“When the government gathers intelligence in order to prevent the future occurrence of an act of domestic terror, as opposed to when it gathers evidence in order to solve a crime that has already been committed, it believes it is not subject to the constraints of the Fourth Amendment. Such an argument is Stalinesque in its sweep, has no support in history, law or Supreme Court jurisprudence, and is a subterfuge concocted to dupe the public, the media and the judiciary into overlooking, accepting and authorizing the broadest governmental assault on constitutionally protected freedoms since the Alien and Sedition Acts.”
http://www.creators.com/opinion/judge-napolitano/spying-and-lying.html
Related posts:
Detlev Schlichter: ‘Positive Money’ and the fallacy of the need for a state money producer
Eric Margolis: Why I Keep A Swiss Bayonet On My Desk
Debt Excess and the Liquidation Process in a Historical Context
If You Are A Baby Boomer, You Will Go Bankrupt—If You Stay In America
There Will Be No Economic Recovery. Prepare Yourself Accordingly.
The Advantages of Bitcoin Over Paper Money and Gold
Guns, Badges, and Cartels
Bob Higgs: The Relentless March of the U.S. Police State
What Happens When Share Buybacks Dry Up?
Banks Get One Last Mulligan in Payments
The States Could Reform Obamacare If Only We Would Let Them
Is Your Portfolio Ready for this Coming Disaster?
Jacob Hornberger: Master and Servant
The Triumvirate of Modern Warfare
When Did the “Peace Officers” Get a “License to Kill”?