Skip to content

Question:

January 15, 2009

IF WE ARE GOING to continue on with ‘the state’ (as it is,) and the state continues to ostensibly be based upon ‘the constitution’ (for what it’s worth,) and it’s subjects (the idiots,) are to continue to submit to the authority of ‘the courts’ (those beacons of justice!) in determining the ‘constitutionality’ of things… is it really a good idea to also allow the existence of secret courts that say things like:

…the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures, contain[s] an exception for the collection of foreign intelligence information.

…when the fourth amendment contains no such exception — when the fourth amendment, in its totality, says nothing more than:

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.

… ?

Just asking.

New York Times: Intelligence Court Rules Wiretapping Power Legal [Via: GFA51]

Advertisements

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: