NSA is keeping logs of phones calls in the US

I have alot to say about this topic. But where do I begin? How about the fourth amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Lets take the example of a persons papers. According to this amendment, the government cannot simply take my papers, for example, my mail. They must first provide a warrant (and one that is issued upon probable cause), that is supported by "oath or affirmation." It must "[describe] the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

So, if the government has not provided probable cause, than they cannot issue a warrant. If they have not issued a warrant, they cannot search or seize. And when searching and seizing, they must specify who, where, and what.

When the government takes logs of who I call, I equate that to reading the destination address of a letter. I don't have an objection based on this idea alone. However, there have been accusations of warrantless eavesdropping on phone conversations. Is this not a violation of the fourth amendment?

But then some rebuttal comes in:

"There are too many potential terrorists to get warrants for all of them."

If this is the case, than why are we breaking the law? The Constitution is the "supreme law of the land" right? Why don't we simply make an amendment to the constitution, or put more people on the staff for giving warrants? There is plenty that can be done in order to stop breaking the law.

"We do not own the lines that phone messages and email travel on/we do not own the transmitters that transmit cell signals"

Again, lets use the example of a letter. The government cannot open snail mail; it is my "paper." However, they CAN read email or listen to phone calls because it is not on "paper" and I do not own the lines it travels across? Isn't this like saying I do not own the services the post office offers, and therefore that theoretically the government could search my mail?

Obviously, both networks work similarly. The internet goes through servers and land lines. Regular mail goes through the hands of post-office workers and post-offices. So, whats the difference? I think its safe to say that it is the contents of the message within the paper/mail that is being protected, not the physical, self-owned paper.


I understand that the government is doing these things, but is it legal? Is it constitutional? No. They are doing it without a search warrant. Whether the phone call or mail is international or not makes no difference; according to the constitution, you have to have a warrant. You are intercepting an american's mail. Yes, there are war-time provisions, such as 1811 of FISA (authorization during time of war):

Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for a period not to exceed fifteen calendar days following a declaration of war by the Congress.

So, have they exceeded their 15-day limit? I would say they have.


Another issue that comes to my mind is the cold war. Powers like these were given to the administrations before. They were very-much-so abused. Other leaders have claimed to need these kinds of powers in order to up security, only to abuse them later. Fear of a government having too much power from acts like this is not unfounded. People have reasons to be wary of giving up liberty for "security." Its been abused before, and the current administration is just as capable of abusing it as the others.

Well, im running out of characters! Ill end it here. Aggroskater.

[edit on 20-5-2006 by aggroskater]

Now that was what I was trying to say earlier in the thread. But the other posters felt that this was just a "trivial matter" and that the "government was not breaking the law".

Kudos for your explaination of the Fourth Amendment. But beware of the those who will ask you about "what's reasonable" in the "unreasonable search and seizure" clause.

And then...there are those that will ask you about fully searching the FISA law--even though it is spelled out clearly what the President and his "officers" can or cannot do.

I'm only saying this as a helpful warning. Being forewarned is forearmed.

But I enjoyed your post fully. And I agree.


[edit on 20-5-2006 by ceci2006]

www.patriotdaily.com... rpose-.shtml

While Bush proclaims that his NSA program is for the purpose of finding terrorists, this article says it is not effective for that purpose. On the other hand, the former head of NSA operations division told the 9/11 Commission that "ThinThread could have identified the hijackers had it been in place before the attacks." Is that why Bush team often states that NSA surveillance would have permitted the identification and capture of the 9/11 hijackers had it been in place prior to 9/11? That is, the general statements made by Bush are true for ThinThread, which is a NSA surveillance program, just not the program that Bush is using. So, in accordance with Bush's parsing practice, his statements would be technically true, just misleadingly false.

Interesting article, i dont know if someone posted it before. Bush went with the least desirable program of the NSA...not the highly recommended one implimented by Clinton.

Originally posted by Simon_Boudreaux
Christ...do these people in congress just not give a crap what they do to us or did they not really read the Patriot Act before voting it in again like they did last time

here, here. i agree. wtf did they think was going to happen when they put a law with a privacy loophole in it? i mean, this is old news, they should have been debating this when the patriot act came out, not right now. its not illegal what theyre doing, and its unfortunate that it is legal, because those members of congress who voted the patriot act in, you can blame them for it. we put them there!

