Posted on 01/20/2014 4:55:51 PM PST by Olog-hai
A federal judge in a Chicago terrorism case says the government doesn’t have to disclose whether it employed the kind of phone and Internet surveillance revealed in leaks by ex-government contractor Edward Snowden.
The pretrial ruling dealt only with Adel Daoud’s case. He denies seeking to detonate a bomb outside a Chicago bar in 2012. …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Hard cases, bad law....
It’s not harassing Boy Scouts (or the new non-gay alternative, Trail Scouts) that the government is going to defend anti-4th-amendment spying for. It’s catching a would-be bomber.
In the long run, this is going to create headaches for everybody. Because the country is so over-lawed. There are bans on everything from A to Z. Want to harass someone you hate? Arrange an “accidental” discovery of something they did wrong.
God being God, this is going to end up blowing back on the spies. But the times in between will be very “interesting” eh.
It’s becoming clear via recent articles that local police are indeed getting all the help they need from the big NSA computer.
The IT issues are still daunting, IMHO, because of the sheer volume of material which must be digested.
Some could be chalked up to providence rather than to spying. We do note that nobody else has hijacked a plane to serve as a jihadi bombing in the USA since 9/11. The spies may want to crow about that, but they are not God. I credit God.
Still, the capability could lend itself to mischief. Interesting times may be ahead.
What we are finding out about today is only the latest version of spying technology that was not new when the 20MB Seagate ST-225 was the state of the art. They solved the storage matters of “sheer volume” before Reagan began his second term.
No but the shoe bomber and the fruit of the boom panty bomber were both actively engaged trying to detonate their bombs in mid-flight when passengers tackled them.
In other cases, there have been suspcious muslims playing musical chairs on flights.
James Woods observed such shenanigans on a dry run by the 9-11 hijackers and reported it to the authorities (prior to the 9-11 attacks).
Even with forewarning by the Russians regarding the Boston bombers, the US authorities tie their own hands. Even AFTER the video surfaced, they supressed news of the profiles of the suspects. Wouldn't want to irritate CAIR.
Were they afraid that putting their mugs on tv would "warn" them that we knew who they were?
And what of their moderate friends and relatives who said that even when the pictures were released, they didn't come forward to ID them? Let alone the government figures who'd personally interviewed the older brother repeatedly.
It would be nice if they actually used their spying system to detect Muslim terrorists. Actually, as long as they have other evidence to convict this guy, I think the judge is correct here. And if they don’t, then presumably he’ll get off.
Is it better that the guilty are punished, or that the innocent are not harmed?
Does anyone know the name(s) of his attorney(s)? If so, could you please list them here at FR.
thanks
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.