NSA collecting phone records of millions of Verizon users: Why?

[saveliberty]

The reason is pretty obvious. The real question is why do we tolerate it?

 

[dilloduck]

The reason is pretty obvious. The real question is why do we tolerate it?

We don't have the power to stop it.

 

[BlindBoo]

obama believes that Americans are his enemies, like foreign terrorists are. He has no idea really who is liberal and who is conservative. It's not like American conservatives run around screaming allah akbar. He has to find out whether a grandmother in Pasadena is telling her friend in Glendale that she doesn't really think that obamacare is going to work.

The NSA started this shit when Bush was in office and had your blessing because you were scared of terrorist. The ACLU and other "awful liberals" tried to warn your dumb asses but you don't listen to them because they're stupid.

Now it's happening just like we said it would and you're caught by surprise.

Now who's stupid?

When Bush was in office there were rules. One side of the call had to be in a foreign country, and be a number or from a person known to be on a terrorist watch list. This is not the equal of Americans making local calls to one another no matter HOW liberals want to make it so. The taps under Bush were to identify those who would bring harm to the country. The taps under obama are to identify those who are critical of obama.

These are not wiretaps. Same rules as with the Bush Administration. They even gave the telecoms immunity after the fact. Now of course the Warrant(s) absolves the Telecoms.....

Ready to repeal the Patriot Act yet?

 

[dilloduck]

The NSA started this shit when Bush was in office and had your blessing because you were scared of terrorist. The ACLU and other "awful liberals" tried to warn your dumb asses but you don't listen to them because they're stupid.

Now it's happening just like we said it would and you're caught by surprise.

Now who's stupid?

When Bush was in office there were rules. One side of the call had to be in a foreign country, and be a number or from a person known to be on a terrorist watch list. This is not the equal of Americans making local calls to one another no matter HOW liberals want to make it so. The taps under Bush were to identify those who would bring harm to the country. The taps under obama are to identify those who are critical of obama.

These are not wiretaps. Same rules as with the Bush Administration. They even gave the telecoms immunity after the fact. Now of course the Warrant(s) absolves the Telecoms.....

Ready to repeal the Patriot Act yet?

Go for it----you got the votes. Or is there something you don't know ?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Well, he's keeping me safe and I sleep well at night - plus, I'm not trying to hide anything.

is this ignorance or stupidity ?

We can assume both. But you forgot partisanship.
You can bet if Bush was in office they'd be screaming like little bitches.

 

[The Rabbi]

The NSA started this shit when Bush was in office and had your blessing because you were scared of terrorist. The ACLU and other "awful liberals" tried to warn your dumb asses but you don't listen to them because they're stupid.

Now it's happening just like we said it would and you're caught by surprise.

Now who's stupid?

When Bush was in office there were rules. One side of the call had to be in a foreign country, and be a number or from a person known to be on a terrorist watch list. This is not the equal of Americans making local calls to one another no matter HOW liberals want to make it so. The taps under Bush were to identify those who would bring harm to the country. The taps under obama are to identify those who are critical of obama.

These are not wiretaps. Same rules as with the Bush Administration. They even gave the telecoms immunity after the fact. Now of course the Warrant(s) absolves the Telecoms.....

Ready to repeal the Patriot Act yet?

54 Democrats in the House voted to extend the Patriot Act in 2011. Are you lobbying them yet?

 

[paulitician]

This Administration is already out there defending this. It's a real mess. Big Brother continues to grow bigger and more oppressive by the day. And a Gang of Communist/Globalist criminals are currently running our Nation. These are very dark times.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Not a conspiracy theory. It's really happening. The Guardian has a copy of the court order.

I'd heard this on Levin earlier and checked it out. The Guardian (left wing Brit newspaper) is reporting that the NSA is secretly collecting millions of Verizon subscribers phone records.

Its probably because the NSA uses AT&T and they are just envious that Verizon users can actually get a signal in far away remote places like for instance, the home, or the workplace.

Something we can agree on....finally.
Verizon kicks butt! At least in the south. I might drop one call a year at most.
While my brother using AT&T drops em daily.

 

[FA_Q2]

I expect to see the left wing outrage in

3.............



2....................


1.....................................

