It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


ATS: AT&T Narus Collaboration Sent Your Private Internet Communications to The NSA

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 23 2006 @ 08:19 AM
In addition to the ones I posted above, USA Today has put together a compilation of article links on the banking story...

Global banking surveillance revealed

[edit on 23-6-2006 by loam]

posted on Jun, 23 2006 @ 09:32 AM

Originally posted by imbalanced
Where do you live ? I would imagine that the goverment in your area has its problems too....

Ontario, Canada... and yes they do have their problems too.. but they do not seem as corrupt. Nothing like what I'm reading in this forum tho!

posted on Jul, 2 2006 @ 03:12 AM
There are advertisements for AT&T on the banners for this website.

posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 07:27 PM

Spy Agency Sought U.S. Call Records Before 9/11, Lawyers Say

June 30 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. National Security Agency asked AT&T Inc. to help it set up a domestic call monitoring site seven months before the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, lawyers claimed June 23 in court papers filed in New York federal court.

The allegation is part of a court filing adding AT&T, the nation's largest telephone company, as a defendant in a breach of privacy case filed earlier this month on behalf of Verizon Communications Inc. and BellSouth Corp. customers. The suit alleges that the three carriers, the NSA and President George W. Bush violated the Telecommunications Act of 1934 and the U.S. Constitution, and seeks money damages.

``The Bush Administration asserted this became necessary after 9/11,'' plaintiff's lawyer Carl Mayer said in a telephone interview. ``This undermines that assertion.''

The lawsuit is related to an alleged NSA program to record and store data on calls placed by subscribers. More than 30 suits have been filed over claims that the carriers, the three biggest U.S. telephone companies, violated the privacy rights of their customers by cooperating with the NSA in an effort to track alleged terrorists.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

If true, either Cheney wanted to implement domestic wiretapping for some other reason other than 9/11, or he wanted to get it in place, expecting the impetus of 9/11 to give him justification. He was getting it ready. That's my take.

posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 12:56 AM

Judge won't drop AT&T eavesdropping lawsuit

A federal judge declined motions on Thursday to dismiss a lawsuit against AT&T alleging the firm illegally allowed the U.S. government to monitor phone conversations and e-mail communications.


There is hope still for some accountability...

[edit on 21-7-2006 by loam]

posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 10:49 AM

Originally posted by loam

There is hope still for some accountability...

Do ya think?

From your link above:

The U.S. National Security Agency asked AT&T Inc. to help it set up a domestic call monitoring site seven months before the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks...

posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 11:43 AM
It's worse than you think, a few years back I was handed copies of emails I had sent years before.

Grant you, I sort of expect that at work but not from the road. I was told they could analyze and collect some non-trivial percentage of emails then. Things have just gotten a bit more efficient with this Narus equipment, I suspect.

posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 05:11 PM
It seems nowadays that good, honest people of this world are being treated as criminals. It is getting to the stage where all the governments have to do is call up your details on a computer and they know your entire history, your family, your finances etc,etc, etc.

I can understand them investigating people who are suspected of perpetuating crimes; but to scrutinize somebody who has an opinion and not happy about the way they are being led and for those of us in search of the truth-they infringe on our freedom of speech, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

As far as, I know we are not extremists, but have views on how policies are affecting us in our lives and how we feel like we are being led to slaughter by our leaders in government.

We are all entitled to our opinion and freedom of speech is a human right. We shouldn't be made to fear that if we state our opion that it is going to be spun on us from the authorities.

Lets be real: they have their own spin doctors and they spin doctor each other-what are we to them then? They can take an innocent comment or opinion and twist it into something sadistic or take it out of context.

posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 09:53 PM
I guess not....

ACLU lawsuit against AT&T dismissed


posted on Jul, 26 2006 @ 01:13 AM
Sucks. But hopefully there will be another avenue:

Specter Preparing to Sue Bush in Federal Court Over Signing Statements


posted on Jul, 26 2006 @ 06:05 AM
Our (US) government will not legislate against itself. The last time we had a gov. makeover was after the Civil War. Europe, OTH, some of those countries had to change almost every 30 years. So they are well updated.

There is no revolution or reformation that will change this, it is a cold hard fact of reality. Only decades down the road when the US is a backwater will serious discussions begin to take place regarding our policies.

posted on Jul, 26 2006 @ 09:35 AM
I hope not.

Hopefully, the American Bar Association task force will take action:

ABA: Bush violating Constitution; signing statements erode democracy

President Bush's penchant for writing exceptions to laws he has just signed violates the Constitution, an American Bar Association task force says in a report highly critical of the practice. ...The ABA group, which includes a one-time FBI director and former federal appeals court judge, said the president has overstepped his authority in attaching challenges to hundreds of new laws. ...The attachments, known as bill-signing statements, say Bush reserves a right to revise, interpret or disregard measures on national security and constitutional grounds.

"This report raises serious concerns crucial to the survival of our democracy," said the ABA's president, Michael Greco. "If left unchecked, the president's practice does grave harm to the separation of powers doctrine, and the system of checks and balances that have sustained our democracy for more than two centuries."

