NSA logging all domestic calls

[FlaSoxxJim]

IS anyone worried that the phone company has these records to turn over in the first place? If you are all so worried about the eeeevil government spying on you, what's to prevent the eeevil corporations from accessing the same info that they already had, BEFORE the government asked for it? They sell our info to telemarkets for a profit, whats to prevent them from using the info for more nefarious reasons?

 

Actually, the Stored Communications Act has provisions in it to prevent such misuse.

 

And, sure, the telecoms can violate the provisions and use your information in an inappropriate manner. In that case the government is supposed to provide oversight, regulation, and penalties for violation. But when it is the government that is the nefarious entity, and is in fact coercing the telecoms into nefarious complicity, then thre is a real problem.

[YASNY]

IS anyone worried that the phone company has these records to turn over in the first place? If you are all so worried about the eeeevil government spying on you, what's to prevent the eeevil corporations from accessing the same info that they already had, BEFORE the government asked for it? They sell our info to telemarkets for a profit, whats to prevent them from using the info for more nefarious reasons?

 

Of course the phone company has these records. Did you ever receive a phone bill with your long distance calls listed? Or how about if you question the charges on your cell phone bill and they send you a detailed list of all calls made and received in the disputed billing cycle? I'm as concerned about this NSA thing as anybody, but expecting the phone companies not to keep records is unrealistic.

[Controlled Chaos]

I don't really give a s*** about this. It's not like the NSA is listening or even hand looking through who I call. There is a massive computer....just scanning numbers and if they hit some pattern worth looking into then they will look. You think its checking to see if I call my mom?? They most likely have a database of bad guys....and then scan numbers to that list. That's it....Big deal...

[Balta1701]

I don't really give a s*** about this. It's not like the NSA is listening or even hand looking through who I call. There is a massive computer....just scanning numbers and if they hit some pattern worth looking into then they will look. You think its checking to see if I call my mom?? They most likely have a database of bad guys....and then scan numbers to that list. That's it....Big deal...

Of course...when you avoid speaking out against the President or his war, avoid donating to alternative candidates, and never worry that you're somehow going to go to an airport and discover you've been put on a no-fly list, you have nothing to worry about. Oh, unless your name winds up resembling a terrorist, like that guy in Oregon a year ago or so.

[southsideirish71]

Of course...when you avoid speaking out against the President or his war, avoid donating to alternative candidates, and never worry that you're somehow going to go to an airport and discover you've been put on a no-fly list, you have nothing to worry about. Oh, unless your name winds up resembling a terrorist, like that guy in Oregon a year ago or so.

 

I love the tinfoil hat talk. You really need to put down your copy of 1984 and realize that the government really doesnt care about Joe Citizen. I doubt if they care about Joe Liberal like yourself. They care about Joe Bin Laden and his phone calls.

 

[Balta1701]

I love the tinfoil hat talk. You really need to put down your copy of 1984 and realize that the government really doesnt care about Joe Citizen. I doubt if they care about Joe Liberal like yourself. They care about Joe Bin Laden and his phone calls.

 

Which is exactly why they need my phone call records, of course.

[YASNY]

I heard something this morning about a program called Echelon, that the NSA was intercepting everything from email to baby monitors and mining that data. Apparently, 60 Minutes had a show about this group back in 2000. I believe our current president was inaugurated in January 2001.

[Balta1701]

I heard something this morning about a program called Echelon, that the NSA was intercepting everything from email to baby monitors and mining that data. Apparently, 60 Minutes had a show about this group back in 2000. I believe our current president was inaugurated in January 2001.

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.

Former CIA director and current Presidential Medal of Freedom winner George Tenet, testifying under oath before Congress in 2000.

[southsider2k5]

Former CIA director and current Presidential Medal of Freedom winner George Tenet, testifying under oath before Congress in 2000.

 

"I recognize that it is standard practice for some countries to use their intelligence services to conduct economic espionage. But that isn't the policy or the practice of the United States," he said.

