NSA building massive database of phone records

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: tman_ndsu08 You don't have a right to have your calls not listened to. You pay a service to a phone company. If you don't like that service then get another service.

Right, or better yet, just create your own, well, if you can procure licensing to infringe on the established lines, or frequencies that belong to big players, and then the government will come in, and strong arm you like they did the other guys, that'll work.

[RickSp]

Despite the claims by the White House and the misinformed gent with nothing to hide, the NSA violated Federal Law in monitoring domestic calls without judicial oversight. Unfortunately, only Qwest had the backbone to say no to NSA.

Qwest's Refusal of N.S.A. Query Is Explained

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."

[bishop]

too bad hayden's nomination is not solely going to result in his confirmation... seems that with great "bipartisan" support, the administration will win retro-legalization of their warrantless wiretap program. what a victory for the american people, as these sob's cover their asses.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php...5761&C=america

Sen. Richard Durbin, the Illinois Democrat, said Hayden told him in a private meeting he was concerned when he set up the highly secretive program that approaching Congress could reveal tactics, techniques and procedures used by U.S. intelligence to track al-Qaida suspects. "He said, however, that with all the publicity that’s been surrounding this program, he may be closer to the possibility of asking for a change," Durbin, the Democratic whip, told reporters after meeting with Hayden for 35 minutes. "I hope they do, and I think they’re going to find bipartisan cooperation. I want to find a way to make it legal for us to be safe as a nation," he added.

[Milton Bradley]

I talked to my Father about this, he worked for Ohio Bell, and then went with AT&T ( 1967 - 1989 ) when they were split, and says he recalls NSA people being present in the building since he had access to maintain equipment behind the scenes all those years ago.


Something tells me that this is not something new, but perhaps only the methods are changing. ( Preceeding, and creating the very discussion, and news stories that got us all blabbing about it. )


My Father is pro big brother, big government, big any thing else you can think of, and he merely shrugged it off as if it was nothing new. ( At least that was my perception. As always, we are so adds philisophically we don't talk politics much. ) I think he would quote Vicchio, and say" if you're not doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about. ( But then, he's not a Libertarian being excluded from all the reindeer games, so WTF does he know, right? )

[Sandy]

I'm pleased that my phone company (Qwest) refused to turn over their lists. I have nothing to hide but I willl not approve of our government treating us as if we are all enemies. I'm always stunned at the ignorance of the American people when it comes to our Constitutional rights. Read the 4th Amendment!

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Something tells me that this is not something new, but perhaps only the methods are changing. ( Preceeding, and creating the very discussion, and news stories that got us all blabbing about it. )

The only thing new is that they were caught. Like the Dubai fiasco, the Bush administration is arrogant and careless. And why not be? They get caught and the sheep either become outraged for 5 minutes and go back to watching American Idol or they just don't see anything wrong with it. After all, our President said our privacy is guaranteed so why worry about it?

[Mr.Vicchio]

Why didn't you guys freak out when the first reported on this database....

in early 2000?

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio Why didn't you guys freak out when the first reported on this database.... in early 2000?

I bet we did.


What is hard to imagine is you forgetting about it.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio Why didn't you guys freak out when the first reported on this database.... in early 2000?

I'm sure I did freak out, as this is the kind of thing that upsets me. However I'm sure by the time this forum was STARTED in 2003 I had calmed down a little.

[RickSp]

The last time this came up related to the Office of Informational Awareness, there was considerable uproar, leading to the office being disbanded and defunded. This particular intrusion on American privacy has been a secret until the NSA wiretapping was leaked to the New York Times and the NSA data mining was leaked to USA Today. We still do not know the full extent of the NSA criminal activities because they remain secret, safe from judicial review.

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: RickSp LOL. Oh well. That isn't true of course. Then again, I know you don't care about such things.

Quote by: brien Could it be the 4th Amendment has some jurisdiction over telephone conversations? That said, the fact that the government was conducting this activity secretly is beyond explanation. It is downright wrong and probably unconstitutional as well.

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.

Seems like they had probably cause to me.

I sure don't want to have another Sept. 11th attack in my city, do you?

Quote by: Chancellor So, why aren't YOU doing something other than sitting on your backside accepting the status quo?

There's nothing that I can do. There's nothing you can do either. None of us have any power.

The government is the only one who has the power.

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Right, or better yet, just create your own, well, if you can procure licensing to infringe on the established lines, or frequencies that belong to big players, and then the government will come in, and strong arm you like they did the other guys, that'll work.

Have you ever heard of Qwest?


Were any mobile phones listed? Seems to me they were working only with Verizon, BellSouth, and at&t. Those are all land line phones.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: tman_ndsu08 Have you ever heard of Qwest? Were any mobile phones listed? Seems to me they were working only with Verizon, BellSouth, and at&t. Those are all land line phones.

AT&T recently bought Bell. AT&T owns Cingular. Bell owned Cingular before the acquisition. AT&T had it own wireless, before that.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: tman Seems like they had probably cause to me.

To treat everyone like a terrorist? Tens of millions of terrorist suspects? Snap out of it. Read the 4th Ammendment just once thouroughly. To put it in simpler terms: ALL Americans have a RIGHT to feel secure, AGAINST unreasonable searches. The government must have a good reason to spy on us. That reason must be documented in the form of a WARRANT, that explains why the suspect is a suspect.

