Maybe it's because I've held a Top Secret security clearance once...

[JDPriestly]

130. People who worked in this kind of program are anethisized

to its dangers and should not be trusted.

No surveillance of ordinary people. The government should be required to have real probable cause based on reasonable suspicion before it gets ANY kind of subpoena. That's the guarantee in the Constitution.

I don't care how long this has been going on, the Constitution is very, very clear on this. And I do not believe that the old cases permitting the subpoenaing of pen registers would cover this kind of apparently blanket acquisition of records of electronic transmissions.

If a reporter believes that his phone calls might be under surveillance, he will be unable to report on stories he would otherwise report. If a person running for public office thinks that his or his aides phone calls will be under surveillance, he might hesitate to call a donor who would "pay" for supporting him, say with the loss of a government contract.

This may seem normal to the creeps that run these programs or work for them. But then . . . we know what kind of people they are or have become.

It's a sorry moment in our history when people justify this stuff. If the program is not being abused, I think that it would not be so kept so secret.