MAINWAY: Difference between revisions

This article documents a current event. Information may change rapidly as the event progresses, and initial news reports may be unreliable. The latest updates to this article may not reflect the most current information. Feel free to improve this article or discuss changes on the talk page, but please note that updates without valid and reliable references will be removed. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

The NSA call database is a database of telephone calls created by the United States National Security Agency (NSA) with the cooperation of four of the largest telephone carriers in the United States: AT&T, SBC, Verizon and BellSouth. ^[1] The existence of this database and the NSA program that compiled it was unknown to the general public until USA Today broke the story on May 10, 2006. ^[1] It is assumed that the database contains over 1.9 trillion call-detail records of phone calls made after September 11, 2001. [1] The database's existence has prompted fierce objections from those who view it as constituting a warrantless or illegal search, and therefore a violation of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Note: The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF.org) had filed a suit against AT&T as early as 1/31/2006 in a related case. EFF charged AT&T with allowing NSA direct access to its database, a charge reiterated in the USA Today article.

Qwest Communications

The USA Today report indicated that Qwest's then CEO, Joseph Nacchio, doubted the NSA's assertion that warrants were unnecessary. In negotiations, the NSA pressured the company to turn over the records. Qwest attorneys asked the NSA to obtain approval from the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Aside from the chief justice, FISC was unaware of the NSA's warrantless domestic activities. When the NSA indicated they would not seek this approval, Qwest's new CEO Richard Notebaert declined NSA's request for access. Later, T-Mobile explicitly stated they do not participate in warrantless surveillance.^[2]

Contents of the database

According to the article, the database is "the largest database ever assembled in the world", and contains call-detail records for all phone calls, domestic and international. A call-detail record consists of the phone numbers of the callers and recipients along with time and duration of the call and while the database does not contain specific names or addresses, that information is widely available from non-classified sources.^[1]

According to the research group TeleGeography, AT&T (including the former SBC), Verizon, and BellSouth connected nearly 500 billion telephone calls in 2005 and nearly 2 trillion calls since late 2001.^[3] It is reported that all four companies were paid to provide the information to the NSA.^{[4] [5]} It is unknown whether the compensation was larger than in cases of lawful interception.

Uses of the database

Although such a database of phone records would not be useful on its own as a tool for national security, it could be used as an element of broader national security analytical efforts and data mining. These efforts could involve analysts using the data to connect phone numbers with names and links to persons of interest.^{[6] [7]} Such efforts have been the focus of the NSA's recent attempts to acquire key technologies from high tech firms in Silicon Valley and elsewhere. Link analysis software, such as the Analyst's Notebook, is used by law enforcement to organize and view links that are demonstrated through such information as telephone and financial records, which are imported into the program from other sources.^[8] Neural network software is used to detect patterns, classify and cluster data as well as forecast future events.^[9]

Using relational mathematics it is possible to find out if someone changes their telephone number depending on calling patterns.^{[citation needed]}

Government response

• In response, the Bush administration defended its activities, while neither specifically confirming or denying the existence of the potentially illegal program.^[10] According to the Deputy White House Press Secretary, "The intelligence activities undertaken by the United States government are lawful, necessary and required to protect Americans from terrorist attacks."^[1]

• Senator Arlen Specter has said that he will hold hearings with the telecommunications CEOs involved. The Senate Intelligence Committee is expected to question Air Force General Michael Hayden about the data-gathering during his confirmation hearings as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Hayden was in charge of the NSA from 1999 through 2005.^[11]

• Commenting on the apparent incompatibility of the NSA call database with previous assurances by President Bush, former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich told Fox News, "I’m not going to defend the indefensible. The Bush administration has an obligation to level with the American people... I don’t think the way they’ve handled this can be defended by reasonable people." ^[12] Gingrich did not criticize the program itself, but rather the way the government has attempted to defend it before the public.

• Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told Fox News, "The idea of collecting millions or thousands of phone numbers, how does that fit into following the enemy?"^[13]

• House Republican Caucus chairwoman Deborah Pryce said, "While I support aggressively tracking al-Qaida, the administration needs to answer some tough questions about the protection of our civil liberties." ^[14]

• Current Republican House Majority Leader John Boehner said, "I am concerned about what I read with regard to NSA databases of phone calls."^[14]

• Democratic senator Patrick Leahy, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said "Are you telling me that tens of millions of Americans are involved with al-Qaida? These are tens of millions of Americans who are not suspected of anything. ... Where does it stop?"^[14]

• On May 15, 2006 FCC Commissioner Copps called for the FCC to open an inquiry into the lawfulness of the disclosure of America's phone records.^[15]

Public reaction

• In a new Newsweek poll of 1007 people conducted between May 11 and 12, 2006, 53% of Americans said that "the NSA's surveillance program goes too far in invading privacy " and 57% said that in light of the NSA data-mining news and other executive actions the Bush-Cheney Administration has “gone too far in expanding presidential power" while 41% see it as a tool to "combat terrorism" and 35% think the Administration’s actions were appropriate.^[16]

• According to a Washington Post telephone poll of 502 people, conducted on May 11, 63% of the American public supports the program, 35% do not; 66% were not bothered by the idea of the NSA having a record of their calls, while 34% were; 56% however thought it was right for the knowledge of the program to be released while 42% thought it was not.^[17] These results were later considered inaccurate by further polls on the subject, specifically a USA Today/Gallup poll showing 51% opposition and 43% support for the program.^[18]

