Re: PRISM: NSA/FBI Internet data mining project

[Phil Fagan <philfagan () gmail com>]

Good point; apparently the doctorine does protect against the case whereby
any collected data would have been found anway "with a court order."


On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:

> On Jun 21, 2013, at 5:10 PM, Phil Fagan <philfagan () gmail com> wrote:
>
> 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 warrant.
>
>
> That statement ignores a longstanding legal principle known as "fruit of
> the poison tree".
>
>  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.
>
>
> Indeed, they don't even seem to be required to bother with the court order
> any more. The standing FISA order seems to pretty much allow them to do all
> the required line crossing without any additional court order.
>
>  I personally think there is nothing wrong with monitoring US
> communications - big difference between monitoring US communications and
> monitoring US persons communications.
>
>
> It's pretty clear that they are likely monitoring both.
>
> Owen
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Dan White <dwhite () 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


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