Of course, marketing companies can't throw you in jail...

I must admit: this is the kind of stuff I am pleased to have leaked--because the administration appears more than willing to use the powers of the federal government against innocent citizens, and that is problematic.

And I don't think it is the government's business to know who I am calling.

Bush has run out of rope on the "we only target terrorists" excuse. This trampling of the Consititution has to end.

Fourth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Bush apologists - please show me the probably cause for compiling data on my Grandmothers calls to her children and grandchildren.

From how I understand the program the data tracked (and it's just "data" - not the conversation itself. This is a different program, from the descriptions, than the overseas program) is number calling from and number calling to. Thus, phone number A called numbers B C and D. Kind of like this site - http://www.touchgraph.com/TGGoogleBrowser.html . They make relational graphs of sites. But that doesn't tell you much about what's on the site, except that they link to other sites. So if you have phone number A linked to phone number D who links to O and S and AF and then a known "-istan" number, than if it linked back upon itself.

Crap, wrong key. What I was trying to say is that if you find a chain that links to a known "-istan" number, that's "more interesting" from an intellegence point of view than a closed loop calling chain that doesn't link outside anywhere. But, until you run the connections, you don't know where it's going. Or who, if it's an automated process.

We need to call a grand jury and call Leslie Cauley to find out who leaked this information, and then they should be charged and prosecuted.

Bush apologists - please show me the probably cause for compiling data on my Grandmothers calls to her children and grandchildren.

While not a Bush apologists - you're asking the wrong questions.

The phone lines and air waves are not your private property, so the fourth amendment doesn't protect the fact that you use them or who you use them with. It's the same as if the police parked on the street and watched your coming and going. The police can even follow you on public streets and into any public location to see where you go, what you do, and who you meet, all without a warrant. The fourth amendment not only doesn't protect individuals from such observation, but requires it in most cases to prove probable cause before a warrant can be issued.

It's obvious the liberal MSM wants to build this into a case of warrantless searches, but it's no such thing.

NSA has been building it's data banks on electronic signals for many years. It didn't start with 911 or with Bush. Virtually every phone call foriegn and domestic that goes over the airwaves is picked up by NSA and filtered through it's computer system.

There is no way for them to JUST pick up foriegn originated signals. Get used to it, it isn't going to stop and if it did we would lose over 75% of our intelligence gathering capability.

I reiterate: This is not new it was going on under Clinton, Bush 1, Reagan etc. As the technology has improved, the NSA has been able to cast a wider net.

I for one, welcome it. I'm glad one of our intelligence agencies is doing it's job.
Chuck

Oh, and by the way, the Intelligence Committees of both houses are fully aware of NSA's activities and have been for years. When you hear one of them badmouthing the program, he is lying through his teeth.
Chuck

Qwest is our phone company so NSA doesn't have a list of people we called. Of course they do have records of family and friends who called us. I must admit I am surprised at the "nothing to see here move along" attitudes. I guess "privacy" is not that big an issue for you. I think you will find that many who have given our President the benefit of the doubt will say
"well this goes to far."

A couple of simple yes or no poll questions. Do you consider it a private matter whom you call? Do you believe it is reasonable for our Government to maintain a log of every phone call you make.

The phone lines and air waves are not your private property, so the fourth amendment doesn't protect the fact that you use them or who you use them with.

Under that same interpetation our emails, credit card transactions, bank records, amazon.com orders - any electronic data transmitted over the air or via the internet would not be protected, true?

Interesting, and scary. I suspect this will make a lot of law-abiding upright U.S. citizens concerned. The question is - will they believe George (WMD) Bush's explanation of the need for this? Or his promise that the it won't be abused?

Maybe it's time for the administration to back off and give Al Qaeda a crack at Los Angeles. It would shut these whiners up for a few years and with luck wipe Hollywood liberals off the map.

Another act of treason by the Liberal Media ,the extended wing of the democrat party. Until we enforce the laws on the books and execute the Traitors the deomcrat party will continue to break every law in their quest to bring down President Bush and con their way back into power.

Democrats are lying despicable retards. Their infantile mentality and malicious lies are the direct result of their being incompetant utter failures. You who desparately talk out your ass in attempts to Clintonize President Bush and the Republican Party can go to hell. You morons can't win anything by way of an honest election so you must lie and create chaos and organize mass protests as to create intimidation as a tool to bully your failed agenda onto the Majority in this Country.

