NSA Wiretap Program

Ever wish you could whisper in the president's ear? Give him advice on issues plaguing the nation? Well, here's your chance to tell the world what you would do if you were president of the United States. Twice weekly, we'll ask our readers a question about an issue facing the nation and post your responses here.

Today's question:

If you were president, what limits — if any — would you put on the NSA as it tries to track terrorists inside and outside the U.S.?

Click on the links in the box on the right to read recent stories on this topic, then e-mail us at speakout@foxnews.com. Check back during the day to read more responses from FOX Fans and to see if yours was posted.

Here's what FOX Fans are saying:

"I am willing to give up many privacy issues to the president to stop terrorism. Let him do what he thinks he needs to do to keep me safe.” — Bill (Columbus, OH)

“The NSA spends most of its research dollars trying to find ways to mine nuggets of intelligence information from the vast amount of raw material it collects. If part of that mining process involves tying phone calls to suspected terrorists, whatever their residency, so what? It’s just a tempest in a teapot being whipped up by anti-Bush administration factions to score political points at the expense of our national security. The people who leak classified information about our most secret intelligence programs are not patriots - they are criminals who are helping our enemies avoid detection. The same people who would like to twist the law to create technicalities that prove these surveillance programs are illegal totally ignore the unequivocal law breaking that occurs when classified information is leaked. It’s a disgusting double standard that is clearly politically motivated and is hugely detrimental to our national security. If we are to have any chance of using our intelligence apparatus to avoid future 9/11-style disasters and worse, we cannot continue to lay bare our intelligence capabilities to those who would do us harm. At some point, we all must trust our intelligence institutions to do the right thing to best protect us.” — Michael

“I would not put any restrictions on gathering the information needed to fight terrorism. I don't understand the flak the President has taken for doing his job and it appears he is doing it right since there have been no further attacks on our soil since 9/11. If, God Forbid, another attack were to occur, all those that are whining about the NSA will be asking how the terrorist slipped through. They will have no one to blame but themselves.” — Bryan (Lenexa, KS)

“There should be no limits placed on the NSA when it comes to monitoring the communications (electronic or written) of any non-citizen, regardless of their origin, status or reason for being in this country. This monitoring should include all individuals who are here legally but who still hold citizenship in any other country, even if they have become naturalized U.S. citizens. The safety of my family and our country as a whole should not be compromised for fear of treading on the 'rights' of these people. The first and highest obligation of government is to protect the physical well-being of its citizens.” — Dave (Jefferson City, MO)

“In the 21st century, with the dynamics of the world at a breaking point concerning the recognition of the U.S. as the one and only legitimate world leader, it is of insurmountable importance that the American people, as well as the leaders and populations of our allies, accept the role of the increased powers of our security and intelligence agencies. Without the ability of the U.S. to do whatever it takes to protect its own security, we are left in world without a stable center and in a world that is susceptible to crisis. Thus accepting that the NSA is an agency with a demonstrated record of integrity and ability, going back to the acceleration of our victory over Japan in World War II, I can see no reason why there needs to be a concern over the liberties that we allow to their discretion.” — Mitchell (New York, NY)

“I would give the CIA full reign in tracking terrorists and would ask congress and the senate for full power to do my job. I would pursue anyone who leaked our methods and prosecute them to the extent of the law. I would act now in securing our borders; later may be too late. We must maintain our sovereignty.” — John

“The president and the government should use all means to protect us and destroy our enemies. In fact, we are not doing enough to ensure the enemy does not harm us again. Our forces in Iraq should be more aggressive and eliminate the combat and/or terrorist potential of the enemy there. Domestically, we need to track anyone who appears to be a potential threat. Bottom line, let’s quit pretending we can fight a war politely. More power to the president and the government. Bless our men and women in uniform.” — Joe (Houston, TX)

“I would impose little, if any, limits on the NSA keeping tabs on conversations with terrorist organizations. I would remember the wisdom of Abraham Lincoln who said, ‘Far more scoundrels than honest men will hide behind our constitutional guarantees.’" — Tom (Lemoore, CA)

