Image Image

  Nostalgia ain't what it used to be

Friday, 04 December, 2020

In a Pickle

Date: 01 January, 2006

By: Chief

Imagey, my, my. Aren't we in trouble? Oh, yes indeed, the king is in a real pickle.

Well just when the king thought nothing else could go wrong the inevitable happened. Something else did go wrong and boomeranged right smack-dab up against King George the Bush's empty head. Just as it should have.

The king has been, by his own admission no less, spying on U.S. citizens. Indeed, unless you have been living under a rock (sharing it with the king eh?) you know that King George the Bush has authorized the National Security Agency (NSA) to conduct electronic eavesdropping and intelligence collection against us. Against We the People.

According to the New York Times:

"Mr. Bush's executive order allowing some warrantless eavesdropping on those inside the United States - including American citizens, permanent legal residents, tourists and other foreigners - is based on classified legal opinions that assert that the president has broad powers to order such searches, derived in part from the September 2001 Congressional resolution authorizing him to wage war on Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, according to the officials familiar with the N.S.A. operation."

Based strictly on the above quote it would clearly appear that We the People — We the Citizens of this country — are no longer citizens. We have become debased to the uncomplimentary classification of terrorist suspects.

How do you like them apples? You, that's right, you maybe under surveillance as a terrorist suspect. Not you, you say? You pay your taxes and are a good, loyal Republican. By God you even voted for the king in the last two elections.

I don't care. You, I or any other citizen have no factual idea whether or not what we say, do or write is not ending up in some NSA and Just-Us department database for use against us in some future terrorist investigation.

We all should be not only scared but more importantly madder than a wet hen and insisting that King George the Bush cease and desist these warrentless and unreasonable searches immediately and forever more.

Where in the Sam Thump is the Congress when you need them? Good question and here is part of the answer:

"After the special program started, Congressional leaders from both political parties were brought to Vice President Dick Cheney's office in the White House. The leaders, who included the chairmen and ranking members of the Senate and House intelligence committees, learned of the N.S.A. operation from Mr. Cheney, Gen. Michael V. Hayden of the Air Force, who was then the agency's director and is now the principal deputy director of national intelligence, and George J. Tenet, then the director of the C.I.A., officials said" (quoting the NY Times).

Gee whiz boys and girls, ain't that lovely. Members of our federal legislature were briefed on this Constitutional outrage and apparently blessed the project. Those members sure as shootin' did not publicly complain about it, that much is a for certain. As far as I am concerned those members of Congress who were in on the briefings and did nothing should be lined up against the nearest wall and shot.

There are some government officials who, shall we say, do not feel comfortable about this latest (in a never ending series) assault on our Constitution by King George the Bush and his court. Again, quoting from the New York Times:

"[Some government officials] consider warrantless eavesdropping inside the United States to be unlawful and possibly unconstitutional, amounting to an improper search. One government official involved in the operation said he privately complained to a Congressional official about his doubts about the legality of the program. But nothing came of his inquiry. 'People just looked the other way because they didn't want to know what was going on', he said."

Wonderful. Some members of Congress who had actual knowledge of this latest travesty turned a blind eye. By doing so said Congressmen violated their oath of office, put the Constitution at risk and placed We the People in the terrorist suspect category.

Hmmm, me thinks that the nearest wall is going to get a lot of use.

When the Times first broke the story the king and his court would neither confirm or deny the story citing critical and ongoing intelligence operations. But U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez (a true member of the king's court) did say this:

"Well, let me just say winning the war on terror requires winning the war of information. We are dealing with a very dangerous, very patient, very diabolical enemy who wants to harm America, and in order to be effective in dealing with this enemy, we need to have information," Gonzalez said.

"That is very, very important. And so we will be aggressive in obtaining that information, but we will always do so in a manner that is consistent with our legal obligations" (quote from CNN).

The king himself did say this:

"After 9/11, I told the American people I would do everything in my power to protect the country, within the law, and that's exactly how I conduct my presidency," Bush said in an interview with PBS' " (quote from CNN).

Notice how everyone connected with this current trounce of the Constitution keeps referring to or at the very least mentioning the "law?" Notice that? Well what — exactly — does that mean?

It means this — King George the Bush and his court made a deliberate and willful decision to:

All based on a:

Got that? A scum sucking lawyer who is employed by the federal Just-Us department types up his or her very own opinion, gets it classified (which is not at all hard to do), hands the infernal thing to the king's court lawyer or jester (Alberto Gonzalez) who, in turn, presents it to the king. 'See King George the Bush, you now can violate your oath and trash the Constitution because I have a lying lawyer who says you can'.

More candidates for the nearest wall says I.

Speaking of the presidential oath of office, here it is:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Please note the "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" phrase. Ah, yes and that is the phrase which may, if Congress has any balls, place the king in a real pickle. The king, in my opinion, has clearly violated his oath of office. As such, I submit that the king, along with each and every member of his court including the dolts in Congress who had actual knowledge of this high crime, should be impeached, drummed out of office and then taken to court.

How did the king, his court and some members of Congress violate their respective oaths of office you ask? By willfully violating the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. The Fourth Amendment is quoted for your edification:

"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 shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularity describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

It seems pretty dog gone clear to me. I just wonder what part of "shall not be violated" or "no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause" or even the "right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures" don't the dirtbags in Congress, the White House and the Department of Just-Us understand?

I am not a scum sucking lawyer and yet I understand the Fourth Amendment. Is it possible that to understand the Constitution one cannot be a:

Nah. Both lawyers and politicians fully understand the Constitution. It just gets in their way. Hence both groups willfully ignore the supreme law of our land and then when caught make excuses for their hideous conduct.

Now, have you contacted your members of Congress (as worthless as they all are) and demanded that this spying upon We the People end — permanently and right now? You might want to do that. I already have.

Secondly, why not ask our members of Congress to draw up articles of impeachment against King George the Bush? What have we to lose? Absolutely nothing.

Lastly, we have a mid-term election coming up in November of this year. I highly suggest that each of us vote and throw all the current members of Congress out on their bad faith, parasitic heads.

You know Richard Nixon was a no good, scum sucking, lying, thieving parasite. And that is being polite. But compared to King George the Bush, Nixon appears almost saintly.

We can ill afford anymore wannabe monarchs attempting to turn our country into their own personal kingdom.

(Return to the top)