“Paranoia is just…reality on a finer scale”
—Philo Gant, Strange Days (1995)

Over the history of this site, we’ve tried our best to stay away from jumping headlong into wild conspiracy theories; an argument is usually much more convincing when there are solid sources to back it up, and—to be honest—a baseball hat is a lot more comfortable than a tinfoil one.

But, try as we might, we couldn’t shake the feeling that there was much more going on with the NSA’s controversial domestic surveillance program than the Bush administration would (reluctantly) admit. When Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified in front of Congress about the program, he threaded through the eyes of so many rhetorical needles that he might as well have been manufactured by Singer; furthermore, it was deemed unnecessary for him to testify under oath.

Despite all the doublespeak and triplespeak, there were assurances made that the program was highly-targeted and only dealt with calls that weren’t purely domestic. So, unless you fit a specific profile, you didn’t have to worry about Big Brother listening in on your phone conversations. “Nothing to worry about!” supporters of the program asserted. “Your rights are safe.”

But the paranoia started creeping in when Gonzales started wording his responses in ways that wouldn’t rule out additional phone-monitoring programs, even ones that were purely domestic in origin. When asked if the White House had the authority to monitor domestic calls without a warrant, Gonzales replied with a simple “I wouldn’t rule it out.”

Considering this administration’s fondness for claiming almost any authority under the guise of fighting terror, and their equal fondness for interpreting laws how they see fit, the cynical among us figured that the other shoe was about to drop. And here it is:

The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.

The NSA program reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans — most of whom aren’t suspected of any crime. This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations. But the spy agency is using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity, sources said in separate interviews.

“It’s the largest database ever assembled in the world,” said one person, who, like the others who agreed to talk about the NSA’s activities, declined to be identified by name or affiliation. The agency’s goal is “to create a database of every call ever made” within the nation’s borders, this person added.

For the customers of these companies, it means that the government has detailed records of calls they made — across town or across the country — to family members, co-workers, business contacts and others.

Well then.

According to laws already on the books, telephone companies are prohibited from sharing information about calling habits without a court order. But laws were a mere formality when President Bush decided to sign an executive order authorizing this program, and with this revelation you can finally see why the administration was so keen to bypass the FISA courts. Even with the 72-hour retroactive warrants allowed under FISA, it would be flat-out impossible to process warrants for a database of millions of calls per day. And besides, the people who might support a surveillance program that magically only targets terrorists may feel a little bit differently when their personal calls are being processed through the grid.

The unnamed sources quoted above say that the program doesn’t involve the recording or monitoring of actual conversations, but who knows for sure? Remember, people swore over and over again that the NSA program wasn’t a “dragnet” or “fishing expedition”, and that the program wouldn’t bother with purely domestic calls or massive data mining. All of that has been proven to be false by any reasonable standard, even if the administration does the expected dodge of “but this is a different program than the one we were talking about before, so we technically didn’t mislead anyone”.

Does anyone know the definition of “is”?

When it comes down to it, this is yet another example of the administration saying something that contradicts the reality of a situation. We are continually turning corners in Iraq while the body count piles steadily higher. We love free markets while we hand out no-bid contracts. We fight to bring democracy to brutal dictatorships, except when said dictators are our allies. We practice fiscal responsibility when we run up a huge debt. We have a great economy, even if people’s wages are stagnant and gas is $3 a gallon. We talk about a culture of life but have one of the highest infant mortality rates in the industrialized world. We know where the weapons of mass destruction are, though we can’t find them. We are a nation of laws, except when the President decides to interpret them differently. And we would never ever monitor our citizens without a warrant, except when we do. And so on.

Reality seems to be catching up with paranoia at a pretty ridiculous pace.

—————————————————–

Addition #1: In an odd twist of fate, these revelations have appeared right after Michael Hayden, the former NSA director who would know a thing or two about these programs, was appointed to become the next CIA chief. It might be an interesting confirmation hearing after all.

Addition #2: Kudos to Sarabeth for winning the 1115.org Miss Cleo award for psychic blogging:

It’s true that Gonzales was repeatedly asked whether President Bush had authorized other programs that would be illegal if not for the claims of constitutional power or authorization to use military force the administration has been invoking to justify the NSA program, and Gonzales said: “Not to my knowledge.” But I set little store by that. When details of such programs emerge (and I do believe it is just a question of when, not if), Gonzales will be there to look straight at the camera and smoothly explain why his “not to my knowledge” answer was perfectly accurate.

Addition #3: The President responds:

In a hastily arranged appearance in response to a story in today’s editions of USA Today, Bush also denied that the government listens to Americans’ phone calls without court approval and maintained that citizens’ privacy “is fiercely protected in all our activities.”

“We are not mining or trolling through the personal lives of millions of Americans,” Bush said. “Our efforts are focused on links to al-Qaeda and their known affiliates.”

Well, that settles it…I sure do feel much better knowing that “links to al-Qaeda and their known affiliates” apparently includes anyone who makes telephone calls.