“If I were president, I would allow only leads that have been long established to be investigated. Who these people are, is no secret; they make very little effort to hide themselves or their disappointment with our lopped sided foreign polices. If there is no link between any of these groups and a particular citizen then the citizen privacy should be respected. Any wiretapping must be approved by a federal judge.” — Jimmie (Minnesota)

“I would get the NSA involved electronically, of course, in monitoring our borders, ports and other ports of entry. It seems as if they're spending considerable effort looking at law-abiding citizens, and less on people who are flooding the country.” — Jim (Lynchburg, VA)

“I would maintain executive oversight of the program, setting broad goals and letting the agency put a plan together for my approval; then allow them to move forward. Wiretaps, surveillance, etc. would be OK with me and I would explain the agency's actions, and results, to the American people, to the extent that disclosure would not compromise operations. There have always been covert activities on the part of governments and there always will be. Our enemies have hidden behind our freedoms to kill innocent Americans and they can no longer be allowed this luxury.” — Tony (Belleair Beach, FL)

“When Americans allow our government to ignore laws, the constitution, and our checks and balances system, the terrorists have already won. They hate our freedom and way of life. By permitting our civil liberties and privacy to be trampled on in the name of national security, we are acquiescing to a life of fear and corruption. Our soldiers are fighting in Iraq to protect and spread the very thing Bush is taking away at home. Apathy, blind trust and a lack of accountability will destroy America without help from al Qaeda.” — Carly

“I would suggest that before conversations are completely listened to, there has to be enough due cause to suspect that the call is harmful to our country and any U.S. citizen.” — Ed (Central Point, OR)

“Keeping our country safe from terror is the most important job our president has. Whatever it takes to accomplish that, let it be done. I do not feel that my privacy will be invaded and I do not think that the NSA is interested in listening to citizens who go about their daily business. As far as I am concerned, there should be no limits put on our safety.” — Judi

“None, the safer the better. I am one of the few that trust our government. If you have nothing to hide, then what is the problem?” — Jeff

“Keeping Americans safe is first and foremost. We have nothing to hide in this household, and if they want to waste their time listening to my phone conversations, fine. Whatever is necessary to keep us safe up to and including closing our borders.” — Bruce

“The only limits are to ensure that their activities are truly targeting terrorists or other criminals. They need to be considered a ‘wing’ of the military because they are fighting against those who would like to see America destroyed. Handcuffing the NSA with peacetime-based legalities is not only absurd, but also dangerous. Even after 9/11, we still have not understood that we are in a war for survival and our enemies are many. If the NSA needs some unusual freedoms to ensure our safety and survival, then that seems the only reasonable course of action.” — Chris (Kansas City, MO)

“The limits that are put on the NSA are the opportunities we give to the enemy. What the NSA is allowed to gather should be boundless. What they may justly investigate should be based on separate evidence that justifies the need for further information; and any link with a known terrorist should always be enough for starters. That would be our opportunity to exploit their limitations, through the door they've left open.“ — Loren (Tulsa, OK)

“I have no objections to the administration listening to our phone conversations with terrorists or those associated with terrorists. I do, however, object to all of our country’s methods for prevention of terrorism being made public. I also object to the detailed explanations the press provides for how weak our borders, shipping and postal systems are. These terrorists do not need confirmation or any new ideas on how to attack us.” — Justin

“If I was president, I would set up a special court or commission to handle any specific cases where an individual United States citizen can be heard if they felt they have been damaged by the NSA or any government agency activities related to domestic wiretapping, phone call monitoring or call analysis, video or audio surveillance, spying, or any other process which is focused on counterterrorism. If that individual can prove that damage truly occurred and that they absolutely had nothing to do with terrorism or aiding terrorism, they should be rewarded a substantial settlement quickly. I don't believe that you would find many, if any, truly damaged individuals, even over years of time. Then, I would turn the NSA loose with whatever tactics, with presidential approval, is deemed necessary to protect the safety of our citizens and country. The ‘right-to-privacy Kool-Aid crowd’ needs to try to find some reality instead of their hypothetical concerns. Unless you’re doing something illegal, why would you care if the NSA listened in?” — Gary (Omaha, NE)