I'm a Verizon user and I certainly am not happy....been texting key terms such as "bomb", "terrorist" "middle east" "revolution" etc. randomly to express my displeasure. I recommend that everyone on Verizon flood their texts, phone calls with such words.

I don’t see how you think that is any kind of ‘protest.’ The point of surveillance of this nature is not to find anything but to accumulate evidence should the government ever suspect you of anything. They are recording ALL information, not searching and dinging key phrases here. Not to mention that the automatic search of key phrases is done by automation which means your protest goes entirely unnoticed.

If the government ever has a reason to suspect you though…. that could be another story altogether.

 

[Dutch]

2006-Liberals: "Why is President Bush spying on my telephone records?" "Im outraged."
2006-Conserrvatives: "He's just trying to keep America safe."

2013-Conservatives:"Why is President Obama spying on my telephone records?" "Im outraged."
2013-Liberals: "He's just trying to keep America safe."

Same shit different day.

 

[paulitician]

Still think we're not living in a Police State? Well, think again.

 

[The Rabbi]

2006-Liberals: "Why is President Bush spying on my telephone records?" "Im outraged."
2006-Conserrvatives: "He's just trying to keep America safe."

2013-Conservatives:"Why is President Obama spying on my telephone records?" "Im outraged."
2013-Liberals: "He's just trying to keep America safe."

Same shit different day.

Standard responses by liberals:

1) They all do it
2) Boosh
3) What difference at this point does it make?
4) September was a long time ago.

 

[paulitician]

2006-Liberals: "Why is President Bush spying on my telephone records?" "Im outraged."
2006-Conserrvatives: "He's just trying to keep America safe."

2013-Conservatives:"Why is President Obama spying on my telephone records?" "Im outraged."
2013-Liberals: "He's just trying to keep America safe."

Same shit different day.

Sums it up perfectly.Thanks.

 

[BlindBoo]

When Bush was in office there were rules. One side of the call had to be in a foreign country, and be a number or from a person known to be on a terrorist watch list. This is not the equal of Americans making local calls to one another no matter HOW liberals want to make it so. The taps under Bush were to identify those who would bring harm to the country. The taps under obama are to identify those who are critical of obama.

These are not wiretaps. Same rules as with the Bush Administration. They even gave the telecoms immunity after the fact. Now of course the Warrant(s) absolves the Telecoms.....

Ready to repeal the Patriot Act yet?

Go for it----you got the votes. Or is there something you don't know ?

It was a rhetorical question. If you supported Bush in this type of data collection you can't very well not support the current administrations use of the very same tactic. If you didn't support it under Bush, you shouldn't change your tune just because it's a Democrat in the office.

 

[Stephanie]

we should be giving our thanks to Obama right?

this is that hope and change you voted for...

 

[williepete]

By 2011, Obama renewed parts of the Patriot Act TWICE. At this point in 2013, in his second term, Obama owns it. For the posters here trying to deflect the current situation to Bush in any way shape or form, you're trying in vain to suspend reality. Most won't go along with that. The Patriot Act is Obama's.


No oversight in Patriot Act renewal
PolitiFact | The Obameter: Restrict warrantless wiretaps
Updated: Tuesday, October 25th, 2011 | By David G. Taylor

On May 26, 2011 President Barack Obama signed a bill that reauthorized key elements of the Patriot Act. The bill called for a four-year renewal of some of the most controversial provisions of the surveillance legislation. While the bulk of the Patriot Act is steadfast law, there are certain measures that Congress must periodically reauthorize or else they expire. Among them is roving wiretaps, i.e., the ability of law enforcement officials to track targets if they change phones without law enforcement first consulting a judge.

The Patriot Act, passed shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks, granted law enforcement increased surveillance powers to prevent additional terrorist incidents. Since its conception, the Patriot Act has been mired in controversy. Civil rights advocates argue that the law is a violation of Americans' privacy rights. Key members of Congress, including both liberal Democrats and Tea Party Republicans, have attempted to amend the Patriot Act in order to protect Americans from potential privacy rights violations.

The expiring provisions of the act came up for re-authorization in late 2009. Despite months of congressional debate and a delayed vote, President Obama ended up signing a re-authorization that included no changes in early 2010.

