Media Back To Hyping NSA Controversy

"There is nothing new here, nor am I especially worried about this sort of thing. It has been going on almost since the invention of the telephone. The only thing that makes it "news" right now is the fact that it can be crafted by the left/media into a political weapon at an opportune moment."

if it weren't for the huge targets on republicans' backs, you wouldn't have anything to worry about.

say, rob - exactly what are conservatives doing right these days? where is the ship not leaking?

~~

more from the usa today article:

Among the big telecommunications companies, only Qwest has refused to help the NSA, the sources said. According to multiple sources, Qwest declined to participate because it was uneasy about the legal implications of handing over customer information to the government without warrants.

The NSA's domestic program raises legal questions. Historically, AT&T and the regional phone companies have required law enforcement agencies to present a court order before they would even consider turning over a customer's calling data. Ma Bell's bedrock principle — protection of the customer — guided the company for decades, said Gene Kimmelman, senior public policy director of Consumers Union. "No court order, no customer information — period. That's how it was for decades," he said.

The concern for the customer was also based on law: Under Section 222 of the Communications Act, first passed in 1934, telephone companies are prohibited from giving out information regarding their customers' calling habits: whom a person calls, how often and what routes those calls take to reach their final destination. Inbound calls, as well as wireless calls, also are covered.

The financial penalties for violating Section 222, one of many privacy reinforcements that have been added to the law over the years, can be stiff. The Federal Communications Commission, the nation's top telecommunications regulatory agency, can levy fines of up to $130,000 per day per violation, with a cap of $1.325 million per violation. The FCC has no hard definition of "violation." In practice, that means a single "violation" could cover one customer or 1 million.

In the case of the NSA's international call-tracking program, Bush signed an executive order allowing the NSA to engage in eavesdropping without a warrant. The president and his representatives have since argued that an executive order was sufficient for the agency to proceed. Some civil liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, disagree.

One major telecommunications company declined to participate in the program: Qwest.

According to sources familiar with the events, Qwest's CEO at the time, Joe Nacchio, was deeply troubled by the NSA's assertion that Qwest didn't need a court order — or approval under FISA — to proceed. Adding to the tension, Qwest was unclear about who, exactly, would have access to its customers' information and how that information might be used.

Financial implications were also a concern, the sources said. Carriers that illegally divulge calling information can be subjected to heavy fines. The NSA was asking Qwest to turn over millions of records. The fines, in the aggregate, could have been substantial.

The NSA told Qwest that other government agencies, including the FBI, CIA and DEA, also might have access to the database, the sources said. As a matter of practice, the NSA regularly shares its information — known as "product" in intelligence circles — with other intelligence groups. Even so, Qwest's lawyers were troubled by the expansiveness of the NSA request, the sources said.

Unable to get comfortable with what NSA was proposing, Qwest's lawyers asked NSA to take its proposal to the FISA court. According to the sources, the agency refused.

The NSA's explanation did little to satisfy Qwest's lawyers. "They told (Qwest) they didn't want to do that because FISA might not agree with them," one person recalled. For similar reasons, this person said, NSA rejected Qwest's suggestion of getting a letter of authorization from the U.S. attorney general's office. A second person confirmed this version of events.

the issue is not whether personal information is attached to the data being mined - the issue, as always, rob, is whether it's legal or not.

it should not just continue to roll along - and the man in charge of it should not be taking over the CIA - until this is resolved.

ah... of course....

"The three telecommunications companies are working under contract with the NSA"

read: getting paid.

guess who's paying for this?

"There is nothing new here, nor am I especially worried about this sort of thing."

Let's see..the WH says it is only intercepting phone data from AlQaeda to US citizens and vice-versa.

Yet, the article says "tens of millions " have had their phone data collected.

It seems Rob Port has been caught in an inconsistency.

Either there are tens of millions of Al Qaeda members (which means we're losing the War on Some Terror faster than previously thought) or the WH has been caught in yet another lie.

It seems Rob Port has been caught in an inconsistency.

Really?

So Jade, what do you think about the Clinton Administration's use of this program for POLITICAL spying?

Yes, that is right, the Echelon Program was started under Clinton and was abused politically under Clinton ----- oh, but you don't talk about THAT!!

Yes, that is right, the Echelon Program was started under Clinton and was abused politically under Clinton

Two lies in one brief sentence; Bravo, Greg.

Firts, Echelon actually began in the late-1960s/early 1970s. Since President Clinto didn't become President Clinton until 1993--I'd say he had zero to with starting it.

Second lie: As acknowledged by Alberto Gonzalez---Echelon was never employed against US citizens.