SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend....
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Sully- who wrote (20063)5/23/2006 4:57:52 PM
From: Sully-   of 35834
 
In Defense of the NSA Phone Program

Betsy's Page

Morton Zuckerman has a defense of the NSA program collecting phone number data.

<<< Much of the rhetoric of the press now essentially charges the White House with illegally trampling on our constitutional rights and creating an ominous surveillance state. The fact is that the NSA has not been "snooping" on the conversations of Americans. Moreover, what it has been doing is presumptively legal, given the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act, or CALEA, of 1994. That law made it clear that a telecommunications carrier had a duty to cooperate in the interception of communications for law enforcement purposes. The law reads,
    "Interception of communications or access to call-
    identifying information ... can be activated only in 
    accordance with a court order or other lawful 
    authorization."
In other words, a court order is not the only form of lawful authorization. A subpoena or "national security" letter from the FBI may also compel a telephone company to hand over these records without court approval. This action is consistent with telephone and Internet business contracts, which include provisions authorizing the company to disclose records, if necessary, to protect public safety and national security or to comply with a lawful government request.

The case for the NSA's data mining is even stronger than it was in 1994, before the 9/11 attacks. It was hardly controversial when it was passed and signed into law by a Congress and White House controlled by Democrats. Given that the leaders in both chambers and members of the newly created intelligence subcommittees were briefed on the matter, and given that the U.S. Supreme Court had already distinguished between collecting routing information and phone numbers as acceptable and separate from obtaining the actual content of phone calls, why the uproar? Is it because the Republicans now control the White House and Congress? >>>

Read the whole thing.
usnews.com

betsyspage.blogspot.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News