posted May 15, 2006 07:39 PM              

In October of 2001, the United Nations warned that due to a brutal combination of poverty, drought, dislocation, and long years of warfare, up to seven and a half million people were at risk of dying from starvation during Afghanistan’s coming months -- at precisely the time that the United States launched a post-9-11 war to displace the ruling Taliban. As the snows of late November approached, and with them a guaranteed death sentence for millions living in areas made impassable to aid trucks by winter snows, Washington refused to halt its bombing runs and Northern Alliance proxy war long enough for aid to resume. It was only through the serendipitous decision of the Taliban to withdraw to the mountains before winter’s onset that mass famine -- in effect, a genocidal invasion -- was averted.
Virtually nobody in America noticed the narrowly avoided holocaust.

On October 29, 2004, the British medical journal Lancet published a peer-reviewed article that made a compelling case that to date the U.S. invasion of Iraq had caused some 100,000 deaths over and above the civilian mortality that Iraq would have experienced in peacetime. Given that more time has passed since then than between the original U.S. invasion and the writing of the study, and that the insurgency has only intensified in that time, and that civil war has begun on top of it, and given the additional cumulative effects of war on public health and mortality, that number undoubtedly now exceeds 200,000 Iraqi deaths. The number continues to climb daily.

You can find the details each day, a few of them, in small type, on page A27, under “World: In Other News.”

And now, America erupts because… the Bush administration has been secretly trying to build a database of every single phone call in the country, and it probably already includes your calls.

Over the weekend, both Newsweek and USA Today/Gallup released polls showing that a majority of Americans think the secret NSA database program “goes too far,” as they say. I guess 200,000 dead, or seven and a half million, wouldn’t have been quite far enough.

The Newsweek poll has Bush at his lowest approval rating in that poll’s history; the USA Today poll claims that nearly two in three Americans favor Congressional hearings on the NSA matter. So do most Congressional Democrats, and more than a few Republicans that want to distance themselves from a plummeting presidency. Here in Blue America, a local Seattle daily devoted three separate stories Friday to how much D.C. politicians, local politicians, and ordinary citizens (respectively) were alarmed by last Thursday’s USA Today story.

Why was anyone shocked? A 12-23-05 Boston Globe story -- nearly five months ago -- reported that the NSA was not simply monitoring the international phone calls of Americans, as the White House claimed, but using data mining operations to survey millions of Americans’ calls. A story in the following day’s New York Times confirmed it, and over the following month the Los Angeles Times added more details. The revelation that the NSA is not only doing data mining but building a permanent database from call records is just one more onion layer peeled back from a secretive program that’s smelled (and made any sensible, Constitution-abiding folks cry) from the beginning. Appalling? You bet. A surprise? Only if your head has been buried in the sand.

The inexorable erosion of constitutional rights in this country is deeply alarming. With the NSA database, we’re now keeping track of the phone calls of (in the Bush ideal) every single American regardless of whether the callers are even relevant to an investigation, much less suspected of a crime, much less are approved for investigative attention through the oversight of a judge. (And yes, the Fourth Amendment does include the phrase “probable cause.”) The degree to which Bush and his cabal are consistently arguing these days that they are above the law is beyond worrisome; it is grounds for impeachment, because Bush and his senior officials have all taken oaths to protect and defend (and, oh, yes, implement) the Constitution.

To the degree the NSA database flap rises above the usual short life cycle of most Bush scandals (by now, far too numerous to count, let alone recount), it can only be a good thing. The controversy reinforces, for any conservatives who might be having doubts, the reality that these guys are just about the apex of the evils of Big Government. (Can you imagine the uproar if this database had been launched by Clinton?) Given that this is a White House that politicizes every piece of information it can get its hand on, hard science included, it’s pretty difficult to avoid the conclusion that some of these records being reviewed more closely and referred to the FBI involve political opponents and administration critics.

So, yeah, this is a big deal. With luck, it might even help bring the Republicans down in November. It might even help bring Bush himself down.

All these radical erosions in America’s civil liberties are being justified by a unilaterally declared “war” on a tactic, a war its authors proudly proclaim will last generations. If we don’t fight to regain these rights now, and to not only remove Bush from power but reframe the so-called “war on terror” as an effort that must involve crime investigation, diplomatic reforms, and poverty alleviation as more important components than raw military power, these rights aren’t coming back in our lifetimes. Somehow, the American political scene has completely buried the “irony” that the same administration that, through incompetence and sloth, allowed 9-11 to happen in the first place, has been building up its own power by citing its presumed competence on national security.

