Ramblings of an old Doc

 

I wonder what on earth the NSA is doing. All phone records (not the content of the calls themselves, nor the caller’s identity) including numbers dialed, duration of calls, location data, unique identifiers all are being handed over on an ongoing basis to the NSA. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in Miami ordered this in April 25th, for a three month period ending July 19th.

This means that whether you are suspected of wrongdoing or not, your records are being analyzed by the NSA, and whoever they  share the info with (legally or not). This is the first proof that such bulk info gathering is going on. The government has wanted this metadata forever to learn of peoples’ network connections.

Just because the Verizon Order was leaked and we now know of it, they might not be the only carrier having had such an Order presented to them. It is also unclear if the leaked Order was a one time order, or part of a series of such orders for three moth or longer periods. The FBI, NSA and Justice Dep’t. responded with a “No comment” comment.

The first time this came to light was during the prior President’s administration. Now it’s clear this has probably been an ongoing practice.

What is truly incredible here is the unprecedented scale of the data collection: Choosing one or several targets would be the ‘norm’. Here, every Verizon customer’s records are involved! How in the world could a judge order such a thing? This is a seemingly marked increase in the government’s data collection.

As usual, included in the Order is the gag order forbidding the revealing of the existence of the Order to anyone (including legal consul). That has been the subject of judicial order to cease such gag orders and which the Justice Dep’t. is trying to perform an end run around (my article https://forums.wincustomize.com/445202/page/1/#3366027).

This is all product of the Patriot Act, 50 USC section 1861’s “business records” provision. It is amazing that a judge has interpreted that as an “everybody’s data is now the government’s”. Really? This crap was started in 2001 and discovered in 2006 when multiple carriers were shown to be involved and that data was being collected on tens of millions of Americans.

The NSA was tasked from its inception on monitoring and collecting electronic intelligence from foreign sources. It has been increasingly focused on domestic sources. In the 1970’s, the NSA’s mandate expressly forbade that.

The words of Senator Frank Church return to haunt us:

"The NSA's capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn't matter."

How very true.

Source:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order


Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jun 06, 2013

Saw this on yahoo this morning. Apparently a 'top secret' order was placed on it. IMO...within 5 to 10 years we're looking at the US turning into a police state. Now here's the thing......I'm beginning to believe that the constitution of this country is being eroded slowly but surely. Seems those schmucks (no apology) in DC really don't give a damn. 

on Jun 06, 2013

Curious, too, that it was Judge Vinson who signed the order - same judge who held Obamacare to be unconstitutional in its entirety.

 

on Jun 06, 2013

Sensenbrenner today claimed that while framing the Patriot Act, he never meant for it to be used as a "dragnet", only to obtain more information on those targeted through other means. If so, why weren't safety features put into the law? Why wasn't it made very clear in the law that it could not be used as it has been since its passage in 2001? Why hasn't the law been amended since?

Why didn't he speak up in 2006? http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA

You see, this "revelation" has happened before, and naught came of it. If you look on the left side of the article, you'll even see the same answers were given then as today! 

This is no "Blame Bush! Blame Obama!" crap. 

The truth is that we demand of our Presidents and government protection. Neither George W. Bush nor Barack H. Obama are evil. They were trying to do an impossible task. The remedy, if anyone has the courage to do it, is to amend that law.

The simple truth is that no one wants to give up the protection that screening gives, despite the pious noises to the opposite, and no one really cares that freedom is forsaken for security. After all, who really wants to pay the price that freedom demands? If one or more successful terrorist acts ensue, no one would want the responsibility for not preventing them, if possible.

"Everyone want go heaven but nobody want die." - Bob Marley.

 

on Jun 07, 2013

There may be less to this than appears at first blush.  Preserving call records (metadata, not content) for a defined period of time has been SOP for the wireless companies for a long time now (they have to provide it to you on your bill, after all).  What's news (at least to me) is that the Feds are requiring it be turned over to them on a daily basis, not just if/when there is probable cause to get a warrant for the info.  Perhaps that is a more 'secure' way to ensure preservation, but leaves open the question of how long the Feds can preserve the data.

As long as content isn't being recorded & shared (but who really knows for sure?), this may be old news.

Nonetheless, gives new meaning to Verizon's "Share Everything Plan" ...

on Jun 07, 2013

I'd be more concerned about PRISM if that turns out to be real.  That's all about content.

on Jun 07, 2013

Daiwa
Nonetheless, gives new meaning to Verizon's "Share Everything Plan" ...
That, it does.

on Jun 07, 2013

I didn't read the article but according to Dianne Feinstein the order is lawful. I'd like them to define lawful. Bet it differs from the dictionary's. 

on Jun 07, 2013

Daiwa
I'd be more concerned about PRISM if that turns out to be real.  That's all about content.

When you dovetail all the programs, gag orders and secrecy together, the picture isn't at all pretty.

We are becoming a "Security State". The price for that are freedoms once thought to be unalienable. The choice is fairly clear: Like it or not, what we term "security" and "freedom" appear to be inversely proportional.

That's why crafting these laws and correcting any unforeseen/unintended abuses. I don't see Congress demanding an open discussion about these laws. I don't think it valid to claim a need for secrecy since they all read and voted on these laws and the laws are publicly available.

As for the programs initiated to filter and deal with hostiles? I am in a quandry. If even mentioning them is anathema, how can we oversee them? 

Who watches the watchers? Nothing done in secrecy is abuse free, but some methods should remain secret. A true conundrum.

on Jun 07, 2013

I didn't read the article but according to Dianne Feinstein the order is lawful. I'd like them to define lawful. Bet it differs from the dictionary's. 

I wouldn't put Feinstein in any type of credible or honest category.

 

on Jun 08, 2013

Its ironic how this massive data collection failed to stop the Tsarneav brothers from bombing the marathon, even with the added assistance of having the Russians flag them as terrorists and extremist posts on their social media.

 

on Jun 08, 2013

Anthony R

Its ironic how this massive data collection failed to stop the Tsarneav brothers from bombing the marathon, even with the added assistance of having the Russians flag them as terrorists and extremist posts on their social media.

 

Indeed. Even with communication, there was a failure.

on Jun 08, 2013

Because the FBI ignored the Russians or was it because the Russians got to 'em first. Sibling rivalry. 

on Jun 08, 2013

Pertinent, and as always a good read: Steyn

M. Stanton Evans’s Law of Inadequate Paranoia: “However bad you think it is, it’s probably much worse.”

on Jun 11, 2013

M. Stanton Evans’s Law of Inadequate Paranoia: “However bad you think it is, it’s probably much worse.”

Something akin to...

Confidence.  The feeling you have immediately before fully understanding the situation.

Murphy's Law.

If something CAN go wrong - it will.

Sod's Law.

If something CAN go wrong - it will - to YOU.

on Jun 11, 2013

Pertinent, and as always a good read: Steyn

M. Stanton Evans’s Law of Inadequate Paranoia: “However bad you think it is, it’s probably much worse.”

Something akin to...

Confidence.  The feeling you have immediately before fully understanding the situation.

Murphy's Law.

If something CAN go wrong - it will.

Sod's Law.

If something CAN go wrong - it will - to YOU.

"Well said."  to you both. 

2 Pages1 2