The task force said the statements suggest the president will decline to enforce some laws. Bush has had more than 800 signing statement challenges, compared with about 600 signing statements combined for all other presidents, the group said.

ed for format

[edit on 26-7-2006 by soficrow]

posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 12:53 AM
You can't miss Bush's response to the recent ruling made on the NSA matter:

Countdown on Terror and Politics

Folow the link for the video clip...



And here is more on the "Global banking surveillance" issue I posted above:

CIA's secret UK bank trawl may be illegal

A covert programme under which confidential information about British banking transactions is passed to the CIA with the full knowledge of the government may breach both British and European law, the Guardian has learned.

The information commissioner, who is responsible for enforcing the Data Protection Act, is investigating the arrangement, which has seen details of computerised transactions from around the world passed to the CIA in an attempt to spy on the financiers of jihadist terrorism....

A spokesman for the information commissioner told the Guardian that the privacy issue was being taken "extremely seriously". If the CIA had accessed financial data belonging to European individuals then this was "likely to be a breach of EU data protection legislation", he said, adding that UK data protection laws may also have been breached if British banking transactions had been handed over. The commissioner is requesting more information from Swift and the Belgium authorities before deciding how to proceed.


Oh, and be sure to see this latest gem:

Federal Appeals Court: Driving With Money is a Crime

I wonder how long before that rationale is used in potential "terror" cases...

[edit on 21-8-2006 by loam]

posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 11:16 AM
This is a terrible thing indeed, but is there really anything we can do to stop it?
I mean, alot of people, including myself, were angry when the NSA wiretapping scandal was first leaked to the public and news, but that didn't stop them, no, they're still doing the wiretapping from what i've read, and it's becoming more and more clear that this administration dosen't give a damn what the american public, or international community, thinks of what it's doing.

Bully a few major communication giants with government subpoenas and clandestine bribery and you get what we're going through now.

What we as the american public can do to counter this illegal activity however still draws a blank from me.

posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 10:39 PM

US sues Maine officials for probe on Verizon, NSA

The U.S. government sued Maine officials on Tuesday to block their demand that Verizon disclose whether it gave the government's spying program access to its customer data, documents showed.

The government's civil suit, submitted by the U.S. Department of Justice to a district court in Maine, said the Maine public utilities officials' attempts to obtain information on Verizon's involvement with the National Security Agency (NSA) were "invalid".

"The defendant state officers' attempts to obtain such information are invalid under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution and are preempted by the United States Constitution and various federal statutes," the lawsuit said.


So much for the generally conservative notion of "states rights"...

We have been so had! :shk:

[edit on 23-8-2006 by loam]

posted on May, 8 2007 @ 12:56 PM
The latest spin:

Verizon Says It Has A First Amendment Right To Illegally Give Your Call Records To The Government

The nation's biggest telcos are working hard to make the lawsuits against them for passing customer call records and other info to the government as part of its program of warrantless wiretaps disappear. AT&T's argument that it was just following government orders didn't wash with a judge, and now Verizon is claiming that its passing of information to the government is protected by the First Amendment. Yes, you read that correctly: it says the Electronic Communications Privacy Act is unconstitutional, and the information it passed to the government -- in apparent violation of it, and to comply with the sort of warrantless surveillance the ECPA was designed to prevent -- is constitutionally protected free speech.


posted on May, 12 2007 @ 12:59 PM

Bipartisan bill bans warrantless wiretapping of US citizens

Members of Congress from both parties succeeded on Friday in passing legislation that restricts the wiretapping of US citizens by the National Security Agency without warrants.

"When Congress said the Administration must get court approval for domestic surveillance, we meant it. Today, Congress reaffirmed that basic protection," said Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), who co-sponsored legislation included in the intelligence authorization bill that Congress passed.

Schiff, with Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), sponsored the NSA Oversight Act in January to "retain court supervision over domestic electronic surveillance," according to a release the two Congressmembers sent to RAW STORY.


posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 11:06 PM
Well, the issue found in this thread has been an amazing journey.

When I saw Keith Olbermann’s Special Comment on FISA and the President's State of the Union Address, I thought it was worthwhile placing that here:

Video Link.


But when you then demanded again, during the State of the Union address, that Congress retroactively clear the Verizons and the AT&T’s, you wouldn’t even confirm that they actually did anything for which they deserved to be cleared!

“The Congress must pass liability protection for companies believed to have assisted in the efforts to defend America.”


Don’t you know?


Which is why the Vice President probably shouldn’t have phoned in to the Rush Limbaugh Propaganda-Festival yesterday.

Sixth sentence out of Mr. Cheney’s mouth: The FISA bill is about, quote, “retroactive liability protection for the companies that have worked with us and helped us prevent further attacks against the United States.”


Full Transcript.


[edit on 31-1-2008 by loam]

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 12:18 AM
well, here's what we do

we all call AT&T and Verizon and we cancel our phone services.
They'd go bankrupt if we all quit

Then we tell them when they decide not to give out our
information illegally, then we'll consider cutting the service
back on.

Or better yet, just sue their a$$es til it bleeds.

Then next sue the gubment for doing it. Course I doubt
it will get very far as Bush will have his buddies at the
Supreme Court throw the case out.

what a f*cked up country we live in ......

Bush !!!! ..... read my upright middle finger

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 11:16 AM
In case this is easier for some, here is the youtube version:

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in