The ChicagoTrib asked it's readers how they felt about *'s eavesdropping

[sabra]

The good news is, most aren't drinking the Kool-aid

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0512230219dec23,0,6895977.story?page=1&coll=chi-newsopinioncommentary-hed

Eavesdropping on readers

Published December 23, 2005


This week the Tribune invited readers to declare whether President Bush's eavesdropping authorization is an unacceptable violation of rights, or a necessary component of the war against terror. Readers e-mailed their opinions. Here are some of their comments:


I believe the president, in a state of emergency, should exercise any and all forms of surveillance available in securing our nation. We are at war with an invisible attacker, and the president's power should allow this type and all available forms of surveillance at any cost, to protect us against another plot to kill Americans on our soil.

His job is to serve and protect his nation with all available means. I support the president's decision.


--Michael Curcio
Hoffman Estates



I'm all for it. If you don't have anything to hide, why should you be worried? It makes this country a safer place, and that is all that matters.


--Brian Farrell
Chicago



The decision by President Bush and his administration to authorize a domestic spying program is not surprising. This latest controversy regarding a secret program that involves spying on American citizens without going through the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act clearly illustrates how he thinks he is above the law.


How arrogant.
How dangerous.


--John Osbolt
Elmhurst


President Bush misled us about the reasons for going to war with Iraq, someone in his administration seems to have leaked the identity of a CIA operative, members of his administration have wanted to protect the use of torture and now he expects U.S. citizens to trust him when he says he'll only spy on the "bad guys." Doesn't he know his credibility is shot?


--Laura Knapp

Warrenville



Is breaking the law acceptable for someone sworn to uphold it? This silly question answers itself and reminds me of the Vietnam War quote, "We had to destroy the village in order to save it."


--Richard Friedman

Wilmette

[Viva_La_Revolution]

1. another good one...

This president has not asked the American people to make any material sacrifices in the war on terror, yet he felt justified in sacrificing our civil liberties for us. He claims it is an important tool to fighting terror--more important, apparently, than the majority of recommendations set out by the bipartisan 9/11 Commission, which he has failed to act on.

I believe in a relentless war on terror. But the point of this war is not merely to keep us safe. It is to keep us free. President Bush dishonors us all by secretly choosing otherwise on our behalf.

--Mike Cooper

thanks sabra!

[sabra]

6. np, it felt good to see most of my fellow Chicagoans aren't buying the BS

[AX10]

2. Here's another one:

We went from leaders of the free world to no better than Fidel Castro's dictatorship. I understand the need for security, but what gives anyone the right to ignore our Constitution? The president has already become a dictator, going against the Constitution and doing what he wants when he wants it--now spying on Americans without just cause. We're a pretend democracy.

--Essam Maan

Chicago

[sabra]

5. I can see that one making Freepers heads explode.

[mr blur]

3. I just don't understand anyone

in your country or mine with so little self respect as to say "I don't mind being spied on, they can listen to my phone or read my emails, I'm all for it!"

What is wrong with people?
:wtf:

[HereSince1628]

7. One thing is auto-obfuscation

The dimwits say I don't do anything wrong so I don't care about being spied on. Which is completely irrelavant.

In their foggy minds they completely miss that the urgently critical question is "Do you want a president who violates the constitution, the countries laws, and judicial decisions?"

I rather imagine if Zogby put such a question in his poll he would get near a 100% response of "absolutely not."

And so if the pollsters and the media won't ask this question WE MUST.

[justjones]

8. Do you think it might have to do with them never believing....

they could be part of a persecuted minority?

It seems to me that the people who support this pResident and all that he does identify with him and the ruling elite, if only in their minds, rather than those who they want us to believe would be the main target of the spying, which would be the ever elusive terrorist, who has been painted as the dark, swarthy Arab.

Of course, we know they are spying on those who don't fit that stereotype at all, for example, anti-war groups, but as long as they identify with King George, they believe he will always be in their corner.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

9. Just ask them if it will still be OK when

Hillary is President. :rofl:


This is no way an endorsement of Hillary. She's not my choice, but the Freepers really hate her!

[recovering democrat]

10. It works too!

This is the argument I have used about this subject exactly for this same reason. It is surprisingly effective and causes freeper types to seriously reconsider their excuses for Bush! Or, referring them to former GA Congressman Bob Barr, who most of them respect and who opposes Bush about this. The right wing seems to be really having trouble justifying Bush's actions and can be convinced not to support it with just a little effort.

[janx]

4. Laura Knapp

rocks! LOL!