I understand you comments, FairOpinion.
===
ON THE NET...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=annadiggstaylor
===
===
http://www.freecongress.org/commentaries/2006/060823.asp
"Terrorism Over Kingship – 43 Pages of Near Rant"
By Marion Edwyn Harrison, Esq.
August 23, 2006
===
===
Note: The following text is a quote:
---
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2006/August/06_ag_550.html
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
THURSDAY, AUGUST 17, 2006
WWW.USDOJ.GOV
AG
(202) 514-2007
TDD (202) 514-1888
Statement from the Department of Justice on Yesterday’s Ruling on the Terrorist Surveillance Program
The Terrorist Surveillance Program is a critical tool that ensures we have in place an early warning system to detect and prevent a terrorist attack. In the ongoing conflict with al-Qaeda and its allies, the President has the primary duty under the Constitution to protect the American people. The Constitution gives the President the full authority necessary to carry out that solemn duty, and we believe the program is lawful and protects civil liberties. Because the Terrorist Surveillance Program is an essential tool for the intelligence community in the War on Terror, the Department of Justice has appealed the District Court's order. The parties have also agreed to a stay of the injunction until the District Court can hear the Department's motion for a stay pending appeal.
###
06-550
===
===
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=24040
"Why Britain Stopped the Terror Plot"
By Insight Magazine
Insight Magazine | August 25, 2006
ARTICLE SNIPPET: "The Homeland Security Department has neither the legal nor technical tools to match the British capture of terrorist operatives before they were about to blow up passenger airliners.
Officials said U.S. law would not have allowed the FBI to conduct the type of surveillance that led Britain to uncover the al Qaeda cell and capture what could be the network’s chief. They said the department also does not have the funding to detect new types of bombs used by al Qaeda.
''What helped the British in this case is the ability to be nimble, to be fast, to be flexible, to operate based on fast-moving information,'' Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said.
Officials said British authorities have greater powers of surveillance and investigation, which facilitated the capture of more than 20 suspected al Qaeda plotters. In contrast, they said, Congress has been reviewing the Bush administration's warrantless eavesdropping program and military tribunals.
On Aug. 17, U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ruled in Detroit that the National Security Agency's wiretap program was unconstitutional and ordered that it be halted. The administration plans to appeal the decision.
"If this program were to be halted, it would hamper our ability to foil terrorist plots," said Sen. Mike DeWine, Ohio Republican and member of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee. "It is a critical tool to prevent America from being attacked.""
From the other article you posted:
"Officials said U.S. law would not have allowed the FBI to conduct the type of surveillance that led Britain to uncover the al Qaeda cell and capture what could be the network’s chief. "
It's very clear, that our intel agencies, need a wider latitude, not more restrictions, to be able to prevent terror attacks.