[Mikey_1962]

Common Sense of the American People...

[Coop]

I really don't think the motivation of this media nonsense was to end the surveillance (although that would be a nice bonus for the libs). I think it's a blatant attempt to delay or defeat the nomination of Gen. Hayden for CIA Director.

[digger48]

The Democrat knee-jerk stategery strikes again......

[bobsunshine]

It really is sad when the MSM can distort the truth in order to control the direction of the government.

The article in the USA Today is not new, in fact is was printed in Feb. 2006 but didn't get any attention. Done by the same Leslie Curley, who donated to the DNC:

Telecoms let NSA spy on calls
AT& T, MCI, Sprint cooperate with warrantless surveillance, execs say

By Leslie Cauley and John Diamond
USA TODAY

The National Security Agency has secured the cooperation of large telecommunications companies, including AT&T, MCI and Sprint, in its efforts to eavesdrop without warrants on international calls by suspected terrorists, according to seven telecommunications executives.

The executives asked to remain anonymous because of the sensitivity of the program.

AT&T, MCI and Sprint had no official comment.

The Senate Judiciary Committee begins hearings today on the government's program of monitoring international calls and e-mails of a domestic target without first obtaining court orders.

At issue: whether the surveillance is legal, as President Bush insists, or an illegal intrusion into the lives of Americans, as lawsuits by civil libertarians contend. In domestic investigations, phone companies routinely require court orders before cooperating.

A majority of international calls are handled by long-distance carriers AT&T, MCI and Sprint. All of the carriers own “gateway” switches capable of routing calls to points around the globe.

AT&T was recently acquired by SBC Communications, which has since adopted the AT&T name as its corporate moniker. MCI, formerly known as WorldCom, was recently acquired by Verizon. Sprint recently merged with Nextel....

...The Times and The Washington Post have said thousands have had communications intercepted.

The two intelligence officials said that number has been whittled down to about 600 people in the United States who have been targeted for repeated surveillance since the Sept. 11 attacks.

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20060206/1a_lede06.art.htm

H/T Macsmind for finding this along with the donation:

CAULEY, LESLIE
BROOKLYN,NY 11201
WRITER AND JOURNALIST
6/30/2003
$2,000
Gephardt, Richard A

And this from Macsmind:

By the way....a bit of bad news though for the sources of the USA Today article, per a tip, your identities are known to those who care.

Opps!

UPDATE II: On above. I have an source email which details where the leak on the story originated.

[Wurlitzer]

Well the treason, abortion, gay rights party agrees with the TSA doing warrant-less searches so I don't understand why they have their knickers in a twist over keeping track of phone numbers. Seems to me, they were quick to point their fingers at the administration for not connecting the dots prior to 9/11 (even though much of that was caused by Gerlach/Clinton). No the treason party does not want the government to even collect the dots let alone connect them.

It must be great to belong to the treason party as the MSM gives you cover no matter which side of an issue you take even if it is both sides.

[Jack of all Trades]

Isn't it more than a little naive to assume that telecomunications aren't broadly monitored? The foundation was laid back in '94 by CALEA (Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement), which was sponsored by Leahy. Massive, high speed, distributed data acquisition does not happen as an afterthought. It's been built in for decades. Did anyone think wouldn't be used?

[alnick]

the secret program, disclosed Thursday by USA Today

Thursday? I haven't been keeping up lately, but isn't this old news?

[Denver Ditdat]

63 percent in this ABC News/Washington Post poll say...

I thought that we didn't believe lying polls, especially from a source such as ABC/WaPo. ;-)

[mtntop3]

Are we to understand that the Democrats, if in power, would not have a national telephone database?

That they, for instance, would not want immediate access to calls made by a person utilizing a cellphone to set off a murderous explosion in a subway?

That they would not want to monitor international calls by terrorists and suspects to persons and groups in the U.S.?

It would be suicidal to place our security, our families' security and that of the nation in the hands of the present generation of Democrats.

[Dazedcat]

More like the American people as sheeple. So this is one of the dreaded MSM polls that we're to believe in....because it helps validate a republican administrations' orders.

Ok, now I'm clear, thanks ever so much. The founding fathers are rolling in their collective graves, but my government is keeping me safe and secure. They're STILL letting anybody in, but hey, safety is so precious.

God help us all.

[Beagle8U]

Is nice to see some articles posted that aren't Bush/Bash.

Great post.

[HitmanLV]

Here's the thing - the admin has to get on the ball with communication and keep the public on their side of this issue. In the past, instinctively the American public has sided with the admin, only for that support to be eroded by inattention to the message.

Dubya has shown he can't stick to the 2003 'freedom is on the march' and squinting script and expect to do well.

[MissAmericanPie]

ABC polls are so amusing given their audience. But people who call their congressmen, the White House, and Senate alot to compain about issues may find it uncomfortable at some future date.

[mewzilla]

Dialing and the Democrats

[Almondjoy]

Maybe....

But the 2nd percentage doesn't make a lot of since. The American public also approved by a wide margin the NSA deal.

It seems to me that there is about 10% of people that approve of individual tactics of the administration but have been scared into paranoia that Bush somehow is intruding or not doing enough of something(they don't know what it is) to make their privacy rights more secure.