Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter 6 Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend (6 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   7 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

Open Letter to US Law Enforcement

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Well Said 2   Valuable 2   Must Read 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

Become a Fan
  (18 fans)
- Advertisement -

Political Film Blog

by Political Film Blog

Open Letter to US Law Enforcement


Who are you, really?  And what exactly is your role in the bigger picture?

This is not an academic question, but goes to the heart of who is in charge and if they themselves are on the right side of the law.  With numerous whistleblowers from the National Security Agency coming forth, as well as from the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, all of them exposing crimes committed by those in charge, you should pay special attention to what these individuals are saying about current so-called "leaders."

Former President Richard Nixon once said, "Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal." How many law enforcement officers would accept this excuse today?  How many have already accepted it as a fact of the current United States system of "justice?"

The 4 th Amendment of the US Constitution, in the Bill of Rights, is explicitly clear that a "warrant" is necessary to invade the personal effects of civilians.  We are all mandated by the highest law in the land to be "secure" in our "persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures."

Government officials swear an oath of office to defend this Constitution, as you yourself have also probably done. To knowingly, flagrantly and systematically violate this oath -- in secret no less -- is a grievous crime against the United States.  To do it with impunity and protection from prosecution, however, is something else entirely.  A government that does not respect the laws that it publicly swears to defend is a fraud and a tyranny.

- Advertisement -

To casually throw away the 4 th Amendment, a bedrock freedom, the cornerstone of a free and open society, is not only unacceptable.  It is Treason, the waging of a war against the People of the United States. 

By what right can Constitutionally guaranteed rights be deleted?  These protections have served us for more than two centuries, and yet in the age of technology they are to be dismissed without debate, by secret decree?  By memos that are classified "Top Secret" because they directly violate the Supreme Law of the Land?

Armies of police are to enforce these secret decrees as law and to assist the surveillance state without question? Are we a nation of sovereign citizens or of human drones who execute instructions?

On April 19 th of this year, the federal government "crossed the Rubicon" suspending the Constitution in Boston and ordering nearly 10,000 heavily armed troops to "lockdown" a major metropolitan city.  Homes were searched without warrants and invaded at gunpoint by squads and platoons of officers, many of them from the local force who had been militarized and placed under the command of federal authorities.  All this was done to apprehend a single injured suspect.

A Supreme Court decision already decided that the Constitution cannot be suspended no matter how inconvenient it may be perceived by those in power.  In Ex parte Milligan (1866), the Court wrote: 

- Advertisement -

"The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government."
By testing this new suspension of the Constitution in the wake of the latest terrorism event in Boston, a cynical calculated play was made to convince people that the government somehow possessed the right to do so, when clearly no such right exists.  This outright subversion of Constitutional protections was tested that day to see if it could set a precedent and be sold to the public on the basis of allegedly protecting them.  This ploy used public perception as a means to subvert the law and to overturn the established restrictions on the government's exercise of force here domestically against its own citizens in their homes!

This July 4th, 2013, it's time to wake up and smell the clear felonies coming out of Washington DC.  Crimes of this scale and sweeping nature threaten to turn America into George Orwell's Big Brother police state.  And law enforcement officers are not immune to the surveillance.  Their privacy is no more protected than mine.  Nor is the privacy of a Congressman or a Supreme Court Judge or even the head of the CIA, David Petraeus.

A high-level NSA whistleblower, a satellite analyst named Russell Tice, revealed"[NSA] went after lawyers and law firms" They went after judges. One of the judges is now sitting on the Supreme Court that I had his wiretap information in my hand" They went after State Department officials. They went after people in the executive service that were part of the White House -- their own people."
We are now a society wide open to blackmail.  We are without privacy, and can be hacked at the will of secret, often private contractors, such as Edward Snowden's recent employer.  Mr. Snowden, remember, wasn't working for the US government in an official capacity, but at the time was employed by a private corporation, Booz, Allen Hamilton.  Right now thousands of privately-paid computer "analysts" can wiretap anyone at their own discretion. Edward Snowden said:  "Any analyst at any time can target anyone.  "I sitting at my desk certainly had the authorities to wiretap anyone, from YOU or your accountant to a federal judge to even the president if I had a personal email."

That means you, the reader, are also vulnerable.  Your life is an open book, and should you in the future need to be coerced and blackmailed into silence or into acting in a particular manner, that can easily be arranged.  Information from your digital presence and history across telephone, web, credit card and any other channel is now stored indefinitely by this emerging, unconstitutional surveillance state.

That is not freedom.  That is not Constitutional governance.  That is not the America I was taught about in school, as were you. That is why the flag flies upside down here today.

Joe Giambrone
July 4, 2013

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles
Google Content Matches:
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Is This the Man Who "Radicalized" Dzhokhar Tsarnaev?

The U.N. Would Never Lie to George Monbiot

The Future Children of Fukushima

Genocide and the Native American Experience

Nuclear Nightmare Worsens

Do I trust Christopher Nolan or his Batman?


The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
5 people are discussing this page, with 7 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)
So far at least, we as a people have the right to... by Judy Swindler on Thursday, Jul 4, 2013 at 11:23:27 AM
Good afternoon Joe Giambrone. Thank you for taking... by Daniel Penisten on Thursday, Jul 4, 2013 at 2:15:43 PM
In line with the Constitution, obviously. Invadin... by Joe Giambrone on Thursday, Jul 4, 2013 at 3:17:27 PM
and having read no contradictory statements, that ... by Doc McCoy on Thursday, Jul 4, 2013 at 9:23:47 PM
by rambone5, Youtube ...that's Dzhokhar Tsarnaev ... by Joe Giambrone on Thursday, Jul 4, 2013 at 10:23:22 PM
and comments from someone who was merely a bystand... by Doc McCoy on Thursday, Jul 4, 2013 at 11:24:32 PM
legally... by ketcher on Friday, Jul 5, 2013 at 8:52:18 AM