Powell Gammill
Letters to the Editor • Police State
NSA Illegally Wiretapped Your Phone, Fax and Private Email Communications? Now Your Internet?
• NewsIn 2008 Telecoms were granted government
immunity after they helped U.S. Government spy on millions of Americans’
electronic communications. Since, Government has not disclosed what happened to
NSA’s millions of collected emails, faxes and phone call information that
belong to U.S. Citizens? Could those wiretaps perhaps illegal, become a problem
for some Americans? Neither Congress nor the courts—determined what NSA
electronic surveillance could be used by police or introduced into court by the
government to prosecute Citizens.
In 2004, former Attorney General John Ashcroft asked government prosecutors to review thousands of old intelligence files including wiretaps to retrieve information prosecutors could use in “ordinary” criminal prosecutions. That was shortly after a court case lowered a barrier that prior, blocked prosecutors from using illegal-wire tap evidence in Justice Dept. “Intelligence Files” to prosecute ordinary crimes. It would appear this information, may also be used by government to prosecute civil asset forfeitures.
See: http://www.securityfocus.com/news/5452
Considering that court case, it appears NSA can share its electronic-domestic-spying with government contractors and private individuals that have security clearances to facilitate the arrest and civil forfeiture of Americans’ property—-to keep part of the bounty. Police too easily can take an innocent person’s hastily written email, fax, phone call or web post out of context to allege a crime or violation was committed to cause an arrest or asset forfeiture.
There are over 200 U.S. laws and violations
mentioned in the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 and the Patriot Act
that can subject property to civil asset forfeiture. Under federal civil
forfeiture laws, a person or business need not be charged with a crime for
government to forfeit their property. In the U.S., private contractors and
their operatives work so close with police exchanging information, to arrest
Americans and or share in the forfeiture of their assets, they appear to merge
with police.
Rep. Henry Hyde’s bill HR 1658 passed, the
“Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000” and effectively eliminated the
“statue of limitations” for Government Civil Asset Forfeiture. The statute now
runs five years from when police allege they “learned” that an asset became
subject to forfeiture. With such a weak statute of limitations and the low
standard of civil proof needed for government to forfeit property “A
preponderance of Evidence”, it is problematic law enforcement and private
government contractors will want access to NSA and other government wiretaps
perhaps illegal and Citizens’ private information U.S. Government agencies
glean monitoring the Internet, to arrest Americans and to seize their homes,
inheritances and businesses under Title 18USC and other laws. Of obvious
concern, what happens to fair justice in America if police and government
contractors become dependent on “Asset Forfeiture” to pay their salaries and
operating costs?
Under the USA Patriot Act, witnesses including government contractors can be kept hidden while being paid part of the assets they cause to be forfeited. The Patriot Act specifically mentions using Title 18USC asset forfeiture laws: those laws include a provision in Rep. Henry Hyde’s 2000 bill HR 1658—for “retroactive civil asset forfeiture” of “assets already subject to government forfeiture”, meaning "property already tainted by crime" provided “the property” was already part of or “later connected” to a criminal investigation in progress" when HR.1658 passed. That can apply to more than two hundred federal laws and violations.
Watch Streaming Broadcast Live:
LRN.fm
DLive
Telegram
1 Comments in Response to NSA Illegally Wiretapped Your Phone, Fax and Private Email Communications? Now Your Internet?
They miserably believed Keynes’ monetary and fiscal policies adopted by Democracies the world over except in the world of Communism and Free-Market Anarchism – which by the way Keynesian economics had made this country the greatest economic leader in the entire Universe -- is a bad Agorism and wanted Keynes economic doctrine abolished by Congress.
In this “interesting” comment written by H. Skip Robinson, there is an attempt to discuss Agorism against Keynesian economics. However, it is evident that there is no sufficient knowledge even to bring about this Konkin-Schulman political philosophy into the discussion. Konkin and Schulman are firm believers of “untaxed black market activity” which they think would “lead to development of private defense force sufficient to protect private property and liberty from the State to the point where such protection is strong enough to overthrow the State.” It is a philosophy or belief scholars described as just a delusional wish – a bad dream of academic somnambulists -- that could not and will never happen in real life or take place in the real world.
The good news out of this bad news is that there is a Konkin-Schulman logic in this imaginary rebellion against the existence of the State or Government which the vacuum in this roadside comment of H. Skip Robinson had poorly skipped or hardly escaped, thereby embarrassing these two great libertarian philosophers to no end. I do respect Konkin’s and Schulman’s anti-Keynesian arguments, but debunk their dream to change Keynes doctrine in economics, as utterly delusional, like millions of scholars all over the world do. Can you imagine a United States without Government, or can you perceive this greatest economy in the world to exist without a Central Bank and without taxation? That’s what their dream was all about.
To be sure, read again “Free Market Needs Keynes Law Just As Civilized Society Need The Government And World Order” at http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Letter-to-Editor.htm?EdNo=001&Info=0098216, and “Market Intervention Is Always Necessary But Not Obama’s Kind Of Economic Intrusion” at http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Letter-to-Editor.htm?EdNo=001&Info=0098493 that I shared with the reading public.
Unfortunately, this written comment only states several “conclusions” or multiple “declarations” of this and that, out of blind rage or misguided passion common to unthinking libertarian extremists in our midst. Learn from the way how these short effectively written essays are created and published – when you make a stunning declaratory statement, create your premises first then conclude from out of these established premises.