Tuesday, January 17, 2006

I HAVE A FAVOR TO ASK

If you read my NEWSGNOME blog, I’d like to ask you to post an anonymous answer on comments to the following question. Do not identify yourself. You can use a handle if you wish...I use NG when I comment. I’d appreciate your response. You can also send an email by clicking on the letter next to the comment but you do have to include your email address if you do that.

If America had suffered one terrorist attack in which at least one American died on American soil every year since 911, would you consider the wiretapping of phones without a judicial warrant of Americans talking to known al Qaeda numbers legal?

Please answer yes or no or add a comment. You can even criticize the question if you don’t like it, but if you do, you have to provide your own question.

Thanks, NG

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

I would say at least one American HAS died every year since 911 as a result of al Qaeda. Even if they hadn't, I still think the wiretapping is necessay. People complain George Bush is not doing enough to protect us and now they complain he is doing too much. They can't have it both ways.

Anonymous said...

If one was certain that these deaths were linked back to al Qaeda, then I don't think it should be illegal. Under normal day to day circumstances, I think a President receives more information than we the public do regarding all aspects of domestic and national security. Thus, he or she may feel it necessary to "tap" a line to protect national security. The question then becomes, how do you make the call? On that issue, I am not exactly sure where to draw the line.

Anonymous said...

You are asking if I am more concerned about who listens to conversations on the phone or the safety and security of my precious little ones? HUMMM....Let me see here....I think that people need to step back and really think about what is really important in this world.

Anonymous said...

I really don't mind the wiretapping at all even if no Americans have been killed by terrorists since 9/11 because they can still be here plotting for their next attack.
It seems the only people that mind are the far left wingnuts. Because once again they join the ranks of their "Beat Down Bush" crowd.

Anonymous said...

i never understood why people are worried about some phone taps on suspected al queda people. if a person has those kind of suspected contacts i really hope someone is watching them. al queda has no redeming qualities and everyone knows what they do to thier own women, not to mention any other innocent civialians. i am strongly in favor of the government watching these people, i don't have the resources to do it but someone needs to have our saftey in mind. i am also not a terrorist and have no fear of being phone tapped, i'm more worried about a government that wants to take my firearms away.

Anonymous said...

YES!!! Absolutely David S. Mendoza
wire tapping - mail reading - and interrogation and detention! yes I am bullish about this. I think it's time we all were.

NewGnome said...

Anon #1 - I shortened the question and neglected to include "on American soil" in the original question. I have added those words so you're right, Americans have died via terrorists, in Bali, Spain, London and Jerusalem.

Anon #2 - The wiretaps by federal officials were put on known overseas al Qaeda phone numbers. Some of those numbers were called by Americans. At that point since the FBI doesn't have a warrant do we immediately stop recording the phone call? I think we must each make the decision on whether to wiretap Americans who conspire to kill other Americans?

Anon #3 - Precisely. If we know who to watch, we can protect our children and outserves. If and when the wire tapping becomes unnecessary then we can consider other options.

Anon #4 - Wilson jailed American citizens without trial before and during WWI. FDR put Americans in concentrations camps during WWII. Clinton used Echelon to wiretap thousands of ordinary citizens and searched Aldrige Ames home without a warrant. And you're right...its just the bash Bush groupies.

Anon #5 - I'm afraid if my phone conversations were tapped, they would wind up on the Internet with somebody selling them as a cure for insomniacs. There is a concerted effort to take our guns and our property.

Anon #6 - Hey DSM...howdy. Right on Bro....If we're going to protect our country and children...we've got to take action, particularly in time of war.


Thanks for your comments everybody. 100 per cent of the poll was that there is a responsibility of the President to do what it takes to protect us. Not the same result on
the liberal blogs....just the opposite in fact. They'd rather die and let their families die than be wire tapped during time of war.

Anonymous said...

I would feel fine. I personally have no reason to hide my telephone conversations. I understand that some people are upset, but crime doesn't wait for permission and if the conversations are of that nature you sometimes can't wait.

Anonymous said...

Isn't it amazing how many people agree with you but have to remain anonymous to do so?
TOS

NewGnome said...

I don't mind the anonymous too much, but if someone wants to have an exchange it makes it difficult to try to respond to them.

Noticed you on Bring It On. Your comment about the facts was a good one regarding this very issue. I find it amazing, how the fibs ignore the facts you presented.

At least, Cranky hasn't been able to censor me off that one yet...but he's trying. NG

PS. It is really sad that to express an opinion different from the fiberal press gets stomped on.

Anonymous said...

Yeah yours were really good too but you know how that manipulate the facts to benefit their agenda.
So instead of debating they just call people stupid.
TOS

Anonymous said...

There are too many "ifs" in this question. It is too conditional. The gov't has legal means to tap suspected criminals. Why give it unlimited power to tap into your conversations and target you, if they don't like something you say. The govt will tap and spy on you anyway and making it illegal or legal won't stop them if they realy want to do it. If the gov't can hold people for unspecified charges for an unspecified amount of time then what is going to stop them from planting video or audio bugs in your house to "determine" if you are a bad guy? I seem to recall a book by George Orwell. Much of which seems to be coming true.
NG

NewGnome said...

Too many ifs? There is one if and your comment didn't address my question. So, according to your position: if TODAY bin Laden were to have been recorded telling an American citizen on a phone in this country that he was planning to crash a fuel loaded airliner filled with Americans into the the Sears building next week, you would find that authorities would not be allowed to stop the terrorist attack. An interesting position, particularly had you been on the top floors of the WTC...but then you wouldn't have had to worry about it anymore.

Apparently you would therefore disagree with Bill Clinton and Jamie Gorelick.
NG