Silly question about Nsa spying

[GlashFordan]

If calls are indeed recorded, then why can't they be used in criminal trials? The Rachel-Trayvon phone calls would have been huge pieces of evidence. In addition we've all heard that satellites can identify items the size of a loaf of bread from space. So why isn't this data used in criminal investigations?

[orpupilofnature57]

1. $$$$$$$$

[GlashFordan]

2. Maybe Snowden can send us

The audio tapes? Lol

[orpupilofnature57]

4. I trust him more than them .

[randome]

9. You don't know 'them' or Snowden so why would you trust either?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Andy823]

14. Excellent point.

I don't trust the NSA, I don't trust Mr. Snowden, nor Glen Greenwald.

[orpupilofnature57]

16. Do you trust ?

[orpupilofnature57]

15. Agendas, They want to exclude me, He wants to enlighten me . n/t

[lapfog_1]

3. no serious person has claimed

that the NSA is recording all domestic phones, or even international phone calls between US citizens.

They are recording the numbers that call each other, the date and time, and the duration (phone bill information).

[jazzimov]

5. Because a lot of disinformation is being spread.

You are correct - such things prove that the NSA isn't doing the things that a lot of people here are claiming. They are merely trying to stir up FEAR.

[PSPS]

7. It "proves" no such thing. You're just throwing out a #10

Worshiper/Apologist Hit Parade:

1. This is nothing new
2. I have nothing to hide
3. What are you, a freeper?
4. But Obama is better than Christie/Romney/Bush/Hitler
5. Greenwald/Flaherty/Gillum/Apuzzo/Braun is a hack
6. We have red light cameras, so this is no big deal
7. Corporations have my data anyway
8. At least Obama is trying
9. This is just the media trying to take Obama down
10. It's a misunderstanding/you are confused
11. You're a racist
12. Nobody cares about this anyway / "unfounded fears"
13. I don't like Snowden, therefore we must disregard all of this
14. Other countries do it

[randome]

10. You know, your list is designed to shut down conversation.

What happens when you truly are confused? You'll just refuse to admit it, right?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[DirkGently]

17. No, the false arguments listed are designed for that.

[intaglio]

11. What a terrible list

Numbers 1, 7 and 9 are true.

Number 14 is part true and has been part true for in excess of 50 years. Waht is more for in excess of 50 years the USA has been providing the funding for these effirts and this has been know for more than 25 years.

The rest are just what you want others to say so you can feel oppressed.

Please note that because nothing that the NSA has done is currently illegal, Alan Grayson is proposing a rider to the Defense Authorisation that would outlaw it.

[DirkGently]

18. Assuming the NSA stopped breaking the laws it broke

under Bush and then under Obama in 2011, you mean.

You actually have no idea whether either the laws or the Constitution are being violated.

[intaglio]

23. When did examining open, public information become illegal?

Envelopes and what is written on them is public information in exactly the same way that metadata is public information. What is more it has to be public or else the postal service and the internet cannot work. Grayson's proposed amendment restricts money available under the Defense Authorization and forbids the retention and examination of such public information with a criminal penalty.

If course it would mean that the many government servers and lines through which internet data passes on the way to its destination would also have to be locked or sold off ...

I can see many predatory companies drooling at the prospect

[DirkGently]

24. Since no one thinks NSA is collecting "open, public information?"

For Pete's sake, if that were true, we wouldn't need the Patriot Act and secret FISA rulings to support it. By the way, if you think people's e-mail and phone records are "open, public information," try calling up a service provider and getting it for yourself.

Moreover, metadata is hardly all the NSA is doing. Even the rubber-stamping, Bush-administration packed FISA court has already found the NSA law under which it runs PRISM was being used unconstitutionally as late as 2011. Of course, the government has argued no one can see the ruling, so we don't know how it was violating the Constitution, or what it's done to fix it.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/public-first-secret-court-grants-eff-motion-consenting-disclosure

Government Says Secret Court Opinion on Law Underlying PRISM Program Needs to Stay Secret

In a rare public filing in the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), the Justice Department today urged continued secrecy for a 2011 FISC opinion that found the National Security Agency's surveillance under the FISA Amendments Act to be unconstitutional. Significantly, the surveillance at issue was carried out under the same controversial legal authority that underlies the NSA’s recently-revealed PRISM program.

EFF filed a suit under the Freedom of Information Act in August 2012, seeking disclosure of the FISC ruling. Sens. Ron Wyden and Mark Udall revealed the existence of the opinion, which found that collection activities under FISA Section 702 "circumvented the spirit of the law” and violated the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. But, at the time, the Senators were not permitted to discuss the details publicly. Section 702 has taken on new importance this week, as it appears to form the basis for the extensive PRISM surveillance program reported recently in the Guardian and the Washington Post.

[treestar]

12. So those arguments are wrong because you say so? nt

[99Forever]

20. Nice list.

Might I borrow it? Pretty sums up the authoritarian/surveillance state tools bullshit excuse list, very well.

[PSPS]

6. Because it isn't intended to be used that way

The Stasi worked the same way.

All of this information is used to monitor people and, if necessary, it will be used to trigger other actions. Since it is being collected illegally ("secret court" overriding the 4th amendment not withstanding,) it could never be entered into evidence.

[Th1onein]

22. Bingo!

Just for extortion purposes on judges, congressmen/women, presidents, etc.

[FarCenter]

8. Most of the earth is not in a satellite camera's field of view most of the time

Consider a camera with a very powerful zoom lens. At maximum magnification, it has a very narrow field of view.

This, of course, leads to a game of tracking satellites and doing stuff when one is not overhead. But the imagery is good for stationary targets, and satellite orbits can be changed to photo specific targets at specific times in the future, although that is extremely expensive.

[jmowreader]

21. Not only is it expensive, it's almost impossible to do

Retasking a satellite takes a shitload of coordination because so many people's work depends on the thing staying on its original course. The satellite controllers don't want to do it either because satellites only have so much fuel onboard (it's there to make minor course adjustments, not to shove the bird a thousand miles east for one consumer) and retasking takes a lot of it, hence shortening the lifespan of the vehicle.

If you need coverage of a specific area at a specific time, you use "airbreathers" - drones and manned airplanes.

Think back to the first time they terminated the SR-71 program. Congress was all "now we have satellites and you can do anything with a satellite that you can with an SR-71." And all the spooks were going, "yeah, except for putting the bastard over Moscow at exactly two in the afternoon next Tuesday if it wasn't going to be there anyway." Then the Gulf War came and that one little issue turned into a huge problem.

[treestar]

13. For a criminal trial, they'd need a regular warrant from a court

Plus there is not recording of phone calls from the phone company. The warrant is for a wiretap on the phone, probable cause that there is criminal activity going to be revealed in the phone conversations.

[moondust]

19. Probably because few people had any idea what NSA was doing.

But now that everybody has at least a general idea:

Lawyers eye NSA data as treasure trove for evidence in murder, divorce cases