McPaper and Osama, Sittin' in a Tree

David Weigel | May 12, 2006

Some of the dogged supporters of warrantless government surveillance have rushed in to defend the NSA phone call database program. It's more than could have been expected from their takes on the first iteration of this story - the revelation, six months back, that the NSA was tapping international calls. At the time, commentator/novelist Michelle Malkin raged against "civil liberties Chicken Littles" who thought warrantless wiretapping was a big deal or something.

Those who actually read the piece will note that the paper must grudgingly acknowledge that it is talking about the NSA's monitoring of international communications (e-mails, cellphone calls, etc.) only; the agency still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.

It turns out that this isn't 100% true - the NSA isn't seeking warrants as it assembles "a database of every call ever made" in the United States. Malkin has an answer for that, too.

Translation: NSA--gasp!--is doing its job.

Not to pick on Malkin. Her take is fairly representative of civil liberties restrictionists in the media at large, and her blog provides links to some similar takes on the story. Here's AJ Strata, upon learning that the telecom Qwest refused to go in on the data mining because the government wasn't providing warrants:

USA Today just tipped off the terrorist how to avoid detection and put the people in Qwest's areas in danger because now it is known those areas have the least protection and should be targeted! What are these people THINKING! Someone needs to go to jail.

Let's assume this isn't a completely nutty reading of the situation. Wouldn't it be a huge break in the War on Terror if terrorists started clustering in the areas serviced by Qwest? Assuming they're all dumb enough to use land lines and not change cell phones or phone cards or anything (these are the goofballs who forget that the government taps phones unless the New York Times reminds them, remember), they'll be constricted to one part of the country and easily targeted by our intelligence agencies. It's the flypaper strategy gone fiber-optic!

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

|5.12.06 @ 1:36AM|#

Not to pick on Malkin.

I will. She's an idiot.

|5.12.06 @ 2:20AM|#

Maybe it would be good if terrorists congregated in Qwest territory (check out their 14 state service map)https://iot.qwest.com/iot/new/StartNewService.do since if I recall correctly, these states are receiving significanlty higher anti-terrorist funding than their relative risk from terror would warrant. Perhaps this is their way of shouldering some of the risk.

|5.12.06 @ 3:00AM|#

How quickly people forget the lessons of the past. Has no one remembered that the US government did have crucial (non-wiretap) intelligence about suspicious activity regarding Arab student pilots, but that interagency rivalry and a breakdown in communication prevented anything purposeful from being done with that info? And considering the federal response to Katrina, there isn't any indication that these underlying problems have been fixed.

Granted, this program is more about analysing aggregate data and not individual phone calls (Completely invalidating Strata's scenario). However, some of these commentators seem to want KGB/Stasi style monitoring of anyone with an Arabic surname. Don't these people realize that any important information will be swamped by useless clatter?

(As an aside, how has Bill O'Reilly opined on this? He's had his own experience with overheard phone conversations.)

Jon Swift|5.12.06 @ 3:22AM|#

The NSA needs all that data to search for the ESL codes that will lead them to the terorists.

Jon Swift|5.12.06 @ 3:23AM|#

The NSA needs all that data to search for the ESL codes that will lead them to the terrorists.

The NSA needs all that data to search for the ELS codes that will lead them to the terrorists.

|5.12.06 @ 4:21AM|#

Man, I thought I was going to be all clever and say, "no, let's do pick on Malkin", and the first two commenters already beat me to it.

At this point, though, you have to admire at least her persistence - most folks would say, "hey - maybe 71% of the population aren't being completely ridiculous!" But not Michelle!

|5.12.06 @ 4:27AM|#

|5.12.06 @ 4:29AM|#

And now, yes, thanks to the posting engine, I can admire my persistence, too.

|5.12.06 @ 7:52AM|#

To sum it up for morons and liberals (but I repeat myself)..
The Info the NSA got was that at 12:34 PM on 6 May 2006, phone number 888-555-1212 called phone number 888-555-2121 and talked for 6 minutes.
It is against the law for them to know who has those numbers, the location of those numbers, if they were land line or cell phone, if they were data or fax or voice, etc.
And thats whay all the NSA asked for and got was stripped down CDRs. To get anything more on US calls, they have to hand it over to the proper agency (FBI, DEA), who will then have to establish probably cause, go to a judge and get a wiretap warrant.
The legal protections are still there. Your rights are still protected, and there is nothing the NSA can or will do to personally identify you unless one end of your call is overseas.
Hell, caller ID tells people you call more about you than the NSA got with this data.
Stop with the hysteria already.
The press is so full of shit and half-trughts that its obvious this was planted and slanted to damage Hayden and the President.
I want the sumbitches who leaked this at CIA shot. Out front of the building in Langley where all can see what happens to traitors who value their politics above their nation's security.

