[Vision2020] Remember: Verizon was once GTE

[Art Deco]

print
------------------------------
 U.S. phone companies never once challenged NSA data requests By Brian
Fung, Updated: September 18, 2013

None of the phone companies that handed over communications metadata in
bulk to the National Security Agency ever challenged the agency on its data
requests, a newly declassified government document shows.

In a formerly secret memo published by the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court — the judicial body responsible for approving the NSA's
surveillance — Judge Claire Eagen reveals that "to date, no holder of
records who has received an Order to produce bulk telephony metadata has
challenged the legality of such an Order ... despite the explicit statutory
mechanism for doing so."

Section 215 of the Patriot Act has been interpreted by the NSA to authorize
the blanket seizure of millions of U.S. phone records. The law allows court
orders issued under Section 215 to be contested if the recipient can prove
that the data request is unreasonably broad.

Silicon Valley has been known to take advantage of a similar mechanism in
response to other types of data requests. In the 2000s, Yahoo tried to
resist a court order<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/technology/secret-court-ruling-put-tech-companies-in-data-bind.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&>on
Fourth Amendment grounds but failed, leading it to become, according
to
the New York Times, one of the handful of companies participating in the
PRISM program. The legal action was kept secret because of the gag order
that accompanies NSA data requests.

Tech companies including Google and Microsoft are now suing the government
for permission to talk more openly about the FISA court orders.

Unlike the tech firms, however, it now appears that the telephone providers
never once resisted the NSA. Speaking in Tokyo on Tuesday, a top Verizon
exec dismissed<http://www.zdnet.com/verizon-exec-slams-google-microsoft-yahoo-for-nsa-lawsuit-grandstanding-7000020769/>Google
and Microsoft's suits as "grandstanding."

"The laws are not set by Verizon; they are set by the governments in which
we operate," said John Stratton, president of Verizon Enterprise Solutions.
"I think it's important for us to recognize that we participate in debate,
as citizens, but as a company I have obligations that I am going to follow."

The newly released FISA document also appears to gloss over how Congress
was notified about the surveillance programs. It suggests that members of
Congress had ample opportunity to review the NSA's activities before
reauthorizing the relevant sections of the Patriot Act — something the
Obama administration also has repeated:

In light of the importance of the national security programs that were set
to expire, the Executive Branch and relevant congressional committees
worked together to ensure that *each* Member of Congress knew or had the
opportunity to know how Section 215 was being implemented under this
Court's Orders. Documentation and personnel were also made available to
afford each Member full knowledge of the scope of the implementation of
Section 215 and the underlying legal interpretation.

However, we also know that Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), chairman of the
House Intelligence Committee, withheld a
letter<http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-08-16/politics/41417421_1_briefings-congress-surveillance-program>from
fellow members that would have explained the programs in detail. In
its newly declassified document, the FISA court simply accepts that
lawmakers were suitably informed when many have publicly disagreed. Last
month, Rep. Justin Amash posted on
Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=583562278349849&set=a.173968155975932.31945.173604349345646&type=1&theater>that
"the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence did NOT, in
fact, make the 2011 document available to Representatives in Congress,
meaning that the large class of Representatives elected in 2010 did not
receive either of the now declassified documents detailing these programs."


-- 
Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
art.deco.studios at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20130918/49fb3b45/attachment-0001.html>