Michael Hayden's Dictionary by KimB

One of the more interesting aspects of the NSA and all the hooha surrounding what the surveillance agencies do, is their ability to redefine words in any language, primarily English, because it's so easy to do. If you don't like a rule that prohibits X just rename X to Y and now since Y is not prohibited by law, the spy business moves along as usual.

Some of these re-names are in the notorious category like the word games for “torture”.

“Torture” became “Enhanced Interrogation” but after a great deal of complaints, “Enhanced Interrogation” was returned to its previous definition of “Torture”. If left at “Torture”, the surveillance agencies sadists would have nothing to do, so they renamed it again and it now parades under the definition of “Coerced Interrogation”. Doesn't change what it is, it's still “torture” but since it's not prohibited by law under this name, the NSA/CIA and their American Psychological Association licensed sadistic members and un-licensed CIA sadists get to enjoy the full gamut of torture and get to write books describing how virtuous this activity is, providing you are the torturer and not the torturée. These licensed APA members get to write the operations manuals for Neophyte CIA Sadists, who haven't yet discovered how to do these sorts of things on their own. If per chance a legal complaint ensues about this new name, another suitable name will be applied to the same activities and the CIA Sadists and their Junior Sadist Helpers, will remain in business as usual.

Sadists are everywhere.

General Hayden knows a lot about these activities as he ran not only the NSA but also the CIA. He is well rounded and extremely adept as the Redefinition Game.

That's why I was somewhat surprised to see an old YouTube video of General Hayden from 2006, making what seemed to be an enormous gaff during a televised interview. It was completely out of character for him and well... the news agencies made some pointed comments about what General Hayden said.

During the interview General Hayden engages the reporter in a short discussion about the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution. During the exchange General Hayden said that "probable cause" is not in the Fourth Amendment. But of course “probable cause” IS part of the Fourth Amendment.

Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution
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.

So, how could General Hayden make such a statement? During the exchange, he tells the reporter that the NSA is extremely well-versed in the US Constitution and that Probable Cause is not part of the Fourth Amendment. It looks to be an embarrassing moment and the newsrooms and media certainly played it that way.

But when you listen to the exchange carefully, really carefully you can hear the NSA/CIA re-definition happen. This was an important moment that all the newsrooms and media analysts missed. In 2006, General Hayden told us exactly what was going to happen and what did happen, as he foretold during that interview.

So where does the redefinition happen? It happens during the exchange over “unreasonable” and followed up by “probable cause”.

What he tells us, is the fundamental reasoning behind how the NSA deemed everything, everywhere was open to NSA collection. Everything electronic, on the internet, your phone records and every piece of information that anyone could possibly collect on you, was going to be collected and that the NSA was going to collect it all, keep it all and use it at-will without hindrances.

Here is the re-definition in nutshells:

• “PROBABLE CAUSE” is only required for “UNREASONABLE” searches.
• “UNREASONABLE” searches require a WARRANT.
• If the search is “REASONABLE”, there is no WARRANT needed because by definition, warrants are only needed for “UNREASONABLE” searches.
• If the activities are defined as “REASONABLE” they do not require a warrant. No Warrant. Period.
• If no warrant is required then the search, seizure and acquisition of all information is 100% within the law and is permitted without constraints or restrictions of any kind.

He states that there is No Probable Cause in the Fourth Amendment because the Fourth Amendment does not apply to the NSA/CIA – ever. There is no violation of the Fourth Amendment so Probable Cause is never an issue.

Not Then. Not Now. Not in the Future.

To keep the Fourth Amendment at bay, everything the NSA/CIA does now and forever more, will be redefined as “reasonable”. They work hard to get the lofty judges of the US Federal Courts to agree with this view and work with all the power brokers in the US Government, Congress and Senate to ensure that though the name may change, the activities will remain the same and the CIA Sadists and their Junior Sadist Helpers, will never be subject to prosecution for violations of the Fourth Amendment.

We can see this at work now, today with the fading hope of publication of the US Senate Intelligence Committee's Torture Report. The presumed disclosures would place a large number of CIA Sadists directly onto the low-end of the waterboarding table, shackled, saran wrapped with the water can at the ready along with exposing the re-re-re-redefiniton game.

The CIA Sadists have to protect their own. They certainly won't be protecting you.

They never really did, did they?