"The Defenders of Freedom" :lol U.S. Spying On Citizens

[Nbadan]

NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls
Updated 5/11/2006 10:38 AM ET


Gen. Michael Hayden, nominated by President Bush to become the director of the CIA, headed the NSA from March 1999 to April 2005. In that post, Hayden would have overseen the agency's domestic phone record collection program.

From the White House:

The White House defended its overall eavesdropping program and said no domestic surveillance is conducted without court approval.

''The intelligence activities undertaken by the United States government are lawful, necessary and required to protect Americans from terrorist attacks,'' said Dana Perino, the deputy White House press secretary, who added that appropriate members of Congress have been briefed on intelligence activities.

From Capitol Hill:

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he would call the phone companies to appear before the panel ''to find out exactly what is going on.''

Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat on the panel, sounded incredulous about the latest report and railed against what he called a lack of congressional oversight. He argued that the media was doing the job of Congress.

''Are you telling me that tens of millions of Americans are involved with al Qaeda?'' Leahy asked. ''These are tens of millions of Americans who are not suspected of anything ... Where does it stop?''

The Democrat, who at one point held up a copy of the newspaper, added: ''Shame on us for being so far behind and being so willing to rubber stamp anything this administration does. We ought to fold our tents.''

The report came as the former NSA director, Gen. Michael Hayden - Bush's choice to take over leadership of the CIA - had been scheduled to visit lawmakers on Capitol Hill Thursday. However, the meetings with Republican Sens. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska were postponed at the request of the White House, said congressional aides in the two Senate offices.

--

Bush administration officials have said repeatedly that the warrantless surveillance program authorized by President Bush after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks is carefully targeted to include only international calls and e-mails into or out of the USA, and only those that involve at least one party suspected of being a member or ally of al-Qaeda or a related terror group.

Some comments related to what the administration calls the "Terrorist Surveillance Program," and surveillance in general:

Gen. Michael Hayden, principal deputy director of national intelligence, and now Bush's nominee to head the CIA, at the National Press Club, Jan. 23, 2006:

"The program ... is not a drift net over (U.S. cities such as) Dearborn or Lackawanna or Fremont, grabbing conversations that we then sort out by these alleged keyword searches or data-mining tools or other devices that so-called experts keep talking about.

"This is targeted and focused. This is not about intercepting conversations between people in the United States. This is hot pursuit of communications entering or leaving America involving someone we believe is associated with al-Qaeda. ... This is focused. It's targeted. It's very carefully done. You shouldn't worry."

Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Feb. 6, 2006:

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales: "Only international communications are authorized for interception under this program. That is, communications between a foreign country and this country. ...

"To protect the privacy of Americans still further, the NSA employs safeguards to minimize the unnecessary collection and dissemination of information about U.S. persons."

Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del.: "I don't understand why you would limit your eavesdropping only to foreign conversations. ..."

Gonzales: "I believe it's because of trying to balance concerns that might arise that, in fact, the NSA was engaged in electronic surveillance with respect to domestic calls."
By Leslie Cauley, USA TODAY
The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.

The NSA program reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans — most of whom aren't suspected of any crime. This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations. But the spy agency is using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity, sources said in separate interviews.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS: The NSA record collection program

"It's the largest database ever assembled in the world," said one person, who, like the others who agreed to talk about the NSA's activities, declined to be identified by name or affiliation. The agency's goal is "to create a database of every call ever made" within the nation's borders, this person added.

For the customers of these companies, it means that the government has detailed records of calls they made — across town or across the country — to family members, co-workers, business contacts and others.

The three telecommunications companies are working under contract with the NSA, which launched the program in 2001 shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the sources said. The program is aimed at identifying and tracking suspected terrorists, they said.

The sources would talk only under a guarantee of anonymity because the NSA program is secret.

Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden, nominated Monday by President Bush to become the director of the CIA, headed the NSA from March 1999 to April 2005. In that post, Hayden would have overseen the agency's domestic call-tracking program. Hayden declined to comment about the program.

The NSA's domestic program, as described by sources, is far more expansive than what the White House has acknowledged. Last year, Bush said he had authorized the NSA to eavesdrop — without warrants — on international calls and international e-mails of people suspected of having links to terrorists when one party to the communication is in the USA. Warrants have also not been used in the NSA's efforts to create a national call database.

In defending the previously disclosed program, Bush insisted that the NSA was focused exclusively on international calls. "In other words," Bush explained, "one end of the communication must be outside the United States."

As a result, domestic call records — those of calls that originate and terminate within U.S. borders — were believed to be private.

Sources, however, say that is not the case. With access to records of billions of domestic calls, the NSA has gained a secret window into the communications habits of millions of Americans. Customers' names, street addresses and other personal information are not being handed over as part of NSA's domestic program, the sources said. But the phone numbers the NSA collects can easily be cross-checked with other databases to obtain that information.

Don Weber, a senior spokesman for the NSA, declined to discuss the agency's operations. "Given the nature of the work we do, it would be irresponsible to comment on actual or alleged operational issues; therefore, we have no information to provide," he said. "However, it is important to note that NSA takes its legal responsibilities seriously and operates within the law."

The White House would not discuss the domestic call-tracking program. "There is no domestic surveillance without court approval," said Dana Perino, deputy press secretary, referring to actual eavesdropping.

USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA)

And now you know why Dubya is trying to hand the Internet to Verizon, AT&T, Bell South, etc -- the same companies helping the NSA and the Bush Junta spy on Americans. A payback for services rendered -- and a way to allow these same companies to close down any freedom on the Internet as well.

[IceColdBrewski]

Eh, let him spy for all I care. I pose no threat to national security, so I've got nothing to hide.

[Nbadan]

Knowledge is power. Want to spy on political enemies or subverts?

Qwest has declined to participate in NSA illegal wire-tapping program:


Among the big telecommunications companies, only Denver-based Qwest refused to help the National Security Agency, sources tell USA TODAY.


According to multiple sources, Qwest declined to participate because it was uneasy about the legal implications of handing over customer calling information to the government without warrants.

The NSA originally approached Qwest and other major phone carriers in 2001 after the attacks of Sept. 11. They said turning over the "call-detail records" was a matter of national security. The records don't include names and addresses with the phone numbers, rather they show calling activity. Still personal customer information, according to USA TODAY, could be located by cross-checking the entries with other databases.

According to sources familiar with the events, Qwest's CEO at the time, Joe Nacchio, was deeply troubled by the NSA's assertion that Qwest didn't need a court order - or approval under FISA - to proceed. Adding to the tension, Qwest was unclear about who, exactly, would have access to its customers' information and how that information might be used.

