Former NSA head: Don't worry, no one has abused the phone records database *yet*

[Little-Acorn]

On one of the Sunday shows this last weekend, Fox News host Chris Wallace had a conversation with Gen. Michael Hayden, former Director of both the CIA and NSA. Hayden oversaw much of the phone-survellance programs on law-abiding American citizens in the war against against terrorists.

Basically Hayden said that Yes, the govt does have this huge database of phone records (the calling phone number, receiving phone number, time and length of call etc.). And to use it, they ask the database something like, "We have discovered a certain phone number that definitely belongs to a terrorist. Has anyone in the country ever called this particular number, or been called by it?"

Wallace pointed out the huge potential for abuse of such a database. Gen. Hayden's reply was basically, "Well, we've never actually abused it, so you can trust your government not to abuse it in the future."

In light of the clear abuse committed by the IRS against Obama's political opponents for years, Gen. Hayden's promise seems a little thin to me. No doubt the man himself was honest and sincere. But perhaps he'll forgive me if I don't trust that the people in government NOT under his military command, and the others who will follow them soon, don't all have his sterling character and integrity.

Suppose some government weenie started a program where they obtained a copy of the key to my house, possibly without my knowledge. And keys to all my neighbors' houses. And every other private house, apartment, condo etc. in the country. And when caught, the weenie gave as his reason, "Well, this is only for events like what happened in Boston, when someone commits a horrific crime and then goes and hides in someone's house or backyard. Having these keys would greatly help us go in, find, and arrest that criminal. If we don't have good reason to think the criminal is in YOUR house, then we will never touch your house, never use your particular key. You can trust us. But you must turn over your key to us, and we might just go and get it without even telling you."

Maybe that govt weenie is sincere. But how do I know that, when he gets promoted or retires, the next weenie who takes over that job, will be as sincere? And won't be an IRS-type person who says, "Well, Obama himself, and Pelosi and Schumer and Reid and Grayson and all these other high officials have flatly said it's a good idea to crack down on people like Acorn, those conservatives. And I've already seen zillions of examples where Black Panthers intimidate voters and don't get prosecuted, campaign staff call Romney a felon and get away with it, somebody leaves a consulate in a hostile land undefended and an Ambassador gets MURDERED and Obama etc. cover for them, etc. And many of those high officials keep publicly calling people like Acorn evil, destructive to our way of life, unAmerican, and even Nazis. So I think I know something I can do to make my bosses happy and crack down on these evil, unAmerican Nazi conservatives. Clearly the high officials won't call the cops on me, they ARE the cops. Now, I'll just quietly open this big database we have handy and...."

---------------------------------------------------

Excerpts from Chris Wallace's conversation with Gen. Michael Hayden follow.

See
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-news-sunday-chris-wallace/2013/06/09/government-surveillance-unconstitutional-reaction-sens-rand-paul-ron-johnson-and-gen
for the full transcript.


HAYDEN: ...Now, with regard to what the senator said -- if I believed NSA was doing some of the things the senator fears they're doing, I would have been backstopping him during your first segment. He said we're trolling through millions of records. That's just simply not true.

The government acquires records as business records from the telecom providers, but then doesn't go into that database without an arguable reason connected to terrorism to ask that database a question. If you don't have any link to that original predicate, terrorism, your phone records are never touched.

(snip)

You ask the database a question, but the question has to be related to terrorism. I'll give you a concrete example so this is very clear. So, you roll up something in Waziristan. You get a cell phone. It's the first time you've ever had that cell phone number. You know it's related to terrorism because of the pocket litter you've gotten in that operation.

Here's how it works: you simply ask that database, hey, any of you phone numbers in there ever talked to this phone number in Waziristan? I mean, you're already going into the database with the predicate, with a probable cause, with an arguable reason why you're asking for the data.

(snip)

WALLACE: One, what do you do with all the records, the billions of records that you have on all of us law-abiding citizens and what's the potential for abuse with the fact that you have all of that stored in computers somewhere?

HAYDEN: First, to answer your question, what do we do with all of the other records? Nothing. All right?

