Gen. Hayden: "4th Amendment and wrong"
This is Bush's replacement for Porter........
Knight-Ridder's Jonathan Landay questioned Gen. Michael Hayden at the National Press Club in January:
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Countdown-nsa-Hayden.wmv
Landay: "...the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution specifies that you must have probable cause to violate an American's right against unreasonable searches and seizures..."
Gen. Hayden: "No, actually - the Fourth Amendment actually protects all of us against unreasonable search and seizure."
Landay: "But the --"
Gen. Hayden: "That's what it says."
Landay: "The legal measure is probable cause, it says."
Gen. Hayden: "The Amendment says: unreasonable search and seizure."
Landay: "But does it not say 'probable cause'?"
Gen. Hayden [exasperated, scowling]: "No! The Amendment says unreasonable search and seizure."
Landay: "The legal standard is probable cause, General -- "
Gen. Hayden [indignant]: "Just to be very clear ... mmkay... and believe me, if there's any Amendment to the Constitution that employees of the National Security Agency are familiar with, it's the Fourth. Alright? And it is a reasonableness standard in the Fourth Amendment. The constitutional standard is 'reasonable'"
To quote the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States in its entirety, the one the general and the NSA folks are so familiar with and know is about reasonableness and not about probable cause, quote, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Well, maybe they have a different Constitution over there at the NSA.
posted by Name Held by Request | 9:51 AM
16 Comments:
I am a former blue-suiter. I proudly served my country in the US Air Force. I have a built in prejudice in favor of those currently serving in or who have served in the Air Force. It is thus with a heavy heart that I have to strongly object to Air Force General Michael V Hayden as the choice for the next CIA Director.
After 9/11 when the Patriot Act and other legislation were fast-tracked through the congress, included in this wave of knee-jerk reactionary legislation was the formation of secret courts wherein secret warrants could be issued to law enforcement and security agencies to search, monitor and wiretap suspects in the war on terror and their enablers. I am still unsold as to the need for these secret courts and warrants. I doubt that the potential objects of this surveillance have the means to monitor the existing legal apparatus such that they would learn of a regular warrant being issued and alter or cancel their plans. Nevertheless, these secret courts and warrants exist, and any law enforcement or intelligence agencies who are paranoid about their investigations being discovered can utilize them to obtain warrants where needed. I do not have any way of verifying my suspicions but I suspect that the grounds needed to obtain such warrants are probably not extensive or problematic for said law enforcement or intelligence agencies. I certainly would not want to be the judge that slowed down or turned down a request for a warrant that would have, if issued with haste, prevented the next 9/11.
Despite all of this, General Hayden tells us that these secret courts and warrants are not enough, the NSA needs to be able to wiretap American citizens at the Presidents behest without such pesky requirements as going through any semblance of the legal system, secret or not. Any American who thinks the Constitution and Bill of Rights are more than just a cute idea should recoil at any such suggestion. I also believe that acting in such a matter may very well violate the oath of office taken by both Hayden and Bush to “Defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic”. Isn’t someone who ignores express contents of the Constitution and Bill of Rights to take away the rights of American citizens an enemy? I have to ask Hayden why he thinks all military officers are required to take that oath, if not to take the Constitution and the freedoms it provides with ultimate seriousness. There are too many questions about General Hayden and his commitment to the Constitution to allow him to continue in any important governmental role. The Senate should not confirm his appointment to CIA Director and General Hayden should retire.
Are Americans just thick?
I mean after well over 4000 dead soldiers and thousands more disabled for life you would think Americans would be bright enough to figure out for themselves that the Iraqis don't want us in their country.
But no. A good portion of America (mostly Fox news viewers) still think that the Iraqis like us and want our military to stay there and continue "helping" them.
What is the cause of this? Are these Americans stupid? Brainwashed? Insane? What is it?
Not stupid, just,completely self-absorbed and selfish. The people who are still in the * camp only see the profits to be made, and the economic stability that those profits will potentially mean to them. Oh boy, they can drive their gas guzzlers the two blocks to work or the store for another ten years! It seems clear that as long as there is no widespread suffering here, as in a real lack of food, clothing, clean drinking water, and shelter, nothing will change. We are the last nation on Earth to whine about 'entitlement' programs for anyone, as we seem to think that we are entitled to all the wealth and resources, and fuck anyone who gets in our way.
