Pentagon: Use of Surveillance Planes in Protests Was Legal

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Source: Associated Press, via NBC Washington

Pentagon: Use of Surveillance Planes in Protests Was Legal

The flights in late May and early June came as President Donald Trump was calling for tougher measures to quell widespread unrest

By Lolita C. Baldor • Published August 21, 2020 • Updated on August 21, 2020 at 8:13 pm

The use of National Guard reconnaissance planes in four U.S. cities to monitor the widespread protests earlier this year didn't violate rules against the military collecting intelligence on Americans, a Pentagon report has concluded.

The investigation by the Air Force inspector general found that the planes were used to gather information about crowd size, crowd flows and fires but they did not monitor individuals. The probe was ordered by Defense Secretary Mark Esper in response to questions within the department and Congress about whether the military illegally conducted surveillance of American citizens during the unrest after the death of George Floyd.

The flights in late May and early June came as President Donald Trump was calling for tougher measures to quell the widespread unrest. Floyd was a black man who died after a white Minneapolis policeman pressed his knee into his neck for several minutes.

{snip}

The surveillance aircraft were used in four locations. And while the report found no intelligence gathering violations, it concluded that the Defense Department doesn't have adequate rules for the use of the RC-26 plane and that the aircraft is incorrectly considered to be a non-intelligence platform.

{snip}

Copyright AP - Associated Press

Read more: https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/pentagon-use-of-surveillance-planes-in-protests-was-legal/2398007/

---

The use of National Guard reconnaissance planes in four U.S. cities to monitor the widespread protests earlier this year didn't violate rules against the military collecting intelligence on Americans, a Pentagon report has concluded.

Link to tweet

[SWBTATTReg]

1. BS! To spy on American citizens? BS.

[Roy Rolling]

3. My first thought, too

Bullshit.

I was looking to see who made the determination it was all good clean fun, and it wasn’t a court or any third-party, objective arbiter.

It was the Pentagon itself. If the Pentagon has thoughT spying on citizens was wrong, they wouldn’t have launched planes in the first place.

[mpcamb]

5. Right! This another situation where government decides on a conclusion to justify what they did

and uses whatever tortured logic as an excuse to land there.
Keep any inspection of what went on within the confines of the department.

[bucolic_frolic]

2. They spy on citizens and we can't even see Trump's tax returns /nt

[ms liberty]

4. So nice of them to clear up that question for us

[2naSalit]

6. I call BS too!!!

So was this particular IG a -45 appointee?

Asking for a friend.

[jaxexpat]

7. "Military planes spying on US citizens? What planes? There were no planes!"

"Oh, you mean those perfectly legal military planes designed to spot fires, crowd flows and crowd sizes and other usual tasks which I could totally make up at the spur of the moment if necessary." said unidentified person masquerading as informed liaison to military.

[flibbitygiblets]

8. But Republicans say it was "treason" to surveil Flynn who was talking to Russia and Turkey?

Umn, yeah.

I think we Democrats should be freaking out over this, both because it's bullshit, and because it's exactly what Republicans would do, even if it weren't bullshit. What they have in spades is fake outrage. We don't seem to be so good at outrage, even when it's beyond warranted.

[Igel]

11. If you video somebody on the street,

is that as bad as hacking their phone so you get a recording of their conversations when they're at home making private calls?

Here the claim is that the on-the-street recording is seriously *worse* than recording a private conversation.

The question isn't which is worse--it should be obvious that tapping your phone is more of an invasion of privacy than writing down a license plate number displayed on a car in the street--but whether the military was allowed to record what was publicly visible for all to see.

Which was no different from what local police or private citizens could do with a drone.

It's the status of the observer that might make it illegal. Not the action itself, which is perfectly legal.

[llashram]

9. BS, his appointee

Esper can have any outcome he wants on any decision by any IG as trump dictates...BS BS BS...

[turbinetree]

10. They did this spy shit during the Vietnam War protests right along with the FBI