This year-long extension came up for renewal again in early 2011. In this year's re-authorization battle, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., sponsored an amendment that would have increased congressional oversight of these renewed provisions. Yet the Leahy-Paul Amendment was never brought to a full vote. Ultimately the Patriot Act was reauthorized without any sort of additional oversight included in the final language. By reauthorizing the Patriot Act, President Obama guaranteed (barring any judicial action) that the law will live on in its current form until June 1, 2015.

"The extension of the Patriot Act provisions does not include a single improvement or reform, and includes not even a word that recognizes the importance of protecting the civil liberties and constitutional privacy rights of Americans,” said Sen. Leahy.

Michelle Richardson, legislative council at the American Civil Liberties Union, said the Patriot Act has not changed since President Obama took office.

The conservative Heritage Foundation, which expressed support of the Patriot Act in its current form, agreed that there have been few changes since its implementation. "President Obama probably did revisit the PATRIOT Act when he became president and realized that it was extremely helpful to investigators and already contained the needed oversight to ensure that is was used in way that was consistent with the law and U.S. Constitution,” said Jena McNeill, Senior Policy Analyst of Homeland Security at the Heritage Foundation in an e-mail interview.

But the ACLU's Richardson noted that while there have been no additional legislative oversight measures passed during Obama's presidency, there have been some put in place in the executive branch. Most notably, the Justice Department decided to implement several measures that were originally included in the USA PATRIOT Act Sunset Extension Act of 2009 - a failed oversight bill proposed by Sen. Leahy.

In response to a letter from Leahy in December 2010, the Justice Department said it had:
• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.



Leahy also said that DOJ had agreed to work with Congress to determine ways to make additional information publicly available regarding the use of FISA authorities.

"I still believe that these important oversight and accountability provisions should be enacted in law, but I appreciate that by implementing key measures in the bill, the Department of Justice has embraced the need for oversight and transparency," Leahy said in response to the Justice Department's action.

Where does that leave us? President Obama has spoken in the past in favor of more oversight and Attorney General Eric Holder supported the USA PATRIOT Act Sunset Extension Act of 2009. Nonetheless, the president signed a reauthorization that included no additional oversight. However, the DOJ has implemented key components of Sen. Leahy's bill. Whether this decision qualifies as "robust oversight” is in the eye of the beholder. Without legislative action, this oversight can go away with a change in administration. Nevertheless, because of these executive actions, we rate this promise as Compromise.

Sources:

Text of Leahy-Paul Amendment -- 112th Congress

Senator Patrick Leahy, press release, May 23, 2011

Senator Patrick Leahy, press release, May 26, 2011.

Senator Rand Paul, press release, May 23, 2011.

CNN, "Obama approves extension of expiring Patriot Act provisions,” May 27, 2011.

USA Today, "Key Patriot Act elements up for vote,” May 26, 2011.

Wired, "House Delays Patriot Act Spy Vote,” December 19, 2009.

The Christian Science Monitor, "Obama signs Patriot Act extension without reforms,” March 1, 2010.

POLITICO, "Patriot Act clears House, Senate,” May 26, 2011.

The Guardian, "Patriot Act surveillance provisions extended in nick of time,” May 27, 2011.

 

[saveliberty]

The reason is pretty obvious. The real question is why do we tolerate it?

We don't have the power to stop it.

No, you have the power, it is a choice in its use or how applied.

 

[paulitician]

Just like ridiculously high Food & Gas Prices. It's the 'New Norm'. So get used to it. Your Government hates & owns you. You're guilty till proven innocent. That's just the 'New Norm.' So get used to it America.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

If this is what we can expect from the PA?
I'll take my chances with the terrorist.
WAY to much chance for abuse. And after the IRS debacle I'm not sure how anyone can argue that point.

This is something BOTH sides should get behind.
As Americans we should all be pissed!!

 

[williepete]

NSA's Verizon Spying Order Specifically Targeted Americans, Not Foreigners
Kashmir Hill

Andy Greenberg

NSA's Verizon Spying Order Specifically Targeted Americans, Not Foreigners - Forbes

The National Security Agency has long justified its spying powers by arguing that its charter allows surveillance on those outside of the United States, while avoiding intrusions into the private communications of American citizens. But the latest revelation of the extent of the NSA’s surveillance shows that it has focused specifically on Americans, to the degree that its data collection has in at least one major spying incident explicitly excluded those outside the United States.

