Are your phone records under scrutiny?

You have NO right to know

You have NO right to know who your neighbor is talking to. What makes you think that you did? Do your neighbors have a right to know whom YOU are talking to?

I often call my mother in London (That's "London, England", for those who failed geography) does that make me a suspect?

Do I have a problem with the Government checking me out? Not at all... but the issue here is whether or not that process is being done legally.

While I agree with the Preident on many things, he called this one wrong. It isn't legal just because he says it is. While he may not abuse that power, there is no guarantee that his successor will.

This is nothing new... the Federal Government has been overstepping its constitutional mandate for decades, but that's a whole 'nother story.

The last four words of your post speak volumes. "I am a mother". Motherhood is traditionally all about protection and safety, while Fatherhood is traditionally about discipline "laying down the law", if you will pardon the stereotyping. We are a nation of laws. That's what makes this the nation where everyone still wants to live. Change that and you have just another police state. I left England years ago (legally, in case you were wondering) to avoid precisely that.

I close with the words of Ben Franklin "Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"

Anyone who commented here,

Anyone who commented here, provided their email address to do so. Did you provide your primary address? Perhaps not.

Why not? Because you were afraid that some government might read your comment and force ComputerWorld to provide your email address? That's doubtful. Perhaps it is more likely that you gave a backup address to avoid getting unwanted mail at your main address or having your main address entered into some database.

Just as I'm not worried that the government is going to monitor me for this posting, I'm not worried that they are going to monitor me for calling my sister in Florida or talking to a support desk in India. (I, personally, am much more concerned about the extensive amount of US intellectual property that is being sent overseas... an entirely different topic of concern.) I can't imagine that given my lack of involvement in criminal activities that I'm a prime candidate for government concern..... as are probably most readers here.

To think that the notion of the government scanning phone records will lead to a police state is, to me, about the same as the idea that smoking pot will lead to heroin addiction. Many of those of us who lived thru the 60s and 70s probably just chuckled at that old statement.

If you have flown, attended a large concert, or visited a theme park, you know that any bags you are carrying with you will most likely be checked. Having some security guard look thru my personal belongings is, to me, a far greater invasion of my privacy than scanning my phone records. Yet, I have absolutely no problem with that search. I (and I'm sure many others) really don't mind the added precaution if it prevents even one whacko from harming my family, myself, or anyone else who has the freedom to travel and visit attractions in the US.

The events of 9/11 have changed our lives in the US, probably much to the delight of our adversaries. The same freedoms that we enjoy as a country also make us vulnerable. The terrorists who attacked us in 2001 lived in our neighborhoods, ate in our restaurants, traveled our highways, used our ISP servers, and talked on our telephone systems. We should not turn a blind eye to the vulnerabilities of our freedoms and declare it an invasion of our privacy.

Allow us our freedom to feel safe and secure in our everyday lives even it means that some computer in a US government building is scanning our phone records for links to terrorism or that a guard at a park entrance is looking through our bags for weapons. I'm no more worried about a computer red-flagging my phone number than I am about a guard finding a weapon in my bag!

As a law-abiding, American citizen, I'm not the least bit worried that the government is going to find even an inkling of reason to pursue, harass, arrest, or monitor my daily life. Hopefully, their research will find and/or deter criminals and our enemies from attacking our freedoms and rights which make us America... one being the right to feel safe and secure in our own homes, workplaces, and travels within the US.

Why do we even have a

Why do we even have a Congress?

It has been reveiled that all GWB has to do when congress passes a law, is sign-in and then ignore it because he disagrees with the law.

I'm sure at least 99% of the people were not aware of this. I would like to know why congress has not fought this and fought it VERY loudly.

I don't remember reading or hearing about this in any of my civics or government classes.

It would then seem that he can invalidate the law on term limits and be president for life without any elections.

Or appoint his brother, ole jeb bush, president.

Americans have become nothing but a wimpy heard of sheep.

By the way, I am a conservative and a Vietnam veteran. Now who fights for us so that we get the people's government back.

Here are the

Here are the issues:
1-Illegal search and Seizure WITHIN the USA.
2-Failure to follow laws set by Congress for Authorization of such actions.
3-What ELSE is happening that we DON'T know??
4-Failure of Corporations to enforce their own published rules of conduct on disclosing data to outside firms/governments. (Are they ALSO disclosing this information to OTHER governments????)