|5.12.06 @ 8:09AM|#

Deacon Blues,

It is against the law for them to know who has those numbers, the location of those numbers, if they were land line or cell phone, if they were data or fax or voice, etc.

So?

To get anything more on US calls, they have to hand it over to the proper agency...

Or not.

For all you drooling sheep excuse for human being idiot conservatives,

You don't friggin know what the f the gov't is doing so why don't shut your fat stupid sycophant mouths and wait to see what's really happening so you don't look like a slobby putrid syphillitic pussy like Malkin, Limbaugh and Hannity.

JMJ

|5.12.06 @ 8:11AM|#

I found this part of the story to be truly enlightening:

Unable to get comfortable with what NSA was proposing, Qwest's lawyers asked NSA to take its proposal to the FISA court. According to the sources, the agency refused.

The NSA's explanation did little to satisfy Qwest's lawyers. "They told (Qwest) they didn't want to do that because FISA might not agree with them," one person recalled. For similar reasons, this person said, NSA rejected Qwest's suggestion of getting a letter of authorization from the U.S. attorney general's office. A second person confirmed this version of events.

|5.12.06 @ 8:16AM|#

Gosh Jersey, nice articulate posting.

Peter K.|5.12.06 @ 8:25AM|#

Go Qwest! Good to see a private company refused to be bullied or bought off by the state.

"Hell, caller ID tells people you call more about you than the NSA got with this data.
Stop with the hysteria already."

Warrants aren't that tough to obtain.

|5.12.06 @ 8:29AM|#

The Info the NSA got was that at 12:34 PM on 6 May 2006, phone number 888-555-1212 called phone number 888-555-2121 and talked for 6 minutes.

If that's the case, why are they wasting money on such a database at all? Sure, it might help round up people who'd spoken to the perpetrators before their attack, but it won't actually prevent an attack.

Anyway, if terrorists were smart, they'd simply find a low tech/old tech way to communicate. Some communication equivalent of using a box cutter to hijack a plane, like a telegraph or something.

Dave W.|5.12.06 @ 8:41AM|#

Go Qwest! Good to see a private company refused to be bullied or bought off by the state.

Go Qwest's lawyers for convincing Qwest that its financial interests coincided with doing the right thing here. Lawyers rock!

|5.12.06 @ 8:55AM|#

Deacon:

The legal protections are still there. Your rights are still protected, and there is nothing the NSA can or will do to personally identify you unless one end of your call is overseas.

Except tap public, internet accessible sources to tie phone numbers back to customers, which because they are publically available, do not require a warrant. If I'm the NSA the FIRST thing I do when I start getting CDRs from the carriers is develop the system to associate names with numbers. How are the calling patterns of millions of people even vaguely useful if you don't know who's making the calls?

caller ID tells people you call more about you

I can disable CallerID.

Others:

cunt

Whoa, hoss, easy on the C word. If Malkin is a partisan apologist, her gender has nothing to do with it.

|5.12.06 @ 8:59AM|#

JMJ and Akira have me convinced through sheer persuasive logic.

|5.12.06 @ 9:15AM|#

You don't friggin know what the f the gov't is doing - Jersey McJones

Very good point. And in a democracy (gov of, by, and for *the people*) that values 'open and transparent' government that is something to be feared.

|5.12.06 @ 9:20AM|#

Who would've known that the NSA doesn't have a reverse lookup telephone directory? Thanks, Deacon!

|5.12.06 @ 9:21AM|#

I want the sumbitches who leaked this at CIA shot - Deacon Blues

Yeah that's right. Those who inform the people of what *their* government is up to should be punished. Those in the gov, whose actions are contrary to the principles this nation was founded on; who behave more like tin-pot third-world despots than democratically elected servants of the people should be awarded Medals of Freedom, or some such thing.

When news of the infamous "Bin Laden determined to attack US" memo surfaced, administration apologists said that it was understandable for our intelligence agencies to overlook the importance of the memo, because there's just so much raw information for them to deal with that figuring out the one bit that might be of importance was like finding a needle in a haystack. So how is adding more hay supposed to help the NSA find the needle the next time?

|5.12.06 @ 9:38AM|#

Yeah Deacon, they need a warrant, and have to follow legal procedures to get any more info than that worthless little they are collecting. Unless of course, the Decider, the Commander in Chief, decides that he *needs* that info, in which case his supreme powers supercede mere laws.

You know, I'll bet they could learn a lot about terrorist activities by monitoring credit card transactions, and bank transactions. I wondeer if anyone has thought of that? Or maybe they're already doing it; there just hasn't yet been a traitorious leaker to inform us yet. Of course, as long as we have nothing to hide, we shouldn't be concerned that the gov is monitoring all our financial transactions. That's better than having terrorists running wild, with complete freedom. Unless of course you believe in a person's right to privacy and freedom from government intrusion into his personal affairs. But I guess if you see a terrorist lurking around every corner .......

Jeff Fecke|5.12.06 @ 9:49AM|#

Hey, I think those people who have leaked the plan for government-installed camerals in all American homes are traitors. After all, if I'm not doing anything wrong, I have nothing to hide, and besides, it will defeat the terrorists while preserving our "freedom."

Also, I hear prices on Victory Gin are down this week.

|5.12.06 @ 10:00AM|#

Did I make you angry, Jersy? Maybe you could channel that anger into something more constructive than name-calling. But I guess that's the last refuge of someone who doesn't really have anything to say.

Timothy|5.12.06 @ 10:04AM|#

You know, I'll bet they could learn a lot about terrorist activities by monitoring credit card transactions, and bank transactions. I wondeer if anyone has thought of that?

That's been going on for a long, long time. They don't quite monitor everything, but with the banking provisions of PATRIOT (thanks John Kerry, lover of freedom!) and the various anti-money laundering laws contained within things like the BSA.

|5.12.06 @ 10:05AM|#

Deacon, you sleazy hypocrite, this is what you said first:

"To sum it up for morons and liberals (but I repeat myself).."

So go f yourself.

You want to be an incurious sheepy little girl clinging to the dresscoats of your betters, fine. One thing I love about libertarians - their distinct distrust for authoritarianism. You could learn from them. I know I am.

JMJ

|5.12.06 @ 10:35AM|#

Decon seems to be using the same tortured logic of conservatives who want to bring prayers back to public schools, to wit:

1. The prayer itself is bland, non-sectarian, and non-specific.
2. Removing said bland, non-sectarian, non-specific prayer from public schools has made the Christian God angry, causing him to punish the U.S.

Deacon's version goes something like this:

1. The data NSA is gathering is so general and impossible to trace to someone without a warrant that their having it poses no threat to you whatsoever.
2. Exposing the fact that the NSA has been gathering masses of data that is useless without the long, arduous process of going through the right channels to get warrents is endagering us so much that people should be summarily executed for it on the steps of the CIA. (Which is interesting, since this is an NSA program)

|5.12.06 @ 10:45AM|#

What speaks louder than Deacon Blues original apologist argument for the wire-tapping is his choice to not address any of the substantive rebuttals to his post but instead to whine about Jersey calling him a name. (And this after his "morons and liberals" quip.)

|5.12.06 @ 11:05AM|#

Matt, I didn't say ANYTHING about wiretapping except that to wiretap anybody the NSA STILL has to go to a judge. Jersey didn't say anything in his comment except name-calling. I didn't appologise for wiretapping. Go back and read the comment. It seems most people here are saying, since it's the Government, they MUST be doing bad stuff with the information. NO ONE has given any instance where the NSA has done anything unlawful. The possibility does exhist, but the possibility of any government organization doing unlawful things exists. Should we stop all government activity because someone mught do something unlawful?

|5.12.06 @ 11:14AM|#

DB:

"It seems most people here are saying, since it's the Government, they MUST be doing bad stuff with the information."

Yeah, and I think history is on our side here.

BTW,

You're right, I was wrong about the wire-tapping.

|5.12.06 @ 11:50AM|#

Wow. Deacon, you make ME look like a libertarian! The point is this (try to follow):

WE DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING - ONLY WHAT HAS BEEN LEAKED.

WE ARE AMERICAN CITIZENS AND DESERVE TO KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON IN OUR GOVERNMENT.

WE ARE SICK AND TIRED OF THE FEAR FACTOR BEING AN EXCUSE TO USURP OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

IF WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON THEN WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S LEGAL OR NOT.

WE HAVE THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON AS WE ARE NOT AT WAR.

By the way, if Clinton was doing this, you sleazy cons would be muck-raking up a storm.

JMJ

VM|5.12.06 @ 12:08PM|#

...it appears as though IR's ALTERNATIVE identiTy hAS reveALED ITsElF. today...

|5.12.06 @ 12:11PM|#

This Deacon dude is, like, a plant, right? No one in his right mind really believes that . . . right?

|5.12.06 @ 12:43PM|#

Should we stop all government activity because someone mught do something unlawful?

I stopped eating sugar for six months to see what would happen and I lost a couple pounds. So yeah, I'd try this out to see what would happen.

|5.12.06 @ 1:03PM|#

If this program was enacted under President Gore or President Kerry (or President Clinton II?) would Malkin et al. be so behind it? Or would they be characterizing it as an over-reach of gov't power using interests of national security as an excuse? I'm not going to spend much time thinking of the answer.

|5.12.06 @ 1:26PM|#

Let me try again:
Say YOU are the NSA and I'm the phone company. You say "Hey I want to know about a bunch of calls so we can see if there are patterns we can detect - maybe it will help us prevent the next 9-11 if we can find patterns". I say "OK but I can't reveal this data to law enforcment or other individuals without a court order, but if it will help prevent an attack, here you go - with the provision that there will be NO identifying data sent with it and access will be properly legally restricted."
Then I tell you that 703-555-4567 called 704-555-9876 on Sep 11, 2002 at 3:06, and they talked for 5 minutes.
As NSA:
Do you know who those numbers belong to?
Can you give me an exact location? (and remember area codes no longer apply with VOIP and cell phones basically anywhere)
Do you know who made the call?
Can you tell if it was fax, data or voice?
Can you take any actions at all against the person?
What privacy has been violated?
And before you speak, remember you are legally barred from looking up the caller ID data, consulting any database or resouce from the phone companies or civil areas or other domestic enforcement agencies.
The answers are obvious - No you do not know who the numbers belong to, do not know who made the call, do not know how they communicated, do not know where they are or what they talked about, and in fact, no privacy was violated - since to make that call they had to give that data to the phone companies involved in order to complete and route the call. And no you cannot take any actions since you dont know who the number belongs to. The ONLY way you can do this is to hand over "probable cause" to the FBI based on data you legally have, and have them get a court order for the CDRs and such. The most you can do is tip the FIB and then they are legally bound by the Constitution for further action.
Again, what private info can YOU tell me with ONLY that data - where's the violation?
Morally, ethically and legally and constitutionally: THERE IS NONE.
And Jersy, we ARE at war. Just ask Al Queda.

|5.12.06 @ 2:03PM|#

DB:
So what's the point of collecting the data?

Lazlo|5.12.06 @ 2:48PM|#

And before you speak, remember you are legally barred from looking up the caller ID data, consulting any database or resouce from the phone companies or civil areas or other domestic enforcement agencies.

Even if this were true, reverse directory information is available from thousands of private sources and databases, including (in many cases) a simple Google lookup of the phone number.

|5.12.06 @ 3:17PM|#

And if anybody really believes that "but they don't have a warrant!" is going to stop the NSA from looking numbers up in the reverse directory, well...these are, after all, the same people who wouldn't go to the FISA courts (the FISA courts, for Christ's sake!) because they might not get a warrant and didn't want to hear that!

|5.12.06 @ 3:34PM|#

And before you speak, remember you are legally barred

and that has stopped then when? Legally barred; just like they are legally barred from torturing prisoners; or legally barred from holding prisoners without charges; or legally barred from sending prisoners to other countries where torture is routine. But of course all legal barriers fall when the 'Commander-in-Chief' decides that they are a hinderance.

And that "we're at war" crap is more a matter of semantics utilized to justify behavior that would never be tolerated otherwise.

|5.12.06 @ 3:49PM|#

"And before you speak, remember you are legally barred from looking up the caller ID data, consulting any database or resouce from the phone companies or civil areas or other domestic enforcement agencies."

