.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Bird's Blog

Poetry, musings, observations, commentary, rants, confessions...and who knows what else!

My Photo
Location: San Francisco Bay Area

Teacher, writer, poet, grandmother, lover, wine-drinker, chocolate eater, beach comber, hiker, traveler, Giants fan, San Franciscan. All work on this blog is copyrighted material.

Thursday, May 11, 2006

Birds Don't Believe in Flying Blind

Some excerpts from the AP news story “Lawmakers Demand Phone Records Answers”By KATHERINE SHRADER and DONNA CASSATA with accompanying brief commentary by a disgruntled Bird.

AT&T Corp., Verizon Communications Inc., and BellSouth Corp. telephone companies began turning over records of tens of millions of their customers' phone calls to the NSA program shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, said USA Today, citing anonymous sources it said had direct knowledge of the arrangement.

Tens of millions of calls, huh? I’m sure ALL of those communications were between terrorists. Yup. Sure. Right.

"The government does not listen to domestic phone calls without court approval," said Bush.

Yeah, right. Like we all believe that.

NSA is the same spy agency that conducts the controversial eavesdropping program that had been acknowledged earlier by Bush. The president said last year that he authorized the NSA to listen, without warrants, to international phone calls involving Americans when terrorism is suspected.

In Bush we trust.

Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., said NSA was using the data to analyze calling patterns in order to detect and track suspected terrorist activity, according to information provided to him by the White House. "Telephone customers' names, addresses and other personal information have not been handed over to NSA as part of this program," he said.

Yeah, as if I believe that. But even if it were so, once NSA has the call info, it can get names, addresses, and personal info easily enough.

"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.

"I'm not sure why it would be necessary to keep and have that kind of information," said House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, who wanted more details.

Even the Repubs are worried about this. Hmmm…

God bless Amerikuh – home of the free and the brave.


Blogger The Flabbergasted Heathen said...

Personally, I don't have much of a problem with it.

Now, it could be that I'm paranoid, and it could just be behaviour left over from the bad ole days, but I always assume someone's listening. I know exactly how easy it is to do. If I don't want someone being privy to what I have to say, I find a more secure method of communication than a telephone.

May 12, 2006 11:59 AM  
Blogger CROAK said...

The good thing about blogs is that you see some report and you wonder "What does the average American really think about this"?Thanks for the input.
First you then us... just keeping in step.

May 12, 2006 4:11 PM  
Blogger disguised said...

Well, last time I checked, there was something known as the bill of rights. Oh, maybe that's now immigrated to Canada.

May 12, 2006 11:47 PM  
Blogger Pete Bogs said...

funny, they keep restating that only suspects are being surveilled, but don't account for the discrepancy with reality; i.e. where all these rampant spying reports keep coming from...

May 15, 2006 5:43 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home