War is not Getting Coverage It Did In Days Gone By...
That is the sad truth. The Media is not what it once was. Much of it is now owned by fewer companies. We don't have reporters as much as we have spokemodels. The outspoken are discounted and not heard as much.
I don't know about you but it seems some people I know are too busy being good little serfs to really know what is going on. The apathy, though, is just appalling beyond the pale. I know service people -veterans-who say "Do not protest against the American soldier." and this from people who KNEW the war was a LIE. This is someone I care about deeply too, so I just don't understand the reasoning.
The war needs to be covered as the Vietnam War was. I wasn't around then, but I'll bet that war got more than a sound bite on the nightly news.
We need to see the horror of it. We need Entertainment Tonight to be replaced by footage of a typical town where there is no water, no power, no police, etc. We need nightly -24/7- coverage like they did with Clinton, and maybe then our lazy ass American brethren will get off their big fat lazyboys and take to the streets against this administration, like the Latinos did recently.
I mean come on America!!! WTF is it gonna take???
They know the Iraqis don't want us there, they just don't want to admit that they were wrong.. Out of their ignorance and arrogance they truly think that they know what's best for the Iraqis, even though they've never been there, know nothing of their culture, and probably can't even find Iraq on a map.. They know that they don't want us there, they just aren't ready to admit that they were wrong yet..
Flags make great blinders. Slogans make great earplugs.
"Spreading democracy", "Support Our Troops", "God Bless America", "We won't Cut and Run", etc, etc, ad nauseum.
Throw in some stern looking generals adorned with tinware and ribbons, some constipated politicians taling about "the ultimate sacrifice" and "freedom", a weepy rendition of God Bless America, and voila, bodies and carnage disappear. Replaced by exciting pictures of explisions and "heroic" troops battling the "evil doers" with "shock and awe".
And, don't forget the flags. Gotta have a lotta flags.
House Intel Panel Chief Opposes Hayden
A leading Republican came out against the front-runner for CIA director, Gen. Michael Hayden, saying Sunday the spy agency should not have military leadership during a turbulent time among intelligence agencies. Members of the Senate committee that would consider President Bush's nominee also expressed reservations, saying the CIA is a civilian agency and putting Hayden atop it would concentrate too much power in the military for intelligence matters.
Bush was expected to nominate a new director as early as Monday to replace Porter Goss, who abruptly resigned on Friday. But opposition to Hayden because of his military background is mounting on Capitol Hill, where he would face tough hearings in the Senate Intelligence Committee. Despite a distinguished career at the Defense Department, Hayden would be "the wrong person, the wrong place at the wrong time," said the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Peter Hoekstra , R-Mich.
"There is ongoing tensions between this premier civilian intelligence agency and DOD as we speak," Hoekstra said. "And I think putting a general in charge — regardless of how good Mike is — ... is going to send the wrong signal through the agency here in Washington but also to our agents in the field around the world," he told "Fox News
Sunday." If Hayden were to get the nomination, military officers would run the major spy agencies in the United States, from the ultra-secret National Security Agency to the Defense Intelligence Agency. The Pentagon already controls more than 80 percent of the intelligence budget.
"You can't have the military control most of the major aspects of intelligence," said Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, who is on the Senate Intelligence Committee. The CIA "is a civilian agency and is meant to be a civilian agency," she said on ABC's "This Week." A second committee member, GOP Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, added, "I think the fact that he is a part of the military today would be the major problem." Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., mentioned fears the CIA would "just be gobbled up by the Defense Department" if Hayden were to take over.
I was floored when I just saw the
cockroach Saxby Chambliss come out on CNN against him, too.
Never trust a republican. They can talk all they want, but they
all supported Bu*h's policies and gave Bu*h every tool he needed to destroy democracy and everything good about our country.
When it comes to a vote - what will happen then?
The Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee,
Rep. Peter Hoekstra , R-Mich.
