Posted on 05/11/2006 10:25:46 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - President Bush did not confirm or deny a newspaper report Thursday that the National Security Agency was collecting records of tens of millions of ordinary Americans' phone calls.
"Our intelligence activities strictly target al-Qaida and their known affiliates," Bush said. "We're not mining or trolling through the personal lives of millions of innocent Americans."
USA Today, based on anonymous sources it said had direct knowledge of the arrangement, reported that AT&T Corp., Verizon Communications Inc., and BellSouth Corp. began turning over records of Americans' phone calls to the NSA shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Bush said any domestic intelligence-gathering measures he's approved are "lawful," and he says "appropriate" members of Congress have been briefed.
The disclosure could complicate Bush's bid to win confirmation of former NSA director Gen. Michael Hayden as CIA director.
Congressional Republicans and Democrats demanded answers from the Bush administration Thursday about a government spy agency secretly collecting records of ordinary Americans' phone calls to build a database of every call made within the country.
The top-ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee said he was shocked by the revelation about the NSA.
"It is our government, it's not one party's government. It's America's government. Those entrusted with great power have a duty to answer to Americans what they are doing," Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record) of Vermont.
The Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record) of Pennsylvania, said he would call the phone companies to appear before the panel in pursuit of what had transpired.
"We're really flying blind on the subject and that's not a good way to approach the Fourth Amendment and the constitutional issues involving privacy," Specter said of domestic surveillance in general.
The companies said Thursday that they are protecting customers' privacy but have an obligation to assist law enforcement and government agencies in ensuring the nation's security. "We prize the trust our customers place in us. If and when AT&T is asked to help, we do so strictly within the law and under the most stringent conditions," the company said in a statement, echoed by the others.
Bush said that U.S. intelligence targets terrorists and that the government does not listen to domestic telephone calls without court approval and that Congress has been briefed on intelligence programs.
He vowed to do everything in his power to fight terror and "we will do so within the laws of our country."
On Capitol Hill, several lawmakers expressed incredulity about the program, with some Republicans questioning the rationale and legal underpinning and several Democrats railing about the lack of congressional oversight.
"I don't know enough about the details except that I am willing to find out because I'm not sure why it would be necessary to keep and have that kind of information," said House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C., told Fox News Channel: "The idea of collecting millions or thousands of phone numbers, how does that fit into following the enemy?"
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said bringing the telephone companies before the Judiciary Committee is an important step.
"We need more. We need to take this seriously, more seriously than some other matters that might come before the committee because our privacy as American citizens is at stake," Durbin said.
Sen. Jeff Sessions (news, bio, voting record), R-Ala., argued that the program "is not a warrantless wiretapping of the American people. I don't think this action is nearly as troublesome as being made out here, because they are not tapping our phones."
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 spokesman Don Weber said in an e-mailed statement that given the nature of the agency's work, it would be "irresponsible to comment on actual or alleged operations issues." He added, "the NSA takes its legal responsibilities seriously and operates within the law."
NSA is the same spy agency that conducts the controversial domestic eavesdropping program that had been acknowledged earlier by 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 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. Other meetings with lawmakers were still planned.
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.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., who has spoken favorably of the nomination, said the latest revelation "is also going to present a growing impediment to the confirmation of Gen. Hayden."
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.
How would we know? The White House has successfully (thus far) managed to end-run the courts and Department of Justice on this one, and keep any judicial body from reviewing the program for legality. They just wave their hands and say, "Oh, don't worry, it's legal. We're protecting you, see? Now...shhh...go back to sleep...that's right, sleep..."
If anyone actually read the stories on this so far, they'd find that Qwest asked the NSA to bounce their request off of the FISA court, and the NSA categorically refused, because the FISC might not agree with them. Why on earth would that happen? That court is usually VERY agreeable to such requests.
Then Qwest asked the NSA to get a letter from the Attorney General's office authorizing the data collection. Again, the NSA refused.