That is not expecting too much. You may think, "Well, that is just pre 911 thinking". You would be correct. But it is also post 911 thinking. Just because an Ivy League cheerleader "C" student who happened to get planted by the supreme court and corporate interests; in the top job, says the Constitution is just a "Goddamn piece of paper", doesnt make it so.

Did the terrorists win on 911?

Did they manage (With a military stand down on 911) to destroy our Bill of Rights with 4 airplanes? You lay down too easy. I question your patriotism.

You know who has no rights? Prisoners. Should we change our motto from "Land of the free",......... to: "Home of the incarcerated"

Welcome to Prison Planet



Just in:
Darth Cheney is to blame for domestic spying!

Link Cheney Pushed U.S. to Widen Eavesdropping By SCOTT SHANE and ERIC LICHTBLAU Published: May 14, 2006 WASHINGTON, May 13 — In the weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, Vice President Dick Cheney and his top legal adviser argued that the National Security Agency should intercept purely domestic telephone calls and e-mail messages without warrants in the hunt for terrorists, according to two senior intelligence officials.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel AT&T recently bought Bell. AT&T owns Cingular. Bell owned Cingular before the acquisition. AT&T had it own wireless, before that.

Funny thing about Verizon too. I looked at the Verizon phone on my belt and couldn't find ONE land-line wire attached to it anywhere. And Verizon used to be Bell Atlantic.

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel AT&T recently bought Bell.

Wrong.

SBC bought AT&T. SBC used to be called Southwestern Bell.

The new merged company decided to call themselves at&t since the name was older and more recognizable.

AT&T owns Cingular. Bell owned Cingular before the acquisition.

SBC owned 60% of Cingular.

BellSouth owned the other 40%.

Now at&t owns that 60% and there is a deal in the works for at&t to buy Bell South.

If that deal goes through (and I'm sure it will), then yes, at&t will own all of cingular.

AT&T had it own wireless, before that.

AT&T did have wireless but it merged with Cingular in 2004. All AT&T wireless phones became Cingular phones.

Then SBC bought what was left of the AT&T company and the merged company is now at&t.


And, to put the cherry on top of the sundae, if at&t buys out BellSouth, Cingular could very well revert to at&t Wireless.

Which would mean that thousands of mobile phone stores in the western united states would have gone from AT&T Wireless to Cingular Wires back to at&t Wireless.

Amazing.

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: Scribbler1 Funny thing about Verizon too. I looked at the Verizon phone on my belt and couldn't find ONE land-line wire attached to it anywhere.

That's because Verizon is a land land phone company.

Verizon Wireless is a mobile phone company.

Verizon owns 55% of Verizon Wireless. The other 45% is owned by Vodafone of England (the guys on the front of the Manchester United Jerseys).

Verizon would love to own 100% of Verizon Wireless, but at the moment Vodafone is not interested in selling it to them.

And Verizon used to be Bell Atlantic.

Not exactly.

Bell Atlantic merged with NYNEX in 1996.

In 1998 the new Bell Atlantic merged with GTE to form Verizon.
Since then, they bought MCI in 2004.

[gr8fuldaniel]

I have'nt had a cell phone in about 3 years now. I felt naked without it for a long time. Its liberating to be free of those outrageous bills and you cant just miss a payment or 2. They hammer you for like 300 bucks, even if you only have 2 or 3 months left on your contract. I hate contracts. Why cant we just pay as we go?

Another gripe of mine is cable tv. Why cant I just pay $5 a month for CSPAN CNN and Comedy Central? $5 from a million people is better than zero from a million ppl.....

Monopolys should disappear with the Hummer.

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel To put it in simpler terms: ALL Americans have a RIGHT to feel secure, AGAINST unreasonable searches. The government must have a good reason to spy on us. That reason must be documented in the form of a WARRANT, that explains why the suspect is a suspect.

The problem with the constitution is that "probable cause" is not an objective standard..


Personally, I think the Sept. 11th attacks is probable cause to tap every single phone in America.

You obviously don't.


Who's correct?

Did the terrorists win on 911?

They hijacked 4 planes and crashed three of them.

I'd say they won.

Did they manage to destroy our Bill of Rights with 4 airplanes?

Rights you never had in the first place.

Perhaps they just exposed our flawed system.

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel I hate contracts. Why cant we just pay as we go?

Because the businesses would be bankrupt.

People would screw them over.

That's why contracts are necessary.

Another gripe of mine is cable tv. Why cant I just pay $5 a month for CSPAN CNN and Comedy Central?

A simple mind would take a $40/ month. bill, divide it by 60 channels, and conclude that each channel should cost $.67/month.

Advertising doesn't work like that.

The only reason any studio makes money is advertising.

ESPN, for example, if it went to an all subscription based service, would require $25/month.

For one channel!


And that is a very popular channel.


HBO, Showtime, Cinemax would probably be about that.


Commedy Central would probably cost $30-40/month.




IE, don't try to mess with the market.

The studios and the distribution companies (IE cable and satellite) have worked out the best possible way to give consumers what they demand through 50 years of market experiance.

Trying to force them to do otherwise will only drive costs up.