NSA recording US citizens phone records.

Hobbes

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/11/cauley/

Ok so its not wiretapping but it would be a great way for AQ to get your average punter a trip to Gitmo. Just randomly pick 10 people (if your a known target) and ring them and leave a kind of coded message.

Would really work if they hit something shortly afterwards. Especially after 9/11. When I was in Boston FBI raided the apartment complex I was in because someone who looked middle eastern had skipped out on the rent.

Frederico

Noones seems to care anymore that the President of the United States seems to lie.. "allegedly"..

Bush - "Our intelligence activities strictly target al-Qaida and their known affiliates," Bush said. "We are not mining or trolling through the personal lives of innocent Americans."


CIA nominee general Hayden - "And last week we cemented a deal with another corporate giant to jointly develop a system to mine data that helps us learn about our targets."

bonkey

I'm a bit confused about the way this one is being reported.

The NSA is not recording phone records. The phone companies already record phone records. What NSA is doing is obtaining that information from them and collating it.

This isn't a dig at Hobbes....its more or less how I've seen the thing reported everywhere, and I'm at a loss to understand why the distinction isn't being made.

jc

Manic Moran

I'm inclined to side with Bonkey here. I need a little more information on this one. I'm finding a lot of emotion online, but few hard facts. My immediate thought is to be a little uncomfortable, but I believe 'phone records don't even need a warrant/subpeona to be procured by authorities in the US. As a result, I'm not sure anything illegal is going on here. I'll check in with a few laywer buddies, I'll get back to you.

NTM

Hobbes

bonkey wrote:

The NSA is not recording phone records. The phone companies already record phone records. What NSA is doing is obtaining that information from them and collating it.

Correct. However generally if you want to get someones phone records you need a warrant. Although as MM says this may not be the case. Certainly you can get someones phone records with a couple of $ and the right website, but totally illegal.

Btw, QWest was the only Telco to tell the government to get stuffed unless they had a warrant.

Frederico

I thought it was the distinction between phone records and actual Recordings of phone calls...

Its a bit like Project Echelon for phones..?

lostexpectation

don't we already know, or know that we don't know that every government does this? why wouldn't they?

they say it 'war time powers', when has the US not been a war with someone...

this is coming up now because of whistleblowers is it?

all bush has to say is 911.. but you didn't go through the courts 911, but you shouldn't be spying on americans.. 911 but... zip it 911!!!

the crux is that they didn't go through this FISA court, not that the're doing it at all...

theres alot of hysterical people over on DU cancelling and moving the phone contracts to the company that said it refused to pass on the info, but does this company own the hub?

Manic Moran

OK.. A little further into the research, and things actually are quite confusing to my untrained eye.

Firstly, there is no invasion of privacy involved. A 1979 Supreme Court case stated specifically that a Pen Register or similar number-recording device is not a 'search' by the definition of the 4th Ammendment. (that which involves the protectin of privacy)

Secondly: The NSA's remit is specifically to foreign threats. However, I can't find, looking up the original charter and the executive order which currently defines the NSA anything that says that the foreign threat must be in a foreign location. Whilst traditionally foreign threats within the US are dealt with by the FBI, it does not appear to be a legal division that I can see.

Thirdly: In the 1980s, statute was changed to require a court order before the installatin of a pen register unless legitimately required for business purposes. (i.e. the 'phone company). For the NSA to install them without a court order would be a violation of the 5th Ammendment. (Due process). However, it seems the NSA didn't install one, it just took the info from the ones installed by the 'phone companies.

Fourthly a Telecommunications Act of 1934 prohibits the disclosure of telephone records without a warrant. This seems to be the best bet for some form of illegality, though of course the 'phone companies (with doubtless their highly paid lawyers) are claiming that their actions were entirely legal.

The plot continues to thicken.

NTM

Dirk Gently

manic,
are they recording actual conversations or simply the time, date and number called, while not actually listening to the conversation.

Ruu_Old

from an article on cnn.com

Thursday, USA Today reported that Verizon, AT&T and BellSouth have provided the NSA with records of billions of domestic phone calls since shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. According to the report, the NSA doesn't record or listen in on the conversations, but uses data about the calls -- numbers, times and locations -- to look for patterns that might suggest terrorist activity.

No one seems to be bothered about it one way or the other.

Dirk Gently

thanks Ruu, thats pretty much what It seemed to me that they were doing.

What real good is a list of numbers and dates without actually knowing what was said in these conversations. It just leads to guess work and assumption of guilt by assosiation with what they see as a dodgy number.
I smell something more going on here than meets the eye.
Keep investigating Manic.

Ruu_Old

The telcos are allowed to disclose phone records, but only in cases of emergencies.

Manic Moran

clown bag wrote:

What real good is a list of numbers and dates without actually knowing what was said in these conversations.

My guess is that it allows retrospective investigation. Let's say that they are able to identify Ahmed Bin Whatsit as an Al Qaeda operative. They now know to put a trace on any future calls he may make. But what if last month he made calls to another operations cell before cutting off contact (for security purposes)? The record of who called whom might point out "Last month, Ahmed made twenty calls to this number in Houston. Maybe we need to check him out"

It just leads to guess work and assumption of guilt by assosiation with what they see as a dodgy number.

Aside from those objecting to the recordings on principle, that seems to be the biggest concern.

NTM

pantar_dubh

If you violate someone's rights, you should be sued, no matter whether a government, an organisation, or a private party. AT&T and Bell South are being sued by the ACLU for a violation of civil rights over the release of millions of telephone/internet records in the past 3 years to NSA. This will more than likely go all the way to the US Supreme Court.

Manic Moran

pantar_dubh wrote:

I you violate someone's rights, you should be sued, no matter whether a government, an organisation, or a private party. AT&T and Bell South are being sued by the ACLU for a violation of civil rights over the release of millions of telephone/internet records in the past 3 years to NSA. This will more than likely go all the way to the US Supreme Court.

Doesn't mean they'll win. I guess we'll just wait and see what the courts decide.

NTM

Hobbes

clown bag wrote:

What real good is a list of numbers and dates without actually knowing what was said in these conversations.

I'm actually doing a side project on data mining at the moment and it is quite amazing what information you can find once you apply one dataset to another (if you have the software to do the analytics for you).

Lets say you take phone records and apply them to credit card information, or medical information or political donations. Add to that they have location as well with the phone (certainly if its a mobile).

Patterns show up much easier.

Now for tracking a terrorist it would help, however taking every citizens information means they are most likely mining other information. It is unlikely to show up a terrorist unless you have baseline data to start from (eg. Another terrorist).

metrovelvet

What about mobile phone records? Those companies provide landline, cell and internet services. Companies which are exclusively mobile dont seem to be mentioned.

Ruu_Old

Verizon are in on it too, I think they just operate in the mobile phone market, for what Ive seen anyway.

Two New Jersey public interest lawyers have sued Verizon Communications Inc. for $5-billion (U.S.), claiming the phone carrier violated privacy laws by turning over phone records to the U.S. National Security Agency for a secret government surveillance program.

USA Today reported on Thursday that the NSA has been building a database of millions of Americans' everyday telephone calls. Verizon, along with AT&T Corp. and BellSouth Corp., complied, the newspaper reported. Verizon said in a statement that the company had not yet seen the lawsuit and, because of that, believed it was premature to comment. VZ (NYSE) fell 11 cents (U.S.) to $31.79.

metrovelvet

Verizon does landlines, mobile and internet.

Manic Moran

Verizon and Verizon Wireless are legally speaking seperate companies. However, I don't know if the mobile companies are involved or not.

NTM

Ruu_Old

Aye one of the articles just stated Verizon Communications, which I guess would mean all the functions of that company. Probably will hear more in the coming days.

Dirk Gently

Surely any terrorist worth his salt wouldn't be picking up landlines or mobiles and ringing his fellow terrorists phone to discuss planting bombs. The dedicated terrorist with the sophistication to coordinate a major attack would be more likely to communicate in coded innocent looking messages in some obscure chat room while in different internet cafés every time to prevent being tracked. In such a case traditional intelligence such as suspicious activity reported by the public and police stakeouts would be more likely to yield results for the security services.

The data mining would surely be only useful in tracking domestic pressure groups and protest organisations that don't see themselves as a threat and wouldn’t suspect they were under surveillance by the state. The data collect could easily be used to identify any legal civil rights group or environmental organisation which could potentially embarrass the government. Just seems to me that without actually listening in on the phone calls of suspected terrorists this data collecting will be used mainly for domestic spying on ordinary citizens as a dedicated terrorist will obviously not be so careless as to simply ring his mates phone number whether it is landline or mobile to discuss terrorist tactics.

Hobbes

Good break down on it here..

http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2006/05/above_the_law.html

Its illegal for phone companies to give your dialing information out to third parties.

Apparntly QWest were the only company to actually ask the government to get a FISA approval first, but the NSA refused on the grounds they said it would be denied. To add to that they threatend QWest of loosing government contracts.

RedPlanet

Developing story alledging that they're also listening-in on phone calls made by some mainstream media organisations.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/ABC_News_Top_federal_source_says_0515.html

Hobbes

RedPlanet wrote:

Developing story alledging that they're also listening-in on phone calls made by some mainstream media organisations.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/ABC_News_Top_federal_source_says_0515.html

Actually the story doesn't say that at all. It does say that they may of been investigated to look for sources on the phone records.

sovtek

Manic Moran wrote:

Verizon and Verizon Wireless are legally speaking seperate companies. However, I don't know if the mobile companies are involved or not.

NTM

...and Verizon is the company Vodafone had to partner with to enter the US market...IIRC

Frederico

Now ABC journalists are being warned..

http://blogs.abcnews.com//theblotter/2006/05/federal_source_.html

Read some of the comments underneath, very scary.

dahamsta

I'm starting to think twice about this whole anti-american thing. Perhaps I am anti-american after all, and not just anti-bush. If that's the level the population are reduced to, perhaps they're better left to their own devices. Roll on Cold War II.

tunaman

It has been widely reported that in an ABC poll more than 60% of Americans thought bugging them was fine as long as it helped the war on terrorism.

This however is blatant disinformation which completely contradicts the findings of the poll conducted.

Here is a link to the article and poll in question. Click on do you agree to see the results, which like I said amazingly found the complete opposite of what has then been reported all around the World as fact.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=1953464

Is it okay for the government to track phone calls made by you and millions of other Americans?

No, it is not acceptable no matter what the government says.
4,803

Yes, if the government says it is necessary to fight terrorism.1,885

Total Vote: 6,688

dahamsta

I don't get anything when I click "Do You Agree", just a popup window with a banner ad in it. Looks to me like it is or was an internet poll on the other poll - probably a profesionally-run telephone poll - though, which doesn't really follow.

Manic Moran

I have found those "click your opinion" polls to be incredible suspect. Either with massive 'jumps' one way or the other after the polls close when the news company doesn't like the results, or if the word gets around, various groups conduct 'Fire Missions', whereby an email gets sent around, and everyone from RepublicDomain.org or DemocraticUnderground who could be bothered clicks the thing and it just depends on which groups got the word.

NTM