Liberals, answer this:?

Question

Should someone have the right to call a terrorist in afghanastan without the gov't monitering your call?

Yes or no, please.

jester, a liberal of today is a socialist (usually a democrat), and someone who hates Bush and the conservatives, not for any specific reasons, except that they are told to hate them.

And the reason for "yes or no" is because, most liberals will type some crap avoiding answers, thinking they answered the question.

OIAN, I don't believe this govt was founded on not monitoring cell phone calls to other countries in a time of war.

Answer 1

No, they should be "monitoring" the call to Afghanastan. What a waste of resources listening into my discussion with my Grandma.

Answer 2

Less dangerous than a call to Falwell or Robertson (remember, they were the first to say that America DESERVED 9/11, and that the CHRISTIAN GOD was responsible.

Oh, and like a Repub government could figure it out anyway. When the president is informed that:

1.Bin-laden is planning an attack inside the US
2.That he might use airplanes, and
3.That the targets would be large metropolitan areas that were important politically (DC) and financially (NYC)

After being informed by Clinton and his staff that AQ and OBL were the single greatest threat to American citizens,

And, still does nothing … well, I’ll protect myself, thank you.

At least Clinton prevented eight such attacks from happening.

Did you know that OBL was not given permission to attack on 9/11, and has been silent because the people that run AQ were punishing him? That is why he made the tapes. By their rules, he had to offer us three opportunities to convert, or have our heads whacked off.

He has fulfilled that obligation and has been given permission to kill up to 10,000,000 of us.

On the other hand, OBL said that if we pulled our troops out of Saudi Arabia he would not attack again. And, Bush did pull our troops out of SA and OBL has not attacked.

We know OBL is smarter than Bush; he may also be more honest.

Are you aware that the Republicans have lost Afghanistan?
-the Taliban are stronger than ever
-opium production at record levels
-life of Afghans worse than with before US intervention, and now they hate us

Are you aware that Republicans have lost the war in Iraq?

Are you aware that the Republicans are losing the war on terror?

Of course you know these things, but you do not care.

You want all Americans (except idiots like yourself) to lose their rights, and I would not be surprised if you wanted to torture and kill Americans, too.

After all, you and Islamic Radicals are both cut from the same stupid religious cloth.

That's why all conservative Christians should have their calls monitored. It is for the safety of the country - I see that now.


-----------------------------
volleyballchick -

Nice spanking of the Christian-fascist terrorist.

Answer 3

Yes.

Now, answer this: Should someone have the right to call a friend and ***** about the president and the administration without the government monitoring your call??

Yes or no, please.

Or better yet: What if someone is calling their priest to confess the five murders they did just last night, to absolve their sins. Does the government have the right to listen in to that conversation - which is priviledged and can not be used in a court of law? Or if someone is calling and speaking to their defense lawyer about their defense on an upcoming trial. Again, it is priviledged communication, and cannot be breached. So what is the government going to do with the info? They have knowledge of a crime. What if it was a federal case they found out the info about?

You are silly to think that anything gives the government the right to trample on our constitutional rights. How dare you think that is a valid argument!

Answer 4

no

the government has been doing this long before todays terrorist threat. people under investigation for all sorts of crimes have their calls monitored. all the govt have to do is present reasonable cause to a judge and ask the judge to grant permission. its when the govt DOESNT ask a judge, that is what causes the problem.

** the govt does get a "free" 48 hoursto listen, without asking judge.**

next time ask the question in the proper context.

Answer 5

Two questions --1) Is this "just" for liberals ( and by what definitions of Liberal, Conservative, Libertarian, etc do you mean), and 2) Are you asking that the only response be either "Yes" or "No", without any and explanation or reasoning as to why or why not? Sorry to be so nit-picky, but was wondering/curious about the question in general.

Answer 6

A convicted terrorist would warrant a wire-tap.
A suspected terrorist would not, since that means anybody the government doesn't like.

Why don't you read some of the ideas this country was founded on before you go touting authoritarian impositions that cause more problems than they solve?

Answer 7

Yes

Answer 8

Is everybody in Afghanistan a terrorist? Can I call the president, or a business there without having someone spying.

Answer 9

as long as there is a warrant... there is no problem...

if there is no warrant... no one has any idea of who they are monitoring... besides those who are doing the monitoring...

do you trust your government to be perfect?

why do conservatives want yes or no answers... they can't handle discussion?

Answer 10

if th can prove im calling afghanistan before they start monitoring than yes...