Replies

...but it kinda sounds like it's gone further than that.
...but I have not seen anything that would lead me to believe it has been limited in scope.

Everything I've read indicates the scope of the eavesdropping has been broad.

These are your words - why are you attacking me?
Your post to me was uncalled for.

Your post read as if I'm OBVIOUSLY some igmo that believes everything I read from the media. That was uncalled for sir.

First off, your assumption is incorrect. I always try to find multiple sources to get closer to the truth. But how else would you suppose a person get their information at least initially about a particular subject? From the media of coarse. Then you can pick it apart to get at the truth.

Secondly, all the shanagens that go on in the Federal government does not give me a warm fuzzy at all about the "limited scope" of an eavesdropping program.

Hell, look at the Clinton's and how they used the FBI and Internal revenue service to pressure their opponents. What about Sandy Burglar, Hillary and the FBI files, the government guarding our borders--yet millions flow across. I could list hundreds of instances that the government has not been level with the American people.

Do you believe your government when they tell you something? I choose not to have my rights infringed for the sake of catching a couple of guys.