrounded the President and Secret Service so he couldn't
escape, its Nixon remember, and rely on the SS to honor the
Guess they probally would have just phoned it in, then let
the lawyers and Lobbyists fight and rewrite the laws.
Great movie idea.
But that didn't happen, but the FBI didn't let the President get
away with it either, one of the top FBI agents stepped forward
and became "DEEPTHROAT", for Woodard and Burnstein,
Post reporters who eventually brought down Nixon.
Deepthroat recently confessed his part in the Nixon affair.
Something I always wondered did he volunteer to be a
sacrificial lamb, in case he was discovered his career would
have been over. And how far UP the chain of command did the FBI
know about his releasing info on the Felon Nixon?
Or was he a lone wolf?
I wonder how congress would behave now if the FBI had
FBI arresting a sitting President certainly would have set
some new legal precedents.
Would that have changed the current paradigm now?
At sometime the Corporates discovered they could buy
almost any one for $1.5 million to $3 million dollars, and worked
out a way to give Congressmen these huge bribes legally.
Of course its nothing as coarse as an envelope of cash.
The bribes, err I mean donations are made, above board and the Congress
man is preped with a salable cover story of why its good for the
public to use banking loan sharks charging 402% Vig.
A little something, propaganda, a cover story to soothe the Congressman conscience.
And Lobbyist to hold their hand and explain the "RIGHT" VIEW, before
The key was de-regulation; de-regulate "loansharking" and
suddenly its legal. 402% percent,or VIG as the Mafia used to call it,
and they bought the Congressmen to de-regulate loansharking.
And more importantly to stop any Federal laws, or even prohibiting
states for passing anti-loansharking legislation.
And in the NEW BANKING REGULATION LAWS, now get that in the new
Banking "REGULATION" laws they prohibit States from passing anti-loan
sharking bills against the banks. WTF.
They Repealed Glass Segal Act , deregulate Banks to open the door
for the sub-prime swindle.
If its deregulated, the FBI can't touch them, its legal.
Where did this change from "The Customer is always right"
to "how bad can we legally screw the Customer".
Internet Anthropologist Think Tank: Greenspan father of the Sub Prime Debacle
Was the FBI paradigm pioneered by the Bureau or was it
the byproduct of the era?
Did Corporates pick it up from the Bureau?
How much influence does the FBI have on Corporate
integrity? Not by prosecution but by example?
One of the problems of the paradigm is the President
appoints the Attorney General, who is the FBI's boss.
And under Nixon his Attorney General ran the FBI.
Resulting in extraordinary action by "Deepthroat" and
still ensuring Nixon's downfall although the official
FBI were under orders to the contrary.
I suspect the FBI is the BEST under current conditions.
What we seek in security we give up in freedoms.
and there are guys out there that would use WMD.
Paradigm Intel says the world will have some form
of "terrorist" from now on, its the "DARK SIDE" of
Will USA ever get its freedoms and privacy back?
Is the "Dark Side" to "stopping terrorist attacks"
the loss for privacy for ever after?
Something else the World can thank that Asshole Bin Laden for.