NSA phone records story excites Washington(Trying to take down Michael Hayden)

Chicago Tribune ^ | 11 May 2006 | Frank James at 1:10 pm CDT

[demlosers]

Washington is agog today with the disclosure that appeared in USA Today that Verizon, AT&T and Bell South have been providing domestic phone call information to the National Security Agency on millions of residential and business phone calls made by Americans.

It’s all part of the spy agency’s quest to create a huge database of caller information it could data mine in order to find patterns that might reveal terrorist communications. But it has raised enormous privacy concerns in the minds of many.

The USA Today report, coming after last year’s disclosure in the New York Times of the NSA’s warrantless electronic surveillance of phone calls it deems to be connected to terrorism ginned up the debate over how far is too far in the Bush administration’s efforts to protect the American people from al Qaeda and other terrorists.

The newspaper’s disclosure modified a lot of plans today. President Bush, on his way to give a commencement address in Biloxi, Miss., stopped in the White House’s Diplomatic Reception Room to deliver a brief statement to the press.

By the way, the president’s rapid response was remarkable. When other bad news has hit, say Dubai Ports World or the initial revelations of the NSA surveillance last December, there was a noticeable lag which allowed White House critics to define the debate.

The president’s quickness before today might be attributable to Tony Snow, the new press secretary. Or it could be that the White House is so nervous about the president’s ever lower poll ratings that he and his advisors felt he had to speak and quickly.

PRESIDENT BUSH: After September the 11th, I vowed to the American people that our government would do everything within the law to protect them against another terrorist attack. As part of this effort, I authorized

[SauronOfMordor]

I know that no one at FR has ever had an affair or tried to keep a serious illness quiet or even had an unlisted number to keep unwanted interests from calling you, but it does happen. In the hands of the wrong people, this would be a source of an absolutely unlimited growth of authority through the threat of revelation or simply the ability to track anyone and their financial transactions. (By the way, I do not think this in the hand of the wrong people.) This needs, however, to be balanced against our need for security. The president has the clear authority to do this in time of great danger, just as Lincoln had the clear authority to watch the mails during the Civil War.

The problem with the Lincoln analogy is that the Civil War was limited in duration. The current conflict is likely to last decades

I don't think the media have realized the full implication of this on their ability to confidentially interact with sources. Otherwise they would be going absolutely nuts

Your calling patterns identify you. If you have a set of numbers that you frequently call from a phone known to be yours, and there's another phone that also interacts with the same set of people, the probability is high that this is another of your phones, perhaps one whose existance you wanted kept private

[School of Rational Thought]

but they want to spy on gun purchases? HMMm

[ndt]

"Let's put it to a vote of the American people, or even let the Supreme Court decide."

And finally we agree. I do not think that would be the outcome of a vote or S.C. Ruling however, but as long as we agree to have it thats good enough for me.

[ndt]

"Oh come on! That's not the point I was making."

Intentional or not, that is the point you made. You are not talking to a liberal audience, throwing out FDR's actions as justification for the current administrations is not going to sway me, sorry.

[Bush gal in LA]

Yup. The traitors are going to try and throw everything they think they have, at Hayden to torpedo his confirmation.They don't want him in there cause he's a disciplined military patriot and they know he'll expose the leaker's,the incompetent's, the saboteur's , and what really went on with ''Able Danger'' and all the rest. Watch for more of these so called ''scandals'' in the coming days. IMHO!

[new yorker 77]

Since I am not pro-terrorist, and have not tried to make 'forgetting 9-11' I do not have a problem with data-mining phone numbers.

Hysterical nitwits consider a database of phone numbers detached from names and conversation content an invasion of privacy.

Pull your lips off of Senator Leahy's butt to respond.

[verity]

"..but as long as we agree to have it thats good enough for me."

I am glad that is settled. Perhaps you can pursue some other monumental issue of common interest.

[demlosers]

You are not talking to a liberal audience, throwing out FDR's actions as justification for the current administrations is not going to sway me, sorry.

It may not have sway with you, but it does set precedence for future presidential action, which does has sway with presidents from both political parties.

[ndt]

"which does has sway with presidents from both political parties."

As evidenced by the latest budgets sadly you are correct.

[KurtZ]

While it is admirable that some of you trust the government so much, just remember that if Bush can do it, so can Socialist/Commie Democrats in the future.

If you let the government pull your finger, they're gonna take the whole hand.

[new yorker 77]

FRIENDLY REMINDER FOR THOSE WITH SELECTIVE AMNESIA WHO ARE BECOMING THE USEFUL IDIOTS OF THE PRO-TERRORIST LEFT

[mrsmith]

"It is still a search."

Anthony Scalia (in Kyllo): "it is not a search for the police to use a pen register at the phone company to determine what numbers were dialed in a private home, Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735, 743-744 (1979), "

Smith v. Maryland: "...This Court consistently has held that a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he [442 U.S. 735, 744] voluntarily turns over to third parties. E. g., United States v. Miller, 425 U.S., at 442 -444; Couch v. United States, 409 U.S., at 335 -336; United States v. White, 401 U.S., at 752 (plurality opinion); Hoffa v. United States, 385 U.S. 293, 302 (1966); Lopez v. United States, 373 U.S. 427 (1963). In Miller, for example, the Court held that a bank depositor has no "legitimate `expectation of privacy'" in financial information "voluntarily conveyed to . . . banks and exposed to their employees in the ordinary course of business." 425 U.S., at 442 . The Court explained: "The depositor takes the risk, in revealing his affairs to another, that the information will be conveyed by that person to the Government. . . .
This Court has held repeatedly that the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the obtaining of information revealed to a third party and conveyed by him to Government authorities, even if the information is revealed on the assumption that it will be used only for a limited purpose and the confidence placed in the third party will not be betrayed." Id., at 443. "

Third party databases and government use of them is a problem that keeps coming up. It's past time for an examination by the legislature of what would be good public policy on the issue.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

There is a book,:

Unholy Alliance : Radical Islam and the American Left (Hardcover)

*******************************

And a review:

****************************************

Communism is dead. Long live Islam!, September 30, 2004

Reviewer:

Kevin Beckman (Sacramento, CA) - See all my reviews

It sounds absurd: why would Leftists make common cause with a religion that is diametrically opposed to everything the Left stands for? David Horowitz explains that it is really quite logical given the Left's first principle: America is evil and anything or anyone opposed to America is good.

