NSA secret database report triggers fierce debate in Washington

[FUZO]

TweetNSA secret database report triggers fierce debate in Washington




Bush said Americans' privacy was 'fiercely protected' under the program.



NSA SURVEILLANCE

NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls



Questions and answers



Fractured phone system consolidating once again



Security issue kills domestic spying inquiry







TIMELINE






By Susan Page, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — A fierce debate erupted Thursday over the legality and appropriateness of a massive secret database built by the National Security Agency that contains the phone records of tens of millions of Americans.
USA TODAY reported that the NSA has been collecting data from AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth since the Sept. 11 attacks to search for patterns that might help identify terrorist networks. NSA collected records from landlines and cellphones at homes, businesses and government offices across the country, including calls by individuals not suspected of wrongdoing.

At the White House, President Bush said the administration acted within the law and "fiercely protected" Americans' privacy while doing everything possible to prevent terrorist attacks. "Al-Qaeda is our enemy, and we want to know their plans," he said. "We are not mining or trolling through the personal lives of innocent Americans." He didn't address specifics of the program and walked away without responding to reporters' questions.



On Capitol Hill, Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy expressed outrage. "Are you telling me tens of millions of Americans are involved with al-Qaeda?" said Leahy, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. "These are tens of millions of Americans who are not suspected of anything."

Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said he would call phone company executives to a congressional hearing "to find out exactly what is going on."

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said she asked Speaker Dennis Hastert to launch a bipartisan review.

The furor threatened to ensnare the nomination of Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden to head the Central Intelligence Agency. Hayden, director of the NSA from 1999 to 2005, led the agency when the database project was launched and built.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who has spoken favorably of his nomination, predicted the revelation is "going to present a growing impediment to the confirmation of Gen. Hayden." She is a member of the Intelligence Committee, which plans to begin confirmation hearings next week.

Senators in both parties predicted the hearings will be a forum to pursue unanswered questions about the program.

The White House postponed meetings scheduled Thursday for Hayden with Republican Sens. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

Incoming White House spokesman Tony Snow said there is no question about going forward with the nomination. "We support Gen. Hayden 100%," he said.

The telephone database was built without court warrants or the approval of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, a panel of federal judges established to issue secret warrants, according to people with direct knowledge of the arrangement.

A key question: Is it legal?

Bush has argued that he has far-reaching authority to approve NSA surveillance under his constitutional role as commander in chief. He also has cited a congressional resolution, passed just after 9/11, authorizing him to use "all necessary and appropriate force" against those responsible.

"If all they're doing is have a computer program anonymously select people who are making phone calls to known terrorists or something like that, I don't see a problem," said Robert Turner, director of the University of Virginia's Center for National Security Law. "That's not comparable to going into our bedrooms or even listening to our conversations. The goal of stopping terrorist attacks is the greatest of our national interests."

Critics said the administration's warrantless programs violate the Fourth Amendment — it bars "unreasonable searches and seizures" and requires warrants for searches — as well as the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that established the secret court.

Harold Koh, dean of the Yale Law School and author of The National Security Constitution, called the scope of the database "shocking."

"If they had gone to Congress and said, 'We want to do this without probable cause, without warrants and without judicial review,' it never would have been approved," said Koh, a former law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun. "I don't think any FISA court would have approved this kind of scale of activity."

As a general rule, telecommunication companies require law enforcement agencies to serve them with a court order before turning over a customer's phone records. Under Section 222 of the U.S. Communications Act, telephone companies are prohibited from giving out information about their customers' calling habits.

Senate Finance Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, questioned why the phone companies would cooperate with the NSA. "Why are the telephone companies not protecting their customers?" he said. "They have a social responsibility to people who do business with them to protect our privacy as long as there isn't some suspicion that we're a terrorist or a criminal or something."

Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., called the outcry over the program "nuts" and said, "We are in a war, and we have got to collect intelligence on the enemy."

One major telecommunication company, Qwest, refused to participate in the NSA program because of concerns about the expansiveness of the program and the lack of judicial oversight, USA TODAY reported.

'An issue of our times'

Bush said in his remarks that "the intelligence activities I authorized. .. have been briefed to appropriate members of Congress, both Republican and Democrat." Pelosi acknowledged that she had been briefed "on some of it."

The Intelligence Committee has oversight responsibilities for the NSA. Senators on the Judiciary Committee complained that the news account was the first they had heard of the program. Specter said that made it impossible for the panel to "perform our constitutional oversight responsibilities to determine the constitutionality of the program."

"Unfortunately, a lot of this goes on clandestinely and. .. it takes a journalist to discover its existence," said Clayton Northouse, editor of Protecting What Matters: Technology, Security and Liberty since 9/11.

