Bush claims authority to open Americans' mail
 

This is going too far!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


WASHINGTON - President Bush has quietly claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans' mail without a judge's warrant.

http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/p...02/1033/NEWS01

I sent an e-mail to the Whitehouse voicing my displeasure with this. Many of you know that I have supported Mr. Bush in the past, but this is a violation of the Fourth Amendement of our Constitution.

I let him know that I considered it an impeachable offense.


This is the automated response I received:

On behalf of President Bush, thank you for your correspondence.
We appreciate hearing your views and welcome your suggestions.
The President is committed to continuing our economic progress,
defending our freedom, and upholding our Nation's deepest values.

Due to the large volume of e-mail received, the White House
cannot respond to every message. Please visit the White House
website for the most up-to-date information on Presidential
initiatives, current events, and topics of interest to you.
In order to better receive comments from the public, a new system
has been implemented. In the future please send your comments to
comments@whitehouse.gov.

Thank you again for taking the time to write.

More people in Europe start thinking the US is becoming a police state in the near future. :hmm:

Yeah, I support him too, and you are right. That IS a little too far, even for someone like me who has nothing to hide...

American folk don't let your wonderful country become a police state.

This is the follow-up that I sent in response to the automated message.


If Mr. Bush signed an order to allow persons to open the mail of US citizens than he is clearly not committed to
'defending our freedom, and upholding our Nation's deepest values'.

Reading through the hype, I don't see the big deal.

Wasn't mail opening done heavily during WWII even in the US? What is new here?

STEED: not to suggest anything (so DONT anyone), but a presidential assasination will most likely happen before it goes that far, to be a police state would have an opposition rate of about 98%+.:yep:

To fly to the US is almost as hard as going to Moskow during the cold war. :yep:

Oh gee, another signing statement to circumnavigate our nations laws. I'm not surpised in the least.

I had two great holidays there in America back in the early 90's and some day I would like to go back, so I hope I don't run into a wall of regulations on that day.

What does this mean?
"in a manner consistent, to the maximum extent permissible, with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances. ..."


Its BS which violates the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

This mess could very easily draw blood.

Its not that hard. In fact:

On May 29, 1987, Mathias Rust, a 19-year-old German, flew his Cessna 172 from Finland, crossing through the Soviet defense systems undetected, and landed his aircraft in Red Square, Moscow. Rust was tried and sentenced to four years in jail but was freed in 1988. Soviet Defence Minister Alexander Koldunov was dismissed, and there were shake-ups in the armed services.

(true story)

I just call one senators office (they knew nothing of it) and expressed my displeasure. I then called my congressmans office, Tom Tancredo. The woman seemed to have heard about it and was happy to pass the message along, stating she doesn't even let her husband open her mail.


I have my hackles up over this.

He did the flight during the border Guard Day, they were all drunk so they didn't notice him passing :). He was freed because of the sunk of the K219 and the enquiry done by the russian gvt.

President Bush is living proof there needs to be an arbitrary limit on how many Signing statements a president can issue during their term in office.

Can you find me a link to the accepted practices of government postal inspection during WWII?

In fact, try doing the same for the Civil War.

Then we all might know what it means.

I'd go thru that effort but this is neither the civil war nor WWII, so it doesnot apply.

There are people planning massive casualty attacks against US civilian, government, economic and military targets. One was not enough?

I understand that. But violating the Fourth Amendment to our Constitution will not stop people from 'planning massive casualty attacks against US civilian, government, economic and military targets'.

This is a massive invasion of our rights under the Constitution. Based in the signing statement the executive branch of the federal government can violate the fourth amendment without a warrant.

Amendment IV


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 to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


I'm sorry but there are freedoms and rights I will not give up for greater security.