NBC's Myers, CNN's Ensor falsely suggested that NSA has access only to Americans' phone numbers and call records through call-tracking program
SUMMARY: NBC's Lisa Myers and CNN's David Ensor both asserted that data collected by the National Security Agency through a just-exposed program include only "phone calls made and received, but not customers' names and addresses." But they failed to inform viewers about a key point made by USA Today, which broke the story -- that the NSA can easily obtain this information through other databases.
NBC senior investigative correspondent Lisa Myers and CNN national security correspondent David Ensor both asserted that data collected by the National Security Agency through a just-exposed program include only phone calls "made and received," but not names and addresses. But in asserting that the data on "tens of millions of Americans" collected from major phone companies was limited to phone numbers, Myers and Ensor left out a key point made in the May 11 USA Today article exposing the program -- phone customers' names, addresses, and "other personal information" can "easily" be obtained by cross-referencing their phone numbers with other databases.
From the USA Today article:
[D]omestic call records - those of calls that originate and terminate within U.S. borders - were believed to be private.
Sources, however, say that is not the case. With access to records of billions of domestic calls, the NSA has gained a secret window into the communications habits of millions of Americans. Customers' names, street addresses and other personal information are not being handed over as part of NSA's domestic program, the sources said. But the phone numbers the NSA collects can easily be cross-checked with other databases to obtain that information.
From the May 11 broadcast of NBC's Today:
MYERS: According to USA Today, NSA has been secretly collecting phone records of tens of millions of Americans, creating, what one official calls, "the largest database in the world." The data provided by AT&T, Verizon, and Bell South reportedly includes phone calls made and received but not customers' names and addresses. The call records reportedly are analyzed by computers to detect patterns that might reflect terrorist activity. This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording domestic calls.
From the May 11 edition of CNN International's Your World Today, also featuring co-anchor Jim Clancy:
CLANCY: In layman's terms -- and we just heard from the president a short time ago -- in layman's terms, there seems to be a disconnect. Is this getting just phone records or eavesdropping? The president says it's not eavesdropping.
ENSOR: He says it's not eavesdropping. He says that -- he doesn't say much about what the program is, exactly. USA Today says that its sources in the telephone companies tell it that they -- that several of the top telephone companies are providing the records of -- people's telephone records. In other words, the phone numbers they call -- not the names, not the addresses of the people they called, and certainly not eavesdropping on the actual conversations -- but the phone numbers that they called. And this is everybody in the country, with the exception of one major telephone company that, according to the newspaper report, declined to cooperate.
Just your driver's license number.
and your social security number...
this information certainly goes a lot further than the initial information of monitoring oversea phonecalls, these are people directly defending it based on louse arguments, whitout considering that Bush lied again, this time about the extent of the warrantless NSA project.
Everyone is monitored! even registering phonenumbers by the central government is monitoring, even without oversight of any other organ than the president and a few henchmen. The case against the warrantless spying was already dropped because of administrative difficulties.
surprising how easy these guys defend something that is actually secret, though they come up with 'evidence' how this project works (monitoring trends etc). Of course, the president says its ok ............!
Everytime our dear Emperor proclaims the spread of Liberty while he eviscerates her safeguards.
Meanwhile, the foxes report back that the henhouse is secure.
cabinet seem to have broken every rule of law in this country, and think it totally normal and within limits of presidential power. This is not so strange given that he war born in a highly elite family and totally devout of any connection with the normal citizen and the law.
nothing wrong with that, but in case of the two presidents Bush and Jeb Bush this results in total incapability to rule people within laws that are there to protect people from rich elitists (eg. Jeb's overreaching in the Chiavo case; the 2000 election).
They do not believe in facts, because they buy it, they do not believe in promises, because they are only there for minor people, not for them, and they do only belive in law and rules for others!
"How many fingers am I holding up?", the man in the uniform asks as he holds aloft two fingers.
"Two" I reply, and he slaps me across the face for the hundreth time.
Finally I see the light and reply with the answer that gives my heart and mind release, "9-11" I cry. Aaahh I love George W. Bush!
This is the same argument ROVE is attempting in trying to say he didn't expose Valarie Plame to reporters.
"I never said her name. I don't even KNOW her name," Rove declared. Instead, he referred to her as "Joe Wilson's Wife", as if that was sufficient to shield her identity.
I do not believe Fitzgerald is buying that garbage from Rove, and it certainly doesn't work here, either. Having "ONLY" a phone number as a defense for not going after a "specific" person will not pass the laugh test in any court of law.
Our brave Media will continue to try to deceive us, into thinking none of this surveillance stuff is any big deal, right up until the legirons are strapped on these violators of the LAW and our Constitution.
Fitzgerald should lead the investigation. Loss for Rove et al. that he did, which is why they try to smear him and his work.
I probably do not know as much as you about this because I haven't really bothered to pay attention since I think it is a witchhunt.
I know this is an absolute fact, but of course it is taken down so I can't "prove it". On his own website, Joe Wilson said that his wife was a CIA agent. How can anybody illegally reveal her identity if her own husband announced it on the WWW.
Not arguing, just need some clarification.
