In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
NSA Snooping...
Highball
Member Posts: 15,755
USA News today revealed that the NSA has collected entire phone records from three major phone companies since 9/11.
Now, the Kool-Aid drinkers and cowards (security,at ANY price) will cheer the news.
Those people valuing a free country will grieve.
Now, the Kool-Aid drinkers and cowards (security,at ANY price) will cheer the news.
Those people valuing a free country will grieve.
Comments
X-ring sir.
I've got nothing to hide, and listening to MY phone would be great relaxation for some overworked SigInt drone.
Whassamatta HB; been talkin' to somebody connected with the Bad Guys?
gunnut- I think you have totally missed the point and any effort made trying to explain it to you would be lost. The term in one ear and out the other comes to mind immediately.
So who needs a Constitution anyway? The present Administration isn't following it. We're just serfs to the manor born. [}:)]
2. If true, it's BS of the highest magnitude. These sorts of "fishing expeditions" are explicitly prohibited by the Bill of Rights. Even in the name of fighting terrorism there have to be limits on police powers.
3. Again, it's not just the current administration violating civil liberites. It's the federal government, including Dem and Rep presidents and Congresses, since at least 1934 to my knowledge. Anything before that is before my reckoning.
Too old to live...too young to die...
But of course everything I have ever said can be reinterpreted.
WASHINGTON (AP) - The government is secretly collecting records of ordinary Americans' phone calls in an effort to build a database of every call made within the country, it was reported Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth telephone companies began turning over records of tens of millions of their customers' phone calls to the National Security Agency program shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, said USA Today, citing anonymous sources it said had direct knowledge of the arrangement.
On 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 program 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 Qaida?'' 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 program does not involve listening to or taping the calls. Instead it documents who talks to whom in personal and business calls, whether local or long distance, by tracking which numbers are called, the newspaper said.
The NSA and the Office of National Intelligence Director did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
NSA is the same spy agency that conducts the controversial domestic eavesdropping program that has been acknowledged by President Bush. The president said last year that he authorized the NSA to listen, without warrants, to international phone calls involving Americans suspected of terrorist links.
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.
The White House offered no reason for the postponement to the lawmakers.
Hayden already faced criticism because of the NSA's secret domestic eavesdropping program. As head of the NSA from March 1999 to April 2005, Hayden also would have overseen the call-tracking program.
The NSA wants the database of domestic call records to look for any patterns that might suggest terrorist activity, USA Today said.
Don Weber, a senior spokesman for the NSA, told the paper that the agency operates within the law, but would not comment further on its operations.
One big telecommunications company, Qwest, has refused to turn over records to the program, the newspaper said, because of privacy and legal concerns.
Meanwhile, the Justice Department has abruptly ended an inquiry into the warrantless eavesdropping program because the NSA refused to grant its lawyers the necessary security clearance.
The Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility, or OPR, sent a fax to Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-N.Y., on Wednesday saying they were closing their inquiry because without clearance their lawyers cannot examine Justice lawyers' role in the program.
Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said the terrorist surveillance program ``has been subject to extensive oversight both in the executive branch and in Congress from the time of its inception.''
Roehrkasse noted the OPR's mission is not to investigate possible wrongdoing in other agencies, but to determine if Justice Department lawyers violated any ethical rules. He declined to comment when asked if the end of the inquiry meant the agency believed its lawyers had handled the wiretapping matter ethically.
One big telecommunications company, Qwest, has refused to turn over records to the program, the newspaper said, because of privacy and legal concerns.
Well I'll be. [:0]
Just hang tight and wait till the gun grabbing, bleeding heart, tax raising left returns to majority office, and they will.
Presenting facts to bolster one's opinion, does not change the fact, that it is still...only an opinion.
Luckily the telecoms industry has been sufficiently de-regulated that upstanding companies such as Qwest can as it appears they have done, 'Just Say No', as they note in the disclosure statements that are sent to clients.
A perfect time to vote with your pocketbook. AT&T, Bellsouth and Verizon must be told through lost business that collaboration with this type of intrusion has consequences that overshadow any Government contracts they may be trying to preserve.
