Slashdot Mirror


NSA Had Domestic Call Monitoring Before 9/11?

MarkusQ writes "Bloomberg is reporting that, according to documents filed in the breach of privacy suit on behalf of Verizon and BellSouth, the NSA asked AT&T to set up its domestic call monitoring site seven months before the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Could it be that they were intending to monitor domestic calls (and internet traffic) all along, and the 'Global War on Terror' was just a convenient excuse when they got caught?" From the article: "...an unnamed former employee of the AT&T unit provided them with evidence that the NSA approached the carrier with the proposed plan. Afran said he has seen the worker's log book and independently confirmed the source's participation in the project. He declined to identify the employee."

4 of 479 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Of course! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Much as it is tempting to espouse wild conspiracy theories, the fact of the matter is governments will always seek as much power as possible, and rarely cede it once gained. However innocent and well-intentioned these moves are, there is always the danger that future governments will abuse them to set up some kind of tyranny. It's not surprising the administration was seeking to do this before September 11th occurred - it's just another way to gain control over people's lives. And you are right, immediately after the twin towers were destroyed, I remember people in power stressing this had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein. Funny how that story changed over time.

  2. Re:Illegal? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    What Kofi Annan says is pretty meaningless since he has no real power

    In some parts of the world, leaders lead from a position of moral authority, not from the threat of force.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  3. uh, what? by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ok, so since that was entirely domestic this program wouldn't have helped there, but you get the point).

    Well, since this is /. I'm too lazy to RTFA, but the headline says "domestic call monitoring". Why would you then conclude that it would be ineffective against domestic terrorism but effective against international terrorism?

    Anyway, 'terrorism' (both domestic and Islamic) weren't a significant problem before 9-11 and they aren't a significant problem today, despite what the 6 o'clock news wants you to believe. Murder takes the lives of many more people (as in several orders of magnitude) per year. Suicide takes 4x more than murder, and car accidents take over 5x more. Heart disease, stroke, diabetes, cancer, and smoking-related respitory diseases together claim over 200x the lives that murder claims (which is itself claims several orders of magnitude more lives than terrorism.)

    In terms of human lives, terrorism in America isn't even a blip on the radar. It certainly doesn't justify the expenditure of trillions of dollars on wars and "Homeland Security", nor does it justify the wholesale slaughter of our freedoms and even if it did a domestic call tracking program would do jack shit. Despite what the pundits want you to believe, there is no vast centralized network of terrorists. They have no need to keep in constant contact with each other over long distances, and ruthlessly and indiscriminately monitoring law-abiding American citizens (incidentally, none of the 9-11 terrorists were American citizens) will give us nothing but another step towards a police state.

  4. Mathematically, it does not work. by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Yeah, because before 9-11, terrorism was completely unknown in the United States.
    Whether it was known or not is irrelevent. The question is: Will random spying prevent future attacks?

    And the answer is "no". Any system will have "false positives", "false negatives", "true positives" and "true negatives".

    The "false negatives" mean you miss a plot. As long as the false negative rate is above a certain percentage of the actual plots, it will work.

    More problematic is the "false positive" rate. This is when a non-plot is identified as a plot. Innocent people are investigated. This takes time / money / effort.

    Given that there is an upper limit on the time / money / effort available, the government will waste resources chasing false leads.

    People who do not understand that will look at the extreme rarity of "terrorist attacks" in the US (try to name 5 attacks in the US in the last 100 years without using Google) and conclude that the time / money / effort spent was successful.

    However, looking at the budget, you will see that our government is BORROWING the money.

    We are going bankrupt in an attempt to chase down a threat that kills fewer people every year than car accidents.

    And we are surrending the Rights that our forefathers were willing to give THEIR lives for.