Part I of the book is a brief history of 9/11 through the end of major combat operations in Iraq, and the Left's behavior during this time. Horowitz includes the reaction of Katha Pollitt of The Nation magazine: "The flag stands for vengeance, and jingoism, and war." Anthropology Professor Nicholas De Genova of Columbia University said he hoped for "a million Mogadishus." His colleagues objected, not to the despicable sentiment, but because of the bad publicity it brought their "teach-in." Our tax dollars at work!

Part II is the heart of the book: a history of the American and international Left. Horowitz calls them Neo-Communists or Neocoms. The Neocoms of old believed in the Soviet Union the way religious people believe in God. Those who spied for the USSR didn't see themselves as traitors to their country, but rather loyalists to humanity and an ideal of America that's never existed. When the Soviet Union fell, a few of them stopped for some introspection but most pressed on as if nothing happened. Communist historian Eric Hobsbawm put it nicely: "Without the Revolution, my life and my work are meaningless."

Now that they no longer have to defend an indefensible regime, modern Neocoms are simply nihilists. They know what they oppose but they have no plans for the aftermath of the revolution which they still believe will happen. They don't know what they want, but they know what they hate: the United States, capitalism personified.

So why are they allying with radical Islam? Horowitz says that the Neocoms still believe in Marx's dictum that "religion is the opiate of the masses." Once private property is abolished, the need for religion will vanish, and Islamic radicals will stop being Islamic and radical. The only thing standing in the way is the United States.

Sound insane? It is. They are. I highly recommend this book. Horowitz makes the insanity understandable.

[dogbyte12]

Yes, It makes one a communist to not want KGB style spying on our own citizens. Black is white, up and down.

Papers please?

[oceanview]

your face is also personally identifiable information. I would ask you the same question - many cities are putting in surveillance cameras in public places - does the government need a warrant to take a photo of you and store it digitally? does that violate the 4th amendment?

they can't get a warrant in advance, because they don't know what they are looking for until they can demonstrate calling patterns that are suspicious. they need the data first to be able to do that. the same type of data mining could be done on financial records (and likely is) - patterns of the opening of bank accounts by persons.

look, I understand your concern on this. I'll admit - this practice walks right up to the line. but absent this, we are basically ceding free use of the telecommunications and financial networks to persons who would conduct domestic terrorism - if the idea is to catch them in advance, to thwart the act - some accomodations must be made.

[ndt]

"...does the government need a warrant to take a photo of you and store it digitally? does that violate the 4th amendment?"

No, there is no expectation of privacy in public places it's pretty well settled law. I don't like the idea of city wide government run cameras but as the rulings Ive seen come down on the issue of cameras in public I don't think it would be a violation of the 4th.

The analogy is good but fails in a specific and important way. Before even getting into issues of constitutionality, one must look at specific statues and the specific statue in this case explicitly forbids the government from gathering this information from telecoms.

"they need the data first to be able to do that. the same type of data mining could be done on financial records (and likely is)"

Again, banking transactions (which the feds do go through) are not covered by the Telecommunications act so the analogy fails.

If we need to change the law then we change the law, that is how this country work. We do not choose one man or one administration and give them a pass on obeying the law. It is frightening and pathetic how many here are fine with abandoning the constitution when it is our party in power. The precedents we set will continue.

[oceanview]

let's see what happens in the courts. precedent is on the side of the administration in this. lists of numbers are not conversations.

[bobsunshine]

Interesting reading from Macsmind:

By the way....a bit of bad news though for the sources of the USA Today article, per a tip, your identities are known to those who care.

Opps!

UPDATE II: On above. I have an source email which details where the leak on the story originated. This particular leak is directly tied into the denial of security clearances covered in this story, which broke last night.

Simple: Retaliation.

(this story is regarding "Security issue kills domestic spying inquiry - - NSA won’t grant Justice Department lawyers required security clearance)

http://macsmind.blogspot.com/

[oceanview]

I'm not surprised.

this is going to happen again. the NSA does alot of things, the media is going to report each and every one as a "new revelation".

watch the opening segment on OReilly tonight - some "civil rights" atty, basically admitted her goal was essentially to shut down the NSA.

[mcvey]

That is a great point, one of which I certainly hadn't thought. IMO we need to acknowledge the problem--the President has to go to the people over and over again at night and not just depend on the MSM to give him the soundbites he wants. Even if he gets them it does not have the same impact as a speech.

Then, again IMO, we need to adapt constitutionally to this reality. This really is going to be a long twilight struggle.

As to Lincoln, we face destruction I believe, as surely as he did--maybe more so. I was attempting to come up with a parallel to address the political reality.

There is an old Robert Heinlein book, The Puppet-Masters, in which he states that things can never go back to being the same after an insidious invasion. And that is where we are.

McVey