White House Defends NSA Collection Of Phone Records

[dipsydoodle]

Source: Huffington Post

WASHINGTON -- The White House on Thursday defended the National Security Agency's need to collect telephone records of U.S. citizens, calling such information "a critical tool in protecting the nation from terrorist threats."

While defending the practice, a senior Obama administration official did not confirm a newspaper report that the NSA has been collecting the telephone records of millions of U.S. customers of Verizon under a top secret court order.

The order was granted by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on April 25 and is good until July 19, Britain's Guardian newspaper reported Wednesday. The order requires Verizon, one of the nation's largest telecommunications companies, on an "ongoing, daily basis" to give the NSA information on all telephone calls in its systems, both within the U.S. and between the U.S. and other countries.

The newspaper said the document, a copy of which it had obtained, shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of U.S. citizens were being collected indiscriminately and in bulk, regardless of whether they were suspected of any wrongdoing.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/06/nsa-verizon-phone-records-white-house_n_3395423.html

[GoneFishin]

1. Remember TIA? This is the tip of the iceberg. Expect same with credit card and checking

records.

I read an account of a woman who returned an item to a well-known, low priced department store without a receipt. She had used her credit/debit card for the purchase. They confirmed that she bought the item by pulling up a security video showing her at the register making the purchase. Buying contraceptions? Smile. Buying prescription drugs? Smile. Buying ammo? Smile.

It is common on TV shows (albeit fictional) for detectives to electronically cross reference phone records, ATM security footage, credit card transactions, cell phone pings, etc.. If the writers of these shows can think up these scenarios then it is already being done in real life, or it is in the works.

[PSPS]

15. A lot of white house pronouncements smell like Poindexter's "Truth Maintenance" too.

[Kelvin Mace]

2. "a critical tool in protecting the nation from terrorist threats."

BULLSHIT!

This is just a transition of the U.S. from de factor police state, to de jur police state.

The US government had every bit of intelligence needed to stop the 9/11 attacks, but BushCo simply chose to ignore the people telling them there was a problem. Now Obama has decides he loves the Imperial presidency as much as Bush did and wants to codify it.

We defeated the Soviet Union, a country with thousands of REAL atomic weapons without the "Patriot
Act and its ilk. Now they tell us they can't handle a threat dreamed up by people with a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the resources the Soviets had without pissing all over the Constitution.

Folks, the game is over. The bad guys have emerged victorious.

[PDittie]

7. Nailed it.

[clarice]

52. +1.nt

[blkmusclmachine]

86. They're working on putting cameras and microphones into your TV sets.

Like license-plate reading cameras at every intersection and 30,000 drones patrolling your neighborhood ISN'T ENOUGH.

Who do they think they'll be looking for?

I've seen the enemy, and he is US.

[forestpath]

94. +1000

[hobbit709]

3. I(s there ANYTHING from the Bush era that the current administration won't defend?

[rhett o rick]

6. Give me a minute........ NO

[JaneyVee]

17. Torture.

[hobbit709]

19. Gitmo

[JaneyVee]

22. Obama hasn't sent a single person there.

[hobbit709]

25. And the ones that are kept there are treated according to International Law?

[JaneyVee]

37. No. But it will take alot of money to close it, and congress controls the spending.

Obama tried to close Gitmo and it failed in the senate 90-6.

[hobbit709]

43. That still doesn't excuse the treatment of the prisoners

[daleanime]

45. And it costs nothing to keep it open?

[JaneyVee]

49. It costs ALOT to keep it open. But the Republican controlled congress absolutely adores Gitmo.

They will pay to keep it open, not to close it down.

[dbackjon]

84. Is there anything Obama does that you DON'T defend?

[JaneyVee]

99. Huh? I think you have me confused with someone else. Nice try.

[Kelvin Mace]

75. Gosh, who new turning a key and opening a lock costs so much?

Yeah, simplistic, I know, but I fail to see the huge expense.

Also, since when is the Imperial President, who can wage war wherever he wishes, spy on whoever he wants, and kill whomever he chooses, beholden to the senate?

