What's the deal?
 

The New York Times

Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.

The previously undisclosed decision to permit some eavesdropping inside the country without court approval was a major shift in American intelligence-gathering practices, particularly for the National Security Agency, whose mission is to spy on communications abroad. As a result, some officials familiar with the continuing operation have questioned whether the surveillance has stretched, if not crossed, constitutional limits on legal searches.

"This is really a sea change," said a former senior official who specializes in national security law. "It's almost a mainstay of this country that the N.S.A. only does foreign searches."

Nearly a dozen current and former officials, who were granted anonymity because of the classified nature of the program, discussed it with reporters for The New York Times because of their concerns about the operation's legality and oversight.

Such eavesdropping has always been permitted when the destination of the communication was outside the US. Even if it originated within the US.

The only thing that changed was some word search protocols so that the computers can search through emails that contain certain words. They're looking for stuff like: the stuff you can't say on airliners.

Curious to see what sorta response we get from our resident "libertarians". So far POTUS can do no wrong in their eyes, but is this a bridge too far...we'll just have to wait for their cautious reactions. Stay tuned.

Don't talk foolishness. I can't imagine that anybody of whatever political persuasion thinks it's a good idea for the gov to spy on private citizens.

If that is, indeed, what has been done.

Bot

I think our freedoms are slowly being chipped away.

Me too. If this particular thing is true, it's just another damned incremental step in a terrible path we've been on since, oh... Andy Jackson, IMO. Started small and gradual and has been building ever since.

B

Doesn't seem very incremental to me...these frogs were microwaved.
 

Uh, so where do YOU, Mr. "look at me, I'm a libertarian" stand on this particular breach of civil liberties...if indeed, it has been done.

What did I just write?

Bot

Apparently, this.

Must I hold your hand?

Read #6. It's okay if you lips move as you read.

B

Vague generalities beg questions, which beggar the reader.
 

YOU have not SPECIFICALLY addressed how YOU feel about the SPECIFIC ISSUE at hand. Something like: "I think it is very bad that the Bush Administration has given a specific order to allow the NSA to spy on US citizens, without judicial oversight--it pains me deeply that we act no better than third world potentates, yet profess our undying commitment to individual 'liberties' "...ya know, something like that.

I firmly believe all NON-US citizens SHOULD be spied on at all times. As well as those with questionable ties to certain countries. But not your average law abiding citizen.

If true, it is wrong.

Repeat as necessary.

B

You've been riding shotgun with these guys for far too long.
 

What's wrong?

See #1. Apply to #13.

B