WALLACE: You keep it, though.

HAYDEN: Of course, because -- I mean, you get the cell phone with that number six months from now you want to know the history of that number. When does the value of that information begin to age off?

So, you do retain the information so that you can ask questions of it in the future. With regard to abuse, there are no records of abuse under President Bush, under President Obama.

Now, I was criticized because I theoretically didn't have enough oversight mechanisms, but no one accused us of abuse.

---------------------------------------------------------

Hayden's defense seems to consist of, "Well, we haven't abused the records YET." And that may well be true.

But, come to think of it, didn't the head of the IRS say a month or two ago, that no one had abused any Americans there, either?

[revelarts]

And How would any of us know if their was abuse?

But the FBI guy i posted over in the other thread and others I believe have already admitted that they do keep the content as well.

But here's Hayden i belive in
2006 answering NSA questions concerning the 4th amendment and the need to get a warrant to review any material.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/cGhcECnWRGM?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[gabosaurus]

Dubya told us the same thing. "If you aren't a terrorist, you have nothing to worry about."
Of course, ConReps will assert that Obama's spying is worse that Dubya's spying. :rolleyes:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/16/AR2005121600021.html

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/03/bush-spied/

[hjmick]

Dubya told us the same thing. "If you aren't a terrorist, you have nothing to worry about."
Of course, ConReps will assert that Obama's spying is worse that Dubya's spying. :rolleyes:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/16/AR2005121600021.html

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/03/bush-spied/


I said it then, I say it now... It's bullshit. There is absolutely nothing, NOTHING, patriotic about the Patriot Act.

[Robert A Whit]

On one of the Sunday shows this last weekend, Fox News host Chris Wallace had a conversation with Gen. Michael Hayden, former Director of both the CIA and NSA. Hayden oversaw much of the phone-survellance programs on law-abiding American citizens in the war against against terrorists.

Basically Hayden said that Yes, the govt does have this huge database of phone records (the calling phone number, receiving phone number, time and length of call etc.). And to use it, they ask the database something like, "We have discovered a certain phone number that definitely belongs to a terrorist. Has anyone in the country ever called this particular number, or been called by it?"

Wallace pointed out the huge potential for abuse of such a database. Gen. Hayden's reply was basically, "Well, we've never actually abused it, so you can trust your government not to abuse it in the future."

In light of the clear abuse committed by the IRS against Obama's political opponents for years, Gen. Hayden's promise seems a little thin to me. No doubt the man himself was honest and sincere. But perhaps he'll forgive me if I don't trust that the people in government NOT under his military command, and the others who will follow them soon, don't all have his sterling character and integrity.

Suppose some government weenie started a program where they obtained a copy of the key to my house, possibly without my knowledge. And keys to all my neighbors' houses. And every other private house, apartment, condo etc. in the country. And when caught, the weenie gave as his reason, "Well, this is only for events like what happened in Boston, when someone commits a horrific crime and then goes and hides in someone's house or backyard. Having these keys would greatly help us go in, find, and arrest that criminal. If we don't have good reason to think the criminal is in YOUR house, then we will never touch your house, never use your particular key. You can trust us. But you must turn over your key to us, and we might just go and get it without even telling you."

Maybe that govt weenie is sincere. But how do I know that, when he gets promoted or retires, the next weenie who takes over that job, will be as sincere? And won't be an IRS-type person who says, "Well, Obama himself, and Pelosi and Schumer and Reid and Grayson and all these other high officials have flatly said it's a good idea to crack down on people like Acorn, those conservatives. And I've already seen zillions of examples where Black Panthers intimidate voters and don't get prosecuted, campaign staff call Romney a felon and get away with it, somebody leaves a consulate in a hostile land undefended and an Ambassador gets MURDERED and Obama etc. cover for them, etc. And many of those high officials keep publicly calling people like Acorn evil, destructive to our way of life, unAmerican, and even Nazis. So I think I know something I can do to make my bosses happy and crack down on these evil, unAmerican Nazi conservatives. Clearly the high officials won't call the cops on me, they ARE the cops. Now, I'll just quietly open this big database we have handy and...."

---------------------------------------------------

Excerpts from Chris Wallace's conversation with Gen. Michael Hayden follow.

See
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-news-sunday-chris-wallace/2013/06/09/government-surveillance-unconstitutional-reaction-sens-rand-paul-ron-johnson-and-gen
for the full transcript.


HAYDEN: ...Now, with regard to what the senator said -- if I believed NSA was doing some of the things the senator fears they're doing, I would have been backstopping him during your first segment. He said we're trolling through millions of records. That's just simply not true.

The government acquires records as business records from the telecom providers, but then doesn't go into that database without an arguable reason connected to terrorism to ask that database a question. If you don't have any link to that original predicate, terrorism, your phone records are never touched.

(snip)

You ask the database a question, but the question has to be related to terrorism. I'll give you a concrete example so this is very clear. So, you roll up something in Waziristan. You get a cell phone. It's the first time you've ever had that cell phone number. You know it's related to terrorism because of the pocket litter you've gotten in that operation.

Here's how it works: you simply ask that database, hey, any of you phone numbers in there ever talked to this phone number in Waziristan? I mean, you're already going into the database with the predicate, with a probable cause, with an arguable reason why you're asking for the data.

(snip)

WALLACE: One, what do you do with all the records, the billions of records that you have on all of us law-abiding citizens and what's the potential for abuse with the fact that you have all of that stored in computers somewhere?

HAYDEN: First, to answer your question, what do we do with all of the other records? Nothing. All right?

WALLACE: You keep it, though.

HAYDEN: Of course, because -- I mean, you get the cell phone with that number six months from now you want to know the history of that number. When does the value of that information begin to age off?

So, you do retain the information so that you can ask questions of it in the future. With regard to abuse, there are no records of abuse under President Bush, under President Obama.

Now, I was criticized because I theoretically didn't have enough oversight mechanisms, but no one accused us of abuse.

---------------------------------------------------------

Hayden's defense seems to consist of, "Well, we haven't abused the records YET." And that may well be true.

But, come to think of it, didn't the head of the IRS say a month or two ago, that no one had abused any Americans there, either?

Many years ago, I was an employee for the phone company. Pacific Bell Telephone was owned by Bell Telephone of national fame.

I clearly recall upstairs in the Switchman area of the building some machines, about the size of a copy machine that had rolls of paper put in them and typed on the face of the paper was the calling number and the called number including time of call.

I also paid close attention during Bush how it was explained.

I agree with Acorn and Gen. Hayden that they get those records.

Those records have no conversation on them.

If they find a terrorist called a number, as Hayden says, they ask the computer to find out where that terrorist number called and if in America, look at the telephone number records. Again, unless there is a lawful tap, the phone company does not put taps on our phone. Many suppose they bug your home or office phone. All they need do is hook up a special machine the phone company has and record all calls. Then the law gets a court to okay them hearing those calls.

If you think you are being tapped, some court approved it and it is done per the law.

The called numbers are not secret and never were.

When I worked at the phone company, I noticed some sort of machine hooked up to the panels. I asked what they were and was told by management they were phone tap machines and to never ever touch them.

I could be wrong but I believe only the switchman had knowledge of how to hook them up. None of the guys working with me in Frames had hooked them up I was told.

[Robert A Whit]

Dubya told us the same thing. "If you aren't a terrorist, you have nothing to worry about."
Of course, ConReps will assert that Obama's spying is worse that Dubya's spying. :rolleyes:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/16/AR2005121600021.html

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/03/bush-spied/

Your motive is not to defend Bush but to defend Obama.

I want to make this clear.

The Patriot Act is legal and needed. The major improvement it made was to allow all agencies to talk top secrets to each other on a need to know basis.

No longer was the CIA banned by law from telling the FBI its findings.

As to it being patriotic or not, no comment. It reminds me of the long standing RICO laws.

You can bash Bush and defend Obama all day long but you don't understand the internal workings of the telephone companies. Things changed a lot since I worked there but I still know how it works. Where we had a more mechanical set up, now they do it using computers. We had computers too but not like these of today.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Many years ago, I was an employee for the phone company. Pacific Bell Telephone was owned by Bell Telephone of national fame.