Um, not at all. I worked at a government laboratory for many years and I assure that anything that is in the public domain, they are allowed to use.

This is stupid on so many levels, but the easiest is that if there really was no desire to tie these numbers back to real people, the phone companies could go through and replace the real phone numbers with phony ones, retaining the patterns of what number called what. We do this in my current company all the time: it's called "anonymizing the data", and it takes 5 minutes. With anonymized data, you can do aggregate or theoretical studies, but because you can't relate it to anything in the real world, it helps you not a whit with the real world. Either they are tying the data back to real people, or they aren't doing anything.

Andy, who is in the field of social network analysis...

|5.12.06 @ 4:29PM|#

Well, Andy who is in the field of social network analysis, would this program help find terrorists? Can they really analyze this much data into something meaningful?

If they can, that's kind of scary in its own way.

Tom|5.12.06 @ 5:42PM|#

I feel bad falling to the base levels of name calling that goes on, but I feel compelled to comment on Deacon Blues. I find myself wondering how people such as he who are so obviously literate can be so clueless about how government operates. How do you even get to be literate without learning something about history, politics and social order? Is he completely taken in by the propoganda? Or is it really more of an intentional falsehood intended to help solidify the crumbling power of his political block by sowing confusion in the ranks of the less literate?

|5.12.06 @ 8:56PM|#

I don't know...

A portion of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act was posted on one of these site:

Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2511
Section 2703. Required disclosure of customer communications or records
(c) Records Concerning Electronic Communication Service or Remote Computing Service. -- (1) A governmental entity may require a provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service to disclose a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service (not including the contents of communications) only when the government entity -- (A) obtains a warrant issued using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure by a court with jurisdiction over the offense under investigation or equivalent State warrant; (B) obtains a court order for such disclosure under subsection (d) of this section; (C) has the consent of the subscriber or customer to such disclosure...

I would think that a file with (a) My phone number (b) A number I phoned and (c) What time this transpired constitutes "a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber" (me)whether or not I am explicitly named. The government demanding this information from a provider seems to require (1) a warrant, (2) a court order, or (3) my consent. Apparently, none of these exist for most/all of the records slipped to the feds. The government's position is "So sue us." The providers' position is... oh wait, they are being sued.

Lou

Is there another part of the act that provides exception?

|5.13.06 @ 12:19AM|#

I am sick and tired of these sycophantic right-wing apologists. I have just about zero faith in the Bush administration's ability to fight terrorism. Where is the evidence that they have a clue? Where's Osama? Really, anthing at all. Edify me. Just about all they do is politically motivated.

And what is the prime justification for these actions? Defending America, I guess. What about our defining document,the United States Constitution. Who's defending that? In the twisted view of the wingnuts, standing up for our constitutional rights is aiding our enemies.

John Kerry, Michael Chertoff, and dozens of other commenters are correct - fighting terrorism is more police work than conventional warfare. Bombers don't help. This is fourth-generation warfare. Logging that Aunt Millie called Uncle Jed at 5:30 to ask where Jethro went does not make us safer. Doing it hundreds of millions of times is monumentally stupid. Andy is right-on with his comment. Where is the evidence that this illegal programm helps? How many terrorists have been arrested? How many terrorist acts have been thwarted? I know how many terrorists linked to 911 have been prosecuted - one. At this rate we'll have them all prosecuted by 2150.

Michael Price|5.14.06 @ 12:35AM|#

To get anything more on US calls, they have to hand it over to the proper agency (FBI, DEA), who will then have to establish probably cause, go to a judge and get a wiretap warrant.

Or alternatively and far more likely they could use a reverse phonebook on their computer. Considering that they undoubtably have such information (how else could they identify the recipients of calls from all those terrorists who forget they're bugged?) this would be incredibly easy for the most computerised intelligence agency in the world. The legal restrictions on doing this would only operate
if someone came in and demanded records of
what programs the tappers used on their
computers, which even if such records were
kept has never happened and will never happen.
If it did my bet is on a "computer crash" that
"unfortunately compromised the logs".

The legal protections are still there. Your rights are still protected, and there is nothing the NSA can or will do to personally identify you unless one end of your call is overseas.

There's nothing they can legally do, but they've already shown they don't give a damn about that.

Hell, caller ID tells people you call more about you than the NSA got with this data.