9 NEWS (http://www.9news.com/acm_news.aspx?OSGNAME=KUSA&IKOBJECTID=23f4a7e2-0abe-421a-01a7-c2472c590672&TEMPLATEID=0c76dce6-ac1f-02d8-0047-c589c01ca7bf)

By the way, your in the minority. 75% of pollers on this CNN Poll (cnn.com) find the illegal wiretaps 'Creepy" (I guess that's CNNs attempt at humor)

[Ocotillo]

The reason people on the left of the political spectrum generally are more sensitive to this than others is when the abuses begin, they are generally the subject of the legally questionable practices. Back in the 60s and 70s the anti-war movement were illegally wiretapped by the FBI.

Recently, anti-war people, enviromental groups and even vegans and Quakers have been the subject of the hounding tactics.

You're doing nothing wrong? Neither am I but I don't want to be the target of the government invading my privacy because I may have differing views on what government policy is.

When you take into account the wingnut media types like Coulter and her ilk who refer to liberals as treasonous, anti-American, etc.... Some may even adopt the way of thinking of why not eavesdrop on "those" people.

But we are all Americans. We don't accept some "benevolent" dictator picking who and who can't enjoy the freedoms our forefathers created for this nation.

All we are saying is follow the intent of the constitution. Don't act alone, consult the judiciary and get a warrant.

[Nbadan]

Reed Hundt, former FCC Chair writes:


“No one should imagine that what NSA has done, if reports are accurate, is normal behavior or standard procedure in the interaction between a private communications network and the government. In an authoritarian country without a bill of rights and with state ownership of the communications network, such eavesdropping by people and computers is assumed to exist. But in the United States it is assumed not to occur, except under very carefully defined circumstances that, according to reports, were not present as NSA allegedly arm-twisted telephone companies into compliance. That is a topic that can’t be avoided in the general’s hearing, if he gets that far.”

Talking Points Memo (http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/008422.php)

[spurster]

Big brother is watching you.

[Crookshanks]

Oh get over yourselves already! They are not taping any calls and they are not listening to any calls. They have simply set up a program that can ferret out patterns of phone calls - and then they can determine if they need to listen. Oh BTW, this program was approved by the Supreme Court during the CLINTON administration - this is not some new "Bush" program.

If you're not making calls to or receiving calls from a known terrorist organization, then you have nothing to worry about.

I can't believe the extreme arrogance of people who think they are sooo important that they government must want to listen in on their phone conversations. What's funny is that these are probably some of the same people who talk on their cellphones incessantly, in public, so that anyone and everyone can hear all their business!!

[Nbadan]

:rolleyes

So now you’re saying there are 50 million Al-Queda sympathizers in the U.S.? This isn't just a benign surveillance program, with virtually no over-sight, the potential abuse of this program is something comparable to surveillance programs found in fascist states. We aren't just spying on Al-quada anymore; the government has set up a database on every American in the U.S.

[austinfan]

Amendment #4 in the Bill of Rights sez:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The President's job is to uphold the Constitution. If he can't follow the rule of law, then he needs to move to a third-world banana republic, where whatever the local dictator says, goes.

[George W Bush]

Be on alert Spurstalk!
I am reading your posts and checkin' your PM's.



God Bless America :tu

[Crookshanks]

Amendment #4 in the Bill of Rights sez:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Guess what - the 4th amendment doesn't cover the PHONE NUMBERS - just the conversations. The phone numbers belong to the phone companies and there is no expectation of privacy regarding the numbers you call.

Do any of you ever watch Law and Order or other police shows? They are always pulling the phone records of suspects to see who they're calling and who's calling them - and they don't need a warrant to get the records!

The bottom line is that this program has been in effect for many, many years and has been upheld by the Supreme Court. Squawk all you want - but the protection of this country is far more important than your piddly little lives.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Squawk all you want - but the protection of this country is far more important than your piddly little lives.

how many piddly lives is it worth, then?

Edit: You dumbfuck, facist, asshole, pig.

[Mr. Peabody]

Do any of you ever watch Law and Order or other police shows? They are always pulling the phone records of suspects to see who they're calling and who's calling them - and they don't need a warrant to get the records!



Well, in order to do that, you have to invoke the seldom-used "Must See TV" exception to the Fourth Amendment. The majority of jurisdictions no longer recognize the exception, but if you find a judge who doesn't know what he is doing, you might get lucky.

[Crookshanks]

Wrong answer - but thanks for playing! You can go online and, for a fee, get the personal records of just about anybody, including itemized cellphone bills! If the information is out there for anybody to get - why all the screaming about the Federal Govt running a program on numbers to see if there is a pattern of calls to terrorist organizations?


how many piddly lives is it worth, then?

Well, as far as I know, this program has not cost any American citizen their life. However, if it saves lives by preventing another 9/11 - isn't it worth it? I say yes!

[Yonivore]

Qwest has declined to participate in NSA illegal wire-tapping program...
And thus becomes the communications choice of terrorists worldwide.

[Nbadan]

And thus becomes the communications choice of terrorists worldwide.

I think terra' ist would prefer the no-contract pay-and-throw phones.

[Yonivore]

I think terra' ist would prefer the no-contract pay-and-throw phones.
Thanks to the first illegal leak of the NSA program.

[Crookshanks]

Thanks to the first illegal leak of the NSA program.

Exactly! I would think the ILLEGAL leak has the potential to cost far more lives than the "illegal" wiretapping!

[Vashner]

Yea San Antonio has been part of that Spy Machine that Al Queda Dan hates.

What do you think we do at Electronic Hill at Lackland?

It's to play ping pong and eat lunch in.... it has nothing to do with the worlds most advanced *** * ** *** ** **** * *

Al Queda Dan and Taliboutons would be the FIRST people here on this forum to BLAME GW BUSH if they DIDN"T tap terrorists and another major attack happend.

Also how is the DNC promising better security if they won't use digital comm?

I'll tell you how.. It's BULLSHIT.. they don't care about your security and they don't care about oil prices. They want both bad.. they want bombings, terror and bad economy.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

You just think you were talking to your mom. NSA redirected the call in order to brain wash you to eat your veggies.

[IceColdBrewski]

compiling a comprehensive list of 'all' phone calls made in the U.S. is going to prove unwieldy, expensive, and practically useless since the terrorists aren't stupid

Oh, don't worry, the NSA has e-mails covered too.

http://www.monashreport.com/category/public-policy-and-privacy/privacy/

By the time Dubya is finished, terrorists hoping to operate in this country will be reduced to homing pigeons and smoke signals.

[xrayzebra]

Oh my g=d the sky is falling, the sky is falling. They have my phone numbers and
know who I'm calling. What am I to do, oh, what am I to do. I know, I know.
SA210 will let me under the bridge and butons will protect me and dan will keep us
briefed on the latest intel. Sigh......now I fell better already. Now if I can find some
kindly Illegal to help me find a new job.

[Guru of Nothing]

Oh my g=d the sky is falling, the sky is falling. They have my phone numbers and
know who I'm calling. What am I to do, oh, what am I to do. I know, I know.
SA210 will let me under the bridge and butons will protect me and dan will keep us
briefed on the latest intel. Sigh......now I fell better already. Now if I can find some
kindly Illegal to help me find a new job.

Interesting that someone such as myself always capitalizes "God," while you .... d=n't.

[Extra Stout]

You people have no idea about the tracking capability this country has had upon its citizens since the 1970's.

[Yonivore]

compiling a comprehensive list of 'all' phone calls made in the U.S. is going to prove unwieldy, expensive, and practically useless since the terrorists aren't stupid
You don't understand data mining for trends & patterns.

[Guru of Nothing]

You don't understand data mining for trends & patterns.

I understand completely. I call it three strikes and we got you!

Spurs, Fantasy Football, and the Flaming Lips - suddenly I am "unique."

[FromWayDowntown]

I remember when the Fourth Amendment applied to Americans.

sigh.

[IceColdBrewski]

Interesting that someone such as myself always capitalizes "God," while you .... d=n't.

Gonna need a ruling on this.

Deflection attempt...denied!

[IceColdBrewski]

I remember when the Fourth Amendment applied to Americans.

sigh.

I can remember when Islamic extremists weren't parading around with signs that said "Behead all Non-believers."

[sigh]

[greyforest]

come onnnee, come alllll

into nineteen eighty foouurrrrr

[FromWayDowntown]

I can remember when Islamic extremists weren't parading around with signs that said "Behead all Non-believers."

[sigh]

I remember when this country would fight wars to protect a constitutional way of life without the government seizing that war as an opportunity to infringe upon the rights of the people.

sigh.

[boutons_]

Logging all Americans calling details is enormously powerful.

If you don't think the RNC and Karl Rove aren't salivating over the possibilities of getting that data on politcal enemies, you were born yesterday.

dubya/dickhead/rummy would love nothing better than to finish their pre-2000 wet dream of elevating the Executive to unfettered imperial powers, to do as they please "in the name of national security", while buggering both houses of Congress, and any political opponent and Democratic campaign contributor, while their at it.

You red-state right-winger have no idea of the evilness you have put into the WH.

Imagine the Dems abusing the laws the way the Repugs are, and you'd be all over the Dem WH with impeachment proceedings.

[gtownspur]

I remember when this country would fight wars to protect a constitutional way of life without the government seizing that war as an opportunity to infringe upon the rights of the people.

sigh.

What war was that? the spanish civil war? :lol

[IceColdBrewski]

I remember when this country would fight wars to protect a constitutional way of life without the government seizing that war as an opportunity to infringe upon the rights of the people.

sigh.

Ah, yes. The 18th century. We've been so fortunate to see no major changes since then.

[spurster]

We have an administration that barely believes the law applies to them running programs spying on everybody, and we have a Congress that won't make them stop or at least follow the law. The US is becoming China where security as defined by the government trumps freedom of the people.

[IceColdBrewski]

...The US is becoming China where security as defined by the government trumps freedom of the people.

:rolleyes

[xrayzebra]

I remember when this country would fight wars to protect a constitutional way of life without the government seizing that war as an opportunity to infringe upon the rights of the people.

sigh.

You mean like FDR who had people's mail opened? No court order. Or had
all the Japanese put in camps, no court order. Or Lincoln who did his
thing. You really think your rights are being violated. Just get a
copy of your credit history from all the major credit reporting people. Hehehehe,
do you have a shock coming. The know everything about you, from the
git go. You people need to grow up just a little. Like someone said the
Constitution is not a suicide pact. Looking at phone numbers is not
invading anyone's privacy. Not when you can go to any cafe, mall or just
walk down the street and listen to how many conversations. Get real.

[Ocotillo]

What do you think we do at Electronic Hill at Lackland?



I used to work there. Diddybop.

You thumbsuckers on the right slay me. A handful of misfits from the middle east get together and conspire to fly planes into buildings and you are ready to shred the constitution. Please, protect me Mr. Bush! :rolleyes

Now go change your pants.

[Ocotillo]

Oh get over yourselves already! They are not taping any calls and they are not listening to any calls.

And you know this how? Because someone in the media hasn't printed it? Because the liar-in-chief says he isn't? As the right's folk hero used to say,
"trust but verify"

checks and balances. That's what we want, you know that constitutional stuff.

[George W Bush]

I am reading your posts and checkin' your PM's!

[Oh, Gee!!]

Well, as far as I know, this program has not cost any American citizen their life. However, if it saves lives by preventing another 9/11 - isn't it worth it? I say yes!

But you said the illegal domestic spying program was worth more than our (I'm assuming you mean liberals) piddly lives. I'm wondering how many piddly lives is it worth?

[Yonivore]

You Bush-haters are a bunch of knee-jerk lemings. This exact story was reported by the New York Times back in 2005 and nobody went ballistic. It's being regurgitated and sensationalized because of the recent naming of the new CIA Director who happened to be involved in the NSA intercept program -- and this one too.

Man, you people will jump on any piece of red meat thrown to you and act like a bunch of rabid dogs, won't you. Even if it's a putrid, maggot-infested, rotting piece that has been laying around IN PLAIN VIEW for months. Way to "hop-to" you idiots.

Oh, and if you think it's bad for the government to contract with the phone services to data mine calling patterns, you should take at look at Qwest's contract with its customers and see with whom else they can AND DO share this exact information.

The mere fact that Qwest isn't cooperating is vindication that the government isn't doing anything wrong. Otherwise, they'd of done it without the cooperation of any of the phone companies.

God, you people are idiots.

[Yonivore]

But you said the illegal domestic spying program was worth more than our (I'm assuming you mean liberals) piddly lives. I'm wondering how many piddly lives is it worth?
Nothing the administration has done, with respect to communications intercepts, is illegal. Combine that with the fact that over 66% of the public don't care or want them to continue, kind of leaves you out in the cold.

[George W Bush]

You Bush-haters are a bunch of knee-jerk lemings. This exact story was reported by the New York Times back in 2005 and nobody went ballistic. It's being regurgitated and sensationalized because of the recent naming of the new CIA Director who happened to be involved in the NSA intercept program -- and this one too.

Man, you people will jump on any piece of red meat thrown to you and act like a bunch of rabid dogs, won't you. Even if it's a putrid, maggot-infested, rotting piece that has been laying around IN PLAIN VIEW for months.

Oh, and if you think it's bad for the government to contract with the phone services to data mine calling patterns, you should take at look at Qwest's contract with its customers and see with whom else they can AND DO share this exact information.

The mere fact that Qwest isn't cooperating is vindication that the government isn't doing anything wrong. Otherwise, they'd of done it without the cooperation of any of the phone companies.

God, you people are idiots.

Nice spin job Yoni,
Uncle Sam will slip you the cash at the next gtg. :tu

[Ocotillo]

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" -- Patrick Henry, 1775


Why does Patick Henry hate America?

[Yonivore]

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" -- Patrick Henry, 1775


Why does Patick Henry hate America?
What chains? Who's enslaved? Quick...give me some names.

