PRISM: NSA/FBI Internet data mining project

Fri Jun 21 15:10:14 UTC 2013

I would think this is only an issue if they throw out the Fourth in that
when they use that data collected "inadvertantly" to build a case a against
you they use no other data collected under a proper warrent.

If the purpose was to actually collect data on you, in the event you do
something , they can simply run a query against this data post court
order...then that's crossing the line.

I personally think there is nothing wrong with monitoring US communications
- big difference between monitoring US communications and monitoring US
persons communications.

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Dan White <dwhite at olp.net> wrote:

> On 06/09/13 11:10 -0500, Dan White wrote:
>
>> Let me put my gold tipped tinfoil hat on in response to your statement.
>>
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/**world/2013/jun/20/fisa-court-**
> nsa-without-warrant<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/20/fisa-court-nsa-without-warrant>
>
> If accurate, this is extremely concerning:
>
>
>
>   Top secret documents submitted to the court that oversees surveillance
> by US
>   intelligence agencies show the judges have signed off on broad orders
> which
>   allow the NSA to make use of information "inadvertently" collected from
>   domestic US communications without a warrant.
>
>   The documents show that even under authorities governing the collection
> of
>   foreign intelligence from foreign targets, US communications can still be
>   collected, retained and used.
>
>   ...However, alongside those provisions, the Fisa court-approved policies
>   allow the NSA to:
>
>   • Keep data that could potentially contain details of US persons for up
>     to five years;
>
>     Retain and make use of "inadvertently acquired" domestic communications
>     if they contain usable intelligence, information on criminal activity,
>     threat of harm to people or property, are encrypted, or are believed to
>     contain any information relevant to cybersecurity;
>
>
>
> All protections afforded by the fourth amendment have essentially been
> thrown into the (rather large) bit bucket by the FISA court, when it comes
> to any bits which leave your premise.
>
> --
> Dan White
>
>

-- 
Phil Fagan
Denver, CO
970-480-7618