In a top secret order obtained by the Guardian newspaper and published Wednesday evening, the FBI on the NSA’s behalf demanded that Verizon turn over all metadata for phone records originating in the United States for the three months beginning in late April and ending on the 19th of July. That metadata includes all so-called “non-content” data for millions of American customers’ phone calls, such as the subscriber data, recipients, locations, times and durations of every call made during that period.

Aside from the sheer scope of that surveillance order, reminiscent of the warrantless wiretapping scandal under the Bush administration, the other shocking aspect of the order its target: The order specifically states that only data regarding calls originating in America are to be handed over, not those between foreigners.

“It is hereby ordered that [Verizon Business Network Services'] Custodian of Records shall produce to the National Security Agency…all call detail records or ‘telephony metadata’ created by Verizon for communications (i) between the United States and abroad; or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls,” the Guardian’s copy of the order reads. “This Order does not require Verizon to include telephony metadata for communications wholly originating and terminating in foreign countries.”

Though the classified, top secret order comes from the FBI, it clearly states that the data is to be given to the NSA. That means the leaked document may serve as one of the first concrete pieces of evidence that the NSA’s spying goes beyond foreigners to include Americans, despite its charter specifically disallowing surveillance of those within the United States.

“In many ways it’s even more troubling than [Bush era] warrantless wiretapping, in part because the program is purely domestic,” says Alex Abdo, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project.”But this is also an indiscriminate dragnet. Say what you will about warrantless wiretapping, at least it was targeted at agents of Al Qaeda. This includes every customer of Verizon Business Services.”

The leaked document, in fact, is labelled as an order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, a body whose powers were created under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and then broadened after the September 11th, 2001 attacks, with the purpose of intercepting communications between foreign agents and those between enemies abroad and their agents within the U.S. Similarly, the NSA’s charter states that it focuses on interception and analysis of foreign communications, not those within the United States.

But the Verizon order seems to show that the NSA, using FISA, has specifically gathered communications data that both begins and ends with Americans. That domestic surveillance may be allowed under FISA’s low standard for the “relevance” of the data demanded from Internet companies and telephone carriers in the investigations of foreigners, says Julian Sanchez, a research fellow with the CATO Institute focused on privacy and civil liberties. ”The overall purpose of this program is to identify foreign terrorists,” says Julian Sanchez. “But in fact it extends well beyond whether the individual you’re investigating is foreign. If you think an American citizens’s email has information about what a foreign power or individual is doing, that’s ‘relevant.’ The purpose of the investigation is not a constraint on the target or the people from whom the information is sought.”

“If they data mine huge blocks of call records, they’re getting lots of innocent Americans’ data,” adds Sanchez, “But the argument, I imagine, is ‘we’re doing data mining to look for suspicious patterns to help us identify foreign terrorists.’”

My colleague Kashmir Hill has contacted the NSA and Verizon for comment, and I’ll update this post if we hear back from either of the two. Update: Verizon has declined to comment.

In fact, the Verizon order may be just a glimpse of a much larger surveillance program. It’s unclear whether other carriers, not to mention Internet giants like Google, Microsoft and Facebook, have been caught up in similar domestic surveillance, or how long that surveillance has been taking place. But as the Guardian notes, Senators Ron Wyden and Mark Udall have issued cryptic warnings for the last two years that the Obama administration has engaged in widespread surveillance of Americans.

Other phone carriers including AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint all responded to a congressional inquiry on government surveillance last year, stating that they had turned over hundreds of thousands of users’ records to law enforcement agencies, though that inquiry didn’t focus on intelligence agency requests.

In a congressional hearing in March of last year, the NSA’s Director Keith Alexander responded to questions from Georgia Congressman Hank Johnson, who brought up allegations of the NSA’s domestic spying made in a Wired magazine article earlier that month, denying fourteen times that the NSA intercepted Americans’ communications.

“What judicial consent is required for NSA to intercept communications and information involving American citizens?” Johnson asked at the time.

“Within the United States, that would be the FBI lead,” responded Alexander. “If it were a foreign actor in the United States, the FBI would still have to lead. It could work that with NSA or other intelligence agencies as authorized. But to conduct that kind of collection in the United States it would have to go through a court order, and the court would have to authorize it. We’re not authorized to do it, nor do we do it.”

In light of this latest leak and the surveillance it’s exposed, the NSA may have some more explaining to do.