And, if you think what the government is doing -- to protect your sorry ass, no less -- amounts to "chains and slavery," trying living under Sharia law for a few days.

Hell, better yet, go live in Mexico; we owe them a few illegals.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Nothing the administration has done, with respect to communications intercepts, is illegal. Combine that with the fact that over 66% of the public don't care or want them to continue, kind of leaves you out in the cold.


The truth will come out, and when it does Bush will go down in history as the worst leader in the history of the United States.

[Yonivore]

The truth will come out, and when it does Bush will go down in history as the worst leader in the history of the United States.
I happen to hold the opposite view.

[Oh, Gee!!]

What chains? Who's enslaved? Quick...give me some names.

And, if you think what the government is doing -- to protect your sorry ass, no less -- amounts to "chains and slavery," trying living under Sharia law for a few days.

Hell, better yet, go live in Mexico; we owe them a few illegals.


Typical deflection. You say, our president may be violating the US Constitution and sending kids to die in a bullshit war, but you have no right to complain because it could always be worse. I say, it could always be better.

[Oh, Gee!!]

I happen to hold the opposite view.

You think the truth will remain hidden?

[Yonivore]

Typical deflection. You say, our president may be violating the US Constitution and sending kids to die in a bullshit war, but you have no right to complain because it could always be worse. I say, it could always be better.
It wasn't deflection. I specifically asked who was in chains and enslaved. I want to respond to your assertion but, you provide no support for the claim.

My reference to Sharia Law was an attempt to inform my opinion that it is my standard for what constitutes "chains and slavery."

And, why did it take you a year to get incensed about this latest NSA program which was reported by the New York Times in 2005?

[Yonivore]

You think the truth will remain hidden?
Yeah, that's what I mean Mr. Dense.

[xrayzebra]

I used to work there. Diddybop.

You thumbsuckers on the right slay me. A handful of misfits from the middle east get together and conspire to fly planes into buildings and you are ready to shred the constitution. Please, protect me Mr. Bush! :rolleyes

Now go change your pants.

You used to work there. Key words "used to". I did to. Want to compare
notes?

By the way, those "handful of misfits" took over a country, blew up the
WTC twice, several embassies, a barracks, a naval ship and assassinated
several people. Busy little "handful" weren't they. Want to restate your
statement?

[Ocotillo]

You used to work there. Key words "used to". I did to. Want to compare
notes?

By the way, those "handful of misfits" took over a country, blew up the
WTC twice, several embassies, a barracks, a naval ship and assassinated
several people. Busy little "handful" weren't they. Want to restate your
statement?

Actually no. First of all they did not take over any countries. They found refuge in a rogue state is the way I would characterize it. There was very little hue and cry from anyone when the first WTC attack occurred and the other overseas acts. Like I said, when a handful of misfits flew some planes into buildings here then people began surrendering their freedoms for security.

Only an extremely small number of people opposed the military being sent into Afghanistan in pursuit of Bin Laden. I along with most others, were proud of the accomplishments of the military there. They literally took over the country with special forces when the Russians were bogged down for years to no avail.

Then it was off to Iraq. Afghanistan and Bin Laden were shoved to the back burner.

Here at home we were implored that our fight against terrorism was to preserve our way of life. Yet the freedoms and privacy we have enjoyed were being taken away. True, we are not under Sharia law but why are we inching toward something like it? Just because we aren't as bad as someone else does not excuse bad behavior on our part.

[Ocotillo]

I hold my country to higher standards than other nations or cultures.

[Oh, Gee!!]

I hold my country to higher standards than other nations or cultures.


That's exactly what makes you un-American. Ironic, huh?

[xrayzebra]

That's exactly what makes you un-American. Ironic, huh?

I really don't know how to take your post, as sarcasm or what?

I find his statement dumb and misinformed. He holds his country to a
higher standard. Is there a "standard"? I don't think so. Every country,
should and must look out for their own interest, which includes the
safety and security of their citizens. What is different now days is that
people in our own country will reveal the secrets and inner workings of
our government to obtain a leg up on the opposition party. This started
during the VN era and has accelerated during the Bush administration by
operatives of the opposing party, the dimm-o-craps. They have placed
their ideas and party ahead of the security of their own nation and use
the idea of "truth above all else" and "purity of ideas" as their excuse.
I am lucky in some ways over the younger crowd and idealist on this
forum. I have lived a country that prospered and took much pride in
its self. I served many years overseas and saw the gradual deterioration
of ideas that the "progressive" and "liberal" thinkers brought to the
fore. Like the old "ugly American". We should be ashamed of being an
American and acting like an American when we were overseas, hogwash.
I was proud to be a "Texas first, American second". I had pride in my
country and State. In Canada I used to remind the Canadians: "hey
you know you are an American too". You live on the American continent
just like Mexico. They too are Americans, just from a different region.
(But they should be here in the US of A legally).

Now we have the next generation of those who wish to put this country
down and tell everyone within earshot that we, US of A citizens are a
sorry lot, we dominate the world, which is wrong as two left feet, we
bend over backwards to get along with the world. We kill, torture, spy
on our own people, throw people in jail for no reason, wont give people
a fair trial.....on and on and on.

Like I said, I am in the twilight years of my life and have experienced the
a great life in this wonderful country. Those that advocating and
preaching this hate for our country to will rue the day, mark my words.
I was fortunate enough to have been able to serve this great country in
two great jobs for over 50 years, and yes enjoyed every one of them.
Although some were tough. But I did serve from shortly after WWII,
Korea and Viet Nam and most of the cold war years. Those who are
trying to put this country down and give it away, I feel pity and
will resist you till my dying breath. It may only be with words, but
I will not be quite.

[spurster]

The Bush lovers here would go into apoplexy if was a Democratic president doing this. No one, neither party, should have the power this president has grabbed.

[Yonivore]

The Bush lovers here would go into apoplexy if was a Democratic president doing this. No one, neither party, should have the power this president has grabbed.
Clinton did do this. Can you say "Echelon," I knew that you could...

[spurster]

The Clinton administration compiled with the FISA law or at least there is testimony to that effect:

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/20/the-echelon-myth/

The Clinton administration program, code-named Echelon, complied with FISA. Before any conversations of U.S. persons were targeted, a FISA warrant was obtained. CIA director George Tenet testified to this before Congress on 4/12/00:

"I’m here today to discuss specific issues about and allegations regarding Signals Intelligence activities and the so-called Echelon Program of the National Security Agency…

"There is a rigorous regime of checks and balances which we, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and the FBI scrupulously adhere to whenever conversations of U.S. persons are involved, whether directly or indirectly. We do not collect against U.S. persons unless they are agents of a foreign power as that term is defined in the law. We do not target their conversations for collection in the United States unless a FISA warrant has been obtained from the FISA court by the Justice Department."

[Nbadan]

So Clinton is the new ethical standard-bearer for the Republican party? If Clinton did it, then it must be OK, right? Even the most politically gullible can see the fallacy in that argument.