“The limits the NSA must stay within are well-defined, and carved in stone. Congress (both parties) has committees that are fully briefed on what the NSA is doing. Yet every time the Democrats have the opportunity to expose the inner workings of the NSA's very effective programs, they do so gleefully in hopes of scoring points against the president. I can only hope that the American voters realize where the priorities of these terrorist-aiding, self-serving bureaucrats lie.” — Mark (Mesa, AZ)

“I would allow NSA to do their job. They can collect all the information they need if it prevents another terrorist attack on my country. The NSA is on our side, protecting us every way they know how.” — Al

“I would explain to the American people that if there is nothing to hide there shouldn’t be any concern for the tapping. We are in unique times, and protecting America from another attack requires some proactiveness. The only Americans that need be concerned are those Americans who seek to subvert the protections put in place to safeguard America against future terrorist activities. If those individuals do have a problem with this NSA tapping, my question to them is, ‘What are you trying to hide?’” — Ron

“The only limitation I would put on them is that they could only wiretap U.S. citizens known to be conversing terrorists or known terrorists cells within the U.S. If NSA was wiretapping all along, 9/11 may not have happened.” — Carl

“The line should be drawn at our civil liberties. We should not sacrifice our freedom or liberties, which include the right to privacy, as a result of this war. These are the very things we are fighting to protect. As long as there is oversight and no domestic spying, then I support the president in his measures to track down and defeat terrorism, but we must draw the line there.” — Andy (Louisville, KY)

“No limits, as long as they are tracking terrorists and their communications, which I believe is what the NSA is doing. Our senators and congresspeople, both Republican and Democrat, should get on board and show they are concerned about our national security.” — Joann (Dallas, TX)

“I am completely shocked at the number of people who came back with no limits on what the NSA should be able to do. Could it really be that Americans are waking up? Dare I hope that they are? Great job, people. If you have something to hide, mail a letter. Otherwise, let the rest of us feel like we are getting our money's worth out of the government.” — John (New Jersey)

“I would give the NSA as much room as they needed, as long as it is within the law. I would also ask Congress for tougher laws to punish those who leak classified NSA tactics to the media.” — Robert (Glen Allen, VA)

“I would limit the NSA to doing what is constitutional, legal and necessary. If I felt that necessity trumped constitutionality and legality, then I'd do what was necessary and invite the American people to judge my decision.” — Chris (Thousand Oaks, CA)

“I would reactivate the CD Civil Defense Network, to get regular citizens involved, non-politically, and then get the attorney general’s office to actively pursue the leaks from the security agencies and congress. This is a time of war, even if Congress will not declare such. I would then give the NSA, FBI and CIA carte blanche to do whatever needs to be done to secure the American people from terrorists. I would set up a bipartisan committee, like President Bush has done, to review any measures taken, but each member of that committee would be subject to the Secrecy Acts and could not divulge to anyone anything discussed. I would demand the newspapers abide by the Secrecy Acts, and to stop aiding and abetting the enemy. I would have the FBI shut down immediately any news organization that broke those laws, and let them work it out in federal court, but they would be shut down.” — Mike (Miami, FL)

“Every business has a data base on its customers. Many organizations sell names, addresses, phone numbers and client interests to other businesses. Security cameras track us when we enter and leave a business. Our luggage and our bodies are searched when we get on planes or enter public buildings, and we put up with it. Heaven forbid we track anyone calling someone in a Middle Eastern country! The absurdity of it is absolutely sickening! It angers me that some senators are again showboating for the cameras complaining about the so-called ‘illegality’ of the NSA while they sit on their rumps as illegals stream across our borders threatening our national security.” — Diane (Pennsylvania)

