This is more of a question than a regular post. President Bush recently authorized the NSA to eavesdrop of international phone calls and emails that originate from or are directed to those suspected to be linked to Al Qaeda.
On the surface it seems to be a huge infingement on civil liberties, mainly the right to privacy. However, the question is whether or not the current environment of paranoia caused by the rippling effects of 9/11 justify such action.
Everyone wants to be safe and secure, but at what costs do people want it? I'm attempting here to hide my true feelings on this because I want this to be an objective question and am seriously interested in what others think.
So in times of war or in anticipation of possible terrorists activities, should the government have the authority to eavesdrop on private conversation? If so, at what point does it become wrong?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I'm all in favor of a person's rights but in times like these, if some eavesdropping can stop an attack then by all means, proceed.
I would have more of a problem if this were a case of the government eavesdropping on just any conversation, but the way I understand it (and of course, I could be wrong) the eavesdropping would only be done if there was reason to believe that those involved in the conversation were also involved in terrorist activities. If that is the case, then I believe that the government should do anything possible to save American lives.
Post a Comment