Meanwhile, the reason the WH didn't want to go through the FISA court was because they KNEW would lose their case...

Thursday, May 11, 2006
No need for Congress, no need for courts


I just this morning read the obviously significant USA Today article detailing the fact that the NSA is maintaining a comprehensive data base of every call made by every American – both internationally and domestically – whether they have anything to do with terrorism or not, obviously all of this without warrants or oversight of any kind. I'm not going to pretend to have all of the legal issues figured out in two hours, and so I won't yet opine as to whether there are serious grounds for arguing either that this is legal or that it’s illegal.

But there is one highly significant, and revealing, item buried in the USA Today article regarding Qwest's refusal to cooperate with the NSA’s demands (and it heroic refusal to capitulate to the NSA’s intimidation tactics and threats) that it turn over its customers' calling data:


The NSA, which needed Qwest's participation to completely cover the country, pushed back hard.

Trying to put pressure on Qwest, NSA representatives pointedly told Qwest that it was the lone holdout among the big telecommunications companies. It also tried appealing to Qwest's patriotic side: In one meeting, an NSA representative suggested that Qwest's refusal to contribute to the database could compromise national security, one person recalled.

In addition, the agency suggested that Qwest's foot-dragging might affect its ability to get future classified work with the government. Like other big telecommunications companies, Qwest already had classified contracts and hoped to get more.

Unable to get comfortable with what NSA was proposing, Qwest's lawyers asked NSA to take its proposal to the FISA court. According to the sources, the agency refused.

The NSA's explanation did little to satisfy Qwest's lawyers. "They told (Qwest) they didn't want to do that because FISA might not agree with them," one person recalled. For similar reasons, this person said, NSA rejected Qwest's suggestion of getting a letter of authorization from the U.S. attorney general's office. A second person confirmed this version of events.

This theme emerges again and again. We continuously hear that the Bush administration has legal authority to do anything the President orders. Claims that he is acting illegally are just frivolous and the by-product of Bush hatred. And yet, as I detailed here, each and every time the administration has the opportunity to obtain an adjudication of the legality of its conduct from a federal court (which, unbeknownst to the administration, is the branch of our government which has the authority and responsibility to interpret and apply the law), it does everything possible to avoid that adjudication.

This continuous evasion of judicial review by the administration is much more serious and disturbing than has been discussed and realized. By proclaiming the power to ignore Congressional law and to do whatever it wants in the area of national security, it is seizing the powers of the legislative branch. But by blocking courts from ruling on the multiple claims of illegality which have been made against it, the administration is essentially seizing the judicial power as well. It becomes the creator, the executor, and the interpreter of the law. And with that, the powers of all three branches become consolidated in The President, the single greatest nightmare of the founders. As Madison warned in Federalist 47:

From these facts, by which Montesquieu was guided, it may clearly be inferred that, in saying "There can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or body of magistrates," or, "if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers," he did not mean that these departments ought to have no partial agency in, or no control over, the acts of each other.

His meaning, as his own words import, and still more conclusively as illustrated by the example in his eye, can amount to no more than this, that where the whole power of one department is exercised by the same hands which possess the whole power of another department, the fundamental principles of a free constitution are subverted. This would have been the case in the constitution examined by him, if the king, who is the sole executive magistrate, had possessed also the complete legislative power, or the supreme administration of justice; or if the entire legislative body had possessed the supreme judiciary, or the supreme executive authority.

[Yonivore]

So Clinton is the new ethical standard-bearer for the Republican party? If Clinton did it, then it must be OK, right? Even the most politically gullible can see the fallacy in that argument.[/B]
I was specifically answering this post:

The Bush lovers here would go into apoplexy if was a Democratic president doing this. No one, neither party, should have the power this president has grabbed.
Pay attention.

[Ocotillo]

Eh, yes a higher standard. The country you and I live in should not be:

1) Abridging freedoms that are protected by the consititution

2) Torture.

3) Spy on our own citizens without judicial oversight. One man is not above the law and even if he has our best interest at heart, successors may not. How about we borrow something the righties have been saying lately, "I'm not doing anything wrong, so I don't have anything to hide." And you Mr. Bush?

4) Attacking sovereign nations that have not attacked us.

etc.....

[xrayzebra]

So Clinton is the new ethical standard-bearer for the Republican party? If Clinton did it, then it must be OK, right? Even the most politically gullible can see the fallacy in that argument.

Meanwhile, the reason the WH didn't want to go through the FISA court was because they KNEW would lose their case...

Thursday, May 11, 2006
No need for Congress, no need for courts

No dan, once again you show your colossal ignorance. Lincoln did his
thing, FDR did his thing, and Clinton did his thing. Most Presidents did
their thing about spying. Growup. You act like a dumbass teenager.
Spying is about keeping an eye on people who will do you harm. Some
dictators have set up programs where neighbors spy on neighbors, but
as yet, I haven't seen that here. We have not infringed on anyones
rights. Congress has been briefed on all aspects of our programs and
until now have had no problems. Get a life, learn a little bit. And do
enjoy all the freedoms you do have.

[FromWayDowntown]

No dan, once again you show your colossal ignorance. Lincoln did his
thing, FDR did his thing, and Clinton did his thing.

FISA did not exist during either the Lincoln or Roosevelt Administrations. It did exist during the Clinton Administration and, as shown above, that President's efforts to undertake domestic surveillance efforts were apparently preceded by the procurement of an appropriate warrant.

That's the thing that is different here, xray. The Bush II Administration is subject to FISA (and the Fourth Amendment, to which FISA creates a limited exception) but has done nothing -- apparently -- to obtain warrants to legalize its actions. If the Administration had the appropriate warrant, I can assure you that my concerns would be wholly assauged.


And do enjoy all the freedoms you do have.

. . . while you can.

[Yonivore]

Those Phone Records Sure Are Secret!

The Qwest privacy policy (http://www.qwest.com/legal/privacyGeneral.html) for telephone customers on the Web:


"Our representatives pull up account records and may refer to your bill, your calling patterns, and other information we have to answer questions you may have or recommend how we can best serve you."
...
"We share information within our Qwest companies to enable us to better understand our customers' product and service needs, and to learn how to best design, develop, and package products and services to meet those needs. . . . Currently, our primary lines of business include local and long-distance services, wireless services, cable services, dedicated web hosting, Internet access for businesses and consumers, on-line services, and directory publishing. We also offer other products and services, for example, Frame Relay, Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM), telephone equipment, voice mail services, and directory advertising."
...
"As a general rule, Qwest does not release customer account information to unaffiliated third parties without your permission unless we have a business relationship with those companies where the disclosure is appropriate."
So . . .

It's a great invasion of privacy to data mine calling patterns for national security purposes, even if the call is not listened to.

But, isn't it noteworthy that the phone company does this on a far more personal level to decide what services to try to sell to you and, probably, to do joint marketing to you with others?