Brad Steele
quote:Originally posted by sig232
They fail to disclose that the calls are only calls to locations outside the US. To and from locations outside the US, by suspected terriost groups, supporters, etc. Does that change the perspective a bit for the alarmists?
Are you suggesting that AT&T, Bellsouth and Verizon are only turning over records of 'suspected terrorist groups'? That doesn't pass the giggle test. Cell phone records contain location information. The NSA is now monitoring your position, courtesy of a service that you are paying for.
I suggest that it is not alarmist to resist each and every intrusion of Government deeper into our private lives. Private companies are coerced to provide records and they do. What's next? Visa? Mastercard? Bluecross/Blueshield? No thank you.
All records are a legimate source for information if, and only if, they are sourced through legitimate, Constitutional means. This would be court ordered warrants, old fashioned as they may be.
Brad Steele
Important Facts - the government wasnt listening to any of these calls and phone records are public information anyway.
first of all, phone records are NOT private and they are available to buy over the internet. second, the government wasnt LISTENING to these phone calls, they merely received a RECORD of who called who. third....if you dont trust the government with these records then why would you trust the phone companies ?
Important Facts - the government wasnt listening to any of these calls and phone records are public information anyway.
This is the second time I've completely agreed with Albert. Very Scary.
As with all fishing expeditions, some innocents will get caught up---would you think the same if you were one of those innocents?
Lets be semi-rational until the facts are apparent! If they pulled the records on everyone in the country I will stand by your side and holler too!
We need to wait and find out if the phone records are specific to certain individuals, which is what I had heard, or did they pull all the records on every customer in the country. I don't think that was done. Don't panic and turn it into a Democratic, point the finger routine, until you have all the facts. That is being an alarmist!
Lets be semi-rational until the facts are apparent! If they pulled the records on everyone in the country I will stand by your side and holler too!
they are maintaining records of every call made. the idea is to look for patterns of calls ie. first guy is suspected of being link to terror cel...first guy calls second guy and second guy calls third guy. they are all a part of the same cell. Whenever second guy calls third guy, or third calls first etc. they monitor the call mosre closely. They use the info to find out who is in the cell, whether they are up to something based on how often they talk etc.
When i was in college I took the test for the CIA, one of the questions was based on five islands. They gave you information on how often one island sent messages to other islands, how often two islands communicated with only each other etc. then they asked a series of questions based on the message traffic such as which island does the chief live on (the one that sends and recieves the most messages) which islands might be planning a coup against the chief(the two that talk frequently among themselves) etc. etc.
Phone records are not Public Information. Please see the below link which explains 'pretexting' meaning fraudulent misrepresentation of identity in order to obtain information. Not criminal, it seems, but most likely it will be in the near future.
http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-privacy05.html
Important fact II: The Government is getting information that currently only available to the public through deception. Only one of Highball's 'Kool-Aid drinkers' would twist this into 'public information'.
How can you dismiss the Fourth Amendment protections of security in our persons, houses, papers and effects, which is not qualified, and then expect that a Second Amendment Right (that is qualified) to stand?
I can see the camel's nose under the tent. The tragedy is that there are so many horse's * holding the flap.
Brad Steele
I live in the woods, very remotely, and had someone tell me once "they could be sitting anywhere out here and just watching you"..my reply: "well they can if they want, but they'll get mighty bored".lol
I say they could be spending these energies in far better ways...Such as preserving this country that our forefathers faught and died for, and keep it from becoming mexico!!!
the phone companies gave this information voluntarily because they give it to other entities as well.
USA News today revealed that the NSA has collected entire phone records from three major phone companies since 9/11.
Now, the Kool-Aid drinkers and cowards (security,at ANY price) will cheer the news.
Those people valuing a free country will grieve.
Just shows how stupid democrats are. It hits the papers and they fly all to hell.
Just shows how stupid democrats are. It hits the papers and they fly all to hell.
[INSERT ROLLING EYES EMOTICON HERE]
first of all, phone records are NOT private and they are available to buy over the internet. second, the government wasnt LISTENING to these phone calls, they merely received a RECORD of who called who. third....if you dont trust the government with these records then why would you trust the phone companies ?
Important Facts - the government wasnt listening to any of these calls and phone records are public information anyway.
I agree, and I'm a little frightened by that notion.
When you bury your head in the sand, just remember what it sticking up in the air!!
So the question becomes a political one. If you have Democratic leanings then the current adminisrtation is taking away your freedom. Or are they protecting your freedom?
If you are Republican then the government is protecting us from a repeat of 911! Its okay to step on our rights for a short time until the threat is gone.
If the Democrats were in power and we had no war in Iraq, troops pulled out of Afgan, no wiretapping. Dump the CIA, which they tend to do. Cut the funding for the troops in half which they tend to do to make room for more money for social programs. What would they do when we get hit again. No troops, no CIA intellegence, just feel our pain and the pain of the muslims and wait for the next round.
So how do you protect the country, if you were in the hotseat! Not easy to answer is it?
This is a tough topic. I remember a time when all the folks with yellow skin were rounded up an put in camps. In this country, during wartime. Are we at war? How serious is this 911 issue?
When you bury your head in the sand, just remember what it sticking up in the air!!
So the question becomes a political one. If you have Democratic leanings then the current adminisrtation is taking away your freedom. Or are they protecting your freedom?
If you are Republican then the government is protecting us from a repeat of 911! Its okay to step on our rights for a short time until the threat is gone.
If the Democrats were in power and we had no war in Iraq, troops pulled out of Afgan, no wiretapping. Dump the CIA, which they tend to do. Cut the funding for the troops in half which they tend to do to make room for more money for social programs. What would they do when we get hit again. No troops, no CIA intellegence, just feel our pain and the pain of the muslims and wait for the next round.
So how do you protect the country, if you were in the hotseat! Not easy to answer is it?
Easy: You protect the country in keeping with the laws upon which it is founded, else why bother? Whether or not that which has been bestowed upon us by the Constitution has been circumvented in this case is not a partisan issue, so please do not try to make it one; either what has and is being done in the name of the War on Terrorism is in keeping with the Constitution or it isn't. Whether Democrats would have done nothing or Republicans sleep better because of it is hardly the point here.
This kind of monitoring was a cliche back when that movie"The President's Analyst" came out(had the phone line coming out of the president's head or was it the analysts head?) In the days of COINTELPRO lots of this stuff went on. All the excuse they ever needed was that they were listening to the bad guys, whoever that happened to be.
first of all, phone records are NOT private and they are available to buy over the internet. second, the government wasnt LISTENING to these phone calls, they merely received a RECORD of who called who. third....if you dont trust the government with these records then why would you trust the phone companies ?
Important Facts - the government wasnt listening to any of these calls and phone records are public information anyway.
Yup.
Let me add one thing here.
NOBODY likes the idea that the gov't is snooping on citizens in any way. But what's the alternative?
The problem is, there are precious few ways of tracking and identifying terrorists, and in today's day and age, when 2-3 determined people can blow up a Federal building, or 20 can destroy major national landmarks, we have to use all of them.
It doesnt take much to slip through the cracks to cause a lot of damage. Looking at patterns of phone calls is one of the FEW possible ways of doing that. Its non-intrusive. . .and all it does is generate leads that have to be followed up by more conventional (ie warrant-authorized) surveillance.
Having this program revealed in this manner damages national security, because now terrorists (who aren't stupid or naive) are going to simply stop using traceable phones to talk to each other.
Its also probably not a coincidence that this "secret" was leaked right when a new CIA chief is under appointment.
In the days of COINTELPRO lots of this stuff went on. All the excuse they ever needed was that they were listening to the bad guys, whoever that happened to be.
No, it didn't. The difference today is that there is no need of excuse; such surveillance is indiscriminate, widespread and independent of any real or imagined threat. Important difference, if you remember your Orwell.
NOBODY likes the idea that the gov't is snooping on citizens in any way. But what's the alternative?
This is perhaps the most dangerous statement of sentiment posted here thus far. I mean, why wipe your *, you're just gonna crap again, right?
Or do you utilize the resources of law enforcement and the covert agencies to snoop out every possible threat? If you do a large number of people will scream for your head because YOU ARE GOING TOO FAR AND INFRINGING ON OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES!!!
If we gathered 10 people at random off the street and asked them how far should the government go in gathering information in the name of national security I bet we get 10 different answers. How does the administration decide? You know that no matter what Bush does his critics will hang him for it. It's either too much or not enough.
I value my civil liberties but at the same time I don't want the freedoms we enjoy to facilitate our enemies' efforts to destroy us. I certainly don't want to simply wad the Bill of Rights up into a ball and toss it, but at the same time maybe we do need to make some distasteful compromises in time of war.
I don't envy the man who has to make these choices.
Oh, and please don't act like Bush is the first president to act contrary to the Bill of Rights in the name of fighting a war. Lincoln rounded up critics and deported them. Wilson detained Germans and Roosevelt detained Japanese. Nothing new, here, and maybe not nearly as bad as previous administrations.
Too old to live...too young to die...
What to do? Nothing? Protect everyone's right to privacy with absolute 100% certainty? If you do then a large number of people will scream for your head the next time a terror attack occurs because YOU WEREN'T DOING ENOUGH!!!
Or do you utilize the resources of law enforcement and the covert agencies to snoop out every possible threat? If you do a large number of people will scream for your head because YOU ARE GOING TOO FAR AND INFRINGING ON OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES!!!
Using upper case letters and exclamation points is no substitute for reasoned argument. I would be content with just "snooping out every possible threat". Unfortunately, obtaining the telephone records of millions upon millions of citizens whether they pose a threat or not is not the same thing as "snooping out every possible threat". It is precisely this blanket application of preemptive police work that distinguishes "security" from "infringing on civil liberties". Certainly you can understand the difference, regardless of your politics.
Why do the goverment need all this data? What is the cost of this, vs the supposed usefullness? When you look at what this cost, vs the possible outcome, there must be different motives. All the sheeple keep on kissing the jackboots that will rule you.
Why do the phone companies need the data? Why should the phone companies be able to collect his "secret" "private" data and nobody cares?
If the phone companies are already collecting the data and just turning it over to the NSA, why should it cost that much. I don't think the phone companies are charging NSA for the data. Maybe the data is very useful. Maybe the NSA is smart enough to figure out something that you can't figure out and smart enough not to tell everyone exactly what it is.
They are not listening to your calls, they are keeping records of who calls who and those records already existed and could have been accessed under provisions of the Patriot Act and before that, could have been accessed by court order.
Why do the goverment need all this data? What is the cost of this, vs the supposed usefullness? When you look at what this cost, vs the possible outcome, there must be different motives. All the sheeple keep on kissing the jackboots that will rule you.
Ok, some say the gov. has been monitoring phone records for years, but still 911 happened. One venue for the evil doers is and has been chat programs. I fequent a chat called paltalk, and before 911 would see a locked/private room therecalled "the fall project". This room almost always had at least 50 people in it, but the day of 911, it mysteriously disappeared.
Nowdays there are hundreds of far eastern speaking groups, and many are unlocked and open to all. Of course, if you don't go in the room with a far eastern sounding name, they soon bounce you.
As someone said, these people aren't entirely stupid, and there are many, many other ways to communicate.
I dont see how the mere process of collecting the data infringes on anyones privacy. This is not random surveillance.
That is because you insist on putting the cart before the horse. It is rather the grounds and purpose for which such data is collected, and this whether or not it is ever used. If there is no basis for collection other than that it is available and so why the hell not, then anyone with a phone is either a suspect or the victim of undue scrutiny. Which? That you dial 976 numbers to conjure up masturbatory fantasies is your business up until the time the government says it isn't because one of your phonemate's coworkers once dated a guy who knew a guy who went to Pakistan in '99 and came back with a Paula Abdul tattoo and a falafel jones, and so now you are a person of interest. That's the difference.
I wonder how much they charged the government.[:(][:0]
Don