[edit on 5/21/2006 by evanostrand]

I don't understand why people are so surprised by this news. This crap has been going on forever while you folks all wandered blissfully through life. Who cares? Let them listen and if we're all being listened to maybe we might consider giving them something to listen to? If we all started prising Allah in our emails and phone calls we'd clog their system beyond capacity. Look at it as a "job creation program" - they'd hire 10,000 more people to keep up with the volume.

Originally posted by ImplementOfWar

Bush deserves Hell. The FBI, ATF, CIA, and NSA deserve hell along with him.

THis is not Hell that Bush, his administration, governement agencies and corporations who collaborated with his policies deserves, it's a damn overthrow, and a Revolution! Forget the hope of having democracy and freedom "restored"... you Americans are obsverving a downfall of their nation towards FASCISM as you read this.

This entire political system has failed, and the Bush clan is only the blatant testimony of this failure that's big like the Grand Canyon. As long as we as a people, not just the Americans but all the citizens of this planet, don't do anything about it the downward spiral is gonna take us to HELL ON EARTH. Resisting against it is the only valid solution left, I think. It's about time that people wake up and make democracy and freedom their own!

Remember the Durutti column, a bunch of international radicals, consisting mainly of ordinary people, who defended Madrid for more than one year against the Fascist troops of Franco, who were the most dangerous army of Europe... Nothing's impossible.




[edit on 24/5/06 by Echtelion]

1) If you actually read the article it does not say anything about listening in on the conversations so what you have is "who called who". All of your telephone conversations about how much you hate Bush and the current administration are safe, they just know you talked to so and so for X minutes, not about what.

2) From what I can see there is only one side here and it is the side that sais there is a huge conspiricy and the government is evil (not suprising for ATS on either count). No mention of how the companies denied the claims until page 10 of this thread and then nothing else. Seems to me that if people want to find a conspiracy they will and ignore anything that refutes it and cling to anything that supports it without researching themselves (not just this thread but life in general and ATS specifically).




Do me a favor, if someone sais there is a conspiracy (or says there isn't one) do some searching on it before spreading it around.

You might want to read the pdf over at wired news and check out the capabilities
of the hardware and the software.

Regarding Narus

"Anything that comes through (an internet protocol network), we can record," says Steve Bannerman, marketing vice president of Narus, a Mountain View, California, company. "We can reconstruct all of their e-mails along with attachments, see what web pages they clicked on, we can reconstruct their (voice over internet protocol) calls."

Narus' product, the Semantic Traffic Analyzer, is a software application that runs on standard IBM or Dell servers using the Linux operating system. It's renowned within certain circles for its ability to inspect traffic in real time on high-bandwidth pipes, identifying packets of interest as they race by at up to 10 Gbps.

Internet companies can install the analyzers at every entrance and exit point of their networks, at their "cores" or centers, or both. The analyzers communicate with centralized "logic servers" running specialized applications. The combination can keep track of, analyze and record nearly every form of internet communication, whether e-mail, instant message, video streams or VOIP phone calls that cross the network.


www.wired.com...

Fortunately, there's a great reference list of strong encryption anti-snooper tools available
at EPIC.org









[edit on 24-5-2006 by FallenFromTheTree]

Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

You might want to read the pdf over at wired news and check out the capabilities
of the hardware and the software.

Regarding Narus

"Anything that comes through (an internet protocol network), we can record," says Steve Bannerman, marketing vice president of Narus, a Mountain View, California, company. "We can reconstruct all of their e-mails along with attachments, see what web pages they clicked on, we can reconstruct their (voice over internet protocol) calls."

Narus' product, the Semantic Traffic Analyzer, is a software application that runs on standard IBM or Dell servers using the Linux operating system. It's renowned within certain circles for its ability to inspect traffic in real time on high-bandwidth pipes, identifying packets of interest as they race by at up to 10 Gbps.

www.wired.com...

Well, I can name at least a dozen vendors that can easily record "anything" that goes over the net. There is no system available that can analyze everything, however.

Btw, 10Gbps is really old technology.

from aggroskater
Another issue that comes to my mind is the cold war. Powers like these were given to the administrations before. They were very-much-so abused.

Really? How were they abused? Do you think that the USSR strove above all to refrain from abusing their powers?

