Posted on 05/11/2006 12:30:13 PM PDT by demlosers
Washington is agog today with the disclosure that appeared in USA Today that Verizon, AT&T and Bell South have been providing domestic phone call information to the National Security Agency on millions of residential and business phone calls made by Americans.
It’s all part of the spy agency’s quest to create a huge database of caller information it could data mine in order to find patterns that might reveal terrorist communications. But it has raised enormous privacy concerns in the minds of many.
The USA Today report, coming after last year’s disclosure in the New York Times of the NSA’s warrantless electronic surveillance of phone calls it deems to be connected to terrorism ginned up the debate over how far is too far in the Bush administration’s efforts to protect the American people from al Qaeda and other terrorists.
The newspaper’s disclosure modified a lot of plans today. President Bush, on his way to give a commencement address in Biloxi, Miss., stopped in the White House’s Diplomatic Reception Room to deliver a brief statement to the press.
By the way, the president’s rapid response was remarkable. When other bad news has hit, say Dubai Ports World or the initial revelations of the NSA surveillance last December, there was a noticeable lag which allowed White House critics to define the debate.
The president’s quickness before today might be attributable to Tony Snow, the new press secretary. Or it could be that the White House is so nervous about the president’s ever lower poll ratings that he and his advisors felt he had to speak and quickly.
PRESIDENT BUSH: After September the 11th, I vowed to the American people that our government would do everything within the law to protect them against another terrorist attack. As part of this effort, I authorized
(Excerpt) Read more at newsblogs.chicagotribune.com ...
Does that make it TRUE?
No names are attached to phone numbers here. There aren't enough NSA or Service members in the world to listen to the content of the billions of daily calls. Hell it would take 3 full time snoopers just to monitor my niece's daily cellphone activity. Get a grip people, take a pill. Paranoia is not good for your blood pressure. (:^*)
-PJ
PJ:
And that it the test, in my opinion. The Bill of Rights has to interpreted from a political point of view. If, right now, our representatives decide that the Fourth Amendment means this and not that, that is what we and the courts should accept.
Since Congress has been involved in some way, then the process has been gone through. But it is a damned dangerous precedent which any Conservative wary of big government should think really hard about.
McVey
Gawd, now you're nitpicking the truth of the story? Even though it is not contested by anyone else?
I never realized the Constitution would be done in by fire ant bites such as these.
I kinda like this idea.
Also please read this thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1630627/posts
I've been talking in code for years. They listen to my calls and just scratch their heads.
You are hysterical.
Who made you use a phone? I have offered you suggestions to address this if you don't like it. It means you want government fiat to override the decisions of a private for profit business to bend to your ideas of entitlements you feel you deserve.
As I'm sure it did 15 years ago or 25 years ago or 50 years ago or whenever this program was initiated.
Traffic Analysis is offensive apparently only during Republican administrations.
My god, I cannot believe what I am hearing. Hey, why not just pre-install government wiretaps on every phone if that is your attitude - "Who made you use a phone?"
I have to leave this thread before I completely violate every FR posting guideline at the level of utter disregard for basic concepts of liberty and privacy that I am seeing posted.
Sorry, misread your post.
there is no broad constitutional right to privacy as you suggest. your home, your person, your conversations - are protected. the IRS collects far more "personal" data regarding your financial transactions - all apparently without violating the 4th amendment (no legislative statute can remove one of your constitutional protections, the Kelo decision on eminent doman aside for now) - then this list of dialed numbers the NSA collects.
Calling records to the police requires a warrant. And credit card companies cannot arrest people.
ou think you have a right to privacy when you use the phone companies lines?
Uh, yes, from the government. That is why proble cause is required to tap a phone.
Unghhhh - the hits just keep on coming. It's like people have not just forgotten the notion of basic liberty, but now point and make a weird noise at anyone stating such, like in Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
Why you object to this is quite irrational. It does not violate the Bill of Rights.
You are not being searched in any way. The service company would be the one being subjected to illegal search if this were the case, not you.
Echelon was, and is, perfectly LEGAL!!!
Like the foreign NSA surveillance, the American public is going to accrue this to Bush's favor.
Uh, yes, from the government. That is why proble cause is required to tap a phone.
I think you are confused here, calling records aren't phone taps.
You obviously are not versed in the finer aspects of Echelon or CALAE. Might want to do some reading.
GAWD, THAT IS STILL A SUBPEONA. There must be some probable cause. There was NONE involved here. WHY IS THAT SO DAMNED HARD FOR YOU FOLKS TO REALIZE? Why in the hell can you not see the danger of government being able to obtain private calling data without any kind of due process?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.