But although it will clearly require regime change, civil liberties now being lost in this country can be restored. The lives of the nearly 3,000 people who died when Bush ignored warnings about 9-11 cannot be restored. They aren’t coming back. Neither are over 2,400 American soldiers. Neither are all those people who drowned during and after Katrina, many of whom are still “missing” and whose bodies will never be found.

But even the cost of this cabal in American lives is a drop in the bucket compared to what they are willing to spill in other peoples’ blood -- societies whose members, it ought to go without saying (but can’t), value life just as much as you or I. The lives of over 200,000 Iraqis, lost in a war launched illegally and sold by lies, can never be restored. Millions of Afghans narrowly avoided the same fate. And now these zealots are seriously considering nuking Iran, an action which could not only directly result in untold additional numbers of deaths, but which would spark a conflagration that would make Iraq’s dead look like loners.

So: why do we care about someone knowing who we called, but not about the obliteration of whole cities or countries? Don’t we need a little, like, perspective here? Aren’t we talking not about not just criminal actions and civil liberty violations here, but war crimes?

And if Saddam Hussein is on trial for crimes against humanity, why isn’t George W. Bush?

Geov Parrish
WorkingForChange.com
05.15.06

posted May 15, 2006 07:45 PM              

quote:

---

And if Saddam Hussein is on trial for crimes against humanity, why isn’t George W. Bush?

---

posted May 16, 2006 12:00 AM              

The Justice Department claims that its attempt to investigate Bush's eavesdropping programs has gone nowhere because its staff was denied security clearance. With news reports exposing the National Security Agency's previously secret spying on the phone conversations of tens of millions of Americans, what is the status of the U.S. Department of Justice probe of the Bush administration's authorization of a warrantless domestic wiretapping program?

The investigation has been closed.

That's right. Even as it is being revealed that the president's controversial eavesdropping program is dramatically more extensive -- and Constitutionally dubious -- than had been previously known, the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) has informed Representative Maurice Hinchey that its attempt to determine which administration officials authorized, approved and audited NSA surveillance activities is over.

Why?

In a letter to Hinchey, the New York Democrat who has been the most dogged Congressional advocate for investigation of the spying program, OPR Counsel H. Marshall Jarrett explained that he had closed the Justice Department probe on Tuesday, May 9, because his office's requests for security clearances to conduct the investigation had been denied.

"I am writing to inform you that we have been unable to make any meaningful progress in our investigation because OPR has been denied security clearances for access to information about the NSA program," Jarrett explained in his letter to Hinchey. "Beginning in January 2006, this Office made a series of requests for the necessary clearances. On May 9, 2006, we were informed that our requests had been denied. Without these clearances, we cannot investigate this matter and therefore have closed our investigation."

Who blocked the request? The obstruction has come from the very administration that the president asserts is operating "within the laws of our country" and cooperating with appropriate investigations.

The security clearances were blocked by the NSA, which has taken its direction on the spying program from the White House.

Hinchey, who along with Representatives John Lewis of Georgia, and Henry Waxman and Lynn Woolsey of California, requested the Justice Department inquiry in January, following initial reports regarding the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program, is furious.

"It is outrageous that people within the Bush administration have blocked an investigation into the role that members of the Justice Department played in establishing and executing this secret domestic spy program," says the New York Democrat. "We must get to the bottom of this and reveal who has stifled this investigation. The Bush administration cannot simply create a Big Brother program and then refuse to answer any questions on how it came about and what it entails. We are not asking for top secret information. We simply want to know how the domestic spy initiative evolved and who is behind what many legal scholars believe is an unconstitutional surveillance program. If the administration believes the program is legal then it should have no problem being forthright with Justice Department investigators as to how it was initiated and is being carried out."

The key questions that Hinchey and his colleagues want answered are these:

Who within the DOJ first authorized the domestic surveillance program?

What was that official's justification was for doing so?

Had the Bush administration already enacted the program before getting original DOJ approval?

What does the reauthorization process for the surveillance initiative entail?

Why, according to news reports, did the then-Acting Attorney General refuse to reauthorize the program

Why did the Attorney General expressed strong reservations about the program and may have rejected it as well?