And that's why you can turn it off. And why it only goes to the someone you choose to call.

Stop with the hysteria already.
The press is so full of shit and half-trughts that its obvious this was planted and slanted to damage Hayden and the President.

No, it's a real story and was not "slanted" unless telling people the truth is a slant.

I want the sumbitches who leaked this at CIA shot. Out front of the building in Langley where all can see what happens to traitors who value their politics above their nation's security.

No, you're the traitor who puts your politics above the law of the land and the threat of becoming a police state. Should people be shot
for reporting a bank robbery? Then why should they be shot for reporting NSA crimes?

Michael Price|5.14.06 @ 12:45AM|#

I'd just like to remind everybody that the Federal Government will not retaliate against Qwest for doing this by slanting legislation against them, even though communications companies are incredibly vulnerable to such in their highly regulated market. That is all, go about your business.

tablets|5.14.06 @ 6:40PM|#

I�d post a Scottish photo but blueyonder is letting me down again.

testosterone|5.14.06 @ 6:48PM|#

Does anyone else find that hard to process?

topamax|5.14.06 @ 7:06PM|#

We�re having a lazy Sunday around here, nothing special going on. I�m still trying to find a comforable sitting position�

toprol|5.14.06 @ 7:40PM|#

She Got Pimped Review (internetisforporn.com)

tramadol|5.14.06 @ 8:10PM|#

Separating, we laid down on the bed and cuddled for a short time. He suggested a shower to wash off the oil & I said I thought that would be a good idea.

tricor|5.14.06 @ 8:13PM|#

"P.G.S., I really can't function without you." I'm quite serious.

tylenol|5.14.06 @ 8:56PM|#

Actually, I�ve been back for a while now but too lazy to get back to writing anything here.

ultracet|5.14.06 @ 9:13PM|#

Graphic Stories � No more than three pages per submission

ultram|5.14.06 @ 9:43PM|#

Anyway, we're alive and well & hope to be back in the swing of things soon!

valium|5.14.06 @ 9:54PM|#

"But what if I'm not sorry?" (Defiant and proud, even in my shame.)

prescription-valium|5.14.06 @ 10:06PM|#

For the first time I just received an ecard that wasn�t meant for me. Strangely, I�m glad Brian hopes I�m better and is sorry for this morning.

online-valium|5.14.06 @ 10:18PM|#

It would be impossible to stock all the unique colors that folks ask for on a regular basis. So instead we now offer a new and unique color every month.

buying-valium|5.14.06 @ 10:43PM|#

Neal Ascherson just wrote in the Guardian about how the nation turned to talk

valium-buy|5.14.06 @ 10:55PM|#

Consider sticking around, lovers. Especially if you're over the age of eighteen.

diazepam-valium|5.14.06 @ 11:05PM|#

(It would be even more piercing if it wasn�t for those blooming rules�)

online-prescription-valium|5.14.06 @ 11:12PM|#

They'd worked on it, exhaustively, for so long. He'd rather go back to plumbing in Chicago. And a couple hours later, it was clear that was never going to happen!

pharmacy-valium|5.14.06 @ 11:26PM|#

This is the unborn grandson of the Mexican president, Vicente Fox, giving the �v for victory� sign. Full story here

buy-cheap-valium|5.14.06 @ 11:29PM|#

how about, he gasped, taking his tongue out of my cunt for a moment so he could form words, we use the ropes now?

cheap-online-valium|5.14.06 @ 11:42PM|#

so, he suggested brightly, settled in? how about we fuck now?

valtrex|5.14.06 @ 11:58PM|#

Feeling a bit like I fell down the well this week.

vicodin|5.15.06 @ 12:51AM|#

Sometimes being a sex slave involves just holding position until the end.

vioxx|5.15.06 @ 1:07AM|#

Just another lesson learned. A broken rule will come back and bite you in the ass in more ways than one!

wellbutrin|5.15.06 @ 1:39AM|#

And doesn't *that* little fact make your panties wet?

xanax|5.15.06 @ 1:57AM|#

I too let out a loud chuckle until I caught myself thinking "he might be serious".

xenical|5.15.06 @ 2:05AM|#

Any particular reason you'd want to fly to San Francisco? IIRC, Swingers is set in Los Angeles.