That's good news. Perhaps some more members of the Republicans Party Leadership ... those who put the effective functioning of our Democratic Republic above partisan politics will step forward?
Let's all hope so ... and if they do, let's laud their courage.
Good new indeed! :-)
Oh, is that a problem?
Well, don't worry; if it's a real problem and the Republicans actually stand up to Bush, he'll just appoint Hayden during one of Congress' interminable recesses, and voila! Bush gets his man, the country is harmed a little more, the Republicans can pretend they have some independence, and the talking chuckleheads can scold the Democrats for the sorrier state of American affairs. One of those win-lose-win-win situations the corrupt Bush administration and its sycophants love so well.
Hayden put together the warrantless eavesdropping plan
when he headed up NSA. His reason for avoiding the judges warrants? Too much paperwork, too much time.
http://198.81.129.102/ABC_News_PDDNI.htm
When the CIA already has a tendency to avoid the law vis a vis renditions and torture, the last guy I'd want up top is a guy like Hayden. Unless, of course, we like a military fascist secret police state.
The Bush administration has pulled out all the stops in attempting to defend the NSA’s warrantless domestic spying program. After speeches by President Bush and Attorney General Gonzales, Deputy Director of National Intelligence and former NSA Director General Michael Hayden took another crack at the defense in a speech on Monday. He’s not exactly the ideal choice to restore the administration’s credibility.
Hayden misled Congress. In his 10/17/02 testimony, he told a committee investigating the 9/11 attacks that any surveillance of persons in the United States was done consistent with FISA.
At the time of his statements, Hayden was fully aware of the presidential order to conduct warrantless domestic spying issued the previous year. But Hayden didn’t feel as though he needed to share that with Congress. Apparently, Hayden believed that he had been legally authorized to conduct the surveillance, but told Congress that he had no authority to do exactly what he was doing. The Fraud and False Statements statute (18 U.S.C. 1001) make Hayden’s misleading statements to Congress illegal.
Hayden’s fate lies with the tale of another spymaster, Nixon-era CIA Director Richard Helms.
Testifying under oath before a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1973, Richard Helms claimed that CIA was not involved in attempts to overthrow Salvador Allende of Chile:
SEN. SYMINGTON: Did you try in the Central Intelligence agency to overthrow the government of Chile?
MR. HELMS: No, sir.
SEN. SYMINGTON: Did you have any money passed to the opponents of Allende?
MR. HELMS: No, sir.
By the time Helms was called to testify again, CIA activities in Chile had become public knowledge. In 1977, Richard Helms pleaded no contest to charges of lying to Congress and served a suspended sentence.
Four years passed between Richard Helms’ false testimony before Congress and his guilty plea. Hayden’s congressional lying occurred in 2002. It’s now four years later. Time to fess up, General.
CIA Nominee Hayden Linked to MZM
By Justin Rood - May 8, 2006, 11:33 AM
While director of the National Security Agency, Gen. Michael V. Hayden contracted the services of a top executive at the company at the center of the Cunningham bribery scandal, according to two former employees of the company.
Hayden, President Bush's pick to replace Porter Goss as head of the CIA, contracted with MZM Inc. for the services of Lt. Gen. James C. King, then a senior vice president of the company, the sources say. MZM was owned and operated by Mitchell Wade, who has admitted to bribing former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham with $1.4 million in money and gifts. Wade has also reportedly told investigators he helped arrange for prostitutes to entertain the disgraced lawmaker, and he continues to cooperate with a federal inquiry into the matter.
Good! Maybe His Ship Will Sink BEFORE It Sails! Updated at 12:00 PM
By now, the GOP Neocons bear their scandals like so many Dark Marks, instantly identifying them as enemies of the people and the Constitution.
Now ..... if our side doesn't ask REAL questions in his conf hearings
there's no hope.
There are substantive policy questions to be asked (who WERE you eavesdropping on, General? Was it Il Dunce's political opposiiton? Ordinary citizens? Your bookie?) and now there are just as serious background questions to be asked (Why did you contract with that particular company? Did any member of the Republican Party or a supporter of that party suggest you enter into such a contract?) ...... you know ..... actual FUCKING QUESTIO
Post a Comment
<< Home