“One limit — keep within the constitutional boundaries.”— James

“Uphold and protect the Constitution, including protections against unreasonable search and seizure. We've fought many wars to secure these rights, starting with the revolution. Don't throw it away because people are scared of a few religious zealots. We need to prove we are both smarter and better than the terrorists.” — Jon

“Who do I send my phone records, bank and credit card statements to at the NSA? I have nothing to hide! They can have it all as long as it is used for the stated purpose of protecting us.” — Gary

“I would put very limited restrictions on NSA’s task of tracking terrorists. I have nothing to hide and consider my telephone and e-mail not secure. I am more considered about hackers and identify theft then I am about the government looking at my emails or listening to my phone calls.” — Mike (Albuquerque, NM)

“There are no limits when it comes to fighting terror. Have we forgotten 9/11? I have no secrets, and I trust our government to use information on me appropriately.” — Ron

"No limits provided that the sole purpose is to track terrorist activities and communications. It seems that whatever we've been doing is apparently working as we've not been attacked since 9/11." — Philip

"If U.S. soldiers are willing to give their lives for our freedom, then who are we to complain about a government protecting us and them from terrorists. The ACLU does not protest our rights, it is trying to take them away." — Don

"I would do exactly what the president is now doing. If people aren't doing anything wrong, they have nothing to worry about. This is a very dangerous time we live in and I don't want to see another 9/11 just because people are worried about phone numbers. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and this is a small thing in my eyes." — Debbie (Louisiana)

"If I were president I would remind the people that we are at war. That as long as we are at war there will be no limits for the NSA than there already is. We did it during World War II. Since we have people in this country that are working for the enemy, this is necessary. These people have drifted into our country and have to be stopped." — Gay (Libby, MT)

"I would remind our president of the words of a great American, Benjamin Franklin, who said, ‘Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.’" — Sue (Colorado Springs, CO)

"So-called wiretapping. I find this argument against this to be just plain stupid. I have AT&T as my phone service provider. So what if they gave the government my phone records. Thousands of companies pass this info to each other every day for marketing purposes. Not only that, but they also pass along your name, address, financial information, etc. I wonder how many others are getting this info from other countries or organizations that would like to see your demise. Makes you wander what people are doing behind closed doors that they hope nobody else finds out about. Those are the people I worry about, not the government." — Dennis (Rock Island, IL)

"No limits. People need to wake up and remember the past. There are large groups of people in this world that will stop at nothing to dominate the masses and try to achieve the fall of all civilized forms of government to return the world to the time of local warlord control. This is an ongoing process on every continent, including our own, and it has been around for centuries. It only takes a little thought to realize that since 9/11, we have taken the battle overseas to them and they neither like it nor can sustain it. Only persons in this country who are dealing with persons outside this country with known desires to see this country fail have anything to worry about. It seems somebody is worried since there appears to be such concern, and these individuals need to be asked some tough questions." — Neil (Louisa, KY)

"President Bush can't win. After 9/11, most Americans were screaming that he and his administration had failed to keep us safe. We all heard the complaints that the president, the CIA, the FBI and everyone else in our government should have done more to safeguard the American public. They screamed that the CIA and the NSA had failed in their information gathering, otherwise, they would have been able to thwart the hijackers plans. Now, President Bush, is taking every measure available to him to keep another 9/11 from happening and he's catching hell for it. I don't, for one second, believe the NSA is listening in on my conversations with my wife on what she needs me to pick up from the store on the way home from work. If they are, I don’t care. I do believe they are scanning calls throughout the U.S. looking for key words and catch phrases that might lead them to the next potential threat. I certainly hope they are. We are in a war. We are under attack. We are living under a constant threat. Our government has an obligation to use everything at their disposal to go after the bad guys and to keep us all safe. Knowing that they may be listening in on whether I need to pick up the dry cleaning or not is of no consequence for me. 'Ill make that trade all day everyday. I say keep up the good work and keep listening." — Steve