Hinchey is not prepared to let the matter rest. The congressman is seeking to determine who in the administration prevented the OPR investigators from obtaining the security clearances needed to conduct an investigation. When he has that information, Hinchey says, he will press for a reversal of the denial of the clearances and the reopening of the investigation.

At the same time, Hinchey continues to push on a number of fronts for the opening of a full Congressional inquiry into the warrantless wiretapping program and administration efforts to stifle examinations of its domestic spying initiatives. While he has often stood alone in the past, Hinchey's calls come as part of a Congressional chorus of concern expressed by key members of the House and Senate on Thursday.

The Senate's chief critic of the spying program, Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold, says that the latest revelations have raised a range of new concerns about the White House's apparent disregard for the Constitution and specific statutes requiring that a warrant be obtained before tapping into the telephone conversations of Americans on American soil.

"This Administration's arrogance and abuse of power should concern all Americans," says Feingold, who has proposed that the president be censured for authorizing the warrantless wiretapping program. "That the government may be secretly collecting, and using data mining to analyze, the phone records of millions of law-abiding Americans, as reported in the press today, is a frightening prospect. I am unaware of this program, and Congress needs to find out exactly what the Administration is doing and whether it is legal. It is time for the Administration to come clean with Congress and the American people. We can effectively fight terrorism and protect privacy, the rule of law, and separation of powers, but only if we have a President who believes in these principles."

John Nichols is The Nation's Washington correspondent.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/36232

------------------
Up, down, turn around
Please don't let me hit the ground
Tonight I think I'll walk alone
I'll find my soul as I go home.

posted May 16, 2006 12:02 AM            

Of course all those lying numbers come from antiwar sources...and from terrorist supporters in Iraq.

I guess you get to count all the dead terrorists too and the numbers of Iraq civilians the terrorists killed.

posted May 16, 2006 12:05 AM              

------------------
Up, down, turn around
Please don't let me hit the ground
Tonight I think I'll walk alone
I'll find my soul as I go home.

posted May 16, 2006 12:12 AM              

quote:

---

Tell that to the murderous thug Islamic terrorists who killed 3000 civilians in the WTC bombing.--jwhop

---

posted May 16, 2006 12:12 AM              

gwb is responsible for all those deaths. but i would grant him the same sanctuary from capital punishment as i would anyone else.

he should be impeached though.

------------------
Up, down, turn around
Please don't let me hit the ground
Tonight I think I'll walk alone
I'll find my soul as I go home.

posted May 16, 2006 12:39 AM            

Nor is the United States responsible for Iraqi civilians the friends of leftists, the Islamic terrorists are killing in Iraq.

posted May 16, 2006 12:47 AM              

quote:

---

On October 29, 2004, the British medical journal Lancet published a peer-reviewed article that made a compelling case that to date the U.S. invasion of Iraq had caused some 100,000 deaths over and above the civilian mortality that Iraq would have experienced in peacetime.

---

The Lancet is the world's leading independent general medical journal. The journal's coverage is international in focus and extends to all aspects of human health.

The Lancet is published weekly from editorial offices in London and New York. It aims to publish the best original primary research papers, and review articles of the highest standard.The Lancet is stringently edited and peer-reviewed to ensure the scientific merit and clinical relevance of its diverse content. Drawing on an international network of advisers and contributors, The Lancet meets the needs of physicians by adding to their clinical knowledge and alerting them to current issues affecting the practise of medicine world wide. The blend of challenging editorials, signed commentaries, original research, commissioned reviews, an international news section, and the views of readers in the letters pages make The Lancet an essential weekly read for physicians all over the world.

The Lancet is available by personal subscription to individual physicians. It is also available by subscription to institutions, libraries, and biomedical companies.
http://www.thelancet.com

http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/31066/description#descr iption

doesn't sound exactly leftist to me.

------------------
Up, down, turn around
Please don't let me hit the ground
Tonight I think I'll walk alone
I'll find my soul as I go home.

posted May 16, 2006 01:31 AM              

Doug's apology

AN APOLOGY FROM A BUSH VOTER
By Doug McIntyre
Host, McIntyre in the Morning
Talk Radio 790 KABC

There’s nothing harder in public life than admitting you’re wrong. By the way, admitting you’re wrong can be even tougher in private life. If you don’t believe me, just ask Bill Clinton or Charlie Sheen. But when you go out on the limb in public, it’s out there where everyone can see it, or in my case, hear it.