"Congress doesn't know what's going on and is dependent on the news media to tell them what's going on in DOD (Department of Defense) or the CIA, just because there's no formal mechanisms for oversight."

Northouse said the increasing use of huge databases by the government is "an issue of our times" — the conflict in an Information Age between protecting civil liberties while also pursuing data trails that might identify terrorists and other criminals.

Data-mining uses computers programmed with sophisticated statistical algorithms to review vast quantities of digital information in an effort to identify patterns of activity. Banks and credit card companies use the process on millions of financial transactions to identify people suspected of committing financial fraud.

Skeptics question whether terrorists can be spotted in the same way that credit card scam artists can — making the databases a potential waste of resources in the war on terror. They also warn that innocent people could be falsely identified as potential terrorists.

Customers' names, street addresses and other personal information are not being handed over as part of the program, USA TODAY reported. But the telephone numbers the NSA collects can easily be cross-checked with other databases to obtain that information.

"Most Americans believe that their private lives should remain private," Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., said when he introduced legislation to provide congressional oversight of government databases a year ago.

The bill, co-sponsored by Republican Sen. John Sununu of New Hampshire, would require federal agencies to report to Congress on what data-mining programs they are using, how they're working and what steps are being taken to protect privacy.

Scanning for terrorists

The Bush administration has defended the NSA for another program that wiretaps calls between Americans and people overseas suspected of terror links without obtaining court warrants.

In that program — unlike this one — the conversations themselves are recorded. Bush has said that program is narrowly targeted at suspected terrorists.

During that controversy, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll asked Americans whether they thought they had been wiretapped by the federal government.

Most didn't. In a survey in February, 52% of Americans said it was "not at all likely" that the federal government had ever wiretapped their telephone conversations; 24% said it was "not too likely."

One in five said it was very or somewhat likely that they had.

Those polled were split over whether the eavesdropping broke the law — 49% said it definitely or probably did, and 47% said it definitely or probably didn't — and over whether it was a wise idea: 50% said the program was "wrong;" 47% said it was "right."

The Pentagon has built several large databases of information, part of its intelligence-gathering within the borders of the USA that has dramatically expanded since 9/11.

The Wall Street Journal detailed a program last month called Talon — short for "Threat and Local Observation Notice" — which uses reports filed online by members of the armed forces who notice unusual activities around military bases.

A Pentagon data-mining program called Total Information Awareness sparked a firestorm when it was disclosed in 2003.

The project scanned information in e-mails and the commercial databases of health, financial and travel companies in the USA and overseas in an effort to spot patterns linked to terrorism. The leader of the program was John Poindexter, a Reagan national security adviser implicated in the Iran-contra scandal.

After protests from liberal and conservative lawmakers and advocacy groups, Congress voted to prohibit the use of TIA technology against Americans without congressional approval.

The protests Thursday over the telephone database also crossed party and ideological lines.

"This is an outrageous invasion of privacy and a frightening expansion of government power," said Bob Barr, a former Georgia congressman and conservative Republican who served as one of the House managers of President Clinton's impeachment.

Ralph Neas, president of the liberal group People for the American Way, used similar language, calling the program "an unconscionable infringement on the rights and freedoms that are the birthright of every American."

He added, "We can destroy the terrorists without shredding the Constitution and the Bill of Rights."

House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said he is "concerned" about the program. "I'm not sure why it was necessary for us to keep and have that kind of information," he says.

On the other hand, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., argues that the controversy was being overblown.

"I don't think this action is nearly as troublesome as being made out here," he says, "because they are not tapping our phones."

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said, "Whether this is acceptable data-mining or an unacceptable intrusion into privacy is a question that needs to be answered."

[Klash]

TweetDamn, Bush is one aggressive mother phucker. Have much respect for Qwest now.

[Waterboy]

TweetWhether you like it or not, this has been going on for more than this administration. Clinton wanted all of your finicial records at his disposal. He also wanted to know anytime you used your credit/debit card. It recorded your purchase, location and how much it was for.
As far as phone conversations, the Feds (read NSA) have had a program that will record any and all phone conversations when certain key words were spoken. This type of survailence is nothing new, it has been going on since the late 60's or early 70's.
It has been brought to light in the past months due to some media snooping and revealing security secerets.
Don't get me wrong, I do not like knowing that my phone conversations are being listened to just because of a key word that may have been spoken.

[AlmostThere]

TweetBig Brother is watching and listening.

[TestRip7]

TweetI was talking to a guy last night who is working on his PHd. in computer science and has done alot of research with cryptology and all that stuff. He said that the NSA can crack anything, and everything if need be. Including secure e-mails... etc...

Dont forget that someone (uncle sam) is always watching or listening.

[3Vandoo]

Tweetthis is going on since 1950

old news