I clearly recall upstairs in the Switchman area of the building some machines, about the size of a copy machine that had rolls of paper put in them and typed on the face of the paper was the calling number and the called number including time of call.

I also paid close attention during Bush how it was explained.

I agree with Acorn and Gen. Hayden that they get those records.

Those records have no conversation on them.

If they find a terrorist called a number, as Hayden says, they ask the computer to find out where that terrorist number called and if in America, look at the telephone number records. Again, unless there is a lawful tap, the phone company does not put taps on our phone. Many suppose they bug your home or office phone. All they need do is hook up a special machine the phone company has and record all calls. Then the law gets a court to okay them hearing those calls.

If you think you are being tapped, some court approved it and it is done per the law.

The called numbers are not secret and never were.

When I worked at the phone company, I noticed some sort of machine hooked up to the panels. I asked what they were and was told by management they were phone tap machines and to never ever touch them.

I could be wrong but I believe only the switchman had knowledge of how to hook them up. None of the guys working with me in Frames had hooked them up I was told.

The start a web page listing every number you call, and every number that calls you. After all, the numbers are not secret and never were... right?

[Robert A Whit]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-informant-global-datamining

You will need to study the entire article but some points are.

Phone numbers get collected, not conversations.

To get your conversations, they must have probable cause and a court order.



As to the culpability of the leaker, I believe he can be arrested and brought to a court of law.

What happened to Daniel Ellsberg a famous leaker by the way when they tried to charge him?

[Marcus Aurelius]

Your motive is not to defend Bush but to defend Obama.

I want to make this clear.

The Patriot Act is legal and needed. The major improvement it made was to allow all agencies to talk top secrets to each other on a need to know basis.

No longer was the CIA banned by law from telling the FBI its findings.

As to it being patriotic or not, no comment. It reminds me of the long standing RICO laws.

You can bash Bush and defend Obama all day long but you don't understand the internal workings of the telephone companies. Things changed a lot since I worked there but I still know how it works. Where we had a more mechanical set up, now they do it using computers. We had computers too but not like these of today.

utter nonsense. You can't possibly know how things work at the phone company now, as opposed to over 50 years ago. Technically, the company you worked for no longer exists anyway.

[Marcus Aurelius]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-informant-global-datamining

You will need to study the entire article but some points are.

Phone numbers get collected, not conversations.

To get your conversations, they must have probable cause and a court order.



As to the culpability of the leaker, I believe he can be arrested and brought to a court of law.

What happened to Daniel Ellsberg a famous leaker by the way when they tried to charge him?

you are the single densest person on this board.

The numbers called or received are NO ONES FUCKING BUSINESS. Not yours, mine, or the federal governments. I don't care that the conversations are not recorded or passed on without a court order, the numbers should require a court order as well.

What I do, who I call, who calls me... MY FUCKING BUSINESS, not Unlce Sams.

[jimnyc]

you are the single densest person on this board.

The numbers called or received are NO ONES FUCKING BUSINESS. Not yours, mine, or the federal governments. I don't care that the conversations are not recorded or passed on without a court order, the numbers should require a court order as well.

What I do, who I call, who calls me... MY FUCKING BUSINESS, not Unlce Sams.

I agree on that, but the ones to be mad at the most, IMO, are the idiotic politicians that apparently signed off on all of this crap.

[fj1200]

I agree on that, but the ones to be mad at the most, IMO, are the idiotic politicians that apparently signed off on all of this crap.

:cough: TSA :cough:

[Little-Acorn]

The whole problem with this phone-records-database program, is that government owns the database.

Sure, they promise us they will never access it without a court order.

Just like the IRS promised us they would never discriminate against the sitting party's political opponents, send out our private data to be published, etc.

The Federal government is authorized by the Constitution to fight against the country's enemies. But the 4th amendment places limits on how they do it. And govt possession of such a database makes it all too easy to violate the 4th.

[red states rule]

http://dashburst.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/e53.jpg