All the people in here complaining about the Gov. reading e-mails, would be the same one's griping about why the Gov. didn't protect them from Osama.....

The Gov. is damned if they do and damned if they don't. American's will complain about anything.

I don't believe the govtmt is reading everbody's mail...I think you've only read the reporter's version...thsi article is too general...The media is only writing enough to get you out there stirred up...Personally, I feel much safer with the current administration...Watch out for the democrats!!!

I thought we had flying saucers for survielance?

It's simple, the government is a propaganda and lie generating mafia,. and it is not allowed. The government freeky "surviels" neurons. If we were told even HALF the truth, Osama would be long caught

FREE SPEECH!!

In cases with national security, child predators, terrorists, ect., I don't have a problem with the government obtaining information via Comcast, web strings, or whatever.

When the IRS uses it to prove where you were, how you lived, what you purchased in order to fine you for your reported activities, I start to draw the line. (Case involved an individual who lived in Las Vegas, NV and worked in Los Angeles, CA) If our government is so exact with uncovering criminal activity in the USA, why do we have 6 million + illegal aliens roaming around in the states? Maybe we could use this type of investigation to uncover their whereabouts?

Hate to break it to those who believe history began in 2000, but look up project Echelon and President Clinton if you want to see Big Brother.

Z: Actually I was one of the guys sitting in a Humvee in 110 degree heat in a city I couldnt pronounce the name of without spitting the first 50 times I tried to pronounce it. I guess I would have to say I have earned the RIGHT to tell the government they dont get to pick and choose the RIGHTS they honor from the constitution! Also I would say it insults me that after I took an oath to protect it (the Constitution) it annoys me that the regular citizens that also work hard to protect it are ridiculed by people such as yourself.

I support your right to say whatever you want but, I also support mine and millions like me to tell you that you are misinformed and need to educate yourself.

Ron Paul for pres! SEMPER FI!!!

I am currently a customer of AT&T, but after reading this article I think I may switch to Comcast.

It's very comforting to know that a company has the backbone to stand up to the goverment. Most are afraid or just don't give two cents about their customer base, but it is obvious here that Comcast does. Keep up the solid work guys...

And just where does the federal government get it's money? So in essence, We the People are paying out of own pockets to be spied upon illegally. This is nothing but a propaganda piece designed to "soften up" and desensitize Americans for still more tyranny and the destruction of yet more of our constitutional rights.

Robert

Hey, how about some revenue sharing, do the telecommunications companies own our personal data?

At 1k a pop I'll take 50/50, but then again, I'd be making more overseas calls if that was the split.

Good glad to hear I've cost them some cash. (I made overseas calls to Iraq-a National Guard family member was there)

They use our money and our government to spy on all of us, yet they "lose" and "accidentally destroy" their own emails and use private email accounts to avoid being caught at all their many many crimes.

This entire administration should be in jail--Gitmo.

Big Brother is watching, we better be sure we vote somebody in to protect our constitutional rights. Ron Paul in 08

The important underlying issue is the COST of FREEDOM not how much it cost to lose it. Freedom is like virginity once gone you don't get it back. If Comcast was only charging $1 that is still too much! Don't worry about $ worry about you FREEDOM.

Kids, kids, kids....The vast majority of telecom providers absolutely require a subpoena for any kind of telephone record. No subpoena, no information. Also, the vast majority of telecom providers don't charge the gov't for the information. They may get reimbursed for a portion of the equipment required to perform the surveillance, but the information doesn't have an associated cost.

And they say that crime does not pay. Looks like it pays pretty well.

"Kids, kids, kids....The vast majority of telecom providers absolutely require a subpoena for any kind of telephone record."

No, Qwest was the only major carrier that refused from Feb. 2001 on not to release phone records without a subpoena.

The CEO of Qwest, Joe Naccio, ended up in prison for not going along with the Bush gang and the stockholders lost a bunch of money because the NSA pulled a $200 million contract because Naccio wouldn't play ball.

The USDA is also forming a program that will put more surveillance on a certain segment of society, what they do and where they go and at any time this program allows for the USDA to seize their private property should disease be suspected in an area. What crime did these people commit? They own farm animals and are a threat to corporate ag and factory farming because they let their cattle, chickens, pigs, sheep, horses, etc roam free in pastures. They do not feed them growth hormones and feed additives and the public wants to buy this healthy grown food.

Excuse me but will someone tell me where my logic is wrong?

This article says the President may have been operating outside the law.

Isn't that a high crime and/or misdemeanor?

Hence, WHERE are the impeachment proceedings? Hmmmm?