Another point, I hate to tell you guys...wiretapping has been going on since 1952 when Truman created the NSA. Now they just have better technology to do it, and the dems are on a witchhunt. How is this any different than Echelon? Is it really a big deal...do you guys honestly think the government has the desire much less the resources to listen to everyday citizens' phone calls. NOOOO. This is designed for our protection. It has been going on for years. Why the outrage now?
Everytime you use your credit card, the vendor and the credit card have your personal info. They sell it to marketers, and you get those annoying phone calls when you're trying to eat dinner. The government doesn't need AT&T to get access to your phone number and address. Isn't this just another excuse to go after Bush?
"On his own website, Joe Wilson said that his wife was a CIA agent."
-----
At what time? Certainly not before Robert Novak committed a treasonous act by making that information public.
Anyway, that isn't the issue. The issue is whether Libby and Rove lied to Fitzgerald and the Grand Jury about the events leading up to the outing of a covert agent whose job was WMD monitoring in Iraq and Iran.
Whether a website after the fact may have said what you claim without proof is not germane to the case at hand.
Before the September 11, 2001 attacks and the legislation which followed it, US intelligence agencies were generally prohibited from spying on people inside the US and other western countries' intelligence services generally faced similar restrictions within their own countries.
[link to en.wikipedia.org]
Any intelligence gathering must be crime specific (that's why there MUST be a warrant, no exceptions). That's a big problem with it, because there is no oversight. If they use the NSA and ECHELON "for fighting terror" and then start sharing the database with local cops who then bust high-school kids on weed violations, I want some govt employees in jail.
Databases are very easy to abuse. For example, I was friends with a cop once, and he told me that some other cops would regularly use their database to meet women. One way was, if they pulled a hot girl over, they would get her address and start jogging in her neighborhood so they could "meet" her "by chance" one morning as she left her appartment and strike up a conversation that might lead to a date.
I also met a person once who had gotten into a verbal altercation, unkowingly, with an off duty cop at a bar. Suddenly he started getting parking tickets with snide comments written on them while he was at work, in his mailbox, etc. One of them, which I saw, said "We do what we want. We are the police."
There are a lot of dirty, vicious, and generally corrupt people in the world, and there aren't any fewer of them within law enforcement and govt than there are in the homeless shelter. Do you really want this?
Just another excuse to further strip our privacy, start wars to secure resources, hand out bags of $$$ to anyone with a hand, and expand American colonialism? Stop conflating the PAST with the PRESENT. Repeating past wrongs doesn't cleanse them of blood or bile. Spying on US citizens without warrants or provocation is wrong then and now. Stop reframing #43's lawbreaking in terms of yesteryear. Besides, the Republicans set the standard of Presidential conduct FOREVER. Break ANY law, Mr. (or Madam) President, and we will impeach you, regardless of the insignificance of the situation, such as lying under oath about some BJs from a consenting adult. Hardly an issue for federal scrutiny yet there it was splashed all over perdition. We went from a President who waves his prick in the face of one to a President who waves his prick at the whole country. And I am most certainly did NOT consent to Bush's advances. Call it was it is: RAPE.
Isn't this just another excuse to go after Bush?
No, it's not another excuse to go after bush.
But it IS another reason to go after bush.
...you don't know what they are doing because there is no oversight. Of course it is illegal as well. But that is ok at least we are "safe" ...for the time being.
There seems to be a connection with today's story & the whistleblower lawsuit against AT&T filed by the EFF. Do you think he's the source or one of the sources of today's story?
the msm also don't mention Qwest who refused to hand over the goods to nsa. this is an important part of the usa today article because it says that at least one communications corp. still concerns itself with its clients privacy. which throws a negativelight on the big three that don't seem to care anymore.
can use it as they see fit. BTW, the volume of spam mail going into my spam box has increased several fold since registering at this website. Is MMFA selling email lists?
My spam mail hasn't gone up since joining. Lately those pricks at Newsmax somehow got my addy. Righty bastards.
There are several issues here, most of them to do with the sheer volume of data. 1/Too much data, too little value. The purported aim of this gathering of information is to tie domestic terrorists with their cohorts and use data mining of these number, correlated with data mining of airline travel records, credit card transaction, etc to determine if YOU are a terrorist. Yes you, the sixth generation Iowa farmer or you, the pizza parlour owner in Little Italy. The problem is that even with the world's most powerful computers, any kind of meaningful information would take decades to retrieve, and in the mean time, anyone actually up to no good has the comfort of knowing their information is buried behind billions of cross-linked database entries and will probably never see the light of day. 2/Erorr. I catn tpye yure nom curructlee. When dealing with millions of records of useless information, what do you want to bet that the odd typo enters the odd database here and there, such as the no fly list - or, and yes I'm being facecious here, your ex-boyfriend/girlfriend/sheep or whatever enters adds your info to the odd database here and there so that your telephone call list will suddenly throw up some very interesting hits.. Couldn't happen right? No way in hell, our systems are fool proof and not only that, we have made damm sure you can't alter the information entered in any way whatsoever. Obviously the 28,000 American Citizens with similar sounding names to those on the terrorist no-fly list don't quite agree with that opinion. Not only do the Department of Homeland Security refuse to take their names off this list, but even when armed with a letter from the DHS stating they are not terrorists and should be allowed to board their chosen flights, their counterparts scanning your bags don't want to risk the chance you typed that letter yourself. So they not only miss flights to important business meetings, family get-togethers for Thanks Giving or vacations, they also get to be interviewed by security personnel at every connecting airport they fly through - if they are eventually allowed to board a plane and a seat is available for everyone in their party.