Wonder why? I can't imagine the AG of all people would refuse such a request, given his support for the program... Curious. Wonder what they're hiding...?
SW
Great. That means they're running loose in my neck of the woods.
This goes WAY too far. Imagine this info in the hands of a Hillary admin. It'll be blackmail-city for political enemies, whistleblowers, activists of any kind...
Do you believe everything you read or hear in the MSM???
I don't, not EVER>
Dunno. Maybe there is a time limit on how long they keep the records. What they're NOT allowed to do is just give out the information to anyone who asks, especially The Law (w/o a court order). They got busted for allowing private companies to sell phone records to anyone with the cash - d'ya think they should get a pass on this one?
SW
Hm. That history degree I have must be defective, because I coulda sworn that slavery ended 143 years ago, and we're talking about actions taken by our government TODAY. Try to stay in the present day, wouldja?
The 14th Amendment effected slaves, not non-citizens.
Huh? WTF does the 14th Amendment have to do with this conversation? This is about possible illegal search & seizure (i.e. 4th Amendment), not equal protection. Not directly, anyway...
Besides, you're utterly, embarrassingly wrong. To wit:
Amendment 14: Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. [emphasis mine]
See those bold, unitalicized bits? That says "any person," as in ANY person. It means what it says. It's quite clear. If they'd wanted it to only apply to citizens, they'd have said so. It applies to anyone and everyone within the boundaries of any of the States (and by extension, the entire country). It isn't difficult to understand.
SW
"Hm. That history degree I have must be defective.."
Well, I guess we found something we can agree upon.
or what if we had a government agency that demanded every financial institution send records of our transactions and earnings to them once a year?
oh sorry, we already do - and it doesn't violate the 4th amendment.
what suspicious call cluster patterns are smokers and religious persons going to generate? this is pure paranoia.
Objection, non-responsive. Care to, you know, flesh out your argument a bit? Provide something other than smarta$$ comments?
Please, tell me why I'm wrong about the application of the 14th Amendment. There are only two ways I could be wrong:
1. If I misconstrued your argument, and you weren't talking about people within the borders of the United States, or;
2. If there's some court decision I'm unaware of that categorically exempts non-citizens from constitutional protections. (I am an historian, not a lawyer, after all).
Show me either, and I'll gladly retract my argument. Otherwise, you're just blowing smoke.
SW
i am in the category of US citizen. and apparently my calls are being tracked. you like that? fine. i don't. and for what its worth, i do not believe that ignoring FISA is a legal activity. there is only one reason not to go there and get a warrant (even up to 72 hours after you start listening) and that is, no judge would grant one. that is scary.
go ahead and be scared of everything. i think we should be more courageous and hold firm to our constitutional rights, but hey, that's just me, obviously.
Great point!!
You do not know what you are talking about or you
are and enemy agent.
You figure it out!
Democrats were okay with Eschelon and Carnivore which captured every phone call, every e-mail, every baby monitor (!), every ATM transaction and more, and that program is okay, pre war on terror, but this program isn't okay.
Eschelon and Carnivore information:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1543118/posts?page=1#1
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1542838/posts
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1543318/posts
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21387
Oops - Clinton's NSA spying program accidentally (ahem) captured a Republican's phone calls.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/1553101/posts?page=1
And just for kicks, the Commies insisted on FISA:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21453
Flashback: Gore planned to bug America:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1559386/posts
NYT called domestic surveillance a necessity when Clinton was president:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1556815/posts
This is the December 2005 NYT article which says what today's USA Today article says regarding NSA collecting phone numbers.
Clearly, Democrats (and some RINOs) have manufactured their outrage over this already reported on program. LOL
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/24/politics/24spy.html?ei=5090&en=016edb46b79bde83&ex=1293080400&pagewanted=print
"You do not know what you are talking about or you
are and enemy agent."
well that basically conveys absolutely nothing so...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.