PDA

View Full Version : NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls


xpgeek
11-05-2006, 07:37 PM
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.

"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.

Source (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm)

xpgeek
11-05-2006, 07:39 PM
A passage from a CNN story about Congress's reaction to this today. (From a story that was later rewritten)

"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: "Somebody ought to tell the truth and answer questions. They haven't. The press has done our work for us and we should be ashamed. Shame on us for being so far behind and being so willing to rubber stamp anything this administration does."

L-knot
13-05-2006, 11:01 PM
A response I saw elsewhere:

Yes, the MSM (main stream media) is having a cow with this old news. And that is what it is. And it is also misrepresented too btw. They dont actually listen to conversations. What they do is enter the numbers into a database that incorporates certain algorithms which finds certain numbers known to be al-qaeda numbers. And if you're having conversations with al-qaeda then ...yeah ... we wanna know what the heck your saying! But this whole thing is bein blown out of proportion and bein used the the MSM and the democrat polititians to attack Bush. Its so predictable and its a shame that national security means nothing to these peep if it will help democrats get back into power. He's done nothing that Bill Clinton didn't do, and they didn't care about that, nothing that Reagan didn't do. And nothing that Jimmy Carter didn't do. These peep are truly pathetic.

xpgeek
14-05-2006, 05:26 AM
Bush has, repeatedly, lied about the programs tho.

"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." "

And now we know that is bull. Yes I know and understand they, in this case, are not listening to the calls, that we know about, that still doesn't make it legal.

From a well written Cnet story (http://news.com.com/NSAs+data+mining+explained/2100-1028_3-6071780.html?tag=cd.lede) :

" Q: Is this type of data mining legal under federal law? And permissible under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?
It depends on who you talk to. The same people who viewed the earlier wiretapping scheme as permissible are likely to argue that data mining is also perfectly OK.

Peter Swire, who worked in the Clinton White House and now teaches privacy law, has written a set of legal FAQs that say the wiretapping was unlawful. John Eastman, a conservative law professor at the Claremont Institute, argues in a letter to Congress (click here for PDF) that the wiretapping was permissible.

As for the data mining, Jim Harper of the free-market Cato Institute says it violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches. Orin Kerr, a former Justice Department prosecutor who takes a more permissive view of police power, says his tentative conclusion is that it does not run afoul of the Fourth Amendment but the phone companies likely violated the Stored Communications Act. "

Everyone always talks about the war on terrorism, needing to prevent another attack, to justify these domestic spying programs, catch another attack before it happens, etc. Not good enough, thats not a good enough reason. Of course I want people lives to be saved and attacks to be prevented, but no I am not willing to give up freedoms and rights this country was founded on. I would rather be a little frightened everyday then lose the things about this country men and woman are dying for to protect.

Bill Maher joke the other night :

"Yea Bin Laden's pretty pissed about these NSA spying programs too it seems, he said "all that hating you for your freedoms, and now I need a whole new reason." "

I have nothing to hide, I don't care if the government listens to my calls, is what everyone says too, and I don't care either, but they should still need a warrant, because that is the law. The fact that it takes too long or is too much trouble for them to get the warrant, I don't care, that is the law. We can not battle terrorists by sinking to their level, throwing our liberties out the window, endorsing torture, its against everything this country is 'supposed' to stand for.

L-knot
14-05-2006, 05:54 AM
I don't think Bush knows, technically, how it works.

What they do is enter the numbers into a database that incorporates certain algorithms which finds certain numbers known to be al-qaeda numbers. And if you're having conversations with al-qaeda then ...yeah ... we wanna know what the heck your saying!

Everyone always talks about the war on terrorism, needing to prevent another attack, to justify these domestic spying programs, catch another attack before it happens, etc. Not good enough, thats not a good enough reason. Of course I want people lives to be saved and attacks to be prevented, but no I am not willing to give up freedoms and rights this country was founded on. I would rather be a little frightened everyday then lose the things about this country men and woman are dying for to protect.

So you would rather die in a terrorist attack than, allegedly, lose your phone privacy?

That's not even close to sinking to their level


We are at war in case anyone has forgotten -

We have been at war with these Islamo-fascist thugs since long before 9/11. They have told us—repeatedly and clearly—what their intentions are. Why can't we accept them at their word? Especially after 9/11?

Osama bin Laden, Al-Zawahiri, the Iranian ayatollahs, among others, have echoed Muhammad's words from his farewell address in 632: "I was ordered to fight all men until they say 'There is no god but Allah.'" The ultimate goal of these hateful tyrants is a universal Islamic empire governed not by secular law but by divine law. That leaves no place for freedom.

And, since our enemies have no intention of quitting, retreat is a certain prescription for defeat. Nearly three thousand Americans died on 9/11 because we had been in denial (and retreat) for two decades. "United 93" is a poignant—and timely—reminder of the perils of wishful thinking.