So, I’m saying today, I was wrong to have voted for George W. Bush. In historic terms, I believe George W. Bush is the worst two-term President in the history of the country. Worse than Grant. I also believe a case can be made that he’s the worst President, period.

In 2000, I was a McCain guy. I wasn’t sure about the Texas Governor. He had name recognition and a lot of money behind him, but other than that? What? Still, I was sick of all the Clinton shenanigans and the thought of President Gore was… unthinkable. So, GWB became my guy.

For the first few months he was just flubbing along like most new Presidents, no great shakes, but no disasters either. He cut taxes and I like tax cuts.

Then September 11th happened. September 11th changed everything for me, like it did for so many of you. After September 11th, all the intramural idiocy of American politics stopped being funny. We had been attacked by a vicious and determined enemy and it was time for all of us to row in the same direction.

And we did for the blink of an eye. I believed the President when he said we were going to hunt down Bin Laden and all those responsible for the 9-11 murders. I believed President Bush when he said we would go after the terrorists and the nations that harbored them.

I supported the President when he sent our troops into Afghanistan, after all, that’s where the Taliban was, that’s where al-Qaida trained the killers, that’s where Bin Laden was.

And I cheered when we quickly toppled the Taliban government, but winced when we let Bin Laden escape from Tora-Bora.

Then, the talk turned to Iraq and I winced again.

I thought the connection to 9-11 was sketchy at best. But Colin Powell impressed me at the UN, and Tony Blair was in, and after all, he was a Clinton guy, not a Bush guy, so I thought the case had to be strong. I was worried though, because I had read the Wolfowitz paper, “The Project for the New American Century.” It’s been around since ‘92, and it raised alarm bells because it was based on a theory, “Democratizing the Middle East” and I prefer pragmatism over theory. I was worried because Iraq was being justified on a radical new basis, “pre-emptive war.” Any time we do something without historical precedent I get nervous.

But the President shifted the argument to WMDs and the urgent threat of Iraq getting atomic weapons. The debate turned to Saddam passing nukes on to terror groups. After 9-11, the risk was too great. As the President said, “The next smoking gun might be a mushroom cloud.” At least that’s what I thought at the time.

I grew up in New York and watched them build the World Trade Center. I worked with a guy, Frank O’Brien, who put the elevators in both towers. I lost a very close friend on September 11th. 103 floor, tower one, Cantor Fitzgerald. Tim Coughlin was his name. If we had to take out Iraq to make sure something like that, or worse, never happened again, so be it. I knew the consequences. We have a soldier in our house. None of this was theoretical in my house.

But in the months and years since shock and awe I have been shocked repeatedly by a consistent litany of excuses, alibis, double-talk, inaccuracies, bogus predictions, and flat out lies. I have watched as the President and his administration changed the goals, redefined the reasons for going into Iraq, and fumbled the good will of the world and the focus necessary to catch the real killers of September 11th.

I have watched the President say the commanders on the ground will make the battlefield decisions, and the war won’t be run from Washington. Yet, politics has consistently determined what the troops can and can’t do on the ground and any commander who did not go along with the administration was sacked, and in some cases, maligned.

I watched and tried to justify the looting in Iraq after the fall of Saddam. I watched and tried to justify the dismantling of the entire Iraqi army. I tired to explain the complexities of building a functional new Iraqi army. I urged patience when no WMDs were found. Then the Vice President told us we were in the “waning days of the insurgency.” And I started wincing again. The President says we have to stay the course but what if it’s the wrong course?

It was the wrong course. All of it was wrong. We are not on the road to victory. We’re about to slink home with our tail between our legs, leaving civil war in Iraq and a nuclear armed Iran in our wake. Bali was bombed. Madrid was bombed. London was bombed. And Bin Laden is still making tapes. It’s unspeakable. The liberal media didn’t create this reality, bad policy did.

Most historians believe it takes 30-50 years before we get a reasonably accurate take on a President’s place in history. So, maybe 50 years from now Iraq will be a peaceful member of the brotherhood of nations and George W. Bush will be celebrated as a visionary genius.

But we don’t live fifty years in the future. We live now. We have to make public policy decisions now. We have to live with the consequences of the votes we cast and the leaders we chose now.

After five years of carefully watching George W. Bush I’ve reached the conclusion he’s either grossly incompetent, or a hand puppet for a gaggle of detached theorists with their own private view of how the world works. Or both.

Presidential failures. James Buchanan, Franklin Pierce, Jimmy Carter, Warren Harding-— the competition is fierce for the worst of the worst. Still, the damage this President has done is enormous. It will take decades to undo, and that’s assuming we do everything right from now on. His mistakes have global implications, while the other failed Presidents mostly authored domestic embarrassments.

And speaking of domestic embarrassments, let’s talk for a minute about President Bush’s domestic record. Yes, he cut taxes. But tax cuts combined with reckless spending and borrowing is criminal mismanagement of the public’s money. We’re drunk at the mall with our great grandchildren’s credit cards. Whatever happened to the party of fiscal responsibility?

Bush created a giant new entitlement, the prescription drug plan. He lied to his own party to get it passed. He lied to the country about its true cost. It was written by and for the pharmaceutical industry. It helps nobody except the multinationals that lobbied for it. So much for smaller government. In fact, virtually every tentacle of government has grown exponentially under Bush. Unless, of course, it was an agency to look after the public interest, or environmental protection, and/or worker’s rights.

I’ve talked so often about the border issue, I won’t bore you with a rehash. It’s enough to say this President has been a catastrophe for the wages of working people; he’s debased the work ethic itself. “Jobs Americans won’t do!” He doesn’t believe in the sovereign borders of the country he’s sworn to protect and defend. And his devotion to cheap labor for his corporate benefactors, along with his worship of multinational trade deals, makes an utter mockery of homeland security in a post 9-11 world. The President’s January 7th, 2004 speech on immigration, his first trial balloon on his guest worker scheme, was a deal breaker for me. I couldn’t and didn’t vote for him in 2004. And I’m glad I didn’t.

Katrina, Harriet Myers, The Dubai Port Deal, skyrocketing gas prices, shrinking wages for working people, staggering debt, astronomical foreign debt, outsourcing, open borders, contempt for the opinion of the American people, the war on science, media manipulation, faith based initives, a cavalier attitude toward fundamental freedoms-- this President has run the most arrogant and out-of-touch administration in my lifetime, perhaps, in any American’s lifetime.

You can make a case that Abraham Lincoln did what he had to do, the public be damned. If you roll the dice on your gut and you’re right, history remembers you well. But, when your gut led you from one business failure to another, when your gut told you to trade Sammy Sosa to the Cubs, and you use the same gut to send our sons and daughters to fight and die in a distraction from the real war on terror, then history will and should be unapologetic in its condemnation.

None of this, by the way, should be interpreted as an endorsement of the opposition party. The Democrats are equally bankrupt. This is the second crime of our age. Again, historically speaking, its times like these when America needs a vibrant opposition to check the power of a run-amuck majority party. It requires it. It doesn’t work without one. Like the high and low tides keep the oceans alive, a healthy, positive opposition offers a path back to the center where all healthy societies live.

Tragically, the Democrats have allowed crackpots, leftists and demagogic cowards to snipe from the sidelines while taking no responsibility for anything. In fairness, I don’t believe a Democrat president would have gone into Iraq. Unfortunately, I don’t know if President Gore would have gone into Afghanistan. And that’s one of the many problems with the Democrats.

The two party system has always been clumsy and imperfect, but it has only collapsed once, in the 1850s, and the result was civil war.

I believe, as I have said countless times, the two party system is on the brink of a second collapse. It’s currently running on spin, anger, revenge, and pots and pots and pots of money.

We’re being governed by paper-mache patriots; brightly painted red, white and blue, but hollow to the core. Both parties have mastered the cynical arts of media manipulation and fund raising. They’ve learned the lessons of Watergate and burn the tapes. They have learned to divide the nation for their own gain. They have demonstrated the willingness to exploit any tragedy for personal advantage. The contempt they have for the American people is without parallel.

This is painful to say, and I’m sure for many of you, painful to read. But it’s impossible to heal the country until we’re willing to acknowledge the truth no matter how painful. We have to wean ourselves off sugar coated partisan lies.

With a belated tip of the cap to Ralph Nader, the system is broken, so broken, it’s almost inevitable it pukes up the Al Gores and George W. Bushes. Where are the Trumans and the Eisenhowers? Where are the men and women of vision and accomplishment? Why do we have to settle for recycled hacks and malleable ciphers? Greatness is always rare, but is basic competence and simple honesty too much to ask?

