Tuesday, 3 April 2012, WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Ninth Amendment reminds faithful readers worldwide including certain members of the US Supreme Court please to avoid strip search searches by refraining from READING FREE UNLIMITED NEW YORK TIMES DIGITAL CONTENT SIMPLY BY SETTING READERS' FREE FIREFOX BROWSERS TO "PRIVATE BROWSING". The Court in a hectic week surprised no one by now also issuing a decision contrary to a large majority of the Circuit courts that the State even with the safeguards of frisks, x-rays, and hoisting suspects upside down with a chain also may strip search persons arrested for anything including violating leash laws and lawn watering restrictions.
The Ninth Amendment senses discouragement from over 200 million e-mails sent us by certain quarters that the Court, believed to be suffering from some new ultravirulent form of malignant dementia, brain fungus or rot, senility, and delusion but still able to groom themselves and speak (other than Justice Thomas), as it ravenously attacks any case before it that offers any opportunity to obliterate the last shreds of Americans' rights with nonsensical arguments and pithy factual examples based on no known reality. The Court thus has haphazardly obliterated the compact with the people that the US Constitution embodies.
The well-known fact for the day is the marginally sometimes true conventional wisdom that "the glass can be called half-empty or half-full" especially if its packaging is produced by most major American corporations, or alternatively, "it all depends upon how you look at it" unless you have say just been run over by a monster Waste Management garbage truck which next then backs up over your head, neck and chest with the required "beeping" warning.
Our point is that these sorts of little affronts to the Constitution such as the Court now finding it "reasonable" under the 4th Amendment for persons arrested for acts that would possibly have gotten you a "warning" back in grade school or even if just arrested by sloppy mistake as in the case at hand to justify a total-body strip search with government officials up close sniffing (but not touching) you and lingering around your body holes as they stare at your private parts in front of everyone yelling to "spread them" is no cause for anything such as say "armed revolution".
Think positive and even if you really do not enjoy parading around naked with police real close staring at you all over inside and out, pretend to yourself that you do. Imagine that this is how you would be spending the evening anyway. Especially if you are Mr. Justice Thomas (who reportedly did have to be physically restrained in the Court's famous closed-door conference when he became over-excited and attempted to act out the Court's written opinion,) In any case voila problem solved, though you probably should not get carried away and let this get you TOO excited as there is always time for that in one's more private time should one be so inclined and not all the representatives of the State may be so similarly oriented possibly leading to some kind of unfortunate misunderstanding.
As in they "suspected" you maybe are hiding an AK-47 or something in there and made a "furtive gesture". (Police like to tell creative stories like that in court if you are still alive to keep your future interesting.) No just take it easy and think of the rare opportunity to cavort naked with State officials as a gift. Well the Ninth Amendment editorial staff believes we may have been up for a few too many days now and hope anyway as we sign off this might have been a useful suggestion. God Bless America.
The comment below was submitted by the Ninth Amendment and so far as we know was not one of the 1,500 or so that was published in response to yesterday's front page New York Times latest article on the Court run amok. It here is shared with readers verbatim.
Ninth Amendment Comment To Times Not Published We Believe
The Ninth Amendment senses discouragement from over 200 million e-mails sent us by certain quarters that the Court, believed to be suffering from some new ultravirulent form of malignant dementia, brain fungus or rot, senility, and delusion but still able to groom themselves and speak (other than Justice Thomas), as it ravenously attacks any case before it that offers any opportunity to obliterate the last shreds of Americans' rights with nonsensical arguments and pithy factual examples based on no known reality. The Court thus has haphazardly obliterated the compact with the people that the US Constitution embodies.
The well-known fact for the day is the marginally sometimes true conventional wisdom that "the glass can be called half-empty or half-full" especially if its packaging is produced by most major American corporations, or alternatively, "it all depends upon how you look at it" unless you have say just been run over by a monster Waste Management garbage truck which next then backs up over your head, neck and chest with the required "beeping" warning.
Our point is that these sorts of little affronts to the Constitution such as the Court now finding it "reasonable" under the 4th Amendment for persons arrested for acts that would possibly have gotten you a "warning" back in grade school or even if just arrested by sloppy mistake as in the case at hand to justify a total-body strip search with government officials up close sniffing (but not touching) you and lingering around your body holes as they stare at your private parts in front of everyone yelling to "spread them" is no cause for anything such as say "armed revolution".
Think positive and even if you really do not enjoy parading around naked with police real close staring at you all over inside and out, pretend to yourself that you do. Imagine that this is how you would be spending the evening anyway. Especially if you are Mr. Justice Thomas (who reportedly did have to be physically restrained in the Court's famous closed-door conference when he became over-excited and attempted to act out the Court's written opinion,) In any case voila problem solved, though you probably should not get carried away and let this get you TOO excited as there is always time for that in one's more private time should one be so inclined and not all the representatives of the State may be so similarly oriented possibly leading to some kind of unfortunate misunderstanding.
As in they "suspected" you maybe are hiding an AK-47 or something in there and made a "furtive gesture". (Police like to tell creative stories like that in court if you are still alive to keep your future interesting.) No just take it easy and think of the rare opportunity to cavort naked with State officials as a gift. Well the Ninth Amendment editorial staff believes we may have been up for a few too many days now and hope anyway as we sign off this might have been a useful suggestion. God Bless America.
The comment below was submitted by the Ninth Amendment and so far as we know was not one of the 1,500 or so that was published in response to yesterday's front page New York Times latest article on the Court run amok. It here is shared with readers verbatim.
Ninth Amendment Comment To Times Not Published We Believe
- BigMartin
- waronnothing
The Court at one time at least ostensibly looked for "test" cases with some sympathetic facts say here of others "admitted" to jail [STET?]. Now in this case the man wrongly arrested and strip-searched for outstanding fines he actually already had paid (oops!) was his WIFE'S PASSENGER. The Ninth Amendment log at www.waronnothing.blogspot.com adds this as just another case showing a Court gone mad. Good facts, bad facts, imagined facts, whatever, the Court takes whatever is available ASAP should it suspect a SHRED of a Constitutional right intact such as that pesky 4th Amendment and its "unreasonable" restrictions in seven of the Circuits not allowing strip searches when ARRESTED for leash laws and so on. But really impressive is the Court's meticulous review of the strip policy in light of past experience. Justice Kennedy pointed out that one of the 9/11 hijackers was "pulled over for speeding just two days" before the horrific event. And? Had this latest historic decision been the practice at that time presumably he believes the whole 9/11 horror would be averted as with enough rigorous academic training one sees that the dastardly plan required first driving a couple days first with a carpet cutter stashed you-know-where. The next logical step is the savvy "correctional" official assembling a few simple pieces and averting the sordid history of the world for the next several decades. There again a tried and true technique of Supreme jurisprudence -- hit them with your best shot.
Copyright 2012 Big M and Little L All World Rights Expressly Reserved
Copyright 2012 Big M and Little L All World Rights Expressly Reserved
No comments:
Post a Comment