It is not Terror if We do It
"Secret blanket surveillance," "Obscenely outrageous"Al Gore, former USA Vice President,
New in the Website
The slide presentation states that much of the world's electronic communications pass through the United States because electronic communications data tend to follow the least expensive route rather than the physically most direct route and since the bulk of the world's internet infrastructure is based in the U.S., then this country works as an electronic hub for most communications. The presentation claims that these facts provide U.S. intelligence analysts with opportunities for intercepting the communications of foreign targets.
A top secret court order issued in April gave the NSA the power to demand that Verizon, which with more than 100 million subscribers is one of America's largest phone companies, hand over on an "ongoing, daily basis" information relating to phone calls made by all of its customers. The order includes information on calls made within the US and to parties outside its borders. The massive surveillance project was uncovered when the court order, made by the secret Foreign Intelligence Service Court (Fisa), was obtained by the Guardian. In 2006, a USA Today report claimed that the NSA was secretly collecting phone records of millions of customers of AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth.
The Obtuse (T)Reasoning of Civil Servants
"It is legal, I obtained a Court order," summarizes the core statement made by Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence James Clapper.
I must give some credit to Mr. Clapper. As the picture below shows, he wasn't laughing while he uttered this lie. Certain laws and court rulings are illegitimate. A law may pass through all the tedious processes of legislation; still it can be illegitimate, demanding automatic disobedience by the public. No government can pass a law violating Human Rights, which are International Law since 1994. No government operating under the Criminal Law system can legislate laws claiming to prevent a future crime.***
The real crime is accusing someone of "membership in an unidentified organization" and "being a security threat." I read that time and again in the claims made by the State of Israel in Court, and can understand only one thing: "This man is innocent." He committed no crime. He is illegitimately persecuted by the authorities.
Oppressive laws designed to benefit the few while violating the many cannot be accepted as legitimate. They are legal in the same way that the Nazi laws were legal, but they are not legitimate.
A closely related fact is that governments often rely on the ignorance of their citizens; this ignorance is easily supported by an irrelevant educational system controlled by the same governments. How can they expect the People to obey laws that are not taught? Are we still living in the days of the Roman Empire and its obsolete legal principles? I refer to ignorantia iuris non excusat (a.k.a. ignorantia legis non excusat and ignorantia legis neminem excusat) a legal principle whereby ignorance of a law does not allow one to escape liability. It sounds like the ultimate state-entrapment technique ("I legislated that two minutes ago! You are guilty!" The government said to the citizen who stepped on a cockroach).
The USA Government assumes that it can safely fool the People.
President Obama cannot claim that this is an isolated case perpetrated by an ill-prepared civil servant that stepped out of his legal boundaries. The Obama Codex was disclosed on the evening of February 4, 2013, by Michael Isikoff of NBC News. Issued by the USA Department of Justice, it deals with policies related to the USA drone war, including the government’s justification for killing American citizens. The 16-page memo was given to Congress in June, but is not the final Office of Legal Counsel memo that news organizations have sued to obtain. The Codex claims that high-level administration officials may order the killing of senior operational leaders of al-Qaida or an associated force even without evidence they are actively plotting against the U.S. In order to approve the assassination, the civil servant must determine that the target is an imminent threat, that capture is infeasible and that the operation is "conducted consistent with applicable law of war principles." In order to undermine the propagandistic definition, let me remind the reader that a third-generation, 16-year-old American citizen was assassinated in such a fashion while sitting in a coffee shop. There is no proof that he was even remotely linked to any wrongdoing.
The Drones Terror is as illegitimate as the current affair. Both are chilling testimonies of the USA Government disregard for all the values presented in its Declaration od Independence. Is the USA a democracy? Is it peaceful? Is it honest and just? Is it better than the Soviets were?
President Obama, you are too busy reading my emails; thus I don't want to steal more from your time with this article except for reminding you a few words: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
"It's called protecting America," reacted to the publication Dianne Feinstein, the Democratic Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
"It is called violating the People," a boy answered while pointing at the naked king.
"And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light" (2 Corinthians 11: 14)
* "NSA slides explain the PRISM data-collection program." The Washington Post. June 6, 2013. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-collection-documents/
** "NSA collecting phone records of millions of Verizon customers daily." The Guardian. June 5, 2013. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order
*** Criminal Law, also known as Penal Law, the law pertaining to crimes and punishment. The laws comprising this topic regulate the definition of offences found to have a sufficiently deleterious social impact and impose punishments on them. However, the law does not impose restrictions on society that physically prevents people from committing a crime in the first place.
My articles on the web are my main income these days; please recognize my efforts by donating or buying a copy of The Cross of Bethlehem, or Back in Bethlehem.