Does anyone doubt that the satellite surveillance can see through walls?

Question

I recently posted a question concerning the satellite surveillance program that takes effect October 1st. I was very surprised to see the silly answers that I received. Some people stated that they were not criminals so they didnot need to worry. That's exactly why we lose our constitutional rights. If you do not care for yourself...think of these programs and laws like the raises in electric bills. Once the government gets something they do not ever let it go. The news is that it can see through walls, bricks and that congress is questioning whether it is constitutional and what issues need to be addressed regarding our safety. This technology has the power to zap humans and burn them. Yet, I got answers like people that question this wear tin hats. That only proved that some people do not read anything about new technology. The good news is this: There are people out there fighting for your rights just as MLK fought for those who remained silent many years ago.

Congress to probe domestic spy satellite use
Nick Juliano
August 28, 2007

The Department of Homeland Security's top intelligence, privacy and civil rights officials will be called before Congress next week to explain the Bush administration's plan to dramatically expand the domestic use to spy satellites that can see through clouds, buildings and underground bunkers.
The House Homeland Security Committee will examine whether privacy rights will be violated by the DHS's creation of a new office to grant expanded access to spy satellite data to a variety of local and federal agencies, including law enforcement.
Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS) wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff earlier this month inquiring about the spy program.
Under a program approved by the DHS and Office of the Director of National Intelligence, detailed imagery from powerful satellites will be available to domestic security and emergency preparedness agencies to deal with threats

Answer 1

Yeah, the whole -- "I've got nothing to hide, so why should I care if the govt violates the constitution" -- very irrational IMO.

In honor of Pastor Martin Niemöller:

First they came for the 6th Amendment, but I hadn't been accused of a crime, so I didn't object to denial of counsel.

Then they came for the 4th Amendment, but I wasn't talking to anyone overseas, so they wouldn't be monitoring me.

Then they came for the rest of the 4th Amendment, but I only called my mother, so there was nothing suspicious in my phone records.

Then they came for the 1st Amendment, but I never associated with criminals, so I didn't worry about being convicted purely based on what other people might do.

Then they came for the 14th Amendment, but I never really understood the rules for Due Process (and wasn't allowed an attorney), so I didn't object.

Then they came for the rest of the 1st Amendment, but I never told anyone about what the government was doing, so again I remained silent.

Then they came for the 5th Amendment, ...... and I no longer had the right to remain silent.

Answer 2

The reason people gave you silly answers is because you asked a silly question. Stop believing all the nonsense you read in random places. If you want to know more about these things, read a reputable scientific or business journal or a legitimate news source.

Answer 3

Sure it can! I think you need a tin foil fez adjustment.

Answer 4

just stop growing all that weed in your apartment and you too will have nothing to hide!

Answer 5

Yes. I use them to look at you when you're naked.