You shit for brains can cry all you want about President Bush , he hasn't done a damn thing wrong. You are Hypocrites and liars couldn't tell the truth if your life depended on it. They "MAY" be listening. "MAY". You people are so stupid it's disgusting. All you dummies who use AOL for your internet access are having every single thing you do and every sight you go to documented so their can target market your dumbasses yet not one peep from the cry babies who falsely accuse and complain about their privacy being invaded by the Administration,STFU! Hey idiots. What do you think your phone bill is that you get at the end of the month. Continue to talk out your ass like your failed Democrat masters. Keep repeating your desparate and pathetic buss words like "millions of innocent Americans" "Ease Dropping" "wire tapping" while ignoring the facts and acts of "Treason" , "Sedition" amd "Sabotage" you shameless bunch of jackals and MINORITY SORE LOSERS. Suck on those facts you fools.

I wonder when someone will leak to the MSM the fact that the government has been collecting and tracking everyone's individual financial information for at least the last six years. Bush has not stopped the government from gathering individual financial information from banks, employers, and stock brokers. In fact they even require that U.S. residents provide the government with detailed financial records each year including how much money they made, how many children they have, the social security numbers for everyone in their family, how much they gave to charities and how much they paid in interest on their home mortgage. And the government is collecting all this data without warrants. The government will even prosecute you if you fail to provide this information.

For those just crawling out from under a rock this is satire, but the question it raises is serious. Why are the highly invasive tactics of the IRS widely accepted, while NSA's phone usage gathering creates an uproar in the MSM?

I vowed to the American people that our government would do everything within the law to protect them against another terrorist attack Bush

We can have this argument over and over again, but FISA specifically states the original domestic surveillance program, as it is, is illegal, or not within the law. Like it or not, the law says the President must get a warrant. If you don't like that, change the law, but that doesn't excuse the President for knowingly, willfully, repeatedly, and continually breaking the law in the first place.

These are exactly the kind of communications that are intercepted by the NSA under the terrorist surveillance program that has been widely denounced by Democrats. John from PL

Strawman. No Democrat has denounced the original program itself. Democrats (mostly Feingold and a handful of others) are opposed to the President not getting warrants before utilizing the program. Although I hope plenty denounce this new program we just learned about.

Repubs excuses are getting weaker and weaker as we learn more about the NSA's programs. Hell, they actually might be tapping everybodys' calls and Bush apologists would come up for an excuse for that too.

"Maybe it's time for the administration to back off and give Al Qaeda a crack at Los Angeles. It would shut these whiners up for a few years and with luck wipe Hollywood liberals off the map.
Posted by: John S at May 11, 2006 05:43 PM"

I welcome this 100%, just give me a couple minutes to pack my bags. Why stop in LA? The whole bunch of cockroaches should be exterminated period. And no it's not because I don't agree with your proven and failed sick agenda, it's your diseased mentality ,criminal acts of treason and sinister acts of stupidity destroying this Country and putting our lives in danger. If you want to under Communism and worship the trash you call the democrat leadership , get the F**k out of the United States and go disgrace some other piece of dirt on this planet. It's unbelievable how a bunch of sore losers and criminals can become so unhinged and completely in denial that this whole bogus outrage is their own fault. Your most corrupt and loved leader Bill J Clinton by his criminal acts and complete failure as our President and your inability to hold him accountable WAS YOUR CHOICE AND YOUR FAULT. Now STFU and live with it.

Under that same interpetation our emails, credit card transactions, bank records, amazon.com orders - any electronic data transmitted over the air or via the internet would not be protected, true?

You mean to tell me you thought your bank records were protected by the fourth amendment? The IRS doesn't even need to spy on you, your bank, your employer and others send data about you to the government all the time. Every credit card company sends data about you to the private credit agencies. Amazon.com likely sells information about what kind of books or merchandize you buy, and anyone who thinks e-mail is private is living in some other world.

So now there's a database of what phone numbers called what phone numbers and when. Some folks are questioning what value that has. Well any parent might find it useful to know what numbers their kids were calling or what numbers were calling their home. Same for a business. If you suspected your spouse was cheating, you would also find that information interesting. Liberals are all for open government, so I assume you support making the database public.

Whether it is legal or illegal I still have'nt heard of a single case of anyone being violated or damaged by this spying program? I suppose when someone is actually found to have been violated, the government would then have to defend itself.
Personally the IRS sickens Me more.

Well, virgo, I think those Iman's and their pals in Lodi think they were harmed by domestic surveilance...

AT&T... Does that include Cingular after their merger?

Are cell phones more or less private?

