Forbes>> Did The NSA Break The Law?

[sabra]

http://www.forbes.com/home/businessinthebeltway/2006/05/11/nsa-wiretap-bush_cx_jh_0511NSA.html

Business In The Beltway
Did The NSA Break The Law?

<snip>

Section 222 of the 1934 Communications Act forbids phone companies from giving out data on the calling patterns of their customers. But telecom experts say the law wasn't designed to address national security issues.

"There were large competition concerns over how the Bell companies might misuse that information," says Larry Strickling, the former chief of the common carrier bureau of the Federal Communications Commission.

The USA Today piece alleges that the government, as it had with a domestic wiretapping program, skirted the courts set up under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and didn’t get warrants. "I don't know why they didn't do that," said James Lewis, the director of technology and public policy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

When grilled about their failure to get warrants, the NSA, which is known for its data-mining, is likely to characterize the collection of the call data as standard practice, said Lewis. "They'll argue that they bought the data from the companies and used it for statistical analyses."

[acmavm]

1. National Security issue? Right.

:sarcasm:

[Demeter]

2. The Law Was Designed To Address PRIVACY Issues

If one has no privacy, one has no security. Wait till Dubya is behind bars--he'll begin to appreciate privacy issues.

[Karmageddon]

6. He'll especially learn to appreciate privacy issues if the world gets...

... gets to see pics of him in his tighty whities

[KeepItReal]

3. Why would NSA have to *BUY* data if it was national security?

IF it was a legal requirement, the telco's would just have to hand it all over.

[Don Claybrook]

4. no one "skirted" the courts

These people didn't get within MILES of the courts, and I just wanted to point that out.

And if the NSA argues tha they bought the data for statistical analysis, then the telecom carriers need to be sued to kingdom come, then back, and repeat as necessary.

And Bush and Gonzales still need to be removed for LYING to us about this.

[kenny blankenship]

5. The law says nothing about George W. Bush-LOOK IT UP if you don't believe!

Look at the text--nowhere do you see George W. Bush's name. Ergo, it does not apply to him or persons deputized by him to carry out orders and activities that would otherwise represent violations of the law.