You bring up an aspect of this discussion that has been mentioned but not emphasized. From a standpoint of national security and combating terrorism, are we using all other means of intelligence that are less intrusive to the general American population?

The NSA surveillance may be attributed in part to the lack of alternative tools allowed. For example, we’ve pointed out that profiling isn’t allowed. The Obama administration apparently has also shifted away from human intelligence, eg, capture and interrogation, which would also raise the emphasis on electronic intelligence.

Challenging the government contention that the NSA surveillance is necessary for national security should include questioning the government whether less intrusive, but perhaps politically controversial and even currently illegal intelligence gathering means should be increased in order to decrease dragnet intelligence tactics.

Those running government surveillance programs are only human, some use whatever means that they can to further their own agendas. Especially when they can hide behind the veil of limited access.

The public should not be surprised that they have absolutely no privacy in today’s world. Big Brother arrived a long time ago. Everyone should act accordingly.

Whoa, back the truck up a minute. Last I checked use of the word “may” includes the opposite possibility. Which means that Nadler may have understood perfectly well.

As for his retraction; Nadler being a New York Democrat (he has a Progressive voting record in the House) would, based on prior experience, indicate his ability to be amenable to ‘correction’ after inadvertently exposing the administration and democrats to negative repercussions.

James Owens, a spokesman for Nadler, provided a statement on Sunday morning, a day after this article was published, saying: “I am pleased that the administration has reiterated that… the NSA cannot listen to the content of Americans’ phone calls without a specific warrant.”

The entire argument that the NSA needs a FISA warrant to listen in to phone calls rests upon the premise that the NSA wouldn’t break the law…and the administration’s assurances that they understand the law.

The inimitable Mark Steyn weighs in on the likelihood of administration agencies breaking the law; “you have to have a touchingly naé¯ve view of government to believe that the 99.9999 percent of “metadata” entirely irrelevant to terrorism will not be put to some use, sooner or later.”

Count on it, it will be sooner rather than later.

In fact there’s a lot of indications that it’s been happening for quite some time. Consider the following:

In an interview with the black-oriented TV One, U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., known for opening her mouth before engaging her limited intellectual faculties, inadvertantly let slip that while the Obama era might be ending in 2016, his legacy would carry on in the form of “an organization that contains a kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life.”

“I think some people are missing something here. The president has put in place an organization that contains a kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life. That’s going to be very, very powerful. And that database will have information about everything on every individual in ways that it’s never been done before.” “He’s been very smart, I mean it’s very powerful what he’s leaving in place.” Congresswoman Maxine Waters

“The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them”. — Patrick Henry

The circumstantial evidence in support of the contention that Orwell’s “Big Brother” is being created by our Government is now well beyond the ‘reasonable doubt’ standard.

ATF seeks massive database of personal info: ‘Assets, Relatives, Associates and more’

Biometric Database of All Adult Americans Hidden in Immigration Reform

“NSA revelations only ‘the tip of the iceberg,’ says Dem lawmaker”

“Whistleblower’s NSA warning: ‘Just the tip of the iceberg’”

“NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say”

So much for the protests by the administration and its congressional supporters that these programs are vital to our National Security.

“Now FBI wants back door to all software”

“NSA Prism program taps in to user data of Apple, Google and others”

This would appear to be more true if you a a Fox News reporter than if you are a Jihadist.

If a person wants to give his credit card information on the basis of Amazon’s reputation or Ebay’s reputation, that’s one thing.

Trusting in the Leftist alliance for human utopia not to force people to obey, is quite another.

Although most people I know are sleepwalkers, they are probably the last free generation in America.