And, was the outcome of the cold war worth it?

Originally posted by jsobecky
Btw, 10Gbps is really old technology.

I guess I really need to get out more. I thought it was relitively new.

Originally posted by SwitchbladeNGC

Originally posted by jsobecky
Btw, 10Gbps is really old technology.

I guess I really need to get out more. I thought it was relitively new.

I thought so too, considering most fibre networks are running at 100Mb to 1Gb of throughput. There are some 10Gbps networks around, but certainly not to the node.

Back to the topic.

".... So I guess the feds have the al Qaeda white and yellow pages and just wants to make sure none of us Americans are calling them?"

REPLY: Actually, you're correct, and it IS legal. Any number of system anylists for hundreds of public companies log phone numbers, and to whom/from they're called. How secret can it be if a log of your calls are sent through the mail every month?

".... What I want to know is why the American people didn't get to vote on the PATRIOT ACT? Or why didn't we get copies of it to read first so we could them lobby our reps not to vote yes on it?Because they knew we'd all tell them to stuff it."

REPLY: Considering the average intelligence quotient of the American people, thanks to our state-run school system, most wouldn't understand it. To answer your question, America is not a Democracy, which is nothing more than Mob Rule. No phone calls are LISTENED to. Geez..... get a grip, folks.

'Ya want outrage? ..... do a search for eschelon and carnivore, both programs started by the previous administration (Pres. and Vice-Pres) which actually DID listen to phone calls, and also read emails...... both of which were turned down by Bush.

DGTempe: "....and society was smart enough to know a liar when they saw one...."

REPLY: Most all of what have been called "lies" over the past two years have been proven true, mostly by documents and tapes captured from Iraq, and most of which have yet to be listened to/translated.

Simon_Boudreaux ".... But keeping track of who American citizens call is not making us safe it is not bringing any terrorist to justice...."

REPLY: You haven't yet heard of the terrorists caught who were almost ready to down the Brooklyn Bridge?

GrndLkNatv ".... Calling all lawyers, time for class action suit against Verizon, AT&T and all the others who invaded all their customers privacy without their consent. I will personally donate 5k to the first major law firm who takes the case."

REPLY: I think you should have read ALL of the fine print when you signed up for phone service. By the way, internal investigations by ATT, Verizon, etc, show no contract with the government intelligence agencies.

Nygdan ".... This is a different illegal mass public surveillance program."

REPLY: Sorry, but haven't you wondered why the FISA issue went away. even by the Dems who hollered the loudest? FISA laws were not broken. Actually, FISA, itself, is unconstitutional. Sadly, no-one does any research if the "conspiracy(ies) fit their views.

The real story is who is leaking this information: sedition, treason and fifth-collumn come to mind, and it's about time lots of people were wearing prison orange. Hasn't anyone read the Constitution????? There is no "right to privacy". You have only a right to be secure in "your papers and effects." The Constitution does mention a right to privacy, but it has been construed by liberalo judges to mean what I wrote earlier.

Nygdan ".... A law from 1934 plainly makes the practice illegal, and there is also a question of just how much spying domestically is legal anyway."

REPLY: Old law, which has been superceded by events which happened since.

".... They must first provide a warrant (and one that is issued upon probable cause), that is supported by "oath or affirmation." It must "[describe] the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

REPLY: Not true since the '60's. No longer do the authorities have to be that specific as to an exact place or item to be searched for. RESEARCH.

".... So, have they exceeded their 15-day limit? I would say they have."

REPLY: Proof?

".... According to this amendment, the government cannot simply take my papers, for example, my mail."

REPLY: Anything placed in the trash, on the curb, can be taken and read, researched, etc.

".... When the government takes logs of who I call, I equate that to reading the destination address of a letter."

REPLY: Not the same; and what's on the OUTSIDE on the letter/package is not a violation.

"....
Interesting article, i dont know if someone posted it before. Bush went with the least desirable program of the NSA...not the highly recommended one implimented by Clinton."

REPLY: No..... the one president pantload used actually authorized LISTENING to phone calls (Eschelon), and also reading emails ( Carnivore Algore), both of which were authorized by Janet "The Torch" Reno, but Bush would not go along with and, in fact, ended.

