Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
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...."
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.
The only way to eliminate all abuse is to reduce the population to one. Beyond that, there will always be risk of abuse, and there are gobs more situations from within which people can commit far worse abuse, with far less risk of being caught doing so. Why complain about this one before those? Answer: Political theater.
You can’t believe a word that disgraced former NSA director Michael Hayden says. The man is both corrupt and incompetent as proven by the fact that his actions led to the charging of patriotic whistleblower Thomas Drake under the Espionage Act.
This video shows just what an idiot Michael Hayden is. This delusional man is literally a laughing stock in serious intelligence circles. No one can understand how this guy has the audacity to continue showing his face in the media.
Oh, it's even been speculated that his poor decisions while director of the CIA allowed the Stuxnet Worm to be reverse engineered.
The point of my post, is to point out what huge abuse is possible with the govt owning such a database... and that we have a government that demonstrably is just fine with committing that abuse.
The fact that they SAY they haven't committed that abuse YET in this one area, is a laughable excuse.
The particular abuse being discussed, is AGAINST THE LAW.
Actually, that hasn't been established yet, but it's not important: The abuse I referred to is also against the law - uh - I mean "AGAINST THE LAW".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn
Do you begin to get it yet?
What I get is that you seem to enjoy jumping to conclusions and reacting with vitriolic rhetoric even in situations that we don't have all the info yet, and without regard to the more egregious - uh - I mean "MORE EGREGIOUS" matters raised, if you feel you cannot get as much rhetorical mileage out of them. Do I have that right?
You can’t believe a word that disgraced former NSA director Michael Hayden says.
Any particular reason you say this? Or are you just smearing and denigrating the man?
Quote:
The man is both corrupt and incompetent as proven by the fact that his actions led to the charging of patriotic whistleblower Thomas Drake under the Espionage Act.
Any particular evidence linking him to that charging?
Quote:
Oh, it's even been speculated that his poor decisions while director of the CIA allowed the Stuxnet Worm to be reverse engineered.
Link? Evidence?
Nothing but rhetoric and unsupported smears from you yet.
You and bUU need to get together and get your stories straight.
Nothing but rhetoric and unsupported smears from you yet.
And from you.
If you are going to question someone else's evidence, you better have hardcore irrefutable evidence of actual wrong-doing yourself, not your personal opinion of the nature of the actions, but rather a judge or jury's determination. Otherwise, sit back and take as well as you give.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn
You and bUU need to get together and get your stories straight.
Why? We don't agree with each other. Why do you feel entitled - uh - ENTITLED to having only one opposing perspective directed toward yours?
So, would it be possible for the govt to require that each phone service provider, keep those phone records for X amount of time? (Most providers do it already, look at your long-distance landline bill. You can also request those records for your own cell phone, from your provider, and they'll give them to you)
And the government CANNOT access the providers' records, without a warrant issued by a judge "upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized", if/when the judge thinks that the search would be reasonable?
Every govt high official with a need to get such things, knows a judge he can go to, to get that warrant at very short notice. IF the judge thinks the access to the database is "reasonable", then he will issue the warrant quickly, and THEN the official(s) can go ahead and do the searches Gen. Hayden described. And I have no problem with that.
As long as they have good intentions, all is well and good!
I mean, good intentions never harmed anyone right?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