Rob in LA,
I just want to weigh in here before you rupture that aneurysm. I myself question this broad-based monitoring of phone call destinations and I voted for Bush twice and consider myself (at times) an apologist for the President. My problem with homeland security and intelligence is the inability of the government to "clean its administrative house first". Secure borders, reforming the CIA, sharing of intelligence among security agencies, etc. seems to be an impossible task for this administration. Yet, it seems to have contributed most to the intelligence break down that led to 911. I don't care if the phone company knows what numbers I called or what numbers called me. It could be important to ME at some point. But I don't see a compelling reason that the phone companies HAVE to feel they need to give this info to the government? They are threatened with losing a government contract? Is that extortion? The intelligence community in the US is a mess. And more and more information is being dumped into it. I voted for this President twice but his constant mantra of "secrecy in the interest of security" is running a bit thin with me at this time.

We can have this argument over and over again, but FISA specifically states the original domestic surveillance program, as it is, is illegal, or not within the law. Like it or not, the law says the President must get a warrant. If you don't like that, change the law, but that doesn't excuse the President for knowingly, willfully, repeatedly, and continually breaking the law in the first place.

No enacted law can override the Constitution, thus the FISA law cannot restrict the President's Article II powers. Every court case touching this subject as found that the authority to use military power includes intelligence gathering. Article II specifically gives the power of commander in chief to the President and to the President alone. Whatever restrictions Congress may have placeed on the use of the President's power were removed when Congress specifically authorized the President to use all means necessary to conduct the war on terrorism. The fact that members of Congress didn't understand that that authorization included surveillance is irrelevant as many of them have no idea what are in the bills they vote for.

With domestic warrants, one party to most phone calls is being wiretapped without a warrant. You may be perfectly innocent, but when you call a pawn shop that's being wiretapped, your conversation is being intercepted even though there's no warrant to wiretap you. The legal authority to wiretap the pawn shop covers anyone who calls the shop or who the shop calls. It's the same with the NSA program. There's no argument that NSA has the legal authority to wiretap offshore phones, and that authority covers whoever calls the offshore phone or whoever is call from that phone. The NSA program is legal. The President's Article II authority makes it legal. The FISA law is moot because of the authorization Congress gave to the President. It's irrelevant that there are a few dimwits in Congress that don't know what they are doing when they pass such measures. Maybe you shouldn't vote for Congressmen and Congresswomen who have admitted to being incompetent in such matters.

comment by sean nyc/aa :

Being a bitter liar and sore loser because the Democrat Party is full of shit and the majority of the Country know it, doesn't excuse you for knowingly, willfully, continually and repeatedly telling there lies and breaking the law while shamelessly hiding behind "it's your freedom of speach."

What is it exactly that compells you to support criminal liars and complete failures?

Are you a Communist or what ?

You feel like your on their team when all you do is sit on the bench. You just want to win for the sake of winning regardless of what little if anything at all you hope to gain by their having more power?

I can not understand the willing stupidity of ignoring and denying the truth and the facts about what the democrat party is and does. After I made a conscience decision to inform myself of the facts and the truth there was no way I was going to continue my 15 plus years of blindly voting for the democrats. No way in hell. Maybe it's because I never gave a shit about politics nor stood up and declared I'm a proud registered democrat. I don't feel the need to have stand up and declare I'm a proud republican . Bottom line is I'm a proud AMERICAN disgusted with the cretans in the democrat party and those that support them and then lie as to why they support them or just repeat the lies as to what the Democrat Party claims they are for. Democrats in office are frauds , the MAJORITY OF THEM. And since no one in their party has the balls to stand up to the bunch of phonies since Zell Miller I have no problem calling the whole lot of them liars and ignorant who make it a point to actively particpate in their perpetual fraud.

It sounds from the USA Today description that these are CDRs (Call Detail Records) that are being analyzed by the NSA. There are standard formats for these ASCII files and they are generated by both the originating and terminating phone switches. They contain, among other things, the A-number (calling), the (B-number) or called party, time, duration and sometimes other information such as subscriber features or call failure data, etc. They do not contain the subscriber's name, adddress or whatever.

These files are maintained by the operators for billing purposes among other things such as network dimensioning and optimization. Every carrier that sells local, long distance, VoIP, mobile or prepaid is required by law to maintain such files. The loss of even fifteen minutes of these files will cause an operator to incur huge fines from the FCC. I do not know what the retention time is for such data by the operators. I suspect that it is many "years" rather than several "months" or one year or whatever.

This is nothing new by the way, and a recent example of this was the FBI using these CDR and call performance data to try to apprehend the D.C. snipers. This didn't work, of course, but it was done.