Originally posted by Echtelion

Originally posted by ImplementOfWar

Bush deserves Hell. The FBI, ATF, CIA, and NSA deserve hell along with him.

THis is not Hell that Bush, his administration, governement agencies and corporations who collaborated with his policies deserves, it's a damn overthrow, and a Revolution! Forget the hope of having democracy and freedom "restored"... you Americans are obsverving a downfall of their nation towards FASCISM as you read this.

This entire political system has failed, and the Bush clan is only the blatant testimony of this failure that's big like the Grand Canyon. As long as we as a people, not just the Americans but all the citizens of this planet, don't do anything about it the downward spiral is gonna take us to HELL ON EARTH. Resisting against it is the only valid solution left, I think. It's about time that people wake up and make democracy and freedom their own!

Remember the Durutti column, a bunch of international radicals, consisting mainly of ordinary people, who defended Madrid for more than one year against the Fascist troops of Franco, who were the most dangerous army of Europe... Nothing's impossible.
[edit on 24/5/06 by Echtelion]

REPLY: America is not a democracy, and you should hope it never becomes one..... do the darm research. Oh.... and you should look up the word fascism. Our political system has worked better than any other, and has raised the baseline of human existance in less than 230 years. It's still a work in progress, but it's still better than whatever comes in second.

Yes, zappafan1. The King is dead. Long live the King. You're right. We're not living in a democracy now. We're living in a Monarchy. King George the second.

But to be more specific: we're living in a petty dictatorship.

But seriously, I knew about Clinton's insertion into government spying business. But the majority of it was done off-shore. You should be bothered that any leader would attempt to do that against a populace of people.



[edit on 25-5-2006 by ceci2006]

Also, polls showed immediately after this news was released that a slim majority of Americans supported this program.

What is so idiotic about this is than any terrorist can buy a trak-fone cell phone from Target which does not have to be registered to an individual. This program obviosly has the Nixonian purpose of spying on political enemies.

As the man said, whoever is willing to give up freedom for safety deserves neither.

Originally posted by Thinker_1
I don't understand why people are so surprised by this news. This crap has been going on forever while you folks all wandered blissfully through life. Who cares? Let them listen and if we're all being listened to maybe we might consider giving them something to listen to? If we all started prising Allah in our emails and phone calls we'd clog their system beyond capacity. Look at it as a "job creation program" - they'd hire 10,000 more people to keep up with the volume.

This is a good idea save for one small problem: How are you going to organize 600 million people to praise Allah in their phone calls?

[edit on 5/28/2006 by Brian Nowhere]

2) From what I can see there is only one side here and it is the side that sais there is a huge conspiricy and the government is evil (not suprising for ATS on either count). No mention of how the companies denied the claims until page 10 of this thread and then nothing else. Seems to me that if people want to find a conspiracy they will and ignore anything that refutes it and cling to anything that supports it without researching themselves (not just this thread but life in general and ATS specifically).

The point is that this program is unprecedented, illegal and unconstitutional. I mean, how can republicans spew this crap now [I'm presuming by your post you are a rabid Bush supporter?], the way they acted over Clinton lying under oath.
Back then all of a sudden the law was the law and it wasn't about the sex..it was that he LIED under oath and are we not a nation of laws?

This seems to be so simple to understand. This is what the country's forefathers warned us about. This is why the government was divided into three branches and even a fourth , independent media was tossed in to boot.

This administration has blurred the lines between all four and we are witnessing a slow shift towards one party rule. This should not be a partisan issue. This should be of concern to everyone.

The thing is, I generally vote democrat. It just works out that I usually see the democratic candidate as more "inherently good" than the republican candidate, who usually strikes me as purely greedy.

But if a democrat ever pulled this crap, I would drop my support like a hot potato.
Ideology shmidieology. Wrong is wrong.

I just don't get why some supporters are so afraid to admit they made a mistake with their vote. [ I see someone upthread that was not above admiting this ]

hasn't anyone considered that the government isn't really spying on terrorists. nor are they concerned with the petty talk of the unwashed masses. You see There are those in the government who want to make money. wouldn't it be great to find out who GM or motorola is calling. There could be a merger in progress or bankrupcy. this information is so valuable. You could short the stocks or get out before another enron happens becuase there are alot of calls between the company and another company or even a company and a catering company or a party planner.