I agree with rarelamb; we don't have a lot of information just yet. On the one hand, we were hit by a horrific terrorist attack due (in part, at least) to the failure of federal officials to either obtain or process information that might have prevented it. I want our government to recognize its failure, and redouble its efforts to gather the information that might help prevent the next attack. And some of the constraints on them, at least as they have been interpreted thus far, are asinine; it's silly to say that they can listen to a conversation, but only use the half of it that wasn't spoken by a US citizen.

On the other hand, the Bush administration has shown such disregard for human rights, and for reasonable limitations on Executive authority, that they don't have a lot of credibility left on questions of this sort. In times of national emergency, I'm prepared to allow our government a certain amount of latitude (temporarily, at least), if it seems that they need it. Lincoln's transgressions against the Bll of Rights were much greater than this, as were FDR's, and yet they are regarded as perhaps our greatest Presidents, principally because they saw this nation through times of great danger. But based on the Bush administration's track record, I am skeptical that they are using their real and/or assumed authority judiciously.

I think we need a full investigation. I am prepared to withhold judgment for now, provided that I have confidence that the facts are forthcoming.