 

Also from Tenet during this testimony...

 

But this comes from former employees who used Echelon.

 

From 1974 to 1984, Margaret Newsham worked for various arms suppliers that also make equipment for intelligence computers and satellites: Digital Equipment, Ford Aerospace, Digital Science, Hughes Aircraft and, the largest of them all, Lockheed Martin (the company from which Hækkerup also intends to buy new Hercules planes).

 

"We monitored ordinary people, interest groups, companies and the like. To target specific subjects all you had to do was code them into the computer and write 'Amnesty International' or 'Margaret Newsham' for example. Then we could monitor the subject in question - as they were communicating, mind you," she tells Ekstra Bladet.

 

Also

 

According to Ekstra Bladet's sources, Europe's jointly-owned Airbus aerospace company lost a major order to Saudi Arabia in 1994. The winners in the deal were two US companies, Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas, who received an order totaling 42 billion Danish kroner (6 billion US dollars).

 

Fred Stock's information about extensive industrial espionage is confirmed by another former CSE agent, Edwina Slattery, whom Ekstra Bladet has spoken with.

 

"My job only involved analyzing surveillance against 'the bad guys', (the East bloc countries - ed.)." But there were other departments that took care of financial spying and industrial espionage."

 

http://cryptome.org/echelon-eb2.htm

 

According to ex-spies they also spied on Greenpeace, Amnesty International, and other governments, in addition to their corportate spying. But I am sure since George Tenet said it in front of Congress it must be true, because no one has ever lied in front of Congress after all...

[Balta1701]

From the Wikipedia entry on Ekstra Bladet, the paper you're citing there:

 

Ekstra Bladet [ˈɛg̊sd̥(ʁ)ɐˌb̥læð̪ˀð̪̩(d̥)] is a Danish tabloid newspaper focusing on sensationalist stories. It gets a share of its income from sex ads. Since 1979 it has always had a partly or completely naked woman on page nine which is referred to as Side 9 Pigen ("The Page 9 Girl"), a Danish equivalent of the English Page Three girl.

 

The current editor is Hans Engell, a former chairman for the conservative party, a position he left in disgrace after a drunk driving episode. This has not prevented the paper, true to its tabloid nature, to be among the most aggressive critics of the current government coalition, which include the conservative party.

 

The political leaning of the newspaper might traditionally be viewed as social-liberal (as it is an offspring of Politiken), but it would probably be more accurate to say that the newspaper considers itself in opposition to anyone in a position of power, and the defender of the ordinary man. A less flattering description would be that the newspaper is a proponent of anything that can sell more issues at the newspaper stands.

 

The motto of the paper is "Tør hvor andre tier" (speaks where others are silent). Opponents of the paper rephrase the motto as "Tører hvor andre tisser" (dries where others pee), making the newspaper equivalent to toilet paper.

[southsider2k5]

From the Wikipedia entry on Ekstra Bladet, the paper you're citing there:

 

I used a self-proclaimed "liberal" source... You should be happy, right?

 

OK How about more?

 

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/070200-02.htm

 

Perhaps the most startling result of the new Clinton policy came in January 1994, when the then French Prime Minister Edouard Balladur flew to Riyadh to conclude a $6bn (£4bn) deal for arms, airliners and maintenance, including sales of the European Airbus. He flew home empty-handed.

 

The Baltimore Sun later reported that "from a commercial communications satellite, NSA lifted all the faxes and phone-calls between the European consortium Airbus, the Saudi national airline and the Saudi government. The agency found that Airbus agents were offering bribes to a Saudi official. It passed the information to US officials pressing the bid of Boeing Co."

 

Clinton's government intervened with the Saudis and the contract went to Boeing.

 

A second contract where US intelligence played a decisive role concerned Brazil. In 1994, NSA intercepted phone-calls between France's Thomson-CSF and Brazil concerning SIVAM, a $1.4bn surveillance system for the Amazon rain forest. The company was alleged to have bribed members of the Brazilian government selection panel. The contract was awarded to the US Raytheon Corporation – which announced afterwards that "the Department of Commerce worked very hard in support of US industry on this project".