zanaflex|5.15.06 @ 2:10AM|#

Nigella is extremely fuckalicious. It's just a shame that she opted to marry an insidious prick with lots of money, instead of a rich man with an insidious prick...

zantac|5.15.06 @ 2:20AM|#

Damn, once again I was too disorganised to get myself ready in time for National Slacker Day

zelnorm|5.15.06 @ 2:33AM|#

It was well worth the sleep deprivation.

zithromax|5.15.06 @ 2:46AM|#

Down the roof and down the rods all around us,

zocor|5.15.06 @ 2:55AM|#

"There are too many anal penetration shots," she says.

zoloft|5.15.06 @ 3:08AM|#

"Only in New Orleans, and I don't think they were real."

zyban|5.15.06 @ 3:17AM|#

You can see the rest of the column here.

zyprexa|5.15.06 @ 3:25AM|#

For any family members out there who haven�t seen Bessie�s newest great grandchild yet, I�ve got three (fairly big) pictures here, here and here

drugs|5.15.06 @ 3:34AM|#

�My husband tells me that you know (Well Known Rope Top)?�

irritable-bowel-syndrome|5.15.06 @ 4:33AM|#

Those Friday Thing folk said that boobah is �a bit odd�

buy-adipex|5.15.06 @ 5:13AM|#

So help a merry kinkster out, friends, and leave a comment or email the_educated_slut@yahoo.com. Thank you, kindly.

buy-diazepam|5.15.06 @ 6:01AM|#

I think this would be fun to try. At least fun to try out on the comment spammers, of course, not on me!

buy-phentermine|5.15.06 @ 6:28AM|#

And my collar is lost somewhere in there.

buy-viagra-online|5.15.06 @ 6:59AM|#

oh, and my cleavage was reunited with miss rachel kramer bussel's boobage. the girls are still rosy from the encounter.

cheap-phentermine|5.15.06 @ 7:16AM|#

Just been listening to the new album on their website and it sounds just as good.

diet-pills|5.15.06 @ 7:33AM|#

When there�s no protest how can there be song The flowers on the mall told us something was wrong But now we�re back in control of the human machine We are the future Your future

ephedrine|5.15.06 @ 8:04AM|#

That's what Silvia says over at Sextherightway. And I am so not getting that. Probably because I love morning sex, and I'm not getting that right now either.

folic|5.15.06 @ 8:54AM|#

well, you'll have to go for a leak eventually, won't you? then we'll see what happens.

ionamin|5.15.06 @ 10:03AM|#

Finally, in my Try This at Home mailbag, I listen to one man's defense for why marijuana is the best sex drug of all time. Conflicting testimonies, anyone?

lipitor-side-effects|5.15.06 @ 10:26AM|#

straight from the telegraph comment pages!

online-pharmacy|5.15.06 @ 11:03AM|#

"That's OK. Also, I'm not going on vacation. I'm going on a business trip. I'll only be gone tomorrow and the following day. Can you revise the email you just sent out?"

tenuate|5.15.06 @ 11:27AM|#

I answered her questions, I just did not volunteer any further information.

viagra-alternative|5.15.06 @ 12:11PM|#

"Are you still posting explicit visuals on your blog?" asks a coworker, a few weeks ago.

accutane|5.15.06 @ 6:56PM|#

I sit down at my desk and start writing the job description.

|5.15.06 @ 7:26PM|#

Hey, for the scumbag using the copyrighted title to one of my songs as his nickname.... Try using your own brain for a moment and dream up your own. No telling what wonders it will open up for you in the world!

aceon|5.15.06 @ 11:22PM|#

"So, no more running. I aim to misbehave."

acyclovir|5.16.06 @ 6:25AM|#

As well as the main critical mass ride there�s now a north london version.

|5.16.06 @ 4:55PM|#

For those that think the NSA can not identify the number consider this.

Bet that the NSA has a contract with Choice Point, Lexus Nexus or some other data broker. All the NSA has to do is cross reference the phone numbers in their possession with phone numbers listed in land titles, state driver's lic, credit cards, bank accounts, marriage and death certs, ect and of all things, THE PHONE BOOK!!!!

Don't be so willing to believe an agency the doesn't really want to admit it exists. They are in the business of lying.

aleve|5.17.06 @ 7:35AM|#

For you? Chloraform and strapping tape. Or a magazine. Go with the one without the federal charges.

Reason Magazine

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices:

advertisements