RSSBellSouth: No Call Data Given to NSA
By Ed Oswald | Published May 16, 2006, 1:01 PM
With the NSA's recently uncovered domestic call tracking program facing increasing public criticism, BellSouth said Monday that after an internal review it determined it had not given any call data to the NSA. The company, along with AT&T and Verizon, was accused of supplying the agency with the call records of millions of Americans in a USA Today report last week.
BellSouth said that following the report, an investigation was conducted to see if the company had been supplying the NSA with such information. "Based on our review to date, we have confirmed no such contract exists and we have not provided bulk customer calling records to the NSA," the company said in a statement.
The Bush Administration has yet to either confirm or deny the story's validity. President Bush said that any activity by the NSA was within the confines of the law, and that the government would get court approval before listening in on domestic calls.
The call-tracking program detailed in the USA Today article only included the "external" details of the calls, not the "internals," which is the content of the phone call itself.
Even so, at least one Democrat on the Federal Communications Commission has pushed for a federal investigation into the legality of the program, saying it may have broken communications laws which protect the privacy of American's phone call records unless the customer approves their release.
BellSouth seemed to agree with this premise in its statement. "BellSouth has built a successful business because of the trust that our customers have placed with us," it said. "We will continue to take our obligations to our customers seriously."
Verizon and AT&T have both not directly answered whether or not they participated in the program, with AT&T saying it only provided information to the government "strictly within the law."
"...it had not given any call data to the NSA."
They didn't - Bell South and Verizon just looked the other way as the NSA spliced their cables in.
Score: 0
|If the NSA isn't going to give up any information about this because of national security, the phone companies can just say "what call information?".
Score: 0
|The bottom line with these phone companies is not whether they are complying with the law. The fact that the governement threatens to take away lucrative contracts if they don't comply with request, no matter how invasive or wrong it is. The bottom line with big companies like this is money. Obviously, At&t, verizon, bell all probably weighed how many customers they would lose versus the amount of government contracts. I am sure they all ran cost benefit analysis and realized they stood to lose more without government contracts. By the way, I think bell south is covering their a** because now they realize they lost something they need and that is consumer trust
Score: 0
|The bottom line with these phone companies is not whether they are complying with the law. The fact that the governement threatens to take away lucrative contracts if they don't comply with request, no matter how invasive or wrong it is.
Is that speculation or is there factual information to backup those claims?
Score: 0
|Qwest communications the other company that refused to give information stated publicly, according to cnn, that they were threatened with termination of government contracts. Let me clarify that. If they don't comply there could be implications on future contracts.
Score: 0
|Huh...
Disobey the government...have your government contracts terminated.
Makes sense to me. Which part are you having trouble with?
Score: 0
|We are supposed to trust this administration without oversite to do anything, give me a break!
Score: 0
|There is plenty of oversight.
It's called November 2008.
*grin*
Am I wrong?
Score: 0
|yeah, you're completely wrong. winning the election is not a pass to break the law or ignore the constitution, unless you live in a dictatorship, last I checked this was a representative republic, get it.
Score: 0
|Funny.
Last I checked dictators *couldn't* get voted out of office.
winning the election is not a pass to break the law or ignore the constitution
Name one law broken, one letter of the constitution violated.
Score: 0
|funny, 90% of dictators have bogus elections. But you wouldnt know that because you are ignorant as the day is long.
Score: 0
|lmao..
Couldn't name one, eh?
Thought so.
Have a nice day! :)
Score: 0
|Yeah.......'cause big business rarely lies to the public.
Give me a break. Just freaking admit it and move on.
Stupid poop heads.
Score: 0
|mommy, he said stupid poop head!
Score: 0
|Funny thing is, if the FCC REALLY wanted this information, they would have had it already.
Protest or not, the phone companies are obligated to comply with Federal Requests, you can argue the validity AFTER you comply.
The NSA has FULL Authority from the FCC and the Law to get whatever records are neccessary.
Score: 0
|exactly, and it would be criminal for the phone companies to disclose the transaction to the public
FBI, CIA, NSA...these guys don't mess around
if you don't comply with said agencies, you go to jail for interference in a federal investigation.
you can't fight a democraticly run government. would be like fighting yourself. after all, you voted them there. and if you didn't, well, shut up, cause more than half the public disagrees with you.
Score: 0
|No, they dont have to comply without a warrant, hence the FISA court. That is what this entire ILLEGAL activity is all about, warrantless searches.
Score: 0
|Hows come no one has been arrested or there hasn't been any trial over the so called "illegal" activity?
Oh right it's not illegal.
Score: 0
|fewt:
Simple answer to this: one party rule. Come on, do you think Republicans would investigate Republicans (or vice versa??????)
Score: 0
|Sure, one party rules.
Why do you think that is?
Oh, right America voted it to be that way.
So, if America wants to change that then they can when it's time to vote again.
Still doesn't prove anything was wrong here. ;-)
Score: 0
|why, are you that much of an idiot, the reason is simple, because your morons in crime control all three branches of government there is no checks and balancing. unlike when your party impeached a president for lying about an affair in an unrelated court preceding.
Score: 0
|ever heard of gerrymandering (redistricting) idiot! you really are uneducated arn't you, and that is the problem.
Score: 0
|Hmm smells of treason.
I don't think *I'M* the idiot here.
Why is it "my party"? Who says I'm republican? (For the record, I'm not nor am I a democrat thanks.)
Score: 0
|"you really are uneducated"
I'm uneducated because more than 50% of the country voted for Bush?
That sure makes a lot of sense.
Score: 0
|more than 50% of the country voted for Bush
Well, now...*that's* debatable. :P
Score: 0
|Off with his Head!
Score: 0
|NO, you're uneducated because you have no frame of reference or knowledge of politics, history, or the convergence of the two, which puts you in with the sheeple that many of our most famous politicians spoke about, for example "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."—Thomas Jefferson
Score: 0
|"Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith, let us, to the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it." - Abe Lincoln
"In every battle there comes a time when both sides consider themselves beaten, then he who continues the attack wins." -
Ulysses S. Grant
Score: 0
|heh
Score: 0
|yes interesting quotes, of no relevance whatsoever but interesting.
Score: 0
|They are absolutely relevant to the conversation, or they would be if you had any comprehension of what security means.
Score: 0
|If the phone companies didn't release any information, then why was it necessary in the first place for Bush to argue that what the NSA did was legal?
Score: 0
|Um...Bush won the popular vote in 2004. Even Al Gore would admit that. Districting has nothing to do with the Presidential elections. Now--refering to Texas, are we? No--every district could have voted for Tony Sanchez or Rick Perry. We picked Rick Perry. Then, under his leadership, Texas was re-districted. However, WE VOTED FOR THE PEOPLE WHO APPROVED IT. That is 100% fair, period. Electoral votes? Why all or nothing when it is a difference of 900 votes?There's something we will never agree on...
Score: 0
|so by "review" i assume they mean, "big meeting to get their story straight" then they come out with an answer.
Score: 0
|No by review, they saw that the data they supposedly gave to the NSA, didn't exist..
I think a company would know if they voluntarily surrendered 50 million customer phone records... that's not something you just click upload and wait a few seconds to complete..
I think they would know if they did it.. it would take a lot of resources to accomplish.
Since landlines, mobile lines, and fax, ISDN, and T1 lines AREN'T in the same database..
Score: 0
|The most disturbing thing is that they had to have a investigation to see if THEY were providing this info.
Score: 0
|