It may be decades before we have the full picture of how paranoid and contemptuous this administration has been. And I am open to the possibility that I’m all wet about everything I’ve just said. But I’m putting it out there, because I have to call it as I see it, and this is how I see it today. I don’t say any of this lightly. I’ve thought about this for months and months. But eventually, the weight of evidence takes on a gravitational force of its own.

I believe that George W. Bush has taken us down a terrible road. I don’t believe the Democrats are offering an alternative. That means we’re on our own to save this magnificent country. The United States of America is a gift to the world, but it has been badly abused and it’s rightful owners, We the People, had better step up to the plate and reclaim it before the damage becomes irreparable.

So, accept my apology for allowing partisanship to blind me to an obvious truth; our President is incapable of the tasks he is charged with. I almost feel sorry for him. He is clearly in over his head. Yet, he doesn’t generate the sympathy Warren Harding earned. Harding, a spectacular mediocrity, had the self-knowledge to tell any and all he shouldn’t be President. George W. Bush continues to act the part, but at this point whose buying the act?

Does this make me a waffler? A flip-flopper? Maybe, although I prefer to call it realism. And, for those of you who never supported Bush, its also fair to accuse me of kicking Bush while he’s down. After all, you were kicking him while he was up.

You were right, I was wrong.

http://www.kabc.com/mcintyre/listingsEntry.asp?ID=432586&PT=McIntyre+in+the+Morning

------------------
Up, down, turn around
Please don't let me hit the ground
Tonight I think I'll walk alone
I'll find my soul as I go home.

posted May 17, 2006 02:51 AM              

please read!

------------------
Up, down, turn around
Please don't let me hit the ground
Tonight I think I'll walk alone
I'll find my soul as I go home.

posted May 17, 2006 09:41 AM              

What an awakening for this guy!

A guy with his eyes finally wide open!

A couple quotes....

quote:

---

...In historic terms, I believe George W. Bush is the worst two-term President in the history of the country. Worse than Grant. I also believe a case can be made that he’s the worst President, period.

---

Oh man! Ain't THAT the truth!

quote:

---

I believe that George W. Bush has taken us down a terrible road. I don’t believe the Democrats are offering an alternative. That means we’re on our own to save this magnificent country. The United States of America is a gift to the world, but it has been badly abused and it’s rightful owners, We the People, had better step up to the plate and reclaim it before the damage becomes irreparable.

---

Amen! (I pray it's not too late)

This former bushman really has my admiration for finally seeing and admitting the truth!

posted May 24, 2006 10:12 AM              

quote:

---

We’re being governed by paper-mache patriots; brightly painted red, white and blue, but hollow to the core. Both parties have mastered the cynical arts of media manipulation and fund raising. They’ve learned the lessons of Watergate and burn the tapes. They have learned to divide the nation for their own gain. They have demonstrated the willingness to exploit any tragedy for personal advantage. The contempt they have for the American people is without parallel.

This is painful to say, and I’m sure for many of you, painful to read. But it’s impossible to heal the country until we’re willing to acknowledge the truth no matter how painful. We have to wean ourselves off sugar coated partisan lies.

---

posted May 24, 2006 06:38 PM            

A lie, the mother of which are lying leftists, in the press and in the Congress; repeated by lying leftists who never tell the truth when a lie will serve their purpose.

Why do the liars continue the lie long after it's been proven false?

The program which has been revealed is one where telephone numbers are collected--data mined for the number, where numbers are associated with calling other numbers --what numbers called what numbers and compared with telephone numbers of known and suspected terrorists. No names are mined and no addresses are associated with these data mined numbers. If there are connections to known terrorist phone numbers then warrants would be issued.

The other NSA program actually does monitor telephone conversations....when one end of that conversation comes from outside the United States and comes from a telephone number known to be a terrorist or suspected terrorist's phone.

Thanks to leftists in collaboration with terrorists, the secret NSA program is blown and now terrorists will simply find another method to communicate with those persons inside the United States. Nice going leftists and I hope if there is another terrorist attack inside the United States those leftists who blew the top secret program will be right at ground zero. Idiots.

posted May 24, 2006 06:46 PM              

quote:

---

The thrust of the article claiming the NSA is "listening" to millions of telephone conversations of Americans is a flat lie.--jwhop

---