No products in the cart.

News

FBI Says That Citizens Should Have No Secrets That The Government Can’t Access

eyeinsky1

This article was written by J.D. Heyes and originally published at Natural News

The police and surveillance state predicted in the forward-looking 1940s classic “1984” by George Orwell, has slowly, but steadily, come to fruition. However, like a frog sitting idly in a pan of steadily-warming water, too many Americans still seem unaware that the slow boil of big government is killing their constitutional liberties.

The latest sign of this stealth takeover of civil rights and freedom was epitomized in recent Senate testimony by FBI Director James Comey, who voiced his objections to civilian use of encryption to protect personal data – information the government has no automatic right to obtain.

As reported by The New American, Comey testified that he believes the government’s spy and law enforcement agencies should have unfettered access to everything Americans may store or send in electronic format: On computer hard drives, in so-called i-clouds, in email and in text messaging – for our own safety and protection. Like many in government today, Comey believes that national security is more important than constitutional privacy protections or, apparently, due process. After all, aren’t criminals the only ones who really have anything to hide?

In testimony before a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee entitled “Going Dark: Encryption, Technology, and the Balance Between Public Safety and Privacy” Comey said that in order to stay one step ahead of terrorists, as well as international and domestic criminals, Uncle Sam’s various spy and law enforcement agencies should have access to available technology used to de-encrypt protected data. Also, he believes the government should be the final arbiter deciding when decryption is necessary.

What could go wrong there?

Find more articles on the police state at PoliceState.news

Government, at all levels, is responsible

During the hearing, TNA reported, technology experts warned the panel that giving the FBI limitless access to the personal electronic data of Americans would open it up to exploitation by “bad actors.” But Comey was having none of that.

“It is clear that governments across the world, including those of our closest allies, recognize the serious public safety risks if criminals can plan and undertake illegal acts without fear of detection,” he told the committee.

“Are we comfortable with technical design decisions that result in barriers to obtaining evidence of a crime?”
So, in essence, Comey like many before him, especially since the global war on terror was launched – believes that, in the name of national security Americans ought to give up more of their individual and constitutional rights because that’s the only way we can be adequately protected.

Perhaps realizing that his Senate hearing testimony was public, Comey gave the Constitution a passing glance, noting that the government should respect the “requirements and safeguards of the laws” and the country’s founding document. However, as Americans now know, spy agencies during the past two presidential administrations have been tasked increasingly with conducting warrantless, unchecked surveillance of Americans’ electronic data and communications.

But all of this is not on men like Comey and Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Congress bears its share of responsibility, too.

This is the way it is – shut up and take it

When such activities of the National Security Agency were exposed in 2013 by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, many in the media and among the American electorate were quick to blame the agency, as if it was somehow acting out of rogue instinct.

The reality is, however, that the agency is tasked to perform its duties either by statutory law (think the USA Patriot Act) or by presidential directive (think Bush’s order after 9/11 to conduct warrantless surveillance).

“We are not asking to expand the government’s surveillance authority, but rather we are asking to ensure that we can continue to obtain electronic information and evidence pursuant to the legal authority that Congress has provided to us to keep America safe,” Comey said during the Senate hearing.

What does all this mean? It simply means that at every level, government considers its own citizens hostile.

Oh, and there’s nothing we can do about it.

Sources:

thenewamerican.com

nytimes.com

naturalnews.com

0

Brandon Smith

Oath Keepers Merchandise

8 comments

  1. “Oh, and there’s nothing we can do about it”

    Starting with the last first. It is not only our choice, but it is our duty to remove all in any position who serve within our governments – state and general (federal) who do NOT keep the Oath, and the duties DELEGATED and assigned by the US Constitution to the different branches.

    It is important to realize that removing those who are domestic enemies or Traitors to the USA in no way is “going against” our government as they are NOT “our government” but are put into place to do specific put-into-writing-duties. They are hired, elected, contracted, etc but they are NOT THE government, nor are they our nation, that is the US Constitution, the state Constitutions, and all Americans.

    Judge Thomas M. Cooley: “”Legislators have their authority measured by the Constitution, they are chosen to do what it permits, and NOTHING MORE, and they take solemn oath to obey and support it. . . To pass an act when they are in doubt whether it does or does not violate the Constitution is to treat as of no force the most imperative obligations any person can assume.”

    As Dr. Edwin Vieira says: “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides…

    The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights…
    The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.

    … the famous case Norton v. Shelby County… The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”

    And that applies to any (and all) governmental action outside of the Constitution…”
    What are the defining characteristics of a limited government? They are its disabilities; what it does not have legal authority to do. Look at the First Amendment… What does it do? It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion. But how does it do that? I quote: “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press” etcetera. “Congress shall make no law;” that’s a statement of an absence of power. That’s a statement of a disability.”

    And again here saying

    “Americans would have had to understand and enforce their Constitution. You notice I say Americans, not the Congress or the Supreme Court, because who is the final arbiter of this document? [holding a copy of the Constitution] It is not Congress, and it is not the Supreme Court. It is “we the people.” Read the thing. How does it start? “We the people do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States”; not “we the politicians,” not “we the judges.” Those people are the agents of the people. We the people are the principals.
    The doctrine is very clear that, being the principals, we are the Constitution’s ultimate interpreters and enforcers”. (end quote) We the people are the Constitution’s ultimate interpreters. (Dr. Edwin Vieira, http://www.constitution.org/mon/vieira_03225.htm )

    But not sure that you believe this, then here

    Abraham Lincoln: “We, the people, are the rightful masters of both congress and the courts – not to overthrow the constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution”

    It is important to understand that the authorities delegated to general and state employees – be they elected, hired, contracted, etc are in writing for all to read and understand the agreement. Plus it is backed by a personal guarantee with the Oath that those who serve within our governments in ANY position that they understand exactly what they are agreeing to, plus they swear they will support and defend the US Constitution before orders of any superiors or the duties of the position they occupy.