Moral of the story: Those hot and bothered by the telephone call database mining program don't know or appreciate what telephone companies do all the time for their business purposes or the purposes of their business partners.

And wasn't there a big news story just a couple of months ago about the fact that, for a nominal sum, you can buy anyone's cell phone records? In fact, liberal bloggers tried to put together a plan to buy and analyze the telephone records of prominent Republicans in hopes of finding calls that would somehow be embarrassing. These same liberals, of course, are now up in arms about the fact that the NSA does computer analyses of phone records, not with the malicious purpose of singling out political enemies for harassment, but to try to stop terrorist attacks.

There is really no hypocrisy quite like the hypocrisy of a liberal.

One more thing: since Qwest shares its customers' records with companies with which it has a "business relationship," but not with the NSA to prevent terrorist attacks, there is no way I'm doing business with Qwest.

You should never trust a company that can't spell.

[Yonivore]

FISA did not exist during either the Lincoln or Roosevelt Administrations. It did exist during the Clinton Administration and, as shown above, that President's efforts to undertake domestic surveillance efforts were apparently preceded by the procurement of an appropriate warrant.
Show me where Clinton received the millions of search warrants that surely would have been "appropriate" for the Echelon and Carnivore programs.


That's the thing that is different here, xray. The Bush II Administration is subject to FISA (and the Fourth Amendment, to which FISA creates a limited exception) but has done nothing -- apparently -- to obtain warrants to legalize its actions. If the Administration had the appropriate warrant, I can assure you that my concerns would be wholly assauged.
No you wouldn't, you'd be bashing them on something else.

[Nbadan]

Greg Palast dwells into who is DATA-MINING for the Neocons...


The leader in the field of what is called "data mining," is a company, formed , called, "ChoicePoint, Inc," which has sucked up over a billion dollars in national security contracts.


ChoicePoint's board has more Republicans than a Palm Beach country club. It was funded, and its board stocked, by such Republican sugar daddies as billionaires Bernie Marcus and Ken Langone -- even after Langone was charged by the Securities Exchange Commission with abuse of inside information.

I first ran across these guys in 2000 in Florida when our Guardian/BBC team discovered the list of 94,000 "felons" that Katherine Harris had ordered removed from Florida's voter rolls before the election. Virtually every voter purged was innocent of any crime except, in most cases, Voting While Black. Who came up with this electoral hit list that gave Bush the White House? ChoicePoint, Inc.

And worse, they KNEW the racially-tainted list of felons was bogus. And when we caught them, they lied about it. While they've since apologized to the NAACP, ChoicePoint's ethnic cleansing of voter rolls has been amply assuaged by the man the company elected.

And now ChoicePoint and George Bush want your blood. Forget your phone bill. ChoicePoint, a sickened executive of the company told us in confidence, "hope[s] to build a database of DNA samples from every person in the United States …linked to all the other information held by CP [ChoicePoint]" from medical to voting records.

[B]And ChoicePoint lied about that too. The company publicly denied they gave DNA to the Feds -- but then told our investigator, pretending to seek work, that ChoicePoint was "the number one" provider of DNA info to the FBI.

" And that scares the hell out of me," said the executive (who has since left the company), because ChoicePoint gets it WRONG so often. We are not contracting out our Homeland Security to James Bond here. It's more like Austin Powers, Inc. Besides the 97% error rate in finding Florida "felons," Illinois State Police fired the company after discovering ChoicePoint had produced test "results" on rape case evidence … that didn't exist. And ChoicePoint just got hit with the largest fine in Federal Trade Commission history for letting identity thieves purchase 145,000 credit card records.

But it won't stop, despite Republican senators shedding big crocodile tears about "surveillance" of innocent Americans. That's because FEAR is a lucrative business -- not just for ChoicePoint, but for firms such as Syntech, Sybase and Lockheed-Martin -- each of which has provided lucrative posts or profits to connected Republicans including former Total Information Awareness chief John Poindexter (Syntech), Marvin Bush (Sybase) and Lynn Cheney (Lockheed-Martin).

But how can they get Americans to give up our personal files, our phone logs, our DNA and our rights? Easy. Fear sells better than sex -- and they want you to be afraid. Back to today's New York Times, page 28: "Wider Use of DNA Lists is Urged in Fighting Crime." And who is providing the technology? It comes, says the Times, from the work done on using DNA fragments to identity victims of the September 11 attack. And who did that job (for $12 million, no bid)? ChoicePoint, Inc. Which is NOT mentioned by the Times.

" Genetic surveillance would thus shift from the individual [the alleged criminal] to the family," says the Times -- which will require, of course, a national DNA database of NON-criminals.

It doesn't end there. Turn to the same newspaper, page 23, with a story about a weird new law passed by the state of Georgia to fight illegal immigration. Every single employer and government agency will be required to match citizen or worker data against national databases to affirm citizenship. It won't stop illegal border crossing, but hey, someone's going to make big bucks on selling data. And guess what local boy owns the data mine? ChoicePoint, Inc., of Alpharetta, Georgia.

The knuckleheads at the Times don't put the three stories together because the real players aren't in the press releases their reporters re-write.

But that's the Fear Industry for you. You aren't safer from terrorists or criminals or "felon" voters. But the national wallet is several billion dollars lighter and the Bill of Rights is a couple amendments shorter.

And that's their program. They get the data mine -- and we get the shaft.

[Yonivore]

Scoop? We Didn't Have Any Scoop! (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/12/opinion/12fri1.html?ex=1305086400&en=4b6fd378bf5fd134&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss)

The New York Times editorial page is in its usual hysterical form today:


Ever since its secret domestic [sic] wiretapping program was exposed, the Bush administration has depicted it as a narrow examination of calls made by and to terrorism suspects. But its refusal to provide any details about the extent of the spying has raised doubts. Now there is more reason than ever to be worried--and angry--about how wide the government's web has been reaching.

According to an article in USA Today, the National Security Agency has been secretly collecting telephone records on tens of millions of Americans with the cooperation of the three largest telecommunications companies in the nation. The scope of the domestic spying described in the article is breathtaking. The government is reported to be working with AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth to collect data on phone calls made by untold millions of customers.

President Bush has insisted in the past that the government is monitoring only calls that begin or end overseas. But according to USA Today, it has actually been collecting information on purely domestic calls.
The Times' conflation of "monitoring" and "collecting information on" calls is quite dishonest. What the government is doing here is essentially maintaining a database of people's phone bills--information the phone companies store and use for their own marketing and billing purposes. In Smith v. Maryland (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=442&invol=735) (1979), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that law-enforcement agencies do not need a warrant to collect such information.

That's not even the most astonishing thing about the Times piece. The USA Today report (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA) that leaves the editorialists so breathless turns out to be largely a rehash of a story that appeared way back on Christmas Eve--in, yep, you guessed it, the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/24/politics/24spy.html?ei=5090&en=016edb46b79bde83&ex=1293080400&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all)!