By-the-way: They could ALSO know about that Porn movie you watched the last time you went to a hotel out-of-town (even though you paid cash for it). I wonder if they will use THAT against you sometime??????? If AT&T and the others disclose without a warrant, What other companies are disclosing YOUR DATA????

I just want to remind

I just want to remind everyone of the quote of a great figure in this country and founding father...

(paraphrased of course)

"Those who are willing to give up a little freedom for security deserve neither freedom nor security" -- Benjamin Franklin

"I understand it. I am a

"I understand it. I am a mother"?

I understand it. That's a nonsequiter!

We need to remember in this country we are not looking for a parent-child relationship, or for that matter, even a little sister - big brother relationship with our government.

We're the government, and we need to understand that the constitution, the notion of laws, and the notion of a balance of power exist to keep the government in check.

To me, one form of "the terrorists winning" is if they succeed in turning us into a fear-driven, less free people than we were before 9/11. Our ultimate victory is saying "no" to either those among us that are too weak in character to refuse to surrender our freedoms and form of government, or to those that perhaps favor a more instrusive government and have chosen to use 9/11 as a vehicle to get what they want.

The Benjamin Franklin quote earlier in this chain says it all.

C.J. You said, "The bottom

C.J. You said, "The bottom line in my mind, is that I care more about the security of this country, and my family, than I care if the government looks at..."

I also am concerned about the security of our country, but I see a greater threat for our future safety if unchecked, unauthorized and unstoppable intrusions into our lives are allowed. The idea of checks and balances allows a dynamic state, wherein we constantly weigh the cost and benefit of public, governmental actions.

Removing the legislative and court review process unbalances the system. Like an engine, it may run faster without a governor, but without feedback, it will eventually run out of control. Temporary benefits rarely outweigh long term costs.

Terrorists scare you? Extremisits within our own government scare me more. History tells us how fallible human institutions are.

Would you put the power to set taxes in the hands of a single individual. No - because it would lead to abuse?

The same applies to individual liberties. There must be a finite cost (in time, documentation, etc.) expended in gathering information and USING it. There must be a review method in place to prevent the whittling away of rights. Simple solutions often contain serious flaws, and blanket survellience WILL lead to abuse.

The fact that a few extremists half-way around the world can make us sacrifice hard won civil rights and constitutional protections at the hands of extremists within this country scares me more than vague threats of physical harm from terrorists.

The world is dangerous. It will never be totally safe. Instead we should be vigilant and wary of enemies, wherever they may be. Putting your trust in a fallible "big government" plan is a flawed choice. We need to apply some critical thinking to the relative risks ....

And to those who think I'm a naive liberal ... my "sig" includes US Army retired. Unlike some of our current leadership, I've been willing to sacrifice myself for the greater good. Trading away rights for security is a bad bargain, you'll just lose both eventually.

The better course (and harder one) is to find a way to protect the individual AND the country. Any other course is a win for the terrorists.

"I understand it. I am a

"I understand it. I am a mother."

Then you don't understand whatsoever. A mother loves her children and might do anything for them--but there comes a time when they are no longer children--and while they might still appreciate and love you for guidance, they do not expect it forced upon them.

This action is quite clearly a violation of the 4th. This is an unprecedented violation of civil liberties, and will likely never catch a single terrorist. It's already widely acknowledged in the intelligence communities if you do any research whatsoever that if these people use cell phones, they run on card plans with disposable SIMS--you'd catch at best the most moronic bottom of the barrel. This is nothing more than an attempt to go fishing in the lives of US citizens to provide yet another tool for law enforcement to exercise arbitrarily the moment they slightly suspect a citizen of anything.

Traffic analysis is probably

Traffic analysis is probably a very important part of finding terrorists and preventing terrorism. However, some oversite (other than the Executive branch of government) is needed to ensure that the data collected is not abused. Possible abuses include tracking and wiretapping the political oposition, and other political dissent.

RFID tags, GPS cell phones,

RFID tags, GPS cell phones, transactions of all types. The amount of information about people grows expotentially. The unfortunate thing is how it's used. We live in constant spin. Society has forgotten innocent until proven guilty. A mere accustation can destroy lifes.
I believe this administrations motto is keep em scared and we can control them. The media makes this very easy. Come on people, question everything. It's not always someone elses job. I'll quote Ben Franklin loosely, "Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." Another quote of the day that is memorable to me " If you think the government will take care of you ask an American Indian". I believe this was from before the politically correct "reality".