    Thomas Jefferson to Wilson Nicholas: “Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction.”

    James Madison: “Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.”

    James Madison, Federalist 14: “In the first place, it is to be remembered, that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any”.

    Alexander Hamilton: “Every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”

    James Madison, Federalist 46: “The Federal and State Governments are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, instituted with different powers, and designated for different purposes… They must be told that the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone; and that it will not depend merely on the comparative ambition or address of the different governments, whether either, or which of them, will be able to enlarge its sphere of jurisdiction at the expence of the other. Truth no less than decency requires, that the event in every case, should be supposed to depend on the sentiments and sanction of their common constituents.”

    James Madison: “The ultimate authority resides in the people, and that if the federal government got too powerful and overstepped its authority, then the people would develop plans of resistance and resort to arms.”

    James Madison, Federalist 57, wrote that Congress “can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends, as well as on the great mass of the society.”

    What this all boils down to is that it IS our duty to remove any person, any number of them, or all of them who serves within our government if they are working to destroy our nation and sovereignty – and they are.

    Since Election Fraud unlawfully and illegally bypasses the legitimate voice of the people, and recall is a joke; those that serve within the other branches as corrupt or spineless, it is now up to the Militia to LAWFULLY and CONSTITUTIONALLY remove them, charge them, prosecute them for their crimes up to and including Treason and *Terrorism against the American people.

    It IS the Militia that is as constitutionally described as “being necessary to the security of a free State” that;

    — Enforces the US Constitution and each state’s Constitution,
    — Enforces and keeps the “Laws of the Union” (which are constitutional laws ONLY),
    — Protects the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and
    — “suppresses Insurrections and repels Invasions”.

    There is no other constitutionally mandated and assigned group other then the US Constitution who has the LAWFUL authority here within America per our own duties and part of the”contract” and compact that makes up our government within OUR nation.

    Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Papers 28: The militia is a voluntary force not associated or under the control of the States except when called out; [when called into actual service] a permanent or long standing force would be entirely different in make-up and call.

    John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of the United States 475: “To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.”

    *28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.

    They need to be removed.

  2. Recently court rulings have established that corporations retain the same rights as individuals one could assume that means businesses too. Here are some ‘secrets’ for you FBI, a rent to own business in Bradford, Pennsylvania conspires with known felons to steal appliances to boost profits probably the original appliances are hot too. Not to mention using deceptive business practices to push the sale, verbally saying one thing, but really,, That means these appliances are actually stolen twice once before the sale once after the sale.

    1. “Recently court rulings have established that corporations retain the same rights as individuals…”

      Once again, it is NOT those that serve within our courts that are supreme, it IS the US Constitution. Just because a/some/all judges say it does NOT make it so, or law, or a regulation, etc. Judges are people, they can be as corrupt as any other person, and within the last few decades are as corrupt or worse then the regular politicians who sell themselves and our nation to the highest bidder.

      Judges can, and do, commit Treason, and by what happens as a result of their decisions, First Degree Murder, and even *Terrorism against the American people, the US Constitution.

      *28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.

      Thomas Jefferson: “…To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps… The Constitution has erected no such tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruption of time and party, its members would become despots….”

      Justice Potter Stewart: “The 4th Amendment and the personal rights it secures have a long history. At the very core stands the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion.” <– Which backs the US Constitution about warrantless anything being done against the people, about SWAT teams and cops breaking and entering peoples homes unlawfully, NSA spying which is (I believe) treasonous since it, and the people implementing, enforcing it are/is being used to destroy our legitimate government from within.

      John Adams: “It would be an absurdity for jurors to be required to accept the judge’s view of the law, against their own opinion, judgment, and conscience.”

      If it is "absurd for jurors to accept the judge's view of the law", why would we accept their "interpretation" of the Supreme LAW?

      U.S. vs. Dougherty, 1972: “The pages of history shine on instances of the jury’s exercise of its prerogative to disregard instructions of the judge.”

      16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256: “The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it’s enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law, and no courts are bound to enforce it.”

      That is why it, the US Constitution is (and state Constitutions are) put into writing for all to read, to learn, to follow when there is doubt.

      It is important to remember the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL THAT IS IN PURSUANCE THEREOF IT is the Supreme LAW of this nation, and that IS put into writing.

  3. the time has come to declaw/defund the FBI, DHS, IRS, CIA and NSA. We Americans are far better at defending ourselves and our liberties. How about funding that Obama???

  4. That is so upside down! The Government should have no secrets the public can’t access!
    If there’s nothing to hide there’s nothing to fear! So why can’t we see the text of the TPP until it has been signed for 10 years!?

    The Government should fear the people NOT the other way round, they are public servants! They are our representatives. Except they aren’t! Which means we don’t have any! We have none who will act in our interest and it shows! Represent.us

Comments are closed.