Letters to the Editor
-
@Glenn, @Arne
Thanks for responding to my post. I admit that disproving my theory does not in itself prove anything. I suggest it to cause you to question your assumption, that Mukasey argues that FISA contained legal restrictions pre 911 that prevented determining the destination of a particular call.
He may have just as well been arguing that pre-911 we didn't have the kind of telco support we have today (or recently had).
Glenn, you mention that telcos cooperated with the government pre-911. I don't have the experience to challenge that. In any case I expect that you would agree that quantifying the level of cooperation pre and post 911 (pre and post telco immunity) is a subjective call. I expect that you would also agree that when private organizations are given immunity from liability, their behavior is affected. I think that to argue that we will get the same level of support from telcos without that immunity is preposterous.
Arne: you mention that call signaling information contains the CalledPartyAddress. Sounds like you have an understanding of the protocols used by telcos. However, to what extent does the CalledPartyAddress identify the destination? What if all we get is a destination telephone number, to a cell phone. Can we determine the location of the destination w/o the help of the telcos? I don't think you've refuted my suggestion. A number is not necessarily a physical destination, it's not a person.