[JaneyVee]

106. Besides the expense, which I believe is well worth it, GOP congress LOVES Gitmo.

[rhett o rick]

97. Ah yes, the "Obama is helpless" argument. I wish George Bush would have been that helpless. nm

[JaneyVee]

100. Where did I say he's helpless? I said congress controls spending. Is that true or false?

[rhett o rick]

103. And why did you bother to tell us something that is obvious? Were you making an implication? nm

[JaneyVee]

104. Obviously it wasn't so obvious. You'd be surprised at how many people think he has a magic wand.

[rhett o rick]

108. I believe the President of the USofA has a whole lot more power

than some that try to use his "helplessness" as an excuse for his actions or lack of.

[JaneyVee]

110. According to what section of the Constitution?

[rhett o rick]

112. Good grief. You are sticking by the argument that the President has no power. Cant argue with

that mind-set.

[JaneyVee]

114. No need to argue. It's called a conversation, but if you're done then I guess I'm done. Oh well.

[rhett o rick]

115. Yes I think we've come to an impasse. And arguing isnt bad. It's what Democrats do. nm

[JaneyVee]

117. So my question remains unanswered I guess.

[rhett o rick]

118. Yeah. Using questions to make a point isnt the best method. Try stating your argument as a

statement. No offense intended but insinuation by question is what Fox News does. "Is Barack Obama a Muslim?"

Just sayin.

Have a good evening.

[Kelvin Mace]

74. Nah, he just assassinates them with drones now

Also, he isn't letting anyone out either, including the dozens of people deemed completely innocent by the FBI/CIA/DoJ.

[JaneyVee]

101. True.

[rhett o rick]

95. So that gets him off the hook for any torture that is happening now? Wow, to what lengths will

you go to rationalize?

[JaneyVee]

102. What am I rationalizing? All I did was make a factual statement.

[rhett o rick]

105. Plezzzzz. Your "factual statement" was wrought with implication. Plezz. nm

[JaneyVee]

109. I don't get what you're saying. Are you disagreeing with the statement I made?

[rhett o rick]

111. Hell no. But why did you make such a statement? Were you implying that Pres Obama was

powerless to get the prisoners out of Gitmo? In a time of war, the CIC cant have prisoners moved?

Besides this is a complete distraction from the main question of whether or not Pres Obama supports torture. Many believe that the prisoners in Gitmo are being tortured. But the Obama apologists, with eyes closed and fingers in ears, are saying over and over, "NO NO it cant be true"

For some rationalization is the key to happiness. Are you happy?

[JaneyVee]

113. My statement was that he is powerless on closing Gitmo. You need money, congress has it.

Not only does congress have it, but GOP congress loves Gitmo. Also, it seems no country wants the refugees. So he isn't 100% "powerless", but it also isn't as simple as just turning the key.

[Texano78704]

50. Warrantless wiretapping

Bushco didn't bother with them.

[RKP5637]

53. Changed the names, but business as usual. n/t

[marshall]

73. Eventually we'll have to start calling it the "Obama era"

That may happen after he is out of office and we have a new President in approximately three years. But for good or bad, Obama will have to stand on his own record.

[forestpath]

96. That's Obama's idea of "moving forward." It's like Bush never left.

[leveymg]

4. TIA never died. It morphed into an operational NSA program, Thin Thread, and this is part of it.

It now involves universal collection and storage of all email, phone, and other electronic communications inside the U.S. See, http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022926705#post4

Wake up. It happened here.

[rhett o rick]

5. "a critical tool in protecting the nation from terrorist threats." I feel much better.

Anyone see how the apologists are spinning this? I cant see because I have them on ignore.

[GoneFishin]

8. Yeah. "If you haven't done anything wrong blah blah" and "My life is so boring who cares

if anyone is listening".

[rhett o rick]

93. LOL. Yeah I expected that. "If they are only brutalizing the diry hippies, I dont care."

"If they are only coming for the communists, I dont care." etc. etc. These knuckleheads are more dangerous than the actual fascists.

[GoneFishin]

39. Oh yes. And "but they don't actually record the calls themselves" [yeah right] and

"Don't come crying to me if something bad happens and we didn't give the NSA carte blanche to put video cameras in public bathroom stalls, because you never know where terrorists will meet."

[RKP5637]

56. TPTB can know everything about me 'cause I'm so perfect

and never do anything wrong. Then I ask, what happens when TPTB changes to totally evil and totalitarian ... and I get a blank stare.
Same line of delusional thinking.

[ctsnowman]

59. There are plenty.

I am trying to avoid ignore but may have to use it. What amazes me is that even if they are OK with this invasion of privacy, how can we justify cutting SS (serious talk so far) and other liberal programs to pay for this beast?

This is becoming a New Deal... dealt from a stacked deck.

[treestar]

9. What records?

They don't tape calls, so it has to be just the fact of call-making.

If it is allowed under the law, then there's no complaint except for those affected. They can take it to court.

We let these laws pass after 911 (or maybe this takes place under pre-911 laws, who knows). 80% cheered Bush on in these matters at the time.

[muriel_volestrangler]

11. There is an ongoing court case; remember, those affected are everyone

The court case is being brought by some AT&T customers, since it was the evidence of the equipment installed in AT&T sites that brought the potential for the mass surveillance to the public attention.

https://www.eff.org/cases/jewel

[treestar]

12. That's interesting

We could follow that case and its progress through the courts. Nah. Let's just rant and rave about it.

We know most of us aren't affected in any practical sense. What kills me is: look at the Boston Bombing. The FBI "dropped the ball." So the government is wrong, no matter what it does. Terrorist attack - government failed to prevent it. Government tries to trace phone calls made by the likes of Tamerlan - it's violating our rights.

[RC]

24. They won't pick up on the next one either

The surveillance is less about stopping terrorism than stopping us as they pull the shroud over the Constitution.

[treestar]

27. Stopping us from what?

I'm not that cynical. Or at most, think whatever politicians are in charge don't want terror attacks on their watch, as they know they will be the first one blamed.

[RC]

32. Read the Constitution and notice where they have torn holes in it.

Look at the areas where the Constitution says we have certain Rights, but they don't seem to apply to us in real life anymore. They are still pulling out pieces of what is left of our Rights. And they will continue till none are left. You don't have to be cynical, only observant.

[treestar]

33. You've got to read the case law

to know how the Constitution has been interpreted over the years. Then it may not seem so worrisome.

Either we accept terrorist attacks without blaming the government or we let the government have a way to track them down.

Terrorist attacks occur and the perpetrator is blamed for 5 minutes and then it starts on how the government should have known and found a way to stop it. That's why we have the Patriot Act.

The courts still consider these issues, so the Constitution is still functioning. Nothing is ever black and white. Except on DU.

[RC]

41. I have a better idea. A much better idea.

Stop making terrorists in the first place. Stop treating the average citizen like suspected criminals. Stop tearing up our social safety nets, so those on the bottom don't feel they need to do desperate things to survive or to defend themselves. This country is absolutely fantastic with dealing with the symptoms, while all but totally ignoring the root cause.

[treestar]

64. that's not likely

We can do that. But who makes terrorists? You're blaming everyone but the terrorist. There are terrorists and criminals and always will be. It's a balance. We don't live in Paradise.

[RC]

80. Most of we think of as modern day terrorists are made by someone killing their friends, family...

And who is doing a great job of that? Why it is us, US. The more terrorists we kill, the more collateral damage we inflict, the more terrorists we generate. And around and around we go.

[muriel_volestrangler]

26. But Tamerlan did give them some reason to think he might do something

The Russians said they suspected him. Nevertheless, this recording of all US residents' call information didn't help them find anything in that case (the only person they know he collaborated with was his brother, so calls to him would never show a suspicious pattern anyway).

So you can say this is the worst of both worlds - all the data on everyone is collected, but they still aren't able to use it to stop a bombing.

If you're OK with the NSA recording all your data, then I think you'd have to say the NSA needs public accountability. At the moment, it's internal working is hidden from review on the grounds that it's about 'state secrets'. But, when it's clear it's about all Americans' everyday activities, you need proper oversight. Individuals in the NSA can use the information for blackmail, for instance.

[treestar]

31. Then what were they to do about him?

Collect his phone calls? Tap his phone? But that would violate his privacy. Before he did anything, we don't know, so if we heard about it, we'd be outraged here, since at that point, Tamerlan had not done anything.

Corrupt government individuals could always use blackmail, no matter what their position or the technology involved. And who could they blackmail over what? Give me money or I'll tell your wife about the affair you're having? How many NSA agents really do that? I know cynicism is in fashion and cool and all, but what?

I am not actually in favor of the NSA having these records (I always simple get accused of the opposite merely for questioning the outrage) as considering both sides of the argument. These are interesting questions. We do have to balance one interest against the other. Either we accept terrorist attacks without blaming the government, or we allow the government the ability to investigate to figure out which people might have terrorist ties.

[muriel_volestrangler]

65. I agree there probably wasn't much they could have done abbout the brothers

but that's why I don't think it's worth bringing them up in this discussion - even this level of data surveillance can't pick up something like them.

Yes, corrupt individuals can use blackmail - but more open organisations, like police forces, have a public accountability that the NSA has so far evaded. Yes, the simplest form of corruption would be "give me money or I'll tell your wife about the affair you're having", but there's also blackmailing of people who look likely to commit a crime, or might have confidential business secrets that these records point to. How many NSA agents do that is a very good question (even the total number of employees is classified) - we need to show that they themselves are monitored far more closely than the normal public is - that the chain of management knows the contents of their bank accounts, records their calls (not just the data - the content), does some checking that they're not handling suspicious amounts of cash, and so on. And their management needs to be kept under surveillance in the same way.

[treestar]

72. I think the balance is there to be made though

and that the brothers are very relevant. I'm looking forward to the trial of Dzhokhar - can't wait to see the many DU outrages about the evidence they got before they Mirandized him. Even though case law allows for it. Now he's telling his mummy he didn't do it, so those confessions are going to be needed possibly. And what he's going to say that will give the outraged more violations of his privacy. Probably the same people saying the FBI dropped the ball.

I kept saying during the Bush administration that people want total safety and are willing to give up their privacy for it. So it's very interesting to see the blame that the government gets when there is a terrorist attack. It isn't 5 minutes before somebody is saying the government should have prevented it.

[cheapdate]

66. I'm with you, treestar.

The question is one of balance between two competing and legitimate needs -- public safety and civil liberties.

The question is more nuanced than some people here would recognize.

[treestar]

70. Exactly

[kelliekat44]

10. And when the next attack happens we will all be crying, "Why didn't our intel pick this up?"

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[treestar]

13. This ^^^^^^^^

The FBI dropped the ball!!!!!!!!!111

[tblue]

83. ”Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security.”

It's worth repeating.

”Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security.” - Benjamin Franklin

[treestar]

87. It's a balance

Also easier to say in the 18th century. They were fatalistic about most crimes and could defend themselves better too.

If we accepted terrorist attacks will happen and don't blame the government when they occur, then they should not be combing through who made what phone calls. But if they are going to be held responsible, there must be something they should be able to do.

I was not for the Patriot Act and still don't like it. But then I don't blame the government for not stopping Tamerlan the way most people seem to. Whatever it is, they are talking about connecting the dots, etc., and those people need to quit complaining about the government trying to get the records then.

[joelfreak]

14. Thats not the point

If they WANT to do it, they need to do it in the OPEN. Maybe a social graph of the entire US population is warranted (Its worthy of some discussion). But its the collection IN SECRET that is the problem. Things done in secret can't be kept an eye on, and we KNOW what happens when groups in law enforcement get to just do things with no oversight.

[JaneyVee]

18. Um, if it's not done in secret then it would tip off would be terrorists, who try to stay one step

ahead.

[joelfreak]

20. If you think

That any decent terrorist organization or even any good CRIMINAL thinks that the government/law enforcement is NOT watching them you have to be joking. The problem with rules like this is that its you and I that get caught up in it, the people/groups they SHOULD be watching are 5 steps ahead of this already.

[JaneyVee]

21. I sort of agree, but they actually have caught over 200 suspected terrorists here in America

with this method. Including some rightwinger not too long ago who was planning a terror attack.

[joelfreak]

30. 'Suspected Terrorists'

You can always set the bar lower. Most of the groups/people caught were people that without law enforcement help/setup wouldn't have gotten ANYWHERE NEAR actual action.

[JaneyVee]

36. True, but they were setup because of their suspicion possibly due to phone records.

Look, I'm not condoning this behavior, it's actually a strange predicament we find ourselves in, we can complain about NSA overreach, or we can complain about NSA failure if a terrorist attack occurs. But we can really only choose one. I'm not sure there is a middle ground. Maybe?

[RC]

34. All or at least most of those were sting operations, where the 'guilty' had no real way of carrying

it out without the help of the FBI.

[Pholus]

54. Yeah, heard that before cause that's what Bush said!

http://www.globalresearch.ca/bush-secrecy-policies-have-transformed-u-s-government-from-open-to-closed/8763

[cstanleytech]

68. What do you mean by more open? Surely you arent advocating

they be Open as in they publish the entire list of what numbers called what numbers? This is disturbing already but that would be even worse.

[randome]

16. You and treestar called it!

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[OnyxCollie]

63. It didn't stop the Boston bombers, did it?

[Phlem]

79. Of course not

Last edited Thu Jun 6, 2013, 02:28 PM - Edit history (1)

and they most certainly will "miss" a few so they can maintain the meme. We're fighting an idea, a word called "Terrorism" with an infinite number would be assailants calling for an infinite war.

It's not like we dropped the bomb on Japan and ended the war, nope there is no one person or country to point to. It's everyone all over the world starting with US citizens that are would be terrorists.



-p

[frylock]

91. they didn't even need to do this to prevent the first attack..

but hey, whatever it takes for you to sleep at night.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Ladin_Determined_To_Strike_in_US

[global1]

23. Maybe This Is Obama's Way Of Getting Rid Of This Once And For All.......

When Bush started all this and did this - the Repugs were behind this a 1000%. What did we hear? Oh yeah - 'well if you don't do anything wrong - you have nothing to be worried about.'

Every move that Obama makes the Repugs object to.

So maybe this is a good way to get the Repugs to back stopping all of this. Get the word out there that the Obama Administration is collecting all phone records. Get the Repugs to come out against it. Get bi-partisan support to stop it.

I wonder if this might be the intention?

[totodeinhere]

40. Of come on. Your reasoning is much too convoluted for me.

He wouldn't need to take such a roundabout way to get rid of it. One simple executive order would do.

[OnyxCollie]

62. Concern with motives is a fallacy.

The concept of interest defined as power imposes intellectual discipline
upon the observer, infuses rational order into the subject matter of politics,
and thus makes the theoretical understanding of politics possible. On the
side of the actor, it provides for rational discipline in action and creates that
astounding continuity in foreign policy which makes American, British, or
Russian foreign policy appear as an intelligible, rational continuum, by and
large consistent within itself, regardless of the different motives, preferences,
and intellectual and moral qualities of successive statesmen. A realist theory
of international politics, then, will guard against two popular fallacies:
the concern with motives and the concern with ideological preferences.

~snip~

Yet even if we had access to the real motives of statesmen, that knowledge
would help us little in understanding foreign policies, and might well
lead us astray. It is true that the knowledge of the statesman's motives may
give us one among many clues as to what the direction of his foreign policy
might be. It cannot give us, however, the one clue by which to predict his
foreign policies. History shows no exact and necessary correlation between
the quallty of motives and the quality of foreign policy. This is true in both
moral and political terms.

We cannot conclude from the good intentions of a statesman that his
foreign policies will be either morally praiseworthy or politically successful.
Judging his motives, we can say that he will not intentionally pursue
policies that are morally wrong, but we can say nothing about the probability
of their success. If we want to know the moral and political qualities
of his actions, we must know them, not his motives. How often have
statesmen been motivated by the desire to improve the world, and ended
by making it worse? And how often have they sought one goal, and ended
by achieving something they neither expected nor desired?

Morgenthau, H. (1948). Politics among nations: The struggle for power and peace (pp. 5, 6). New York: Knopf.

[Octafish]

28. Frank Church warned us in 1976.

“That capability at any time could be turned around on the American people and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter. There would be no place to hide. If this government ever became a tyranny, if a dictator ever took charge in this country, the technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back, because the most careful effort to combine together in resistance to the government, no matter how privately it was done, is within the reach of the government to know. Such is the capability of this technology.

I don’t want to see this country ever go across the bridge. I know the capability that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.” -- Sen. Frank Church (D-Idaho) liberal, progressive, World War II combat veteran

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3510598

[malthaussen]

38. And Fletcher Knebel warned us in 1965.

I find it very funny, in a train-wreck sort of way, that the first "sign of insanity" the protagonist of Night of Camp David detects in the President is the latter's "joking" proposal at the Gridiron banquet that all telephone calls in the US be tapped. Yeah, in 1965, it was "insane." In 2013, it's what's for dinner.

-- Mal

[totodeinhere]

42. Frank Church of Idaho was a great man. We really need a few more like him

right now.

[Melinda]

82. ^^^^^THIS^^^^^

I've seen so many brilliant points made in this thread... would that we had a way to recommend individual responses - yours would continually be part/parcel on my rec list. Thanks for posting this Senator Church's warning. Chillingly prescient.

[blackspade]

29. Can't say I'm shocked based on this administration's terrible record on

civil liberties.

[geek tragedy]

35. This is the data mining, right?

they sift through the data with their supercomputers, seeing what connections or patterns emerge, etc.

Thought it was well known that this was what the FISA fight was about under Bush.

[JEB]

44. Madly collecting our private information while prosecuting

those (Manning, Assange) for releasing theirs. Its going to be very difficult to wipe this slate clean.

[WovenGems]

46. NSA Upgrade

The NSA has been around for a long time. It seems to be soup du jour to call this upgrade they are doing as some kind of new police state. The NSA has never been used as evidence. They spy and if something is uncovered they notify the FBI that then does its own investigation. If the NSA was the kind of police state agency some think then gun raids would be happening daily, and they ain't. Gotta keep things in the real world as the world of over reaction is no fun and not productive.

[SamKnause]

47. Terrorists

Every citizen, or person residing in the U.S. is considered a terrorist suspect.

The government no longer works for we the people.

They have total control over we the people.

The United States government and all of it's evil offshoots; DEA, CIA, ATF, FBI, bloated militarized police depts, and the Dept. of Homeland Security are the terrorists.

It is their job to protect Wall Street, CEO's, politicians, and corporations.

The tactics they have used around the world and in other countries will now be used in the U.S.

[Brigid]

48. OK, who around here is actually naive enough to believe . . .

That no phone calls are being recorded, and that this kind of meta information can't -- and won't -- be used for nefarious purposes, in the future, if not now?

[fredamae]

51. When we give up All Freedom

to be free---then what do we have?

[thefool_wa]

55. Geroge W. Obama

Man did we get duped by this guy. No party is any different than the other. I am never voting Democrat OR Republican ever again.

This country needs real change, and it is getting more and more apparent every day that a yearly trip to the voting booth is doing nothing to change it.

[still_one]

57. This is unfortunate, but not illegal. What is even more unfortunate is much of the populous had no

problem with this when bush did it, or when the representative voted of it. The MSM was not particularly outraged either. Progressives did not like it, and still don't, no matter who the President is.

The sad truth is this country, led by the media, has double vision

[muriel_volestrangler]

67. But the NSA does claim this is illegal

Since NSA is authorized by law to collect only foreign intelligence information

http://www.nsa.gov/about/faqs/oversight.shtml

[still_one]

69. Not sure about that, with fiisa and all the other bs they did with the patriot act, I do not think

Is that straight forward, but assume it is, the same thing applies, they had no problem with it until the Democrat did it. In fact I remember very clearly how AT&T and Verizon both had no problem supplying phone data under bush, and those records were not just foreign

[BrainDrain]

58. The NSA is not used as evidence because

the charter for the NSA states that they are not allowed to spy on anyone with the CONUS. PERIOD. Law.

Thats why they are never used as evidence on cases involving US citizens with the continental borders.

BTW anyone even THINK that Verizon is the only one? ATT anybody?

[JDPriestly]

60. That practice violates First Amendment as well as Fourth Amendment rights.

Freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly are all implicated.

If you know that your government keeps or gathers information on who you call, that chills your freedom of assembly. How can independent people organize meetings or assemblies, whether political or religious or simply romantic rendez-vous without fear, without checking who they call or what they say if the government is permitted to track the calls or worse yet listen in if it wishes?

We have no freedom at all if we don't have freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly.

Tracking our phone calls is the end of our most basic freedoms.

And just what percentage of us are terrorists?

Think of how a Nixon-type (and who knows how many of those we have had since Nixon) could use that information against people who organized a campaign or had information that would stop his re-election?

Can't the Supreme Court figure that one out? And can't the Obama administration understand it?

Maybe we should go on strike and refuse to make any calls for any reason for a day or two? Maybe we should silence the internet for a day or two? Or maybe we should all get on the phone and call absurd numbers over and over for a few days? How about the local zoo? Or your husband's or wife's phone when you have unlimited calling? What if many, many
Americans just left their phones off the hook over and over? Just overwhelm their stupid spying apparatus. Would that even be possible? Would it be somehow illegal? Is my even suggesting it maybe illegal? I have no idea in this day of nosy, repressive government.

[AtheistCrusader]

61. Unsaid:

What? You're pissed about THIS? Ahahaha you have no idea...

[Orsino]

71. Millions? Every Verizon call made, every day?

That's not protecting the nation; that's fishing.

[bowens43]

76. No surprise there, Obama always comes down on the wrong side of these issues

[Phlem]

77. "a critical tool in protecting the nation from terrorist threats."

Right. Anybody else falling for this?

This the equivalent of grade school excuses. Yes, that is how they talk to us. My dog ate the jobs bill proposal.

Curious what the fan base POV is on this.



-p

[Fearless]

81. I remember when being a Democrat also meant being a democrat

This is disgusting.

[blkmusclmachine]

85. White House Defends NSA Collection Of Phone Records

Of course he does.

[marshall]

88. Thank goodness for British news sources

If not for the Guardian and other such organizations, we would know far less about what our government is doing.

[forestpath]

98. +1000

[Psephos]

121. Amen! n/t

[struggle4progress]

89. U.S. Is Secretly Collecting Records of Verizon Calls (NYT)

By CHARLIE SAVAGE and EDWARD WYATT
Published: June 5, 2013

... The order ... directs a Verizon Communications subsidiary, Verizon Business Network Services, to turn over ... all call logs “between the United States and abroad” or “wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls” ...

Verizon Business Network Services is one of the nation’s largest telecommunications and Internet providers for corporations. It is not clear whether similar orders have gone to other parts of Verizon, like its residential or cellphone services, or to other telecommunications carriers ...

The four-page order was disclosed Wednesday evening by the newspaper The Guardian. Obama administration officials at the F.B.I. and the White House also declined to comment on it Wednesday evening, but did not deny the report, and a person familiar with the order confirmed its authenticity. “We will respond as soon as we can,” said Marci Green Miller, a National Security Agency spokeswoman, in an e-mail ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/06/us/us-secretly-collecting-logs-of-business-calls.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130606&_r=0

[struggle4progress]

90. U.S. Is Secretly Collecting Records of Verizon Calls (NYT)

By CHARLIE SAVAGE and EDWARD WYATT
Published: June 5, 2013

... The order ... directs a Verizon Communications subsidiary, Verizon Business Network Services, to turn over ... all call logs “between the United States and abroad” or “wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls” ...

Verizon Business Network Services is one of the nation’s largest telecommunications and Internet providers for corporations. It is not clear whether similar orders have gone to other parts of Verizon, like its residential or cellphone services, or to other telecommunications carriers ...

The four-page order was disclosed Wednesday evening by the newspaper The Guardian. Obama administration officials at the F.B.I. and the White House also declined to comment on it Wednesday evening, but did not deny the report, and a person familiar with the order confirmed its authenticity. “We will respond as soon as we can,” said Marci Green Miller, a National Security Agency spokeswoman, in an e-mail ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/06/us/us-secretly-collecting-logs-of-business-calls.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130606&_r=0

[Leontius]

92. Just exactly who and what is this man we elected in 2008 and reelected in 2012.

[felix_numinous]

107. Unaccountable trillions of dollars

are poured into the NSA with no oversight, while cuts are being made to feed house and clothe our people and if you cannot see the obscenity of this, there is no point in discussion.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely, for those who have eyes to see it. We have created many of the terrorists with this unlimited money train around the world-- it is a self supporting system.

Some spying is necessary, but anyone telling you it is being done for your own well being while cutting social programs is a fanatic.

[Thinkingabout]

116. Any time a bill is introduced in Congress lots of thought should be put into the

Composition. Perhaps today it favors one party or the other but there is not a guarantee they will remain in control or their platform does not change. To have a check system in place such as FISA court looking over the request was supposed to be checking the wire taps or record gathering but has been pushed aside with the excuse "they did not have time to wait". If those in charge does not follow procedure then this is a bad thing. If monitoring of calls made results in preventing a terrorist attack and lives are saved or injuries prevented then especially if those victims happens to us personally I don't think many would be upset. Perhaps some are confused into thinking conversations has been handed over but it is the records if the phone calls. Perhaps some wiretaps resulted in analysis of these records but if the Patriot Act is a good law intended to prevent terrorist attacks this us a reality of life we will probably live with.

[quadrature]

119. Too many scandals at once

I get the feeling that President Obama
is trying to hide something and/or
run out the clock on Jan 2017.

just my 2 cents

[GeorgeGist]

120. I can hear it now ...

the outrage should die.