Rights Disregarded

In their huge PR effort to convince Americans that spying is good for them, the Bush White House has trotted out the former head of the NSA, Gen. Michael Hayden to help put a smile on the illegal acts violating our rights as citizens.

Hayden, like all of the Bushies, appears to have a patronizing, dismissive attitude towards Americans. Seemingly wanting to reach out and pat us on the heads, he assures that this is being done for our own good – don't worry.

Speaking at the National Press Club, Gen. Hayden disputed a questioner's statement that the Fourth Amendment requires a showing of "probable cause," a reference to the need for a judicial warrant, for surveillance. 'The Amendment only mandates that a search be reasonable. Just to be very clear -- 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. And it is a reasonableness standard in the Fourth Amendment. And so what you've raised to me -- and I'm not a lawyer, and don't want to become one -- what you've raised to me is, in terms of quoting the Fourth Amendment, is an issue of the Constitution. The constitutional standard is "reasonable." And we believe -- I am convinced that we are lawful because what it is we're doing is reasonable.' Well, isn't that special!

With someone like Hayden “watching over” us, we're in trouble. General, the Fourth Amendment reads like this:

"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 particularly describing the place t o be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

If the General insists that searches need only be reasonable, then that clearly is a violation of the Fourth Amendment and is a felony. His statements ignore the second clause, which requires warrants based on probable cause, he also ignores the FISA statute, which requires probable cause and he seems to not understand that 'probable cause' is decided by judges – not generals.
Posted on The Human Stain