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 ...
-PJ
I would venture that both are fairly intrusive. And there is a court order for the former but not the latter.
Perhaps I need to make up a similar T with a picture of Margaret Sanger captioned "Who Would Jesus Abort?"
Subpeona, subpeona, subpeona. Thanks for making my case for me.
My point was that if all the neighbors give information about you, that information can be used to get a warrant to search your house -- it has nothing to do with you giving out information yourself.
Not a great analogy -- you don't have a business arrangement with your neighbors. I was approaching from the idea that the government has a right to collect information they can about you from other sources.
If they didn't force Verizon to hand over the info, and they didn't break into Verizon to steal the info, your beef is with Verizon, not the government.
I thought we were arguing that the government had no right to invade your privacy by getting and keeping these records. That was the issue I was addressing.
And, once again, if the government gets my phone call information, that is different. Entirely different.
If they didn't force Verizon to hand over the info, and they didn't break into Verizon to steal the info, your beef is with Verizon, not the government.
Oh, I have a beef with both of them. But that still does not change the fact that the government should not have all the calling records. The use of this data will not stop with what you consider to be reasonable uses.
"Another poster with interesting posting history. These supposed NSA "abuses" are bringing you guys out of the wood work."
ahhh...I see. If I don't support Stalinesque government, merely because our guys are engineering it, then I'm of questionable character. Let's see now...which is closer to being a good communist...parroting blindly whatever the Party line is, or standing up for Conservative American values and rights? Who did you take your loyalty oathe to today?
What happens, colorcountry, when the other side does the same stuff our adminstration is doing to American citizens now? You think the next democratic administration's motives are gonna be anywhere near as noble as ours? You think the democrats won't use this administration as an excuse for what they do? You think it won't be easier for democrats to take the NEXT step, to take away OUR rights?
You and I aren't gonna agree on this, obviously, but we'll be voting for the same guy in 08. So back off the innuendo.
Unfortunately, I have no idea where to take it next. HOW do we control tnis stuff. I personally like the idea of someting like inadmissability of any evidence gathered this way for a criminal proceeding. But the problem with that is our friends on the left think that war is a crime. Cf Moussaoui
-PJ
Check out my history. I bet it's boring as can be.
Sp what if theyhave an "interesting" history. Is this about choosing up sides or about trying to figure out how to run a Constitutional and Free Republic. Even if both sides devastate each other with fabulously destructive rejoiners and innuendi, (you leave my end out of this!) we'll still have the problem of how much snooping the gummint ought to be allowed to do in war time. People are still irritated with Lincoln, much less FDR, over this. Got an answer? I sure don't.
And how does that apply to sending the entire Verizon calling database to the feds? That is a very narrow clause, such as in domestic violence incidents.
I never said anything at all about supporting data mining, but I'll say it now loud and clear, "YES I DO!" It happens all the time with all sorts of data, and last time I check, the phone companies are public entities and their data is subject to public scrutiny (as are the records of any public utility.)
Now about you, you signed up of January 5, 2005 and posted 5 posts in two days. We heard nothing from you again until last Friday, May 12, 2006 when you posted 9 post to the thread entitled - Poll: Most Americans Support NSA's Efforts (POLL: 66% NOT BOTHERED IF NSA COLLECTS PHONE RECORDS) and you've posted 2 posts to this thread. All posts have been critical of the Administration.
When something smells bad, I try to find the source of the odor. In this case something smells fishy.
Like I said you have a VERY interesting posting record.
And do you think that is a good thing?
perhaps not, but does it violate the 4th amendment?
I think it does. I think it is a gross overreach of state subpeona power, but what else do you expect from the likes of Spitzer?
And I'm sure he's rationalized it as being for the greater good of the state of New York.
Starting w/ Dana Priest.
I just illustrated an example of data mining. Look at the history of posters, Jumping in red OK and Ninofan. Those records can tell us a lot about a person, and we should use them as long as they are not protected by the constitution as "private."
In the case of phone records and FreeRepublic posts, neither are protected "private" records. It is that simple.
I have 46,000 posts on FR. Maybe you want to root around in those and question my posting history as well.
The poster you are addressing has said nothing out of line of what has been posted in the past on FR - especially back when Clinton was president and we would have had fits if such a program as this one were revealed. So why don't you just address what you disagree with regarding what he has said?
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.