If the NSA mulls over scads of billing data in order to do their job - fine by me. As correctly stated above I have no implied privacy on a telephone network that I do not own. It's essentially the same as yelling down the street to your neighbor.

Drew E.,

*No and **Yes

* No, because I have no knowledge of where the voice circuit resides when I make a call. It could be in the hands of 5 or more carriers' transmission equipment for all I know and may not run on the same path twice. For a long distance call from my house for example, I only own the phone, the phone line to the wall, what runs through my ceiling to and only half of the box on the outside of my house - that's it. Actually, I don't even own the dial tone when I pick up the phone, it comes from the central telephone office.

** Yes, because I think that a Government agency needs to have the capacity to warehouse this data, and query for trends if they need to. I happen to believe that it's just another essential tool for the NSA.

However, while I don't agree with opponents of this I must say that once again, Bush has done a dismal job of explaining this to his boss (me and you, fellow American). He's never done a good job at this and it doesn't even surprise me anymore. When will these politicians learn that "trust me" simply does not work?

That said - the USA Today, today did an even worse job of an explanation when they leaked this to the entire world.

Did someone say "dimwits in Congress"?

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said he would call the phone companies to appear before the panel in pursuit of what had transpired.

"We're really flying blind on the subject and that's not a good way to approach the Fourth Amendment and the constitutional issues involving privacy," Specter said of domestic surveillance in general.

When the Republican Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman admits to "flying blind" on domestic spying you have to wonder just who knows what.

Hi Brad,

AT&T... Does that include Cingular after their merger?

I'm assuming that it does, because AT&T is now the new [old] brand for SBC and/or Bell South. Right now they are in the middle of a bunch of branding swaps again.

Are cell phones more or less private?

The same - all calls, mobile or fixed wireline or Internet calls and even text and multimedia messages generate the similar types of CDRs.

No enacted law can override the Constitution, thus the FISA law cannot restrict the President's Article II powers...
Whatever restrictions Congress may have placeed on the use of the President's power were removed when Congress specifically authorized the President to use all means necessary to conduct the war on terrorism.

Two things about this statement:
1)I've said this before but Article I, Sec 8 says the following -
"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
Therefore, Congress has the Constitutional authority to define the scope of all Constitutional powers. This power does not give Congress the authority to remove a power entirely, but they can say what methods are legal or illegal to use.
2) Regarding the AUMF, even AG Gonzalez said this excuse came after the fact to try and come up with an excuse, it was not among the primary reasons for the program(s) from the start. Additionally, FISA was crafted during the Cold War, so being at war does not nullify its legality.

The bigger question regarding these programs are not whether they are legal or not, but the fact that the President is claiming he can disregard Federal law in the name of national security. This is a radical and completely un-American position.

It's Arlen Specter, he's flying blind on most things most of the time these days.

But seriously I'd like any of the detractors to tell us just how the hell we're supposed to do track down cells and eliminate them.

Enough with the criticism, how about some solutions.

I think to be a Democrat the first requirement is appalling stupidity about how the real world works, or a basic understabding of history or law.

While I could provide a dozen or so logical reasons why the concerns of the Democrats are incorrect on this issue, I'll settle for just one.

FISA is of highly debatable legality and applicability regarding the war on terror. For you Democrats out there, I'll explain this simply and type very slooowly - congress cannot pass a law that negates a power granted to another branch of government by the constitution. For example, congress CANNOT pass a law saying the President can no longer veto legislation - this power is specifically enumerated in the constitution and cannot be taken away by a simple act of congress.

With me so far? The President is commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. As such he commands our intelligence services (that is why a general of the Air Force is currently in charge of the NSA). If the intelligence services are collecting information about a foreign power (islamoterrorists qualify) then Congress has no say whatsoever in this activity or how it is conducted. It is not protected by the constitution. This has been upheld for decades by numerous supreme court decisions (actually I think the first such decision occurred during the Civil War).

The power of the President to command the armed forces in a conflict is absolute. It may surprise you to know this, but our armed forces in Iraq don't need a warrant to kick in the door of a suspected terrorist stronghold. The president also does not need a warrant to intercept phone calls of terrorist agents in the U.S. It is a well acknowledged part of his war fighting powers.

The fact is that the phone numbers you call are not "secret" and never have been. Ever look at your cell phone bill? You think the phone company doesn't keep that list forever? Ah yes, but you trust the large corporation to look out for your best interest, but not them evil folks at the government.

This system in question simply uses a computer to filter the numbers you are calling. Calling a gun shop, Pakistan, and flight schools might get you noticed. At that point a warrant is obtained. Note that the warrant is only obtained