Looks like they're spying on anyone who uses Verizon, ATT or BellSouth, not just Al Qaeda.
Snippet:
---
USA Today
NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls
Updated 5/11/2006 12:30 AM ET
By Leslie Cauley, USA TODAY
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.
NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls
Since the list is being analyzed by a computer looking for algortihims that are indicitive of unsavory activity, without any real association to people's names, addresses, etc. I'd say this has less to do with "spying" on people, than learning what to look for, and doing it.
Unlike call monitoring, I don't see how this type of mass search for patterns can be argued against.
Oh, c'mon. Even papa knows they're watchin' him.
hell, flitty, anybody who's anybody knows i'm under surveillance. but as usual pj's got it wrong. nsa gets their take on me from the ss (secret service, not the combat arm of the schutzstaffel, although the parallel's are kinda creepy, no?) and always have. once ya got yerself a nice fat charlie file like mine, you know that you're never really alone. but it's awfully nice of pj to care enough to mistakenly worry about my tail. just for that i've reconsidered his uncanny resemblance to a certain paranoid barnyard creature. he's much more like a ship captain, who shares a name with a blasphemous prophet, made famous by a guy named hermie and just like that brilliantly obsessive character he'll be dragged down by that which he pursues. right, pegleg?
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/19/05
I always wish Mr. Gonzalez a good morning and good night whenever I'm on the phone or internet.
Papa's just worried his constant barrage of calls to those 1-900 numbers will wind up being send via CIA messenger to Mrs. Papa
Whatever happened to the Republican Party that protected our rights against undue intrusion by the federal government?
please, craig. that fight was fought when the credit card bill came due. a cloak and dagger type i ain't.
Here's the Q&A from the USAToday article. I love the answer to the question "Is this legal?"
===
Questions and answers about the NSA phone record collection program
Updated 5/11/2006 12:31 AM ET
The National Security Agency has been collecting domestic calling records from major telecommunications companies, sources told USA TODAY. Answers to some questions about the program, as described by those sources:
Q: Does the NSA's domestic program mean that my calling records have been secretly collected?
A: In all likelihood, yes. The NSA collected the records of billions of domestic calls. Those include calls from home phones and wireless phones.
Q: Does that mean people listened to my conversations?
A: Eavesdropping is not part of this program.
Q: What was the NSA doing?
A: The NSA collected "call-detail" records. That's telephone industry lingo for the numbers being dialed. Phone customers' names, addresses and other personal information are not being collected as part of this program. The agency, however, has the means to assemble that sort of information, if it so chooses.
Q: When did this start?
A: After the Sept. 11 attacks.
Q: Can I find out if my call records were collected?
A: No. The NSA's work is secret, and the agency won't publicly discuss its operations.
Q: Why did they do this?
A: The agency won't say officially. But sources say it was a way to identify, and monitor, people suspected of terrorist activities.
Q: But I'm not calling terrorists. Why do they need my calls?
A: By cross-checking a vast database of phone calling records, NSA experts can try to pick out patterns that help identify people involved in terrorism.
Q: How is this different from the other NSA programs?
A: NSA programs have historically focused on international communications. In December, The New York Times disclosed that President Bush had authorized the NSA to eavesdrop — without warrants — on international phone calls to and from the USA. The call-collecting program is focused on domestic calls, those that originate and terminate within U.S. borders.
Q: Is this legal?
A: That will be a matter of debate. In the past, law enforcement officials had to obtain a court warrant before getting calling records. Telecommunications law assesses hefty fines on phone companies that violate customer privacy by divulging such records without warrants. But in discussing the eavesdropping program last December, Bush said he has the authority to order the NSA to get information without court warrants.
Q: Who has access to my records?
A: Unclear. The NSA routinely provides its analysis and other cryptological work to the Pentagon and other government agencies.
Bush will address the nation on this topic at noon.
Apparently the outrage--from Republicans and Democrats alike--has taken the White House by surprise.
Clueless, as always...
outrage, schmoutrage. this is a calculated effort. who's gonna come out and say that this is an outrage? the american people have already spoken on this one, and they'll side with george again. safety will trump privacy and the left will look weak on national security and the gop base will be shown again the cost of staying home in november. as far as the politics of it go, brilliant.
72 members of Congress filed papers last night to stop this illegal practice.
Republican Senator Arlen Specter wants the heads of ATT, Verizon and Bell South to testify in front of Congress.
The 73 include 71 Democrats and 1 independent.
John Conyers, Jr. of Michigan
Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii
Gary Ackerman of New York
Brian Baird of Washington
Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin
Howard Berman of California
Shelley Berkley of Nevada
Earl Blumenauer of Oregon
Rick Boucher of Virginia
Corrine Brown of Florida
Michael Capuano of Massachusetts
Julia Carson of Indiana
William Lacy Clay of Missouri
Artur Davis of Alabama
Peter DeFazio of Oregon
Diana DeGette of Colorado
William Delahunt of Massachusetts
Sam Farr of California
Chaka Fattah of Pennsylvania
Barney Frank of Massachusetts
Al Green of Texas
Raul Grijalva of Arizona
Maurice Hinchey of New York
Ruben Hinojosa of Texas
Michael Honda of California
Jesse Jackson, Jr. of Illinois
Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas
Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas
Stephanie Tubbs Jones of Ohio
Dale E. Kildee of Michigan
Carolyn C. Kilpatrick of Michigan
Dennis Kucinich of Ohio
Tom Lantos of California
Barbara Lee of California
Zoe Lofgren of California
John Lewis of Georgia
Carolyn Maloney of New York
Edward Markey of Massachusetts
Jim McDermott of Washington
James McGovern of Massachusetts
Martin Meehan of Massachusetts
George Miller of California
James Moran of Virginia
Jerrold Nadler of New York
Eleanor Holmes Norton of District of Columbia
James Oberstar of Minnesota
John Olver of Massachusetts
Major Owens of New York
Donald Payne of New Jersey
Charles Rangel of New York
Linda Sanchez of California
Bernard Sanders of Vermont
Janice Schakowsky of Illinois
Bobby Scott of Virginia
Jose Serrano of New York
Brad Sherman of California
Louise Slaughter of New York
Hilda Solis of California
Fortney Pete Stark of California
Bennie Thompson of Mississippi
John Tierney of Massachusetts
Tom Udall of New Mexico
Chris Van Hollen of Maryland
Debbie Wasserman Shultz of Florida
Melvin Watt of North Carolina
Maxine Waters of California
Diane Watson of California
Henry Waxman of California
Robert Wexler of Florida
Lynn Woolsey of California
David Wu of Oregon
Albert Russell Wynn of Maryland
...and the left will look weak on national security...
like clockwork.
I'm surprised (and yet not surprised) you find this just dandy.
To me these actions are shocking and blatantly un-American, activities that seem like something out of Stalin's Russia.
Most true conservatives I speak to are objecting.
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/20/05
I've read articles that say all the phone numbers you dial from your cell phone are published and accessible to anyone via the internet if they know where to look.
That's not even the government. That's anyone can find them.
Talk about no privacy.
oh let's wind up the rhetoric, there, comrade. when are you going to admit that anyone you would classify as a true conservative or a republican who's still speaking to you is as much of a republican and or a conservative as you are? someone who registered republican just so they could vote against a candidate in a primary.
a database from which to run numbers. that's it. no content. no names. no addresses. just a database of numbers. in this world where threats are not trumpeted by press releases the time saved by being able to check numbers identified with a captured cell phone or an identified number associated with a threat can be the difference between a quiet arrest and rendition and a mushroom cloud.
Do you who oppose this understand what a database processing such queries looks like. Here:
[
EXECUTING...
]
If a phone number triggers a result because it matches the shape of the cell phone records of the 9/11 terrorists wouldn't you want someone to look at it? How else can we find these people in an era where a disposable cellphone is more of a tool to a criminal than a crowbar.
Reed Hundt, former FCC chairman: "No one should imagine that what NSA has done, if reports are accurate, is normal behavior or standard procedure in the interaction between a private communications network and the government. In an authoritarian country without a bill of rights and with state ownership of the communications network, such eavesdropping by people and computers is assumed to exist. But in the United States it is assumed not to occur, except under very carefully defined circumstances that, according to reports, were not present as NSA allegedly arm-twisted telephone companies into compliance. That is a topic that can't be avoided in the general's hearing, if he gets that far."
PalJoey: Call me paranoid, but these activities are un-American. They are totalitarian tactics and they must be stopped.
un-american
heh heh. yeah, that one's gonna work. run faster. carville's got a few cases of eggs for your party up ahead there. just before the cliff.
Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont: "Are you telling me that tens of millions of Americans are involved with Al Qaeda?"
"I am not a crook." --Richard M. Nixon, 1973
"We're not mining or trolling through the personal lives of millions of innocent Americans." --George W. Bush, 2006
run, pj, run.
Senator Dianne Feinstein: "I happen to believe that we are on our way to a major Constitutional confrontation on the Fourth Amendment guarantees over unreasonable search and seizure, and I think this is also going to present a growing impediment to the confirmation of General Hayden."
Popcorn, anyone?
do 3rd party records fall under the 4th amendment? i wonder if something like that would go to the supreme court? hmmmm, enjoy your popcorn.
Here's the problem, regardless of party or anything else: what is unsavory activity, ckeaton? It's abstract and open to interpretation and therefore subject to exploitation.
You also have to make the assumption that the government is telling the truth, a supposition I NEVER make with anyone, badge or no badge.
The US government has a long and varied history of lying to its people, from the syphllis experiments on African Americans, to the Duck and Cover, chemical and nuclear testing--have you ever seen the old footage of people being doused with DDT? The examples are too numerous to mention.
America has a choice--land of the free or land of the pseudo-free. It's up to us and the people we choose to represent us.
And I suppose if you are innocent, you have nothing to worry about--the only problem is, innocent of what?
Videos