The Times, of course, helped land one of its own reporters in jail by pushing for an investigation of who "leaked" accurate information to journalists in the Valerie Plame nonsense. Now the paper is so eager to hyperventilate about President Bush that it is willing to give another paper credit for a scoop it reported itself months ago. This is demented.

[Yonivore]

Greg Palast dwells into who is DATA-MINING for the Neocons...
Considering how the liberal intelligence community is leaking like a sieve, I wouldn't be surprised if our secrets end up being the absolute domain of conservatives.

[Nbadan]

Well now that the CIA is under the guise of a Dubya apologists, we won't have that 'pesky liberal intelligence' getting in our way anymore, right?

By the way, I switched to QWest this morning, and when my contracts up, I'm switching to T-mobil....


WASHINGTON, May 12 — The telecommunications company Qwest turned down requests by the National Security Agency for private telephone records because it concluded that doing so would violate federal privacy laws, a lawyer for the telephone company's former chief executive said today.

In a statement released this morning, the lawyer said that the former chief executive, Joseph N. Nacchio, made the decision after asking whether "a warrant or other legal process had been secured in support of that request."

Mr. Nacchio learned that no warrant had been granted and that there was a "disinclination on the part of the authorities to use any legal process," said the lawyer, Herbert J. Stern. As a result, the statement said, Mr. Nacchio concluded that "the requests violated the privacy requirements of the Telecommunications Act."

Qwest was the only phone company to turn down requests from the security agency for phone records as part of a program to compile a vast database of numbers and other information on virtually all domestic calls. The program's scope was first described in an article published on Thursday by USA Today that led to an outpouring of demands for information from Congressional Republicans and Democrats. The article said that At&T, BellSouth and Verizon had agreed to provide the information to the security agency.

[xrayzebra]

Well now that the CIA is under the guise of a Dubya apologists, we won't have that 'pesky liberal intelligence' getting in our way anymore, right?

By the way, I switched to QWest this morning, and when my contracts up, I'm switching to T-mobil....

Yeah, dan. That is why all the leaks are occuring. CIA is under the guise of
a dubya apologists. Care about switching, you know how long it takes you
learn anything.

[scott]

Two cheers for McCarthyism!!!

[gtownspur]

FISA did not exist during either the Lincoln or Roosevelt Administrations. It did exist during the Clinton Administration and, as shown above, that President's efforts to undertake domestic surveillance efforts were apparently preceded by the procurement of an appropriate warrant.

That's the thing that is different here, xray. The Bush II Administration is subject to FISA (and the Fourth Amendment, to which FISA creates a limited exception) but has done nothing -- apparently -- to obtain warrants to legalize its actions. If the Administration had the appropriate warrant, I can assure you that my concerns would be wholly assauged.



. . . while you can.


That's funny,, the fourth ammendment still existed back then, what's your excuse?

[Nbadan]

That's funny,, the fourth ammendment still existed back then, what's your excuse?

You dumbass. The FISA Court was created to strengthen the rights granted in the 4th amendment by requiring the government to seek a court issued warrant before wire-tapping domestic phone calls.

[Gerryatrics]

How is keeping a record of freaking phone numbers "wiretapping" dumbass? I'm trying to ignore all this black helicopter shit, but how freaking dense can you be? Phone companies hand over records of phone numbers called... so? Are the phone companies illegally wiretapping you when they record the numbers you called? Should they immediately burn all records so absolutely no information can be gathered on you when you use their services? This kind of thing has been done for years, just not on a national scale. The phone companies hand over phone records to police departments all the time so they can be checked to see if they reveal any information pertinent to their investigations.

Did it at any time cross the small, sad mass of moldy bong resin that passes for your brain that maybe all the government is doing is collecting all that information that is already readily available into a national database so if they're investigating someone with possible terrorist ties they can note any calls to or from areas known to harbor terrorists, or cross reference numbers called and calls received to see if they can track more members of a possible cell?

Do you really think the federal government is doing all this so they can single you out and somehow or other infringe on your civil liberties, you know, just for kicks? Actually you are probably screwed up enough to believe that. But unless you're calling up your buddies in Al-Qaeda, (which again, wouldn't surprise me) what exactly is the problem? If you're that paranoid about it, stop whining here and go find yourself a nice secluded cave in the middle of some heavily wooded area, because if a quarter of the bullshit you believe is true, they're probably already coming for you.

[Yonivore]

Counterintelligence access to telephone toll and transactional records

(a) Duty to provide.--A wire or electronic communication service provider shall comply with a request for subscriber information and toll billing records information, or electronic communication transactional records in its custody or possession made by the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation under subsection (b) of this section.

(b) Required certification.--The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, or his designee in a position not lower than Deputy Assistant Director at Bureau headquarters or a Special Agent in Charge in a Bureau field office designated by the Director, may--

(1) request the name, address, length of service, and local and long distance toll billing records of a person or entity if the Director (or his designee) certifies in writing to the wire or electronic communication service provider to which the request is made that the name, address, length of service, and toll billing records sought are relevant to an authorized investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such an investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely on the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

(2) request the name, address, and length of service of a person or entity if the Director (or his designee) certifies in writing to the wire or electronic communication service provider to which the request is made that the information sought is relevant to an authorized investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such an investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(c) Prohibition of certain disclosure.--No wire or electronic communication service provider, or officer, employee, or agent thereof, shall disclose to any person that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained access to information or records under this section.

(d) Dissemination by bureau.--The Federal Bureau of Investigation may disseminate information and records obtained under this section only as provided in guidelines approved by the Attorney General for foreign intelligence collection and foreign counterintelligence investigations conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and, with respect to dissemination to an agency of the United States, only if such information is clearly relevant to the authorized responsibilities of such agency.

(e) Requirement that certain congressional bodies be informed.--On a semiannual basis the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall fully inform the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate, and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate, concerning all requests made under subsection (b) of this section.
So there is no question about the fact that the federal government can obtain anyone's telephone billing records simply by requesting them, if they are relevant to a terrorism investigation, and the telecom companies "shall comply" with such requests. Under this section, the FBI can pass the phone records on to another government agency, like the NSA, if the information is relevant to that agency's duties.

The question, it seems to me, is whether Sec. 2709 authorizes a blanket request not for the records of a particular person, or the records relating to a particular phone number, but for the records of all of the company's subscribers. Such a broad request probably wasn't contemplated when the statute was adopted, and it might be argued that all of the records can't possibly be relevant to any terrorism investigation. But why not? I don't think it is unreasonable to argue that, for a data mining project like the one carried out by the NSA, the records of all telephone subscribers are relevant. If that is the case, there is no obvious reason why this provision wouldn't authorize a request for all subscriber records, with which the companies would be required to comply.

