I will tell you After I'll turn up the Volume.. (the CIA and FBI are after me)
39%39 Votes
No.
48%48 Votes
Yes.
13%13 Votes
I will tell you After I'll turn up the Volume.. (the CIA and FBI are after me)
This graph isn't ready yet
We haven't received enough votes with gender data to show this graph yet.
We will show the graph as soon as we have enough votes!
Results by Country
Results by Voter Type
Community votes are collected from you and other visitors to Ask500People. Independent votes are collected from visitors to hundreds of other websites around the world.
Sign Up or Login
Sorry, this data is only available to users with an account.
I wouldn't care if they were. I don't have anything to hide, so they'd be wasting their time. I do understand the need for monitoring for the safety of our Country. They don't monitor average Joes, they monitor people who are communicating with known threats.
The protection of our sovereignty is more important that being concerned that my phone conversation with my grandma might be listened to by the government. The only people who are paranoid of this are those who are guilty of breaking the law in some way (druggies, terrorists, liberals setting up their protests, and the like). The rest of us are fine with it.
I'd much rather compromise this right to not have my phone calls listened to than to have our nation attacked by terrorists again. Have you noticed we haven't been attacked by muslims since 9/11? You can attribute that to our President, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and the NSA, all of whom are constantly gathering intelligence (USING PHONE LINES) against the muslims.
The safety of our citizens and the sovereignty of our nation requires agencies and actions that do not necessarily fall under the guidelines of the constitution. We entrust our President and various agencies to this task. Many of their decisions cannot and should not be subjected to scrutiny outside of those agencies because that would compromise operational secrets and, therefore, national security.
Furthermore, I certainly HOPE the NSA is being thorough by tapping ALL of the phone lines. That gives us peace of mind and contributes to our nation's safety.
I just wonder if you are privy to the inner workings of the NSA or have you watched too many spy movies? There is no doubt that the NSA has the capability to monitor any phone call in the world (not just the USA), but I strongly suspicion that there are enough whistle blower around to take care of that problem.
Again... The safety of our citizens and the sovereignty of our nation requires agencies and actions that do not necessarily fall under the guidelines of the constitution. We entrust our President and various agencies to this task. Many of their decisions cannot and should not be subjected to scrutiny outside of those agencies because that would compromise operational secrets and, therefore, national security.
Do you think the telephone companies should be prosecuted for doing what they were probably told was in the interest of national security? I consider protecting us from terrorist attacks as being in the national interest.
You assume that they were doing something illegal. As you love to cite the constitution in your argument here, they are INNOCENT until proven guilty in a court of law.
Money my friend, money. One, it costs big bucks to defend yourself against the government. Second, some telephone customers would assume that where there is smoke , there is fire and would cease doing business with the telephone company accused. I hope they get their immunity.
You say hence the problem, yet there is no problem. Our country has not been attacked since 9/11/2001 and that fact is primarily due to successful wiretapping and intelligence leads gathered through that process. I assume you agree with this point waugs.
[1 point]4 years ago by CandleReplyEdited 4 years ago by Candle
I would agree with you, Candle, if I were certain that my communications were not being taken out of context. Semantics do allow much misinterpretation as we see here. In an ideal world (one where they could read my mind) I would not be concerned at all; I would feel secure and protected; however, since people are so prone to seeing only what they want to see in people's comments, I am not all that sure that excessive verbosity in one's public communications is always a good thing.
[1 point]4 years ago by ChipmonkReplyEdited 4 years ago by Chipmonk
Mike, you generally seem to have a good head on your shoulders. Do you really, in your heart of hearts, believe that ANY government can be trusted with so much power? You can sit here and claim that you're doing nothing wrong so you have nothing to worry about, but will you still be decrying everyone else when they finally come after you and your family? "Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it."
Our forefathers admonished us to keep an eye on our government lest it changes to something not intended. It didn't say to mistrust anything and everything.
People, people. You have been watching too many spy movies. I don't think any other country on the face of this earth goes to such lengths to protect the privacy of its citizens. The frequent questions about our governmental agencies tasked with the security of our country are made by people with an agenda (mostly, not all) and do what they can to plant the seed of distruct in USA citizens. Don't buy it people. Don't buy it.
Waugs, I don't know how much you know about this particular issue. I'd like to know your sources of "knowledge" and the kneejerk comment is a two edged sword.
"That explains nothing."? You have never heard of one political party going on witch hunts to hurt the other political party? I must say, you have lived a sheltered life.
[1 point]4 years ago by MikeHendReplyEdited 4 years ago by MikeHend
Now I see where your warped view of the USA comes from. I could have stopped at that rag the New York Times, but I sampled the others and couldn't find an objective source anywhere. Feingold? Really Waugs, do you consider this a non-biased source of information on anything concerning President Bush's administration. All of these sources are allegations, innuendos and many are politically motivated. Sorry, you bombed out on this one Waugs. You tried to sound impressive by listing several sources,but it didn't quite go over.
