Paper On The Unconstitutionality Of The NSA's Warrantless Spying Of Americans

The following article is disturbing enough regarding the NSA's illegal spying of Americans. * However, imagine what your average American citizen would do if they found that they were being illegally tracked by way of a satellite for most of their lives, while everything that they did was videotaped and archived. This outrageous violation of the 4TH and 5TH Amendments happens all the time, yet only a small percentage of those being illegally spied upon are ever made aware of it.

*They'd be angry enough to start a civil war.

And while the NSA will be loathe to admit this, in all likelihood, if every American is not being watched in such a way at present (remote neurally monitored by way of satellites & super computers located at the NSA's headquarters in Fort Meade, Maryland), they most certainly will be in the near future, as part of the New World Order's use of the NSA -- to keep close tabs on all Americans. My Website describes history in the making as it applies to the NWO and its subjugation of the American people into becoming NSA "satellite slaves" without ever realizing what is being done to them. For many Americans, including myself, this has already become an absolute reality, which is why I am going into great detail to document it here.

For new visitors to this Website (there are many of you), I encourage you to read the following article and then to peruse my Website since it documents what the future holds for the American people, who are already under a more covert type of oppression by the Jesuit/Illuminati hierarchy which controls the NWO.

To those of you who believe that it is physically impossible for the NSA to use a spy satellite to track a person by way of the electromagnetic field which surrounds their body, and to then electronically access and manipulate their thoughts, I can assure you that the technology in which to do so does in fact exist and is being used on myself and myriad other Americans in the present day (as well as many citizens from other countries).

This Website has turned many skeptics into believers, when this information motivated them to do further research on their own. Many of them now promulgate the NSA's Signals Intelligence program over the Internet to alert others to the Orweillian crimes that this Nazi run agency is perpetrating against the American people (and those from many other countries as well). And while the process is a slow one, it is taking place as more people learn about the NSA's illegal satellite tracking systems, and utilization of many Americans as targets for non consensual cover research and human experimentation.

The NSA has been doing so for at least three decades, and possibly much longer, without the knowledge or consent of those of us who have been victimized by it for such outrageous crimes (against our Constitution and humanity). And at some point in time the NSA and others within US Intel will be forced to admit their culpability here and pay the heavy consequences for having committed such treasonous atrocities.


A Legal Analysis of the NSA Warrantless Surveillance Program

By Morton H. Halperin

January 6, 2006


The warrantless National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance program is an illegal and unnecessary intrusion into the privacy of all Americans. The Congress must act swiftly to determine the scope of the program and insist that all electronic surveillance in the United States be conducted pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). This memorandum examines the government's legal defense of the program and concludes that it lacks serious merit.

The Bush Administration Position

The government's defense of the NSA warrantless surveillance program, first reported by the New York Times and then confirmed by the administration, rests on both inherent powers and a claim of statutory authorization.

The precise details of the program are still not known. In a December 19, 2005 press briefing, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and General Michael V. Hayden, principal deputy director of National Intelligence, laid out the legal justification for the NSA program. The administration has admitted that after 9/11 the President authorized NSA to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance in the United States. The program included acquiring the content of conversations of American citizens in the United States at least when the other party is abroad and one or both are suspected of having ties to al Qaeda.

The administration's position is set out most clearly in a letter from Assistant Attorney General William Moschella, sent on December 22, 2005 to the leaders of the House and Senate Intelligence committees, and in the Press Briefing.

First, in the words of the Moschella Letter, "under Article II of the Constitution, including in his capacity as Commander in Chief, the President has the responsibility to protect the Nation from further [terrorist] attacks, and the Constitution gives him all necessary authority to fulfill that duty," including "the authority to order warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance within the United States."

Second, in the words of the Attorney General, "the authorization to use force, which was passed by the Congress in the days following September 11th, constitutes" authority for the administration "to engage in this kind of signals intelligence."

The claim of inherent authority might have some plausibility had Congress not acted so decisively to prohibit warrantless surveillance of U.S. persons in the United States when it enacted FISA in 1978. The second claim - that after September 11 Congress authorized the President to conduct this warrantless surveillance program - is utterly specious.

The arguments regarding the constitutional and statutory claims are intertwined. As Justice Jackson explained in his influential and frequently cited concurring opinion in the Steel Seizure case, the scope of the President's constitutional authority is affected by what Congress has done. The President's power is greatest when he acts with the support of the Congress and is weakest when he acts directly contrary to the will of Congress. The record is clear that Congress intended to prohibit warrantless intercepts in the United States. Because the constitutional argument can only be evaluated in light of the statutory claim, I deal with the latter first.

Read full paper (PDF)Here:

http://tinyurl.com/3a4l7o

© Center for American Progress