NSA building massive database of phone records

Post by **Lyion** » Fri May 12, 2006 1:22 pm

The actual quote is:

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

The misquotating of Franklin in so many arguments about national intelligence really is fascinating since Franklin was one of the premier intelligence agents during the Revolutionary War. Nobody from that timeframe is as prominent or known as him, especially in regards to intel and covert activities. BF was appointed by the Continental Congress to review and publish intercepted communications from England. I'm sure the ACLU and liberals hate him, though, and rank him with that other terrible guy, Reagan. How dare he impugn anyones liberty anywhere! That evil fascist, Franklin!

Anyways, I'm iffy on this, but I'd like to hear more. The simple fact we've had arrests of terrorists and there have been no attacks here since 2001 is good. Also, I have yet to see verifiable abuses of civil liberties by Herr Bush, except as imagined by moonbats.

Plus, it seems people are ok with having open call records for the NSA if it means being safe

Post by **Arlos** » Fri May 12, 2006 1:27 pm

Oh, I can believe it. Good friend of mine worked for a hardware development company as a CompE, and had to get a Top Secret clearence because the company won some NSA contracts. He still can't tell me what it is exactly that they worked on, but from little hints I've been able to figure out that it was new equipment for listening in on other country's satellite transmissions.

So yeah, the NSA has always listened to inter-country communications. The biggest change is that under Bush, they now are listening in on domestic communications, with no independant oversight whatsoever.

I am not real fond of either side on these issues, but at least the Demos are raising a stink about it, and to be fair, a number of republicans are as well. The issue is, as a minority party, there's nothing the democrats can do to STOP it, other than raise a stink. And, in cases where the information hasn't been leaked yet and is stil;l top secret, they are probited by law from making a stink anywhere besides behind closed doors in Congress. Hopefully, if the Demos take back the house and senate in the mid-term elections they can actually do something about it all. If they don't, I can guarantee you all that I'll be first in line to rant about it and change my votes, no matter what party they're from.

-Arlos

Post by **Lyion** » Fri May 12, 2006 1:32 pm

arlos wrote:Oh, I can believe it. Good friend of mine worked for a hardware development company as a CompE, and had to get a Top Secret clearence because the company won some NSA contracts. He still can't tell me what it is exactly that they worked on, but from little hints I've been able to figure out that it was new equipment for listening in on other country's satellite transmissions.

So yeah, the NSA has always listened to inter-country communications. The biggest change is that under Bush, they now are listening in on domestic communications, with no independant oversight whatsoever.

But.... That's the whole mission of the NSA...

I'd bet you the NSA does very little differently now from 1998. I'd also bet that a lot more FUD is being circulated.

And it's never been illegal to monitor calls that originate from outside the U.S. and arrive here. Simply put, we don't know where calls go to most of the time and if they are from a terrorist location, they should be monitored.

Are you against monitoring calls from Sudan, Yemen, and Pakistan, from known terrorist areas if they go to the U.S.?

People wrongly imagine this is some super secret plot to find out about their dope selling buddy or their secret cache of pirated pr0n, but the simple truth is its solely about preventing the guys in towels from creating more carnage here.

Tikker · Post by **Tikker** » Fri May 12, 2006 1:34 pm

I"m agianst whatever Lyion is for!

ClakarEQ · Post by **ClakarEQ** » Fri May 12, 2006 1:48 pm

Lyion, living free has risks. I'm not saying throw every thing out the window. But I don't see how someone can't see this as "too far".

How far can they go before you complain? I'm just curious what is your limit?

I'm of the opinion that what we know is a 10th of the reality of what has been done in situations like this. I'll never know the other 90%, not sure I want to know.

Where are these "some arrests" you mentioned that came out of this technology?

Where was terrorism before 1999? Are you going to say it didn't exist? Why is it that 12 terrorists get "lucky" and now we are preparied to throw our rights away? Are folks here too scared to fight for freedom? You aren't prepaired to die defending your country (and I know YOU are)? Yeah increase security at our perimeter, create new technolgies to find "radioactive" materials, etc. My point is freedom has a cost, too many folks think freedom is "free".

So 5,000 folks die from biochemical bombs, lesson learned, find how it got in and fix it, manage the chemicals, etc. (eg. airport security increase = lessoned learned from 9/11 and even this has been proven a JOKE)

We will never be safe again like we were and all this government has done is increase the reason to kill us. I don't care if it was clinton in office, this is NOT a dem rep issue. It just so happens a rep is in office but my text would be NO different if it were ANYONE else.

EDIT
Freedom != loss of rights

Zanchief · Post by **Zanchief** » Fri May 12, 2006 1:50 pm

I thought you were a libertarian, Lyion?

Post by **Lyion** » Fri May 12, 2006 1:54 pm

What has been thrown out the window? What rights have you lost, Clakar? Can you show me any abuse here?

Despite the scare tactics, the government is not listening to your conversations. They are not monitoring local calls.

I expect and desire the NSA to monitor all calls originating from terrorist areas overseas. I have no issues if a call originating from Sudan or Iran and hits the US is monitored by us. Do you?

I expect the big reason for this information search is to locate Middle Eastern call patterns. They are not looking for anything local, but are approaching this from a macro level.

What should we do, or not do? Should we ignore calls from Al Qaeda in Pakistan, that come here, in your purview?

Post by **Lueyen** » Fri May 12, 2006 2:07 pm

Keep in mind we are not talking line taps and recorded conversations here.
Seriously the NSA compiling a database of what phone numbers called what phone numbers doesn't worry me nearly as much as this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON

It is absolutely frightening what the average person isn't usually aware of when it comes to the security and privacy of widespread technologies, most would find the level of security lacking.

ClakarEQ · Post by **ClakarEQ** » Fri May 12, 2006 2:28 pm

3 of the big 4 telco's gave up ALL records (so it is aleged). Not just me calling france, but me calling mom, in the same state as me. That is not legal, period. It isn't legal for the telco and it isn't legal for the government without a search warrant. Sure toss out your executive privledge BS, yeah that makes it OK. There are already reports about how Quest had been threatend and called unpatriotic, you know, TERRORIST tactics.

Obviously they aren't listening, don't forget 2/3rds of are nation are STUPID. Why listen to 1/3rd when out of that, probably 60% are on the same bandwagon. I'm one of few it seems but I speak up and try to do something about it.

They are not looking for anything local

O rly, and you know this how? Don't kid yourself, they are looking for everything. Lets not be so foolish to think there aren't AlQudia cells in the US, I'd hope most are not the ignorant. You could toss a neo-nazi or ANY anti-establishment group into the AlQuedia bucket.

What I understand of this is they collected it all but they are telling us "O, but we're only looking at international calls" WTF is that? Why not just ask the 3 telcos for international calls then?

Where the hell did you get "they only collected "non domestic" calls" from?

I was saying I don't think we should throw "all" security out the window but security shouldn't trump rights.

I wasn't aware that a pakistany or lebense US Citizen was less then you, apparently they don't deserve the same rights as you, apparently just becuase grandma lives in the old country they need to be monitored. My god man you are either as US Citizen or you aren't.

We are not talking about inbound calls, we are talking about ALL calls, we are talking about how our government collected ALL calls from 15million domestic people.

You or I or any government will never EVER solve this problem.

There is no answer to the problem.

Post by **Arlos** » Fri May 12, 2006 2:38 pm

Actually, Lyion, according to http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/autho ... nklin.html there is a quote as follows:

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

Also:

The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either.

I suspect he said similar things at different times, and they all were recorded.

-Arlos

Post by **Lyion** » Fri May 12, 2006 2:41 pm

First, four telcos gave up between 10 to 15 million call records. That is a fractionally tiny amount of the actual US call total. I'm not sure what the Government was looking for, but just like the last time it was misreported, this could be primarily people with calls coming from overseas terrorist hotspots. I'm sure we'll get more information.

The government has repeated this is tracking people making calls to and from the middle east. Again and again. Both sides of congress has been briefed on this, according to reports. I agree people are ignorant, or they wouldnt be vilifying something they don't really know and that is most likely protecting them from psychopathic known fanatics, while not infringing on any rights.

Given the level of terrorist activity in the middle east, I WANT our government tracking who's talking to who and what's going on. You may not, and thats fine, but most people do.

I'd like to get more information, but this doesn't worry most people, because really it's much ado about nothing.

ClakarEQ · Post by **ClakarEQ** » Fri May 12, 2006 3:16 pm

Yeah, you bet I'm trying to fire folks up, that is my "tactic". I must say I enjoy your unique perception of our government on the exclusiveness that it fits "your desires".

I know I'm off on my facts, most of my regurgitation is from the radio shows I listen too as I don't believe have the crap I "see".

You never answer the hard questions folks throw at you. You remind me of the internet tough guy.

So Lyion, when will it become "not ok" with you? This should be villified, it is wrong and against the law, even you can not deny this. It wasn't done with any oversight approval, it does break the right to privacy, etc. Stealing and then telling the cops you stole doesn't cleanse you of being a criminal.

Gaazy · Post by **Gaazy** » Sat May 13, 2006 12:37 am

Hi Drem ><

Post by **Gidan** » Sat May 13, 2006 8:39 am

For those who are upset about this, are you the same people who talk about how bad our intelligence services are at catching terrorists? Do you agree that terrorists should be granted complete privacy of phone and email transmitions to plan their attacks?

Narrock · Post by **Narrock** » Sat May 13, 2006 8:50 am

People who are against government phone line surveillance are being extremely selfish, and are failing to see the big picture. Stop trying to play your "rights" card. The computer systems that monitor the phone lines only start recording when key words are spoken. If you have nothing to hide then just ignore the fact that you may be recorded from time to time. It really is no big deal, and you are making a mountain out of a mole hill. We need this kind of monitoring for national security. Please use your noggins. Leftists really are setting up America for total collapse.

Post by **Gidan** » Sat May 13, 2006 8:56 am

Holy shit, Mindia and I agree on something!!!!

Post by **Arlos** » Sat May 13, 2006 10:25 am

Sorry, I'm with Benjamin Franklin. Individual freedoms are the foundation of our society. You want to tap phones, get a goddamn warrant, like the law says you're supposed to. Warrantless wiretaps are an unconscionable breach of the Constitution. With a rational congress in place, they'd be drawing up Articles of Impeachment for that. There is *NEVER* a case where, if the government has a legitimate need to listen into the phone calls of a suspected terrorist, it cannot get a warrant in order to do so. Indeed, the FISA law specifically allows for cases where speed is of the essence by allowing for 24 or 48 hours of wiretapping prior to gettting a warrant. I'm sorry, but even if it's 24 hours, there's *NO* reasons, whatsoever, why the government couldn't present it's case to the FISA court within that time frame, if it's a legitimate request.

-Arlos

Post by **Gidan** » Sat May 13, 2006 11:41 am

Benjamin Franklin didn't live in the era or email and cell phones. Also getting approval for taps isn't always as easy as it sounds. You tend to need more then "my gut tells me this guy is bad" to get approval to tap their phone.

Jay · Post by **Jay** » Sat May 13, 2006 11:49 am

I agree with arlos and mindia but I'm kinda caught in the middle. We have a right to privacy, period. We also have security issues that need to be fixed. Where do we draw the line at removing people's rights for their own safety? The phone thing is really not a big deal to me. So some government official might her me phone s3x0r some fatty from the int3rw3b. The issue is what happens next week when they say I can't say certain things over the phone or email. What happens when the governmrnt hears me say something that they think is fishy and they make me take time out of my day to explain myself. How about if it gets as far as middle eastern decent internment camps?

Hatak · Post by **Hatak** » Sat May 13, 2006 11:54 am

Gidan wrote:Also getting approval for taps isn't always as easy as it sounds. You tend to need more then "my gut tells me this guy is bad" to get approval to tap their phone.

Um, isn't that the reason for getting approval? To keep checks and balances in the system against unwarranted invasion of the American citizen's privacy?

It amazes me how we can put laws in place but are deemed unnecessary because we're supposed to be terrifed of terrorists. This is supposed to be America, not a prison where all of our letters, emails, and phone calls are monitored for "our own safety".

Post by **Gidan** » Sat May 13, 2006 12:08 pm

Hatak wrote:
Gidan wrote:Also getting approval for taps isn't always as easy as it sounds. You tend to need more then "my gut tells me this guy is bad" to get approval to tap their phone.

Um, isn't that the reason for getting approval? To keep checks and balances in the system against unwarranted invasion of the American citizen's privacy?

It amazes me how we can put laws in place but are deemed unnecessary because we're supposed to be terrifed of terrorists. This is supposed to be America, not a prison where all of our letters, emails, and phone calls are monitored for "our own safety".

Tell that to the family of people who die in attacks that were planned over the phone or email. "Sorry all, we could have stopped this but the privacy of the terrorists was more important."

mofish · Post by **mofish** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:13 pm

People that, after centuries of making the same mistakes, actually support domestic spying, or any intrusive government action, with no oversight whatsoever, are fools.

I also love the 'they arent actually listening to your calls' line. Riiigghhtt.

The only reason weve made it this far is a little thing called Checks and Balances. But hey, I guess thats an antiquated notion, that has no place in the war on terror zomgzomg!

Thon · Post by **Thon** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:15 pm

Gidan wrote:Tell that to the family of people who die in attacks that were planned over the phone or email. "Sorry all, we could have stopped this but the privacy of the terrorists was more important."

rofl that's such bullshit. i don't much care for the privacy of terrorists.

but i do care when they violate the privacy of tens of millions of AMERICAN CITIZENS on the miniscule chance they'll find something related to terrorism. get a goddam warrant

i hope verizon loses $5 billion, and gets sued out of existance along with the other asswipe companies that shit all over the constitution

mofish · Post by **mofish** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:16 pm

Thon wrote:rofl that's such bullshit. i don't much care for the privacy of terrorists.

but i do care when they violate the privacy of tens of millions of AMERICAN CITIZENS on the miniscule chance they'll find something related to terrorism. get a goddam warrant

i hope verizon loses $5 billion, and gets sued out of existance along with the other asswipe companies that shit all over their customer's privacy

A warrant? You god damned hippy/al qaeda! This is the WAR ON TERROR! There is a nuke about to go off in <insert your town> we cant wait for a warrant!

Trust the NSA man. They are American, and thus infallible.

Post by **Arlos** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:29 pm

You tend to need more then "my gut tells me this guy is bad" to get approval to tap their phone.

You say that as if it were a negative in some way.

Benjamin Franklin didn' tlive in an era with cell phones, but he did live in an era where government was NOT checked by laws like we have in the Constitution. He saw what could happen to the ordinary citizen if the government was allowed free reign in deciding what it did or did not want to do as far as siezing property or arresting individuals for no reason other than they'd annoyed people in government.

That's why Jefferson made such a point of pushing the Bill of Rights into the Constitution. It wasn't right then, and it's not right now, and the Constitution is *NOT* something you can just conveniently ignore because you feel like it. You want to allow warrantless search, siezure & evesdropping against american citizens, by all means, go and get an amendment to the Constitution passed. I can guarantee you that you'll have no success in such an effort, but by all means, feel free to try, as that's your right.

And that's what this argument is all about, really: preserving rights. You want to take them away, and start a domino effect that could lead to who knows what. The first time you allow breaching of the Constitution in the name of "Security" you have set a precedent. Then you give up another right, and then another and another. Eventually, you are no more safe than you were before, but the government is starting to look like that of the one in 1984.

No. It shall not happen.

-Arlos