So you think it's just "DataMining" and no big deal....(NSA Spying)

Why it's a big deal is that the phone numbers and pattens of calls are recorded and can be checked against your Bank and Credit Card records. With the Mergers of Banks and Credit Card Companies this information on all of us who have a mortgage, car loan, pay our medical bills with credit cards or shop at our local stores can be accessed by the government illegally just as they did by requiring every phone service provider EXCEPT QUEST to comply with this illegal spying/data mining.

What if in your network of family or friends you have someone who might know someone else who get's on the Airlines Terra Watch list? Say the NSA decides to "track back" the person on the "watch list" to see who they've called in the last five years? YOU and anyone else that person has called could now be on a "suspect list" where they've checked out all your personal information.

Say you have a small business and one of your clients is on a FBI/CIA or NSA "Watch List." Every time you call that client or they call you it's in the Giant Computer there at the NSA. Say that client is under investigation (which you aren't aware of) and they decide that he/she has made enough calls to your business that YOU are now part of a "pattern of calling" that will place YOU on the "Watch List" to be monitored by FBI/CIA/NSA.

Any one of us American Citizens could have someone in our network of family, friends, aquaintances, business associates who just might be a "target" innocently or not of a Government Agency who will scoop up our phone records and make us a "Target."

This is against the Law and against the Constitution. This is CRIMINAL.

-----------------------------

From the USA TODAY ARTICLE.....THIS IS THE LAW:
The concern for the customer was also based on law: Under Section 222 of the Communications Act, first passed in 1934, telephone companies are prohibited from giving out information regarding their customers' calling habits: whom a person calls, how often and what routes those calls take to reach their final destination. Inbound calls, as well as wireless calls, also are covered.

The financial penalties for violating Section 222, one of many privacy reinforcements that have been added to the law over the years, can be stiff. The Federal Communications Commission, the nation's top telecommunications regulatory agency, can levy fines of up to $130,000 per day per violation, with a cap of $1.325 million per violation. The FCC has no hard definition of "violation." In practice, that means a single "violation" could cover one customer or 1 million.

In the case of the NSA's international call-tracking program, Bush signed an executive order allowing the NSA to engage in eavesdropping without a warrant. The president and his representatives have since argued that an executive order was sufficient for the agency to proceed. Some civil liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, disagree.

More at........
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA

From the USA TODAY ARTICLE.....THIS IS THE LAW:

The concern for the customer was also based on law: Under Section 222 of the Communications Act, first passed in 1934, telephone companies are prohibited from giving out information regarding their customers' calling habits: whom a person calls, how often and what routes those calls take to reach their final destination. Inbound calls, as well as wireless calls, also are covered.

The financial penalties for violating Section 222, one of many privacy reinforcements that have been added to the law over the years, can be stiff. The Federal Communications Commission, the nation's top telecommunications regulatory agency, can levy fines of up to $130,000 per day per violation, with a cap of $1.325 million per violation. The FCC has no hard definition of "violation." In practice, that means a single "violation" could cover one customer or 1 million.

In the case of the NSA's international call-tracking program, Bush signed an executive order allowing the NSA to engage in eavesdropping without a warrant. The president and his representatives have since argued that an executive order was sufficient for the agency to proceed. Some civil liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, disagree.

More at........
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_...