Here’s a transcript of the Sixty Minutes report (It was in 2000, not 1998)
The two articles recount two different facets of the same general program. NYT discussed the fact that the NSA was actually wiretapping US citizens without warrants, in violation of FISA. The USA Today article added more information that, in addition to eavesdropping on targeted calls, they were doing massive sweeps of telephone records without even a target, once again, possibly in violation of the law. Both programs are run by the same agency, but there hasn’t been enough information reported to determine, at least to my satisfaction, that there is any link between the two. My guess is, however, that the information obtained through the telephone records, if worth anything, would lead to a wiretap.
Now, as to the claim that these latest violations of FISA and other laws are nothing more than Echelon, well, let me ask first, why should it matter? Does the fact Clinton violated the law somehow make it allowable for Bush to violate the law? When did “But, we’re better than them!” and “They did it too” become valid defenses of illegal conduct?
Second, I honestly don’t know much about Echelon, and none of the people I’ve heard defend Bush based on it have provided much details about it, other than to parrot the “Echelon did it too!” If you have some credible information, I’d love to hear about it.
Third, here’sa recent article about the difference between Echelon and what the Bush administration is doing.
Well, it’s not necessarily something that was new to everyone, as I stated earlier, there already is a lawsuit that seems to cover at least some of these issues. But, as far as Mr. Hayden is concerned, he testified, along with George Tenet that Echelon does not wiretap US citizens without a warrant, and stated that “If [an] American person is in the United States of America, I must have a court order before I initiate any collection [of communications] against him or her.” Cite. Funny how he changed his tune, isn’t it?
My prior post contained a cite, but I’ll quote a bit of the article: "The 60 Minutes report appears to have been based largely on anecdotal evidence provided by a former Canadian intelligence agent and a former intelligence employee who worked at Menwith Hill, the American spy station in Great Britain, in 1979. In addition, the report contained footage of an assertion by then-Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA) that “Project Echelon engages in the interception of literally millions of communications involving United States citizens.” But the report also included comments from then-chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Rep. Porter Goss (R-FL), who, Kroft reported, “still believes … that the NSA does not eavesdrop on innocent American citizens.” Kroft asked Goss: “[H]ow can you be sure that no one is listening to those conversations?” Goss responded, “We do have methods for that, and I am relatively sure that those procedures are working very well.”
While Goss did not say in his 60 Minutes interview that the NSA does not spy on the domestic communications of Americans without a warrant, then-director of central intelligence George J. Tenet and then-National Security Agency director Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden said exactly that to Goss’s committee less than two months later."
Neither am I, which is why I cited to the EFF v. AT&T case earlier as a possible precursor to the report. It would be nice to get a bit more information about this. Unfortunately, the Senate has refused to conduct an investigation, the DOJ was refused clearance to investigate by the NSA, and the administration isn’t exactly forthcoming.
The things I heard about Echelon, prior to this NSA issue, all sounded, to me, to be tin foil hat crap like the Croft quote you talked about. Reliable information about Echelon is hard to find, except for the testimony from Goss, Hayden, and Tenet I referred to earlier.
That’s my guess, too. It’s not called “monitoring” until it’s tapped, and that requires a warrant. The collecting isn’t “monitoring” until it’s used. That’s my best guess understanding of how this thing is being described and defended.
I guess to you and I, it doesn’t. I guess is someone’s primary interest (as Hentor’s appears to be) is using this as a means to bring down Bush’s approval rating than it does mean something. Personally, I don’t like it, period.
I don’t. Sorry.
I’m checking out your links, and (upon preview) thanks for the good info.
I sent a similar email to Verizon customer service, and this is the response I received:
Apparently Debi doesn’t want to address whether Verizon is complying with its own privacy policy. I intend to press this issue with her, and remind her that with today’s VOIP technology, I have many choices for local and long distance telephone service, and will do business only with companies who will provide me with the privacy I have contracted for.
If Rush Limbaugh is making an argument, you can pretty much guarantee that he is lying through his Oxycontin-stained teeth. And yet some people still treat his word as gospel.
Actually, the problem is this administration seems to think that “monitoring” does not require a warrant, despite clear law to the contrary. Which is why the NYT article was much more damning than this latest one (which incidentally seems to be a violation of a different law altogether).
And for every Hentor that you believe is only interested in Bush’s downfall, there is a Rush, Hannity, or some other blowhard arguing screaming Echelon!. Guess which ones have more people listening and believing them?
No worries. The 60 minutes transcript was a nice read, in a DaVinci Code kinda way. At least it’s a starting point. But now I have to go mutter “jihad” into my baby monitor.
You’re welcome. If you come up with anything new, let me know.
I couldn’t guess, and I don’t have a good cite for a knee-jerk Kook census.
Funny you should mention that. I read the article and thought something similar. We had one of those Sharper Image Video Baby Monitors and we kept the crib by the bed. I hate to think what the NSA might have me on tape doing.
Yeah, what we need is a good nuts and bolts article to lay this all down. I’m looking.
I’d like to simply comment on how happy I am to see Scylla and Hamlet actually communicating with each other instead of yelling. That’s both astonishing and educational. Thanks, guys.
Thanks, Scylla. I read the transcript more carefully this time and I understand what you are saying.
I am using the term “monitoring” to mean actually listening to the conversations. I think that is the way I have understood the president to use in within the past week.
So far the most recent huge database has not been used for monitoring, but it has not existed in its entirety previously. They are looking for “patterns” and can use the information to zero in from there.
I think that this Administration’s secretiveness, deceptiveness, stonewalling and failure to admit mistakes has added to the reaction from the public. Right or wrong, some have already seen the Patriot Acts as a weakening of civil rights. The same can be said about holding prisoners indefinately without trial. The natives are getting restless.
You wanted to know “why now,” and I’m giving you as honest an answer as I can give you. This is the way some of us see it.
As a side note, I found Goss’s comments about the NSA in the 60 Minutes transcript of particular interest.
Perhaps because they both know they are being monitored.
Perhaps you could hum “Ebony and Ivory” for us.
My understanding, too.
[/quote]
So far the most recent huge database has not been used for monitoring, but it has not existed in its entirety previously. They are looking for “patterns” and can use the information to zero in from there.
[/quote]
Right. I think this is called “data-mining.”
I haven’t really seen a public outcry. It looks more like an attempt to stir up a private outcry for political purposes.
My interest is that I think domestic surveillance is a bad thing regardless of who started it and who’s doing it.
I can understand that.
That’s the problem I have. Such statements lead me to distrust and to impugn motives. You say the natives are getting restless but all I see is the media and a bunch of lefties trying to stir things up and tell me what is happening and what it means, and “Yayyyy! look we managed to get his approval ratings down.”
And actually, the natives are eating donuts.
If I read what you are saying correctly, than I think it’s a bad thing to politicize this issue
Thanks.
Yeah, but they are liberal donuts, and it looks like the natives prefer them to conservative Kool-Ade.
Why do you consider ‘politicizing’ this thing to be undesireable? Do you have some other mechanism whereby the program can get the public airing it deserves? What is it? When you say that all you see is lefties…, you’re ignoring the quiet on the right. For those with ears, that silence is as significant as a dog that does not bark in the night. Silence, passive acquiescence, like noise, is a political statement.
Yes, it’s fucking wonderful that Scylla is communicating with Hamlet and throwing little snipes at me about my interest only being the political ramifications of Bush’s civil liberties violations.
I suppose this is because I followed up on a joke about forming a mob with an observation that the size of the mob may be growing. This after a wonderful little joke about how people other than Scylla who are upset about this must be a whole laundry list of nasty hippy liberal things.
Yes, Scylla’s a prince. I’m glad you find little sideways snipes to be a component of educational communication. For my part, I find Scylla to be nothing if not consistent. Some people thought Eddie Haskell was the shits, too.