[1 point]4 years ago by MikeHendReplyEdited 4 years ago by MikeHend
Israel
I wouldn't care if they were. I don't have anything to hide, so they'd be wasting their time. I do understand the need for monitoring for the safety of our Country. They don't monitor average Joes, they monitor people who are communicating with known threats.
I agree.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user Replynot your problem waugs.......
I totally agree with you patriot.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user Replystill not YOUR problem!
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyWhat, are their phone calls about drug deals being intercepted by the NSA?
yep
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyLOL
I definitely think they should monitor waugs phone calls.
The protection of our sovereignty is more important that being concerned that my phone conversation with my grandma might be listened to by the government. The only people who are paranoid of this are those who are guilty of breaking the law in some way (druggies, terrorists, liberals setting up their protests, and the like). The rest of us are fine with it.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyI'd much rather compromise this right to not have my phone calls listened to than to have our nation attacked by terrorists again. Have you noticed we haven't been attacked by muslims since 9/11? You can attribute that to our President, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and the NSA, all of whom are constantly gathering intelligence (USING PHONE LINES) against the muslims.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user Replyand how would you know they weren't doing anything unless you monitored them...like I say, "not your problem!"
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplySave your breath, I mean fingers, waugs.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
You sir truly are an arrogant know-it-all clown!
This comment was deleted.
[0 points] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
LOL, he loves to cry and then flag posts. waaaaaaaa.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyThe safety of our citizens and the sovereignty of our nation requires agencies and actions that do not necessarily fall under the guidelines of the constitution. We entrust our President and various agencies to this task. Many of their decisions cannot and should not be subjected to scrutiny outside of those agencies because that would compromise operational secrets and, therefore, national security.
Furthermore, I certainly HOPE the NSA is being thorough by tapping ALL of the phone lines. That gives us peace of mind and contributes to our nation's safety.
I just wonder if you are privy to the inner workings of the NSA or have you watched too many spy movies? There is no doubt that the NSA has the capability to monitor any phone call in the world (not just the USA), but I strongly suspicion that there are enough whistle blower around to take care of that problem.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyAgain... The safety of our citizens and the sovereignty of our nation requires agencies and actions that do not necessarily fall under the guidelines of the constitution. We entrust our President and various agencies to this task. Many of their decisions cannot and should not be subjected to scrutiny outside of those agencies because that would compromise operational secrets and, therefore, national security.
Do you think the telephone companies should be prosecuted for doing what they were probably told was in the interest of national security? I consider protecting us from terrorist attacks as being in the national interest.
You assume that they were doing something illegal. As you love to cite the constitution in your argument here, they are INNOCENT until proven guilty in a court of law.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyMoney my friend, money. One, it costs big bucks to defend yourself against the government. Second, some telephone customers would assume that where there is smoke , there is fire and would cease doing business with the telephone company accused. I hope they get their immunity.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyYou say hence the problem, yet there is no problem. Our country has not been attacked since 9/11/2001 and that fact is primarily due to successful wiretapping and intelligence leads gathered through that process. I assume you agree with this point waugs.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyI would agree with you, Candle, if I were certain that my communications were not being taken out of context. Semantics do allow much misinterpretation as we see here. In an ideal world (one where they could read my mind) I would not be concerned at all; I would feel secure and protected; however, since people are so prone to seeing only what they want to see in people's comments, I am not all that sure that excessive verbosity in one's public communications is always a good thing.
I highly doubt it unless one is suspected of something illegal.
No, I don't think they are. Even so I don't like it. These things start being abused, we already know this.
How do we KNOW this? Certainly not because the New York Time suggested so.
Mike, you generally seem to have a good head on your shoulders. Do you really, in your heart of hearts, believe that ANY government can be trusted with so much power? You can sit here and claim that you're doing nothing wrong so you have nothing to worry about, but will you still be decrying everyone else when they finally come after you and your family? "Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it."
Our forefathers admonished us to keep an eye on our government lest it changes to something not intended. It didn't say to mistrust anything and everything.
Please, no condescending comments.
They have more important things to do ¬¬
People, people. You have been watching too many spy movies. I don't think any other country on the face of this earth goes to such lengths to protect the privacy of its citizens. The frequent questions about our governmental agencies tasked with the security of our country are made by people with an agenda (mostly, not all) and do what they can to plant the seed of distruct in USA citizens. Don't buy it people. Don't buy it.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyHe's a Democrat and a Republican is President. Need more be said?
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyWaugs, I don't know how much you know about this particular issue. I'd like to know your sources of "knowledge" and the kneejerk comment is a two edged sword.
"That explains nothing."? You have never heard of one political party going on witch hunts to hurt the other political party? I must say, you have lived a sheltered life.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyNow I see where your warped view of the USA comes from. I could have stopped at that rag the New York Times, but I sampled the others and couldn't find an objective source anywhere. Feingold? Really Waugs, do you consider this a non-biased source of information on anything concerning President Bush's administration. All of these sources are allegations, innuendos and many are politically motivated. Sorry, you bombed out on this one Waugs. You tried to sound impressive by listing several sources,but it didn't quite go over.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyAre we not required as American citizens to question authority?
No.