 

This is just one of hundreds of "success" stories openly boasted by the US Government's "Advocacy Center" up to the present day. They do not say where the CIA or NSA was decisive in winning the contract, but often brag of beating UK, European or Japanese competitors.

 

Cases where the US "beat British" competitors include power generation, engineering and telecommunications contracts in the Philippines, Malawi, Peru, Tunisia and the Lebanon. In India, the CIA tracked British competitive strategies in a competition to built a 700MW power station near Bombay. In January 1995, the $400m contract was awarded to the US companies Enron, GE and Bechtel.

 

Also in 1995, General Electric Power Systems won a $120m tender to build a plant in Tunisia. "They beat intense competition from French, German, Italian and British firms for the project," the Center boasts.

 

Documents and information obtained by the IoS show that the critical question of whether US intelligence should systematically help business was resolved after the election of Clinton in 1993. He appointed key Democratic National Party fund-raisers, including the late Secretary of State for Commerce, Ron Brown, to senior posts and launched a policy "to aggressively support US bidders in global competitions where advocacy is in the national interest". Soon, every US government department, from the Bureau of Mines to the CIA and the giant, super-secret National Security Agency, was playing a role in landing contracts for the booming US economy.

 

The new policy, dubbed "levelling the playing field" by the Clinton administration, included arrangements for collecting, receiving and handling secret intelligence to use to benefit US commerce.

 

According to Loch K Johnson, a staff member of the US intelligence reform commission set up in 1993, officials at the departments of Commerce, Treasury and State pass information to US companies without revealing the intelligence source. "At Commerce, there's no code or book to consult to say when and what information can be passed to a US company," he says.

 

If, for instance, a government official learned that a foreign competitor was about to win a contract sought by a US company, he explained, "someone in Commerce might call a US executive and say: 'Look, you might have a better shot at that contract if you sweetened your bid a little,'" Johnson added. "They pass on the information. But they usually do it in a very veiled fashion."

[Balta1701]

So, if nothing else, can I at least note that those would be overseas taps, and thusly not be covered by FISA in the least?

[NorthSideSox72]

The excuse that "we did it before" is lame. We've done lots of stupid things before.

 

And the excuse that "I have nothing to hide" is even worse. It says that its OK for joe citizen if they avoid certain topics in their lives, and that is unamerican in my opinion.

 

Any domestic data for phone calls or electronic media that is being mined, collected or analyzed without a warrant is wrong. Period. I don't care if we did it before or not.

[southsider2k5]

So, if nothing else, can I at least note that those would be overseas taps, and thusly not be covered by FISA in the least?

 

If that's what you want to take out of it... sure. What I took out of it is that George Tenet lied to Congress under oath about economic spying, and I have no doubts that when the CIA/NSA/FBI saids that they are following all of rules regarding spying on US citizens they are full of s***, and have been for decades at least. Heck all that had to happen in Tenets case is for any of those Greenpeace/Amnesty International converstations that they were listening to, if they caught one US citizen who was involved in those groups, and there are plenty, then he lied to Congress about spying on US citizens too.

 

Echeleon wasn't new to Clinton either. Some of the reading I did had some of the programs with roots all of the way back to the Reagan era. This is the way that business has been done forever, and I see no reason to believe it will be changing anytime soon, as this stuff has gone on through both parties administrations. I would love to see it stop, but at the sametime the incentive for the spy agencies to get as much info as possible means there is little reason for them to stop just because someone found out what was going on... again. Call me jaded if you like, but even if you get the ultimate goal of impeaching Bush and elected a democratic Pres and Congress, you can bet this will still go on, and the people feigning outrage today, will be the ones defending it then, just like they did 6 years ago.

[S720]

The excuse that "we did it before" is lame. We've done lots of stupid things before.

 

And the excuse that "I have nothing to hide" is even worse. It says that its OK for joe citizen if they avoid certain topics in their lives, and that is unamerican in my opinion.

 

Any domestic data for phone calls or electronic media that is being mined, collected or analyzed without a warrant is wrong. Period. I don't care if we did it before or not.

 

I second that. "I am doing nothing illegal" doesn't mean that I want you to come into MY house without my consent. This is flat-out wrong.

 

I guess according to the 29% who are still supporting Bush, his fart always smell good, no matter what!

[Mplssoxfan]

Amendment IV

 

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.

 

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Attributed to Benjamin Franklin.

 

Seems pretty clear, no?

[Balta1701]

Echeleon wasn't new to Clinton either. Some of the reading I did had some of the programs with roots all of the way back to the Reagan era. This is the way that business has been done forever, and I see no reason to believe it will be changing anytime soon, as this stuff has gone on through both parties administrations. I would love to see it stop, but at the sametime the incentive for the spy agencies to get as much info as possible means there is little reason for them to stop just because someone found out what was going on... again. Call me jaded if you like, but even if you get the ultimate goal of impeaching Bush and elected a democratic Pres and Congress, you can bet this will still go on, and the people feigning outrage today, will be the ones defending it then, just like they did 6 years ago.

I would be happy and content with just some congressional and judicial oversight.

[NorthSideSox72]

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Attributed to Benjamin Franklin.

 

Seems pretty clear, no?

One would think.

[Mplssoxfan]

Call me jaded if you like, but even if you get the ultimate goal of impeaching Bush and elected a democratic Pres and Congress, you can bet this will still go on, and the people feigning outrage today, will be the ones defending it then, just like they did 6 years ago.

 

I personally think I'm past the point that I'll defend anyone for these kinds of misdeeds. If someone who I voted for is shown to be abusing the Constitution that they swore to uphold, I'll be on the critical side, same as now.

[Balta1701]

Joe Scarborough's show opening last night.

 

Now, for liberals who‘ve long been going against almost all of these issues to defend privacy, the news has to be disturbing. But no less so the conservatives who have fought national ID cards and gun registration for years out of fear of big government.

 

Now, whatever you consider yourself, friends, you should be afraid. You should be very afraid. With over 200 million Americans targeted, this domestic spying program is so widespread, it is so random, it is so far removed from focusing on al Qaeda suspects that the president was talking about today, that it‘s hard to imagine any intelligence program in U.S. history being so susceptible to abuse.

 

You know, I served on the Judiciary Committee and the Armed Service Committee in Congress for four years, and no program I studied while using security clearances ever came close to the scope of this massive spy program. It is dangerous, it breaks FCC laws, and it endangers all Americans‘ right to privacy.

 

But you know what? The villains in this spy program are pretty easy to target, almost as easy as your phone records. First you have the president, who‘s shown that he will break laws if they get in his way of spying. Second, Democratic leaders—they complain now, but where were they? They reviewed the program. Why no protest? Don‘t hold your press conferences now, Nancy Pelosi. Tell us about it when you learn about it!

 

And finally, the phone companies, who actually profited from the government reading all of your phone bills. They should be sued and their CEOs fired.

 

Hey, memo to the president and congressional leaders who signed up on this lousy program; We don‘t trust you anymore. We don‘t trust you with our phone bills. We don‘t trust you with our bank records. We don‘t trust you with our medical histories. From now on, if you want to look at Americans‘ private records, get a damn search warrant!

[Controlled Chaos]

Bottom line...they have a computer looking at a bunch phone numbers....I can care less. If that computer can develop a pattern and help them catch someone, I'm all for it. There are people out there that want to blow up another building. There are people that want me you and everyone else that doesn't praise Allah dead. Intelligence is necessary, not really on this message board, but definitely for the powers that be when runnig this country.