Political action

The Senate Armed Services Committee was scheduled to hold hearings with NSA whistle-blower Russell Tice the week following the revelation of the NSA call database. Tice indicated that his testimony would reveal information on additional illegal activity related to the NSA call database that has not yet been made public, and that even a number of NSA employees believe what they are doing is illegal. Tice also told the National Journal that he "will not confirm or deny" if his testimony will include information on space-based spy satellites being used to spy on American citizens. ^[19]

Lawsuits

New Jersey

Spurred by the public disclosure of the NSA call database, a lawsuit was filed against Verizon on May 12, 2006 at the Federal District Court in Manhattan by Princeton, N.J.-based attorneys Carl Mayer and Bruce Afran. The lawsuit seeks $1,000 for each violation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and would total approximately $5 billion if the court certifies the suit as a class-action lawsuit.

Oregon

On May 12, 2006, an Oregon man filed a lawsuit against Verizon Northwest for $1 billion.^[20]

Maine

On May 13, 2006, a complaint in Maine was filed by a group of 21 Maine residents who asked the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to demand answers from Verizon about whether it provided telephone records and information to the federal government without customers' knowledge or consent. Maine law requires the PUC to investigate complaints against a utility if a petition involves at least 10 of the utility's customers.^[21]

San Francisco

Shortly after the NSA call database story surfaced, a San Francisco lawsuit was filed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.^[22][23]

Justice Department response

The Los Angeles Times reported on May 14, 2006, that the U.S. Justice Department called for an end to an eavesdropping lawsuit against AT&T Corp., citing possible damage from the litigation to national security.^[22][24]

The Stored Communications Act

Legal experts have said that the 1986 Stored Communications Act forbids a turnover of information to the government without a warrant or court order, and the law gives consumers the right to sue for violations of the act and allows them to recover a minimum $1,000 for each violation.^[25][26]

It's argued that the 1986 Stored Communications Act (18 U.S.C. § 2701) forbids turnover of information to the government without a warrant or court order:

"A governmental entity may require the disclosure by a provider of electronic communication service of the contents of a wire or electronic communication...only pursuant to a warrant issued using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure"^[27]

The act is read as stating that phone providers can be held financially liable for violations of the US Constitution:

"The punishment (to the phone provider) for an offense...if the offense is committed...in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or any State."^[27]

Finally, the act is interpreted to mean any customer whose telephone company provided this information can sue that company in civil court for (a) actual damages to the consumer, (b) any profits by the telephone company, (c) punitive damages, and (d) attorney fees. The minimum amount a successful customer will recover under (a) and (b) is $1,000:

"The court may assess as damages in a civil action under this section the sum of the actual damages suffered by the plaintiff and any profits made by the violator as a result of the violation, but in no case shall a person entitled to recover receive less than the sum of $1,000. If the violation is willful or intentional, the court may assess punitive damages. In the case of a successful action to enforce liability under this section, the court may assess the costs of the action, together with reasonable attorney fees determined by the court." (18 U.S.C. § 2707(c) damages)^[27]

However, the Stored Communications Act authorizes phone providers to conduct electronic surveillance if the Attorney General of the United States certifies that a court order or warrant is not required and that the surveillance is legal and required (18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(a)(ii)).

Legal historical background

The NSA call database was not approved by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), which was established in 1978 to secretly authorize taps on the communications of suspected foreign agents on U.S. soil.^[22] The FISC was inspired by the recommendations of the Church Committee, ^[28] which investigated the CIA program COINTELPRO.

In 1971, the US media reported that COINTELPRO targeted thousands of Americans during the 1960s, after several stolen FBI dossiers were passed to news agencies.^[29] The Church Committee Senate final report, which investigated COINTELPRO declared that:

Too many people have been spied upon by too many Government agencies and too much information has been collected. The Government has often undertaken the secret surveillance of citizens on the basis of their political beliefs, even when those beliefs posed no threat of violence or illegal acts on behalf of a hostile foreign power. The Government, operating primarily through secret informants, but also using other intrusive techniques such as wiretaps, microphone "bugs," surreptitious mail opening, and break-ins, has swept in vast amounts of information about the personal lives, views, and associations of American citizens. Investigations of groups deemed potentially dangerous -- and even of groups suspected of associating with potentially dangerous organizations -- have continued for decades, despite the fact that those groups did not engage in unlawful activity.^{[30] [31]}

Robertson takes a stand against Bush

- - In 2006 Pat Robertson called the NSA wire-tapping a "tool of oppression."[2]

See also

• ECHELON
• NSA warrantless surveillance controversy
• Information Awareness Office
• Telecommunications data retention
• Mass surveillance
• Big Brother (1984)
• Project Shamrock

Notes

External links

• "NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls". USA Today. (Original report of the NSA call database)
• "AT&T, Verizon readily break their own rules". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 2006-05-16.
• "NSA Call-Record Data Mining No Surprise to Security Experts". Fox News. Retrieved 2006-05-16.
• "President Bush's press conference following disclosure". Video. Retrieved 2006-05-16.
• "Spying on citizens not unusual Eavesdropping has often led to abuse". Detroit Free Press. Retrieved 2006-05-16.