Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Federal Source to ABC News: We Know Who You're Calling
ABC News ^ | May 15 2006 | Brian Ross and Richard Esposito

Posted on 05/15/2006 8:33:11 AM PDT by jmc1969

A senior federal law enforcement official tells us the government is tracking the phone numbers we call in an effort to root out confidential sources.

"It's time for you to get some new cell phones, quick," the source told us in an in-person conversation.

We do not know how the government determined who we are calling, or whether our phone records were provided to the government as part of the recently-disclosed NSA collection of domestic phone calls.

Other sources have told us that phone calls and contacts by reporters for ABC News, along with the New York Times and the Washington Post, are being examined as part of a widespread CIA leak investigation.

One former official was asked to sign a document stating he was not a confidential source for New York Times reporter James Risen.

Our reports on the CIA's secret prisons in Romania and Poland were known to have upset CIA officials.

People questioned by the FBI about leaks of intelligence information say the CIA was also disturbed by ABC News reports that revealed the use of CIA predator missiles inside Pakistan.

Under Bush Administration guidelines, it is not considered illegal for the government to keep track of numbers dialed by phone customers.

The official who warned ABC News said there was no indication our phones were being tapped so the content of the conversation could be recorded.

(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.abcnews.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cialeak; nsa; spying
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 181-197 next last
To: Mad Dawg
But couldn't they sell the data to those who DO have the power of arrest?

I would rather governments be limited in how they use that kind of data, precisely because they do have power of arrest and we saw during the Clinton years how government agencies could be abused.

101 posted on 05/15/2006 9:50:37 AM PDT by dirtboy (An illegal immigrant says my tagline used to be part of Mexico)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
"I am no opposed to the government obtaining data. But there needs to be some kind of cause involved."

I think the "cause" is the WOT, and connecting the dots from suspected terrorist is why they need data in advance.
102 posted on 05/15/2006 9:54:18 AM PDT by Beagle8U (Juan Williams....The DNC's "Crash test Dummy" for talking points.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

People forget that Reagan used whistleblowers to find out what the yes-men weren't telling him. Reagan knew that the fed workers on the operational level would never use the traditional whistleblower channels, for fear of reprisal, so he would take leaks to the media as a sign that there was something he should be paying attention to.


103 posted on 05/15/2006 9:54:46 AM PDT by mullymt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
Do you have reservations about the 9/11 Commission findings that we failed to "connect the dots" prior to 9/11? Do you see this as the government trying to connect the dots before another city is attacked? Could your probable cause come from the 9/11 Commission recommendation to be more aggressive in connecting the dots in the future? Since the 9/11 Commission was sanctioned by Congress, it is essentially Congress speaking when they say we need to connect the dots. I see assembling this kind of data as doing just that, with probable cause already established.

-PJ

104 posted on 05/15/2006 9:55:36 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U
I think the "cause" is the WOT, and connecting the dots from suspected terrorist is why they need data in advance.

Well, that means until terrorism ends, the government can have whatever data it wants and can use it in any manner that it wants?

Sorry, that is not cause. Like I said, the government had the info it needed to solve 9-11 before it happened - but was unable to pull all the pieces together in time. And the answer to that is not to get more data, but use the data you have more effectively.

105 posted on 05/15/2006 9:57:10 AM PDT by dirtboy (An illegal immigrant says my tagline used to be part of Mexico)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
Do you have reservations about the 9/11 Commission findings that we failed to "connect the dots" prior to 9/11?

Yes, I do. And as I have said repeatedly on this thread, the government had the dots and didn't connect them. And the answer is not to get petabytes more of dots, but do a better job with the dots you already have.

106 posted on 05/15/2006 9:58:04 AM PDT by dirtboy (An illegal immigrant says my tagline used to be part of Mexico)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

what data? what data would you allow the government to access, without court orders each and every time?

flight school records? is my attendance at a fight school "private"? why not, what business does the government have checking up on where I go to school. financial records? what business does the government have knowing that I opened a bank account someplace. and on and on, the same argument can be made everytime. and you seem willing to place 100% faith in the court system on these matters.


107 posted on 05/15/2006 9:59:24 AM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
Sucks to be in Maryland, but that is a state matter and not a federal one. Here in Missouri, you do not get pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt although you can get fined if you're stopped and not wearing it. On the other side of the river, Illinois is closer to Maryland's laws but I don't think they're using NVG's! Whatever the case, I don't see the analogy fitting the circumstance since the Feds have not threatened to withhold highway funds for states that don't enforce seatbelt laws.

In addition, by your own admission stating you work with marketing data and not NSA spy program data, you are in no position to state as fact whether the Federal government is any good at data mining or not.

Unlike you I don't fear my government, but I do maintain a healthy suspicion. Much like I don't fear the rattlesnakes and water moccasins in my woods out back but certainly respect their lethality and unpredictability. That's how I choose to approach this.

And accusing me of burying my head in the sand won't mean much either. If you want to suffer paranoia, that's your business.

