Pristine civil liberties or effective surveillance?

Today’s events force the question: can we have both? This plot was interrupted in part because the US (not just Britain) picked up “chatter”. That means (or very likely means) that we were, among other things, listening to phone calls. 2,700 lives might have been saved and untold psychological devastation because that fascist SOB Bush insists on monitoring phone calls.

If anyone wants to monitor mine they’re welcome to it. Hell, give me the NSA’s number and I’ll patch them in to all of my phone calls.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Pristine civil liberties or effective surveillance?

  1. I would guess that the only people with anything to fear from surveillance of the sort that has been done and that will likely be done in the future are terrorists, drug dealers, child pornographers, or other criminals. And by doing it we can intercept situations like this.

    Like

  2. Wait a minute…are you saying that it’s okay with you if GWB listens to all your phone calls? Sure, that would probably allow us to round up all the bad guys, but it would also allow the current administration to listen to all their political opponents’ phone conversations, right? and then what?

    Like

  3. Red Herring Alert:

    Complaints against the NSA surveillance were not that there was surveillance, but that there needs to be judicial oversight.

    Like

Comments are closed.