 

Just cause the media uses words like survellience and spying and eavesdropping doesn't mean the nsa is outside your window with binoculars. A gazillion phone numbers in a database, which probably 95% never even get looked at by human eyes, is hardly infringing on your civil liberties. Here ya go 630-362-6971.

[NorthSideSox72]

Its truly staggering to me that people on this board who align themselves with the GOP are OK with this. I've voted for Republican Prez candidates more than Dems over the years, and for a long time, I stood firmly with many of the tenets of the Grand Old Party - smaller government, local control, fiscal discipline, etc. And yet here is another program in a list of many which absolutely flies in the face of some of these principles, and there are people who STILL stand by it. They are forced to use arguments that make those core principles seem irrelevant or non-existent, just to defend the actions of people who happened to also be Republicans.

 

To me, this is akin to the people who try to defend the Catholic Church's complete ineptness in handling molestation, simply because they are Catholic. For me, if I am part of an organization, religion or political party that is chipping away at the very principles that drew me to it, I am MORE inclined to call them on it. Not less.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Kerr says the telecos are at risk for $1,000 fine per violation, Richard Falkenrath disagrees. Obviously falkenrath has not bothered to read the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, because none of the exception criteria for turning over records to the government were met here.

 

Telco Liability: Falkenrath Gets It Wrong

 

On Thursday, ThinkProgress argued that the telcos could be liable for tens of billions of dollars for turning over phone records to the government in violation of the Stored Communications Act. In this morning’s New York Times, law professor Orrin Kerr agrees:

 

Orin Kerr, a former federal prosecutor and assistant professor at George Washington University, said his reading of the relevant statutes put the phone companies at risk for at least $1,000 per person whose records they disclosed without a court order.

 

“This is not a happy day for the general counsels” of the phone companies, he said. “If you have a class action involving 10 million Americans, that’s 10 million times $1,000 — that’s 10 billion.”

 

In today’s Washington Post, Richard A. Falkenrath – former deputy assistant to President Bush – takes the opposite view. Here’s Falkenrath’s argument:

 

The three companies reported to have supplied telephone records to the NSA also appear to be acting lawfully….[T]he Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 explicitly permits telecommunications companies to provide customer records to the government if the government asks for them.

 

Actually, that’s false. The relevant portion of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act – known as the Stored Communications Act – explicitly prohibits voluntary or required disclosure of phone records to the government with several limited exceptions. (See 18 U.S.C. 2702-03.) As we explained . . . none of those exceptions apply.

 

It’s clear from his column that Falkenrath is obviously a huge fan of Michael Hayden, the administration, and the NSA program. That’s fine, but it doesn’t change the law or the telcos’ potential liability for turning over the phone records of tens of millions of Americans.

[Balta1701]

A federal lawsuit was filed in Manhattan yesterday seeking as much as $50 billion in civil damages against Verizon on behalf of its subscribers.

NYT.

 

2nd lawsuit filed against Verizon.

 

This is going to happen in every single state where these boys operate. It's just a matter of time and local laws. The lawyers will smell blood in the water here...it looks like a pretty good shot at a major class action suit settlement or victory. And I don't think I'll complain one bit.

[southsider2k5]

Its truly staggering to me that people on this board who align themselves with the GOP are OK with this. I've voted for Republican Prez candidates more than Dems over the years, and for a long time, I stood firmly with many of the tenets of the Grand Old Party - smaller government, local control, fiscal discipline, etc. And yet here is another program in a list of many which absolutely flies in the face of some of these principles, and there are people who STILL stand by it. They are forced to use arguments that make those core principles seem irrelevant or non-existent, just to defend the actions of people who happened to also be Republicans.

 

To me, this is akin to the people who try to defend the Catholic Church's complete ineptness in handling molestation, simply because they are Catholic. For me, if I am part of an organization, religion or political party that is chipping away at the very principles that drew me to it, I am MORE inclined to call them on it. Not less.

 

Trust me me, i am not OK with it, I just see 30 years of history behind this, and I don't see anything changing anytime soon.