"Mistrust those in whom the urge to punish is strong." Friedrich Nietzche

"Any and all non-violent, non-coercive, non-larcenous, consensual adult behavior that does not physically harm other people or their property or directly and immediately endangers same, that does not disturb the peace or create a public nuisance, and that is done in private, especially on private property, is the inalienable right of all adults. In a truly free and liberty-loving society, ruled by a secular government, no laws should be passed to prohibit such behavior. Any laws now existing that are contrary to the above definition of inalienable rights are violations of the rights of adults and should be made null and void." D. M. Mitchell (from The Myth of Inalienable Rights, at: http://dowehaverights.blogspot.com/)

Monday, July 22, 2013

Star Chamber in America

Does anyone remember their history and what the Star Chamber was? From the late Fourteenth Century until the mid-Seventeenth Century there was a court in England that met in secret. It decided if someone was guilty of a crime against the crown. There were no witnesses, or indictments, only government agents presenting their case to the court. The court, the Star Chamber, had the last word. It became a tool of the rulers--the English Monarchy--to deal with their political opponents.

Today, in America we have a Star Chamber, it's called the FISA Court (Foreign Intelligence Surveillence Court). There are no witnesses, no indictments, only government agents presenting their one-sided cases to the judges.

The FISA Court, along with the NSA spying on all Americans--the PRISM program--looking at all the emails, internet connections, credit card use, and any electronic communications from any American citizen to any other person, American citzen or not, in the world--makes for the real spector of tyanny in America.

The ancient Roman poet Juvenal asked the question: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? A literal translation is: Who will guard the guards themselves? Can we trust our civil servants who more and more each year become our civil masters--those who would rule us for our own good whether we like it or not--to not misue their powers? I think not. The recent IRS scandal has proven that.

One so-called Libertarian, Greg Gutfeld of The Five, a Fox cable news program, defends PRISM, saying they're not looking at the content of the emails and so forth. The PRISM program is like looking only at the outside of a letter mailed through the "snail mail" of the U.S. Postal Sytem.

But think. What would the colonists of the original thirteen colonies have thought if the English government, looking for anti-government revolutionaries (terrorists), had put agents in every post offices to write down the "to" and "from" addresses of all the mail. And if they had put check points on all the roads to stop and search all the people traveling to see if they were carrying mail, and then wrote down from whom and to whom the letters were being sent, without opening the envelopes. Do you think the colonists would have thought that to be a gross invasion of their privacy. Of course they would have.

Why don't Americans today--and I mean a huge majority of Americans--rise up and tell the government to stop this domestic spying without out probable cause, a Fourth Amendment violation.

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.

This is a pretty clear and straight foward statement of the rights of the people. No "unreasonable" searches without "probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched... ."

Is the collection of the so-called meta data by the NSA PRISM progam from all the people of the U.S. "unreasonable"? The vast majority of these people are not suspected of committing a crime, yet their private electronic business and messages are being collected and stored by the U.S. Government, without "warrants" being issued and without "probable cause," and without being "supported by oath or affirmation" of the government agents and agencies responsible for this domestic, police state spying.

The reason Americans don't rise up against this basic Constiutional violation--regardless of what the U.S. Supreme Court might think (they are a part of the FedGov problem after all)--is threefold.

First, the average American has been brainwashed by public schools into believing that the authority of government, the nation-state, is proper and good even when there is plenty of evidence that it is not.

Second, the U.S. government's monetarily guided international policies by large international corporation that have interfered in the governments of other nations has caused many people of the world to hate the U.S.-- so-called global terrorists or radical Islamic terrorists.

Third, the people are not just afraid of global terrorists. No, they are also afraid of the U.S. government. There are so many laws and regulations that if the U.S. Government had enough man power they could arrest and charge every person in America for one crime or another. And, as Thomas Jefferson said:  "When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty."

In the United States today we have more people who fear the government and very little to no fear by the government of the people. We have a state of tyranny which has not yet been fully crytallized but eventually, if not stopped, it will be and then we will have a full-blown police state. The NSA spying on all Americans is part and parcel of that tyranny and when--not if--we do become a full-blown police state all that collected data will become very valuable to the rulers.

Finally, I have to ask the question why all this spying by the NSA didn't detect and stop both the World Trade Center tragedy or the equally tragic, even if on a smaller scale, of the Boston Bombing? The lack of stopping these atrocities speaks volumes about the efficiency of the FedGov and their rights-violating agencies.

No comments: