NeoCons Turn Spy Satellites on U.S. Citizens

[Nbadan]

You knew it was just a matter of time....

U.S. Turns Spy Satellites on U.S. Citizens


The Wall Street Journal reports that the Department of Homeland Security has approved a measure to allow federal civilian agencies and law enforcement to turn American spy satellites on their own citizens for the first time.

Until now, the highly sensitive satellites were aimed mostly at other countries, usually ones we didn't really trust. Occasionally, geologists and NASA scientists got to use them to make things like topographical maps. Letting domestic security folks use them to spy is, the Journal says, "uncharted territory."

Officials have been mulling the plan for a couple years, but often bumped up against questions about whether this kind of snooping would violate the Posse Comitatus Act, which bars military for engaging in law-enforcement activity within the U.S., since the satellites are built for and owned by the Defense Department.

The decision was made three months ago by Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnel, and OKed in May by DHS chief Michael Chertoff.

Access to the satellite will be controlled by a new Homeland Security branch, the National Applications Office. As Charles Allen, the DHS's chief intelligence officer who will head up the new program, summed up cryptically, "It is an idea whose time has come."

Naturally, privacy groups are freaking out. Sentences like this one probably don't help. "The full capabilities of these systems are unknown outside the intelligence community, because they are among the most closely held secrets in government."

One privacy advocate complained that it was this secrecy that was the real problem.

"You are talking about enormous power," said Gregory Nojeim, senior counsel and director of the Project on Freedom, Security and Technology for the Center for Democracy and Technology, a nonprofit group advocating privacy rights in the digital age. "Not only is the surveillance they are contemplating intrusive and omnipresent, it's also invisible. And that's what makes this so dangerous."

CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/08/15/the_skinny/main3168959.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_3168959)


Black helicopters are sooo 70's. Black satellites is where it's at...

[ggoose25]

Sweet.

don't you know, Dan? Big Brother is only looking out for our best interests.

[DarkReign]

Unsurprising. Let the games begin.

[xrayzebra]

The sky is falling, the sky is falling. OOOOOOppppss.... just another
Satellite passing overhead. Back to important things, like
smoking with children in the car and trans-fats..

[Yonivore]

Couldn't be looking for terrorists with those things, could they? Nah, their looking for mouse's dope and GGA's porn farms.

Seriously, just because they're pointing satellites at CONUS doesn't mean they're spying on Americans.

I say, go for it...I hope the program is successful.

[Nbadan]

I thought the whole idea was to fight them over there so that we didn't have to fight them here.....and where is the over-sight?....why should this not be used to spy on political enemies?

[Yonivore]

I thought the whole idea was to fight them over there so that we didn't have to fight them here.....and where is the over-sight?....why should this not be used to spy on political enemies?
Well, Dan, those satellites have been passing overhead for quite some time now. Frankly, I find it hard to believe you already don't believe the U. S. Government is using them for nefarious purposes.

Why does revealing domestic uses in a Wall Street Journal article suddenly mean they're going to start something illegal they could have been doing all along...without revealing domestic uses of the satellites?

Just curious.

[Nbadan]

Well, Dan, those satellites have been passing overhead for quite some time now. Frankly, I find it hard to believe you already don't believe the U. S. Government is using them for nefarious purposes.

Why does revealing domestic uses in a Wall Street Journal article suddenly mean they're going to start something illegal they could have been doing all along...without revealing domestic uses of the satellites?

Just curious.

Given the WSJ new relationship with Rupert Murdoch of FAUX News fame, that's a good question.. Why announce something that we know has been going on covertly anyway?

[Yonivore]

Former Spook, a former member of the U. S. Intelligence community, at "In From The Cold," handles the issue a little less hysterically than does Nbadan.

Eyes in the Sky (http://formerspook.blogspot.com/2007/08/eyes-in-sky.html)

Here's a suggestion for some enterprising reporter (assuming there are any left). Keep an eye on the office of Federal Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit. Any second now, an ACLU attorney is bound to rush through the door, with an emergency request to "halt" the expanded use of spy satellites for domestic purposes.

As outlined in today's Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB118714764716998275.html?mod=blog), the nation's top intelligence official has greatly expanded the range of federal and local authorities who can get access to information from the nation's "vast" network of spy satellites. Under a decision made three months ago, the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Mike McConnell, granted wider access to spy satellite imagery to other civilian agencies and law enforcement. Until now, as the Journal notes, access to that data (beyond the defense and intelligence communities), has been restricted to such agencies as NASA and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and only for the purpose of scientific and environmental study.

The prospect of greater domestic use of spy satellites is bound to throw the ACLU into a tizzy, sending them in search of a friendly federal judge, and some sort of temporary injunction. You may recall that Judge Taylor (a Carter appointee) ruled last year that the NSA domestic surveillance program was unconstitutional (http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Judge), a decision that was subsequently overturned by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

However, that little setback won't deter the ACLU; nor will their remote prospects for success in challenging the domestic imagery program. As soon as the organization can find someone who's being "harmed" by the new initiative, the ACLU will be in court, claiming that the domestic use of spy satellites is a major threat to our privacy and other civil liberties.

And ordinarily, it might be. But reading the WSJ article carefully, you'll find that the program will be initially aimed at enhancing border security, protecting key infrastructure and assisting first responders after natural disasters. In other words, the imagery will provide wide coverage of area targets--something spy satellites do very well. They won't be zooming in on 79 Wistful Vista (or any other private address) in the initial phase of the program, and it's doubtful that they will ever be used for that purpose, for several reasons.

First, there is an obvious concern about civil liberties. Charles Allen, the former senior CIA officer who now runs intel operations for the Department of Homeland Security, says his agency will "take time" before providing spy satellite imagery to law enforcement agencies. He told the Journal that DHS will have a team of lawyers to review requests for access or use of the systems.

"This all has to be vetted through a legal process," he says. "We have to get this right because we don't want civil-rights and civil-liberties advocates to have concerns that this is being misused in ways which were not intended."

The envisioned "process" will likely build on the example of USGS Civil Applications Committee, which vetted past requests for overhead imagery, primarily for map-making and scientific research. A new DHS branch, the National Applications Office, will control access to overhead imagery by law enforcement and other civilian agencies.

Secondly, as Mr. Allen points out, the limits of satellite technology create restrictions on what those platforms can collect. It's a popular misconception that the U.S. operates a large fleet of spy satellites, able to pinpoint a specific car (or individual) at will. In reality, the number of imagery satellites is relatively small and they constantly orbit the earth, limiting their "dwell time" over specific locations.

Additionally, the requirement for domestic coverage will place further demands on the constellation--demands that must be carefully weighed against service life, operating costs and other factors. Keeping sensors switched on to cover CONUS targets will mean that batteries, communications links and other components wear out faster. Maneuvering a satellite to optimize imagery of a certain port or other infrastructure components will require more fuel--or an earlier replacement of the platform. These are key considerations in an era when spy satellites typically cost billions of dollars, and are expected to remain on orbit for years.

Finally, there's the very real possibility that Congress and the Courts will get involved in the oversight process, given the lack of existing regulations and legal precedent. Given the recent, bruising fight over the NSA surveillance program, it's likely that the administration may offer some "compromise" over the domestic imagery initiative, formalizing the process through the National Applications Office, or even creating an imagery equivalent of the FISA court. While that process would be cumbersome, the White House--and Congress--might be willing to accept that option, creating a legal mechanism for domestic imagery surveillance, and allowing the program to proceed.

However, the legal wrangling over this effort will likely continue for years--and that may not necessarily be a bad thing. There are a number of unanswered questions about using imagery satellites against CONUS targets which require clarification from the legal system.

For example, let's say that an imagery bird is "tasked" for surveillance of an east coast port. Some of the resulting intel "products" cover not only the port complex, but the surrounding neighborhoods as well. Reviewing the data, an imagery analyst notes something suspicious and zeroes in on a particular backyard. The images suggest that possible terrorist activity is on-going at that location, and an attack may be imminent.

What to do? Under existing guidelines (or the lack thereof), the surveillance can continue without a warrant or a judge's approval. Few would argue against the need to keep an eye on the suspicious activity, but at what point does local law enforcement get involved? Can the cops use information derived from overhead surveillance in convincing a judge to sign a search warrant? What can be disclosed in the discovery phase of the case? What about classification issues? These are but a few of the questions that require some sort of legal resolution.

The real key is balancing the legal concerns against the necessary use of overhead imagery platforms in domestic surveillance. In our current threat environment, the initiative described in the WSJ article is both prudent and overdue, with necessary safeguards for individual liberties. The ACLU is obviously free to challenge the program--and we'd be surprised if they didn't--but civil libertarians (and complicit judges) should not be allowed to halt the effort until every legal aspect can be addressed. As we've learned in the FISA debate, a domestic surveillance program can easily operate within the confines of the law--and produce intelligence information that saves American lives. There's no reason the imagery program can't function in the same, productive, law-abiding--manner.

***

ADDENDUM: Government lawyers who will (eventually) defend the imagery initiative in court must be thanking their lucky stars for Google Earth. In an era when commercial satellite services are providing high-resolution services, it will be more difficult for the ACLU to claim that the government is invading someone's privacy, when the similar information--on the same targets--can be obtained by anyone with a computer and a credit card.
Once you start looking at the realities and limitations (not to mention damn competitive public sector products, such as Google Earth, this whole exercise doesn't seem so onerous to me.

But, I'm not Nbadan.

[Yonivore]

Given the WSJ new relationship with Rupert Murdoch of FAUX News fame, that's a good question.. Why announce something that we know has been going on covertly anyway?
Who says it's been going on covertly? That's a presumption you've yet to prove.

If you'll read the article and my previous post, you'll see how idiotic is your paranoia.

[boutons_]

All this just in time for 2008 election campaign.

All those Repug political operatives parachuted into FBI/CIA/NSA to chase off and replace career professionals will fish out Demo emails, faxes, telephone conversations from the torrent of private info these agencies are vacumming up and feed them to Rove, RNC committee, etc, etc.

Such incredible power to rape privacy without oversight will most certainly be abused.

All (extreme) power always is. With Repugs, have no doubt the abuse will be rampant.

[ggoose25]

How long will it be before American political enemies are dubbed "terrorists" or even worse: "enemy combatants"?

With the Bush record of abusing presidential power and injecting politics into every facet of their administration, would you trust this President not to infringe on your rights if it benefited them?

Worse case scenario is this is the beginning of an overt police state where habeas corpus is suspended and Americans are left to rot beyond the jurisdiction of federal courts.

[Nbadan]

Since the Bush adminstration can't win a war at abroad they have decided to declare war at home - and the enemy combatant is YOU!


WASHINGTON --The Bush administration has approved a plan to expand domestic access to some of the most powerful tools of 21st century spycraft, giving law enforcement officials and others the ability to view data obtained from satellite and aircraft sensors that can see through cloud cover and even penetrate buildings and underground bunkers.

A program approved by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security will allow broader domestic use of secret overhead imagery beginning as early as this fall, with the expectation that state and local law enforcement officials will eventually be able to tap into technology once largely restricted to foreign surveillance.

Administration officials say the program will give domestic security and emergency preparedness agencies new capabilities in dealing with a range of threats, including illegal immigration, terrorism, hurricanes and forest fires.

But the program, first described Wednesday by the Wall Street Journal, quickly provoked civil liberties advocates, who said the government was crossing a well-established line separating use of military assets and domestic law enforcement.

Although the federal government has long permitted the use of spy-satellite imagery for certain scientific functions -- such as creating topographic maps or monitoring volcanic activity -- the administration's decision would provide domestic authorities with unprecedented access to high-resolution, real-time satellite photos.

LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-intel16aug16,1,3054022.story?ctrack=1&cset=true)

[xrayzebra]

Given the WSJ new relationship with Rupert Murdoch of FAUX News fame, that's a good question.. Why announce something that we know has been going on covertly anyway?

No sweat dan. Just Google Earth



http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z273/xrayzebra/Dansworld.jpg

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

All this just in time for 2008 election campaign.

All those Repug political operatives parachuted into FBI/CIA/NSA to chase off and replace career professionals will fish out Demo emails, faxes, telephone conversations from the torrent of private info these agencies are vacumming up and feed them to Rove, RNC committee, etc, etc.

Such incredible power to rape privacy without oversight will most certainly be abused.

All (extreme) power always is. With Repugs, have no doubt the abuse will be rampant.

http://www.buffalobeast.com/96/images/tinfoil.hat.jpg

Yep, there's no check on the executive branch by the legislative or judicial. :rolleyes

Look, it's been widely reported you can log on google earth street view and find all sorts of stuff - even a cop asleep in his car (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=police&sll=32.720848,-117.230945&sspn=0.014424,0.016501&layer=c&ie=UTF8&t=k&om=1&cbll=32.69021,-117.17745&cbp=1,358.6216927187999,0.6654964216729536,3&ll=32.690816,-117.177351&spn=0.001526,0.002494&z=19).

So people are worried about 3 meter resolution images from 100 miles up? Come on...

[Holt's Cat]

So that's what Chertoff does. I guess he can't be bothered with minutae such as a Cat 5 'cane headed towards southern Louisiana and Mississippi.

[Holt's Cat]

I'm sure a Demo administration will rescind this. Yeah.

[medstudent]

oh yeah google earth can be used to spy... :rollin

you guys are wee-tah-dud

[Wild Cobra]

oh yeah google earth can be used to spy... :rollin

you guys are wee-tah-dud
Yep, the google earth has the car in my driveway I solde over 3 years ago!

[DarkReign]

Yep, the google earth has the car in my driveway I solde over 3 years ago!

Exactly. Google Earth may be many things, but "current" is not one of them.