I haven't seen any indication that the government relied on Sec. 2709 when it made its requests to the phone companies, or that the FBI certification contemplated by 2709(b) was given. But it may have been; the White House hasn't said much about the procedures the government followed or the legal principles it relied on. I'm also not sure whether the reference to "toll billing records" represents a material limitation. I would assume this includes records of all "local and long distance" calls, but maybe I'm missing something here, and perhaps this provision wouldn't have allowed the FBI to obtain the full range of records that the NSA wanted.

There are a number of provisions of various statutes under which the government's request to the telecoms might have been justified. It will take some time to sort through the various rationales. This is an odd situation, too, in that the government didn't use any compulsory process, but apparently just asked the companies for their records. It is possible that it could have been illegal for the companies to respond to the request, but on what theory would it be illegal for the government to ask?

What Sec. 2709 establishes beyond question is that anyone's telephone records can be obtained by the federal government, without court order, in the course of a terrorism investigation. Which I think renders some of the more hysterical reaction to the NSA program a little silly.

Maybe I'm the only one who didn't already know this, but I was astonished to learn that there is no expectation of privacy in telephone records at all. Section 2702(c) sets out the circumstances in which a telecom provider can disclose phone records, not including the contents of communications. So this would cover the call information at issue in this program. 2702(c)(6) says that such phone records may be freely disclosed, at the company's discretion:


(6) to any person other than a governmental entity.
That's right. These supposedly top-secret telephone records can be given or, more likely, sold to any company or private citizen. So if I had enough money, I could buy the phone records of every person in the U.S., and donate them to the NSA.

[boutons_]

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/bs/2006/bs060512.gif

[clubalien]

I use SBC(which is now rebranded as AT&T after they bougth att) I wish there was soem way I coudl sign up for Qwest as a show of support for them making a good descion but sadly there isn't with monolpy of infrasturcutres you cannot easily "vote" with your wallet

[Yonivore]

I use SBC(which is now rebranded as AT&T after they bougth att) I wish there was soem way I coudl sign up for Qwest as a show of support for them making a good descion but sadly there isn't with monolpy of infrasturcutres you cannot easily "vote" with your wallet
Yeah, here's your hero clubalien:

Joe Nacchio Indicted On Insider Trading Charges (http://gigaom.com/2005/12/20/joe-nacchio-maybe-charged-of-insider-trading/)


Former Qwest chief executive Joe Nacchio has been indicted on 42 counts of insider trading, reports WSJ (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113509908259027534-email.html). He made $176.5 million in profits from stock sales in 2002 alone. The prosecutors are seeking a $100 million in restitution.


“was specifically and repeatedly warned about the material, nonpublic financial risks facing Qwest and about Qwest’s ability to achieve its aggressive publicly stated financial targets.”
Denver Post (http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_3327357) has a more indepth look at the lead-up to this latest chapter in the ongoing saga of Qwest, a high-flying darling of the investors in the 1990s. Its aggressive takeover of US West, a fiber network that spanned the globe, and the stock that defied gravity, Qwest was supposed to be the future. It did not pan out that way, and now the company is a much shrunken former self of itself.

In “Broadbandits: Inside the $750 Billion Telecom Heist (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect?tag=taazainfo-20%26link_code=xm2%26camp=2025%26creative=165953%2 6path=http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html%253fASIN=0471434051%2526tag=taazainf o-20%2526lcode=xm2%2526cID=2025%2526ccmID=165953%252 6location=/o/ASIN/0471434051%25253FSubscriptionId=02ZH6J1W0649DTNS60 02)” , I write about the rise and fall of Qwest in the chapter called, “Rocky Mountain High.” Here is a background piece from the Red Herring (http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=7165&hed=Qwest+insiders+share+recipe+for+revenue+growth .).

[boutons_]

ECPA 1986 is seen by nearly every legal scholar and lawyer as the applicable law. These people don't even want to imagine being the general counsels for the telecom firms that violated the ECPA and the enusing legal battles they will fight and possible fines ($1000/person whose privacy was compromised).

Indiscriminately vacuuming up 100s of millions of telephone calls going back a decade is nothing but an unwarranted, illegal fishing expedition on American citizens and their privacy. Fishing expeditions, especially without warrants and probable cause, have been denied by the courts repeatedly

There's nothing anonymous about "just the numbers". The FBI/CIA/NSA know exactly how to put a name and address by every number. I'm sure the telco's will provide complete billing information, if they haven't already.

If anybody thinks the Repugs will stop at this huge violation, and that this particular violation is fully exposed (WH and telcos still haven't explained on what legal basis this rape was based, other than, "Repugs want it, we get it, and fuck the Constitution and any laws that limit Executive powers")

NEVER EVER trust any government, in the paranoid, power-limiting spirit of the US Constitution.

[xrayzebra]

I use SBC(which is now rebranded as AT&T after they bougth att) I wish there was soem way I coudl sign up for Qwest as a show of support for them making a good descion but sadly there isn't with monolpy of infrasturcutres you cannot easily "vote" with your wallet


Of course you can. Just call qwest, they will gladly take care of you.
Better yet, call TW cable. Really show you distaste for SBC.

[boutons_]

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/tt/2006/tt060514.gif

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/ta/2006/ta060514.gif

[IceColdBrewski]

OMG! We're going to lose all of our rights! Dubya is throwing out the Constitution! Run! RUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUN!

:rolleyes

[Clandestino]

Hahaha.. too fucking funny...


Those Phone Records Sure Are Secret!

The Qwest privacy policy (http://www.qwest.com/legal/privacyGeneral.html) for telephone customers on the Web:


So . . .

It's a great invasion of privacy to data mine calling patterns for national security purposes, even if the call is not listened to.

But, isn't it noteworthy that the phone company does this on a far more personal level to decide what services to try to sell to you and, probably, to do joint marketing to you with others?

Moral of the story: Those hot and bothered by the telephone call database mining program don't know or appreciate what telephone companies do all the time for their business purposes or the purposes of their business partners.

And wasn't there a big news story just a couple of months ago about the fact that, for a nominal sum, you can buy anyone's cell phone records? In fact, liberal bloggers tried to put together a plan to buy and analyze the telephone records of prominent Republicans in hopes of finding calls that would somehow be embarrassing. These same liberals, of course, are now up in arms about the fact that the NSA does computer analyses of phone records, not with the malicious purpose of singling out political enemies for harassment, but to try to stop terrorist attacks.

There is really no hypocrisy quite like the hypocrisy of a liberal.

One more thing: since Qwest shares its customers' records with companies with which it has a "business relationship," but not with the NSA to prevent terrorist attacks, there is no way I'm doing business with Qwest.

You should never trust a company that can't spell.

[boutons_]

"since Qwest shares its customers' records with companies with which it has a "business relationship,"

.... evidence of that? ECPA calls for a $1000 fine per customer for divulging phone info to 3rd parties.

[xrayzebra]

boutons, go hire you a lawyer and try collecting from Qwest from
giving information to a third party. Bet you wont be able to find one
who will take you case, unless you pay him $300.00 an hour for his
efforts. Then he will gladly represent you, but make no promises of
success.