108 posted on 05/15/2006 9:59:47 AM PDT by liberty_lvr (Those who stand for nothing fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

the reason able danger was buried, was because to run it - DoD used data sources they "shouldn't have had", so they had to bury it.


109 posted on 05/15/2006 10:02:22 AM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: liberty_lvr
Sucks to be in Maryland, but that is a state matter and not a federal one.

The feds are goading states to improve seat belt enforcement. And it also stands as a prime example of program creep.

In addition, by your own admission stating you work with marketing data and not NSA spy program data, you are in no position to state as fact whether the Federal government is any good at data mining or not.

From what I have seen, government is not very good at it - recall that there were multiple instances in the DC Sniper database of the perp's license plate but no one figured out how to do a

Select Plate, Count(*) from Vehicle_Leads group by Plate Having Count(*) > 2

That would have created a list of plate numbers to run down. And it didn't happen until after the fact.

Heck, government has trouble with all kinds of systems - they couldn't implement new IRS systems even though most of the data has an SSN or TIN attached. I love it when I have numbers like that to work with (I often don't).

Unlike you I don't fear my government, but I do maintain a healthy suspicion.

I don't fear it as long as I can beat it back when it overreaches. Which is what I am doing here.

And accusing me of burying my head in the sand won't mean much either. If you want to suffer paranoia, that's your business.

Please show me where I have done that.

110 posted on 05/15/2006 10:05:55 AM PDT by dirtboy (An illegal immigrant says my tagline used to be part of Mexico)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
the reason able danger was buried, was because to run it

Able Danger was buried because it provided links to Clinton Admin malfeasance in Chinagate, IMO.

111 posted on 05/15/2006 10:06:54 AM PDT by dirtboy (An illegal immigrant says my tagline used to be part of Mexico)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: P-40
If it is Constitutional, it is legal. Constitutional only means that the government CAN do something. It doesn't mean that it should. In this case, a smart legislature was afraid of the big government/big brother effect, and only gave the executive permission to conduct a certain set of activities. Government is created in the positive, not the negative; It is not assumed that government has power that laws restrict, it is assumed that government has no power unless expressly granted (think strict constitutionalism, but against all three branches).
112 posted on 05/15/2006 10:07:47 AM PDT by mullymt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
"Sorry, that is not cause. Like I said, the government had the info it needed to solve 9-11 before it happened - but was unable to pull all the pieces together in time. And the answer to that is not to get more data, but use the data you have more effectively."

To "use data more effectively" you need tools to separate worthless data. I think this is such a tool if they have a suspected terrorist to track, they can instantly cross-link to numbers called by that person, and see if those numbers call others that link back making a circle, then they can get phone tap warrants.

I think the terrorist call to order a pizza would be quickly separated.

I really don't care if LEO's use it to track drug dealers either, I'm not one, nor do I know any.
113 posted on 05/15/2006 10:10:15 AM PDT by Beagle8U (Juan Williams....The DNC's "Crash test Dummy" for talking points.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U
To "use data more effectively" you need tools to separate worthless data. I think this is such a tool if they have a suspected terrorist to track, they can instantly cross-link to numbers called by that person, and see if those numbers call others that link back making a circle, then they can get phone tap warrants.

Notice what you said - suspected terrorists to track. I would be in favor of an expedited process to provide records for a phone number and the next level of phones called from that phone. And it could be provided quickly.

But that is far different from mining the call data to look for calling patterns.

114 posted on 05/15/2006 10:12:52 AM PDT by dirtboy (An illegal immigrant says my tagline used to be part of Mexico)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Peach

And if we are it is completely unacceptable.


115 posted on 05/15/2006 10:13:26 AM PDT by AmericanRepublican (There are fools on both sides. Only the true Americans will prevail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U
I really don't care if LEO's use it to track drug dealers either, I'm not one, nor do I know any.

Folks like you help keep the slippery slope well-lubricated.

116 posted on 05/15/2006 10:13:31 AM PDT by dirtboy (An illegal immigrant says my tagline used to be part of Mexico)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert56
Is it my imagination or does every episode of Law and Order and every other cop show have the investigators pulling the suspect's phone records about four times an hour?

Yes.

The records they pull apparently include transcripts of the conversations, too.

117 posted on 05/15/2006 10:16:12 AM PDT by HIDEK6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mullymt
Constitutional only means that the government CAN do something.

Okay, I see where you are coming from now. From what I have read so far, it appears they are operating under the authority granted by CALEA...which is one confusing piece of legislation that I don't think much of.
118 posted on 05/15/2006 10:16:16 AM PDT by P-40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Memo to ABC NEWS....Just because you are paranoid DOES NOT mean the feds aren't out to git ya'!! Write when you get your assigned cell number.


119 posted on 05/15/2006 10:16:42 AM PDT by geezerwheezer (get up boys, we're burnin' daylight!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanRepublican

Are you posting from the NYT or CNN?


120 posted on 05/15/2006 10:16:44 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 181-197 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson