Wonderful! The last line is the best: Dan Rather knows about Pajamas Media & Powerline!

Well, in the Navy, there is still a universal response when asked about nuclear weapons, which is also modified for other actions, to wit: “The United States Navy will neither confirm nor deny the existence of nuclear weapons aboard any aircraft, vessel, or station.” To my mind, that’s the position that the administration should be using with these hearings.

In other words, saying “we’ll be happy to talk to you in a closed session, but not on camera, in public, etc…”

If folks want some more interesting tidbits on this data collection, I would urge them to do a search for “Project Echelon”. That’s the main physical system for data collection for the US and our allies.

Which brings us to an interesting point. If the data is collected offshore of the US, say in Australia, or England, and is intercepted in the free and clear, then what’s all the hubbub? The FBI took down most of the mob through eavesdropping on cellphone calls, which required no warrants. Anytime you broadcast in the ether, through radio, microwave, or any other medium, you forfeit any claim to privacy. It’s no different than you and a friend talking in a pub or cabaret, etc. Others might well overhear your conversations, since you are willingly speaking in an open forum.

If the US sigint collection points are overseas, and intercept calls transmitted through the ether, then there is no law broken.

If you expect privacy, and want the Feds to need warrants, then you need to use a lanline and/or voice encryption. Either one is a clear demonstration of the belief and expectation of privacy. Otherwise, you are fair game for anyone that wants to listen in.

Respects,

Gwedd

The media won’t pick it up because it validates what Bush is doing.

One other thing, it sure is easy to tell where the players line up on this issue based on which of the following phrases they use to describe the program:

“terrorist surveillance program” or “domestic spying program”.