[dirtboy]

Those companies could sell that data if they choose to do so.

Direct marketers don't have powers of arrest, last I checked. That is the key difference.

[liberty_lvr]

While I don't agree with your position on this particular matter, that is an outstanding and very important point. I'm glad you brought this very critical distinction to the table.

However, there are still limits on how that power may be executed. Those barriers have not yet been torn down. And remember BJ used Echelon against his political enemies. The current administration has an equal number, if not more, of enemies and I have yet to see ANYTHING suggesting any of this information has been used in that matter.

It appears we're sliding back up that slippery slope.

[Mad Dawg]

But couldn't they sell the data to those who DO have the power of arrest? (Besides, I'd rather be arrested than get another telephone solicitation, but I guess that's another issue.)

[CharlesWayneCT]

I think his point was that, just as the government can pay an informant to talk to you, and bring back the information from that "private" conversation, the government can ask to see, or to purchase, the phone company information.

The record of your phone calls does not belong to you, it is not your property, it belongs to the phone company.

The contents of the calls belong to you. But in a time of war, govenment has asserted the right to monitor communications, especially out-of-country communications.

Benedict Arnold was discovered because the government was intercepting messages going out-of-country.

That program, while I support it, was to me a greater invasion of privacy than this trivial phone collection project.

The NSA has been doing a lot worse than this, for it's entire existance. You don't know about THOSE things because leaking them wouldn't hurt George Bush. The people leaking aren't trying to save your freedom, they are trying to destroy a president and win back power for the democrats.