Rush Limbaugh is a known and proven liar. I want to hera what a real policeman or attorney has to say about it. I expect, they will say a warrant is necessary.
Here’s something I don’t get. The NSA gets the database of the telephone records from all these companies. My understanding is that by simply obtaining the database, the NSA is not necessarily violating the law (the companies that provide it however are). But having a database is of absolutely no use unless it is used. And the use of the database, the “mining” of the data, is not so easily dismissed. When a police agency wants to look at telephone records, they need to obtain a court order, either a warrant or a subpoena, otherwise they’re potentially violating the law and the constitution. I can’t imagine that the NSA program is any different, if they want to use this database, they need a warrant. Although they’re not actually listening in on convesations (yet), they are still acting contrary to the 4th amendment.
And here’s another example of your Rose, White, and Blue colored glasses tainting your positions. You here a report that the NSA may be obtaining telephone records, and automatically you assume that it is merely an attempt to gain political points, rather than being a cause for concern. This is especially silly when you consider that this administration has been, and continues to, violate the law by wiretapping US citizens.
Again, your bias is showing… well, not just showing, but trumpeting down the street with all the subtlety of the Rose Parade. It’s much better to look at the facts, as we know them, analyze them, and determine what the issues are and how they should be dealt with. The USA today article didn’t surprise me, or provide more information, but it is also not without importance. It shows that, in addition to targetted, illegal eavesdropping on US citizens, the NSA is keeping, and apparently using, information on a majority of Americans that was protected by law. Now the reaction doesn’t need to be “OMG, the sky is falling, impeach, IMPEACH!!!”, but nor should it be “Meh. Clinton did it, it’s not big deal, and it’s just the whiny libruls.”
Feed them enough lies, and they don’t know what to believe; scare them enough, and they won’t question you; and hide enough, and hopefully they’ll get tired and go away.
I’d really like it if you would take a step back, take a deep breath, and look at what you are saying, and how close it parrots what people like Rush, Hannity, and FoxNews are repeating. Any issue that touchs on this administration in a negative light is immediately portrayed as a political witchhunt by the evil liberal media. It doesn’t matter if it is something with merit, like the NSA wiretapping citizens (which I still don’t get your apparent breezy dismissal of), or something incredibly stupid like Cheney shooting a guy in the face; it’s almost always the same. And, unfortunately, you seem to have bought into it.
If anyone’s interested, there are some issues regarding the legality/constitutionality of the the NSA databases. The most relevant Supreme Court case would be Smith v. Maryland, which held that pen registers (telephone number listings) were not protected by the 4th Amendment, mainly because they were not the content of conversations, such as a wiretap, but rather just dialing information. In addition, the court relied on the fact that the expectation of privacy for the telephone caller was much less, because they allowed a third party (the telephone company) to know it: " [A] person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties … When [petitioner Smith] used his phone, petitioner voluntarily conveyed numerical information to the telephone company and “exposed” that information to its equipment in the ordinary course of business. In so doing, petitioner assumed the risk that the company would reveal to police the numbers he dialed."
After the ruling in Smith, Congress, in 1986, got involved and enacted the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. That Act included pen registers into information that was, at least in part, protected. The law purportedly required law enforcement officials to obtain a court order for pen registers, as well as trap and traces. However, the standard for obtaining a pen register order were quite low and the judge reviewing the application "shall approve all pen register installations where the government has certified “that the information likely to be obtained by such installation and use is relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation.” In addition, there are questions of whether, even if illegally obtained, the pen registers can be excluded from evidence under the exclusionary rule.
It appears the telephone records obtained by the NSA are just a massive amount of pen registers obtained without a court order. It’s a legal mess, in my opinion, because you have a SCOTUS case saying they are not protected by the 4th Amendment, but a Congressional act that says they are protected by law. It may be a situation where “it’s constitutional, but illegal”.