If you see an internet poll that doesn't ACCURATELY reflect

[bush_is_wacko]

the circumstances regarding the ILLEGAL, domestic, WARRANT-LESS, wiretapping try and send a corrections request to the "news" agency that is doing the polling.

Unless they accurately reflect the real circumstances it is very hard to get an accurate response. If they aren't wording it to say something to the effect of "Do you believe our federal government/executive branch has the right to perform domestic wiretapping WITHOUT a warrant the poll is meaningless. Apparently even the news "media" has not been able to grasp what the president actually admitted to doing.

We all know there are a lot of individual Americans that do NOT understand that those were a violation of our Constitution because they were done without a warrant or ANY oversight period.

Edited to accurately reflectmy OWN inaccurate reflection of the facts...Sorry

[minyks]

1. If

or both of the parties are outside the United States is a warrant required?

[bush_is_wacko]

2. I think you are asking if both parties are outside the US is a warrant

required...

I believe the answer is no. Our Constitution does not guarantee rights to foreigners. Of course with Bush in office even the Geneva conventions are out the window so I would say anything goes outside this country right about now.

[Vincardog]

3. When my cell phone bounces off a satellite is that out side of the country?

If so nobody is safe from being tapped.

[bush_is_wacko]

4. Nobody is safe from being wiretapped....

It is wiretapping WITHOUT a WARRANT that is at issue here.

Domestic spying HAS indeed been going on for as long as spying, wiretapping, blah, blah, blah, has been going on but it USED to and STILL does require a warrant. The "military force" issue the president is hanging himself on doesn't give him the authority to do what he has been doing. There are ways to get around the law but HE didn't use those LEGAL means.

I think domestic spying in and of itself IS a necessary evil, but BLANKET wiretapping, with no named person and without a warrant IS NOT LEGAL. By the way, I think there is far more to this story than what has been released to the public. (Someone with some clout was likely tapped without a warrant.)

By the way, Nixon tried to get away with the very same thing. It is one of the the reasons he resigned. THE major reason IMO. He knew he wasn't going to be able to defend himself in the impeachment process or escape conviction.

The only REAL difference here is this so called "military force." The Senate and House claim they did not give him that particular authority (wiretapping US citizens without a WARRANT.)