"I don't get it. No matter what the president, the NSA, the CIA or the FBI does to try to thwart terrorism, both Republicans and Democrats stand up and cry. Is that all they do? Maybe they should try being proactive, instead of reactive. My advice to President Bush is to really talk to the people, to have a conversation with us. Talk from his heart, not from a piece of paper. I don't want to know everything the government is doing to protect us, because if I know, then the bad guys know too. But, I do want to know that this administration understands the situation and is taking every measure possible to not only to protect us but also to put an end to these fanatics, wherever they may be. And, like it or not, they are here among us and I certainly don't know how to spot them. Of course, I would hope that all the agencies would act within the law, but we all know that our laws are subject to multiple interpretations and I'm willing to allow a little leeway to achieve results." — Rhonda (Allentown, PA)

"Allow traces of phone, web, e-mail, etc. to areas where suspected terrorists operate. When found, come down like a big hammer on them. Do not close the borders, but secure the borders to know who, and why, people are coming in." — David (Louisville, KY)

"Absolutely none. We should do whatever it takes to prevent another 9/11 or any terrorist attack. Those worried about invasion of privacy either have a political agenda or something to hide." — Tom (Rochester, NY)

"I would keep doing what is being done. The wiretap issue is getting totally out of hand for political gain only. This type of information should have never been released. The knowledge of how we try to protect ourselves can only be helpful to those that want to hurt us. To the Democrats and liberals that are jumping on this band wagon, I say start thinking about the protection of our country and its citizens instead of self." — Guy (Newnan, GA)

"I'd put no limits at all. The safety of America and the American people is first and foremost. If the NSA wants to monitor my phone calls or e-mails, I have no problem with that as I have nothing to hide. Those with something to hide and those who live in fear of every little thing are the ones crying the loudest about this. Some folks are more afraid of their own government than those who wish to destroy it. Unbelievable." — Joe (Elmwood Park, IL)

"I believe the NSA is doing a great job. It is very evident because we have not had any major attacks. I think that prevention is better than after the fact doing an investigation to prosecute someone for a horrendous crime." — Eugene

"I understand that to keep our country safe, we made need to give up some of the liberties terrorists are taking advantage of. I have no problem with the president tapping into the phones of terrorists who wish to harm us. I also understand why many people do not like the thought of our administration listening in on our conversations, but I would rather have a small part of my liberties violated than to go through another 9/11. Besides, what is the big deal if you have nothing to hide?" — Mandi (Texas)

“I would not put any limits on their power to track and stop terrorists in and out of this country. It seems NSA has done a great job so far and as for the phone records of millions, who cares? How much of our private life is available through public records? I don’t have anything to hide and if it means keeping America and Americans safe here and abroad then more power to them.” — Linda (New Bern, NC)

“Let them do their jobs. I’m not a criminal and I’ve got nothing to hide. Whatever it takes to keep my family safe is fine with me.” — Mike (Pewaukee, WI)

“I consider myself to be very conservative, but when it comes to rights of the people, I would never let any branch of the government infringe on any of its' citizens rights.” — Matt (Ohio)

“I would give the NSA unrestricted access to do what is necessary to keep our nation secure. I would demand that if, by chance, they appear to have discovered something, they must present their evidence to a panel of three federal judges to seek appropriate warrants prior to any further investigation.” — Randy

“There is no limit to any wartime measures taken to safeguard the security of our country.” — William (Homwood, AL)

“First of all, I would make sure that the program is not made public. Secondly, the president is doing exactly what he should be doing with regard to this particular program. I trust him completely on this issue. I believe he is guarding our privacy within the confines of the current law. But since this program has been made public, are the terrorists still using cell phones to communicate? If I were a terrorist, I wouldn't be. I would use the old fashion way, drop notes off in a mutually agreed spot.” — Lisa

“I would only put limits only on what is not useful in stopping the enemy and what is, in fact, not lawful. I am not influenced by the press distortion of what is useful and lawful. I go to experts and transcripts as a check on press reporting when it comes to combating our enemy.” — Pat (Denver, CO)