What spy agency might do with your telephone calls

The Seattle Times ^ | May 12, 2006 | Brian Bergstein

[SUSSA]

BOSTON — If the National Security Agency (NSA) is indeed amassing a colossal database of Americans' phone records, one way to use all that information is in "social-network analysis," a data-mining method that aims to expose previously invisible connections among people.

(snip)

That level of cooperation confirmed the fears of many privacy analysts, who pointed out that AT&T is already being sued in federal court in San Francisco for allegedly giving the NSA access to contents of its phone and Internet networks.

The suit, filed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and based on documents from a former AT&T technician, says secret spying rooms and electronic-surveillance equipment were installed by the NSA in AT&T facilities in Seattle and several cities in California to monitor communications. The government is seeking to dismiss the case, citing "the military and state-secrets privilege," according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

(snip)

Social-network analysis would appear to be powerless against criminals and terrorists who rely on a multitude of cellphones, pay phones, calling cards and Internet cafes.

And then there are more creative ways of getting off the grid. In the Madrid train-bombings case, the plotters communicated by sharing one e-mail account and saving messages to each other as drafts that didn't traverse the Internet like regular mail messages would.

[philman_36]

How "comprehensive" can it be if the phone companies (i.e. Bell South, Verizon, etc) DONT EVEN PROVIDE the govt. with any names or addresses associated with any numbers?? (check the USA article)
There's this little thing called "cross referencing a database..."

[Peach]

I'd love to see our Republican Congressmen hold a huge press conference about how the left thought domestic surveillance was just a grand idea after the OKC bombing, how the NYT wrote that Eschelon and Carnivore were terrific programs, etc.

It would have to be a huge press conference in order to force the MSM to cover it.

[mewzilla]

Their choice in the end.

You're right. Let's hope their shareholders can live with it.

[mewzilla]

If you have a chance, read the article from The Daily Telegraph that I've got linked above. Folks should send the link to their pols.

[philman_36]

They may simply not have considered it. It would be rather shortsighted, but it's always a possibility.

[SUSSA]

Believe it or not, the IRS spies on "suspects" in many more intrusive means and has the power to destroy you financially and mentally at their whim.

Agreed but why make things worse?

[Peach]

We do need to get back to activism on FR instead of arguing among ourselves.

And part of that activism is making sure our pols know the facts, because so far, they seem woefully unprepared.

[Dawgreg]

Exactly! Good grief! The government can find out anything they want to about you whenever they want, always have, always will. I have no problem with this. Just another attempt to discredit Dubya and whoever's responsible for all this leaking (and not just this instance) SHOULD, but won't, be hung for treason!

[mewzilla]

Well, considering what 9-11 cost and is costing the airlines in particular and the economy in general, and leaving aside the grievous human losses, I think Quest is being very stupid.

[EEDUDE]

"My instant reaction is to rebel against anyone prying into my privacy."

You're a day late and a dollar short my friend. Information has been collected on you since the first mainframe computer was built.

Ever seen what I prospective employer or an insurance company can find out about you?

If having the NUMBERS and TIMES of your phone calls recorded bothers you, you'd be in an outright PANIC over what is already recorded and accessible by anyone with the desire and money to purchase it.

PS...It's NOT the Government that's collecting all this data.

[EEDUDE]

Precisely.

Echelon and Carnivore did/does much more than just record the numbers and times of phone calls.

Now I had better be quiet.

[spatso]

If you think of yourself as a conservative you are fundamentally opposed to any government intrusion into your affairs. If, on the other hand, the national security interest requires a unique power, as surely exists in this case, it should not be a back room government official who makes that decision. The Courts are given the power to restrain undo government intervention. The more I think of this matter, the more I am certain the President was badly advised and the FISA protocol should have been respected.

[PeteB570]

I'm linked to a lot of people, places and things, since I use my phone for work.

And if the feds want to make a federal case out of it, even you and I are "linked". I wonder what dark and sinister things we are sharing in the basement of FR?

Information is either given to the government or the companies "sell" it to people who will pay for it. Or even somebody who works at the company will illegally sell it.

The information is out there and more than the government are looking for it.

[verity]

(Referring to the Article)

Paranoid idiot alert.

[DustyMoment]

By the time the prosecutor tries to bring that tangled spider web into something that resembles an "Evil Web" the jury would have nodded off and be drooling on themselves.

You, too, huh?

[Peach]

Despite the Democrats saying publicly they don't wish to shut down the terrorist surveillance program, 71 of them have filed suit in federal court to do just that:

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/5/12/02558.shtml?s=ic

[two23]

I am most distressed that conservatives are now placed in the awkward position of having to argue for government intervention into matters of information privacy.

Me too and this keeps going through my mind:

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

But on the other hand, in todays electronic world, we didn't really "give up" any liberties...we acquiesced to subtle intrusion while being dazzled by technology.

[spatso]

You know some people are just plain stupid. Today they think it is a good idea that the government be able to manipulate and message this data without any Court oversight. I can't wait to hear their reaction when Hillary sets out the profiles that she wants to be monitored.

[EEDUDE]

I didn't say I LIKED IT.

I was simply stating what IS.

And as another poster pointed out, If you want to see something intrusive...look at the IRS! And that's not to save lives, that's just to collect money.

Another good example: If you don't pay your child support, they will burn the woods and sift the ashes (electronically speaking), and they WILL find you.

I don't like it at all, but if this data is out there I can't think of a BETTER use for it than trying to keep our enemies from killing a bunch of schoolkids.

Besides, having a public discussion on just how we collect info on terrorists kind of defeats the purpose, don't you think?

[EEDUDE]

"I can't wait to hear their reaction when Hillary sets out the profiles that she wants to be monitored."

She won't.

She'll just request copies of your FBI files. Oh, wait a minute, she already did that, didn't she?

My only point is that the information is out there, has been out there for a LONG time, and this is nothing to get excited about.

I don't think the Government SHOULD know about the number and type of weapons I have in my "arsenal", but I'm pretty sure they do. No big deal.

The Genie is out of the bottle and we can't put it back in.

Let's not blindfold the agencies responsible for overseeing our safety...the Dems have already tied one hand behind their backs and cut off their legs.