Another Step on the Road to Dictatorship

He thought of the telescreen with its never-sleeping ear. They could spy upon you night and day, but if you kept your head you could still outwit them.
Winston Smith in George Orwell’s 1984 Chapter 7
WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional Republicans and Democrats demanded answers from the Bush administration Thursday about a government spy agency secretly collecting records of ordinary Americans’ phone calls to build a database of every call made within the country.
…The top-ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee said he was shocked by the revelation about the NSA.
“It is our government, it’s not one party’s government. It’s America’s government. Those entrusted with great power have a duty to answer to Americans what they are doing,” Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont.
AT&T Corp., Verizon Communications Inc., and BellSouth Corp. telephone companies began turning over records of tens of millions of their customers’ phone calls to the National Security Agency program shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, said USA Today, citing anonymous sources it said had direct knowledge of the arrangement.
Wake up America you’re living in a police state. At least stop giving AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth your money and switch to Qwest. Why Qwest? Because of all the big telecoms they were the only one that flat out said no to the NSA
One company differs
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.
The NSA, which needed Qwest’s participation to completely cover the country, pushed back hard.
Trying to put pressure on Qwest, NSA representatives pointedly told Qwest that it was the lone holdout among the big telecommunications companies. It also tried appealing to Qwest’s patriotic side: In one meeting, an NSA representative suggested that Qwest’s refusal to contribute to the database could compromise national security, one person recalled.
In addition, the agency suggested that Qwest’s foot-dragging might affect its ability to get future classified work with the government. Like other big telecommunications companies, Qwest already had classified contracts and hoped to get more.
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.
In June 2002, Nacchio resigned amid allegations that he had misled investors about Qwest’s financial health. But Qwest’s legal questions about the NSA request remained.
Unable to reach agreement, Nacchio’s successor, Richard Notebaert, finally pulled the plug on the NSA talks in late 2004, the sources said.
.
No tags for this post.Related posts
« Where is your grandmother’s cooking now?
Comments
Comment from Doug Alder
Time: 5/23/2006, 1:02 pm
OMG it’s the infamous LSG {sigh} - oh no I’ve been sighed - whatever shall I do
Damn never should have sent you the link to this blog Les























Comment from Lester Garrett
Time: 5/22/2006, 1:40 am
Quoting you:
{sigh} Bad hair day, Doug?
You might want to take a look at “California v Greenwood 486 US 35 (1988). In it the the USSC reaffirmed its previous ruling in 1979 re. obtaining phone number lists without a warrant in Smith v. Maryland:
-={lsg}=-