Current, former officials back secret surveillance

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    June 17, 2013 9:34 a.m.

    If the President had been governing instead of being out each day to figure out how socialism was going to go forward, he would have figured out that people like freedoms instead of being subservient to others, especially, the government.

    What a time for us to fall under socialism without a war with Russia. Russia doesn't even have to worry now that we won't like socialism, as our President has set that tone. He got elected but he doesn't have all the people on his side. That is a shame that he doesn't try to govern for the people but only his Chicago bunch of hoodlums ready to beat us up with IRS, freedom of press vindictive behavior, and the NSA scandals that the President probably likes as it is a crisis.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    June 17, 2013 8:37 a.m.

    IRS targeting, guns to Mexican cartels, increasing taxes, unprotected ambassador killed in Benghazi, seventeen trillion dollar debt, millions taken from citizens for lavish conferences, and vacations?

    And some are willing to let these people have secret surveillance over our families? I don't get it.

  • My2Cents Taylorsville, UT
    June 17, 2013 4:40 a.m.

    LOL, like all criminals they think that when they break the law it is their right and have no regrets or ethical standards. Breaking the law is illegl and this secret spying is unconditional no matter how you read the document. Security is the duty of the citizens and why we are armed and have the right to bear arms to secure and keep the government from this kind of intrusiveness and oppressive information. Spying is an affront to freedom and our laws. All citizens are the US militia, not just those in uniforms so using security as a shield and lie to wrongfully amass personal and private information as national security is not justified.

    This dysfunctional government has gone over the edge and its time all spying and all spy agency's be dissolved since we no longer have any enemy's outside this country, so our dictator claims.

  • Tators Hyrum, UT
    June 17, 2013 1:13 a.m.

    Day-to-day conversations and communications of average citizens have not and are not targeted. No one has yet given me an example of how they personally have experienced any direct negative consequences in their life because of this terrorist surveillance program. It's rather sad to see the paranoia generated from what some people imagine up in their minds... things that are hardly even remote possibilities, yet all the while receiving additional national security that they don't seem to comprehend nor appreciate.

    How and why is this specifically against the Constitution?

    What has actually happened is that multiple terrorist threats have been detected and taken out before they could be enacted. For this we should be grateful and supportive of this program.

  • Hemlock Salt Lake City, UT
    June 16, 2013 2:24 p.m.

    The first issue is secret surveillance and its legality. The second is the security of that data. As the NSA and IRS have shown, no data held by the government is safe. How long before someone again leaks information for political purposes? When Nixon secretly recorded conversations he was castigated. Recently someone secretly recorded Sen. Lindsay Graham's benign conversation and was rewarded.