Constant's pations: Joe Nordgaard, Spectral Advantage

Joe Nordgaard, Spectral Advantage Director, thanks for visiting.

American citizens and foreign fighters have decided that the US Constitution is above your excuses.

Do you wish to reconsider your views?

* * *

Joe,

Your public arguments are not substantive or impressive.

The American people might have sympathy, but the choice is between the US Constitution, lawlessness, a New Constitution (which you are not allowed to look at), or combat operations. American citizens and foreign fighters outnumber you. The rule of law shall prevail.

All agreements, contractors, or other things you and others may allegedly have in writing promising immunity are not guaranteed. It remains an o pen question to what extent evidence allegedly illegally captured through the NSA was subsequently used to allegedly unlawfully abuse, kidnap, and mistreat prisoners in violation of Geneva.

No one can credibly argue that the US government has its hands tied. Because the US government refused to be bound by law, it has waged illegal warfare, failed, and has run out of options. US government officials' refusal to comply with the laws of war has incited reciprocal actions against US government officials and contractors. Whether nineteen people did or did not do something before or on Sept 2001 is meaningless; despite the FISA requirements, the President and NSA contractors were allegedly violating the law prior to Sept 2001.

Our system of government, until it is lawfully changed, requires a balancing between the needs of the President and the 4th Amendment. The appropriate forum is the FISA court. This President has ignored the FISA court. The President offers no lawful alternative.

Using open sources, it’s easy to trace between the US government, alleged illegal activity, and the failures to enforce the rule of law. As you well know, illegal activity cannot lawfully be classified.

It is irrelevant what debates may or may not have raged for centuries: America has a Constitution; and FISA is a compromise on the 4th Amendment, and the power of the President to wage war. Whether FISA was or was not followed is no longer the issue. The Constitution has been ignored. We are a nation of laws.

Despite the legal requirements, Americans have yet to be provided a suitable alternative that will respect the Constitution and ensure US combat requirements are satisfied. Despite using illegal methods, the US has bungled the combat operations. The issue is not whether there are or are not legal restrictions – there are – but whether the American leadership is or is not competent – it is not.

The Congress has not declared war, and the FISA court process has been largely ignored. Unlike Lincoln who cooperated with the Congressional inquiry, the US president and defense industrial system has not fully cooperated. This is not impressive.

There are systems in place which could comply with FISA. There are also lawful ways to resolve the legal requirements. This President refuses to do that.

Permissions could be automated electronically. The President refuses to do that.

DoJ Staff personnel could have worked on solutions, but they refused to do that, preferring to spend time updating websites unrelated to official business. War crimes prosecutors and Members of Congress have this evidence.

Arguably, by ignoring the laws of war and other legal requirements, this President and the US contractors have substantially compounded a problem: Once we had 19 men living in caves; now we have millions attacking US government officials in combat.

Nuremburg indicted contractors for their active support of war crimes planning in WWII. Foreign fighters may lawfully target those who refuse to fully enforce the Geneva Conventions. You are advised to seek counsel.

Discuss:

___ Why should Americans have confidence in a government that despite violating the law to get information is unable to prevent an attack?

___ Why should we trust the government with more power when was abusing power prior to the Sept 2001 events?

____ Did you attend the 2006 Conference in Hawaii sponsored by inter alia Narus, Terremark, and Boeing?

____ How many times have you visited AbraxasCorp?

____ When did you learn that Boeing was using alleged illegally captured data to support rendition scheduling?

____ How many FISA court reviews have you attended?

____ What method does your equipment use to integrate with the Terremark Fiber Optic monitoring system; and/or the NARUS STA 6400?

____ What are the names of the intermediaries and other entities your firm interfaces with when processing warrants to access data?

____ Do you understand that foreign fighters may view illegal warfare as something that could include a lawful reciprocal response and lawful target US contractors who have supported illegal warfare?

____ Have you ever visited an underwater NAVSEA demonstration of a fiber optic tapping exercise?

____ What is your plan when you are asked to choose between (1) the rule of law; or (b) war crimes?

____ What "not disclosure agreements" have you signed asking you to be quiet about illegal activity, NSA access to facilities, or other agreements preventing you from disclosing evidence of unconstitutional conduct, war crimes, or other alleged violations of Geneva?

Thank you for visiting.

* * *