I'll stop here, because this post is getting to long, but I've shown a couple of good examples as to why Americans of all political faiths and denominations should be outraged by this and other privacy abuses.
I'm just waiting for the first right wing zealot to proclaim, "Well if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear" along with the current claims that "We are at war, and this sort of information shouldn't be revealed at a time of war because our enemies will find out what our strategies are".. obviously the particular congressman that came up with this piece of creative genius thinks everyone other than himself is a terrorist.
We are at war justifies anything for some people. The problem is the Constitution defines how war is declared. According to the constitution we have not been at war since 1945. No declaration of war--no war.
As someone who uses a database of voters I know how many errors are in that database. I just gave the county that keeps the database a list of voters who have something other than "PA" as their state. The simplest error checking when entering data would eliminate that error. If the county and state cannot do this basic precaution in a database essential to civil rights, what chance is there that the NSA prevents errors in a database with billions of entries.
By not spreading the word that Bush has committed impeachable offenses, The Democratic leadership has set the party up for failure. The argument is that "we have to win the November elections". in order to have a chance. But what does "winning in November mean? In our case, the case for impeachment, this would mean taking control of at least the House. But experts polls and common sense say that it is extremely unlikely for the Democrats to win both Houses, and it is unlikely they will win at least one of them. The independent website www.electionprojection.com estimates that if the elections were held today, the Dems would secure 2 new senate seats (they need 6 seats to regain control) and an insignificant 5 House Seats. If these estimates hold, Not only will Bush not be indicted, but we will go into 2008 with the wussy-esque precedent of not having done anything about it.
"Customers' names, street addresses and other personal information are not being handed over"
It's called anywho.com. Go ahead.
Most of our phone numbers are readily avaliable on the internet: safely hidden from this regime.
If you have a phone number it is usually easy to get the name. I used to work for the PA Department of Public Welfare. My clients never told us when their phone numbers change. Numbers change when you never pay your bills. I seldom had much trouble finding a number. If I could not find the information I needed we had an Investigator who usually could.
If you have a phone number it is even easier to find the name than it is to find a number given a name. The phone company has a form on its web site to do reverse look ups.
Whatever I, with no training, and a state investigator, who was trained as an auditor, could do can certainly be done with the NSA. I have seen the (public) headquarters at Fort Meade, Maryland. We are not talking about a couple of guys in a garage with a computer and a phone line. If the NSA does not have more super computers than anyone else in the world I would be surprised. If they don't, I am sure they can tap into NASA for whatever computations they need to do.
would look into this and post to MMFA. The statute is pretty complex, making it difficult to discern what is lawful and what is not. The USA Today article mentioned civil penalties but the Telecommunications Act has a provision that may apply to all violations of the statute making them felonies with prisons sentences available. (47 USC 501 at [link to caselaw.lp.findlaw.com] )
That issue raised, one still wonders what the companies may release, what they may not release, and what they are releasing. They are clearly allowed to release mass publications for directories to anyone that asks for the data (and presumably pays for it):
But they clearly may not release "proprietary information" except for limited emergency purposes (like notification information for emergency personnel via 911. "1) Customer proprietary network information The term ''customer proprietary network information'' means - (A) information that relates to the quantity, technical configuration, type, destination, location, and amount of use of a telecommunications service subscribed to by any customer of a telecommunications carrier, and that is made available to the carrier by the customer solely by virtue of the carrier-customer relationship; and (B) information contained in the bills pertaining to telephone exchange service or telephone toll service received by a customer of a carrier; except that such term does not include subscriber list information."
So, are they releasing information about who we call, as opposed to mass lists of our names, addresses and phone numbers? If they are, if the NSA is spending federal tax dollars to get communications employees to commit felonies, shouldn't the FBI be checking out whether federal officials are involved in a conspiracy to violate federal criminal laws? A lot more information is needed and it is pretty obvious that Lisa Myers and David Ensor and their employers are making no effort to get it.
Notwithstanding subsections (b), (c), and (d) of this section, a telecommunications carrier that provides telephone exchange service shall provide subscriber list information gathered in its capacity as a provider of such service on a timely and unbundled basis, under nondiscriminatory and reasonable rates, terms, and conditions, to any person upon request for the purpose of publishing directories in any format.
47 USC 222 (the section 222 that USA Today was talking about) [link to caselaw.lp.findlaw.com]
USA's questions and answers page sure seems to suggest it is proprietary data: "Q: What was the NSA doing?
A: The NSA collected "call-detail" records. That's telephone industry lingo for the numbers being dialed. Phone customers' names, addresses and other personal information are not being collected as part of this program. The agency, however, has the means to assemble that sort of information, if it so chooses. " [link to www.usatoday.com]