Nate Willis
2A
Current Event #4 In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on Paris last November, many high ranking officials of intelligence agencies across the globe are pondering the question of increasing domestic surveillance. On the sixteenth, C.I.A. director John Brennan stated that “leaks about intelligence programs had made it harder to identify the members of the Islamic State.” (Shane, 2015). The issue of increased domestic surveillance in the United States is a controversial one because of Eric Snowden’s leaking of information about the N.S.A.’s mass phone and internet surveillance network. In response to pro-surveillance advocates, Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the ACLU, stated “as far as I know, there’s no evidence the French lacked some kind of surveillance authority that would have made a difference,” (Shane, 2015). Civil libertarians are on high alert as they fear the government will try to increase its domestic power in
…show more content…
As the first ten amendments to the Constitution are listed under the Bill of Rights, the liberties of Free Exercise, Free Speech, and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures are given to all American citizens. The question at hand is to what extent those liberties apply. Because of the actions of the Islamic State, surveillance can easily be used to target practicing Muslims, which violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Speech, in its verbal and symbolic form, is also at risk because at times when there is a perceived threat to national security, anti-establishment statements and symbols (examples of pure and symbolic speech) are usually monitored and possibly used against those whom are speaking freely (such was the case during the Red Scare and McCarthyism). Surveillance of an extreme kind is
Adam Penenberg’s “The Surveillance Society” reminds Americans of the tragic events of September 11, 2001 and the instant effects the that attacks on the World Trade Center had on security in the United States. Penenberg discusses how the airports were shut down and federal officials began to plot a military response. Although those were necessary actions, they were not as long lasting as some of the other safety precautions that were taken. The Patriot Act, which makes it easier for the government to access cell phones and pagers and monitor email and web browsing, was proposed. Politicians agreed that during a war civil liberties are treated differently.
Introduction Today, electronic surveillance remains one of the most effective tools the United States has to protect against foreign powers and groups seeking to inflict harm on the nation, but it does not go without a few negative aspects, either. Electronic surveillance of foreign intelligence has likely saved the lives of many innocent people through prevention of potential acts of aggression towards the United States. There are many pros to the actions authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) pertaining to electronic surveillance, but there are also cons. Looking at both the pros and cons of electronic surveillance is important in understanding the overall effectiveness of FISA. 1.
Abstract: This paper provides an analysis of the privacy issues associated with governmental Internet surveillance, with a focus on the recently disclosed FBI tool known as Carnivore. It concludes that, while some system of surveillance is necessary, more mechanisms to prevent abuse of privacy must exist.
Taylor, James Stacey. "In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Government Surveillance." Public Affairs Quarterly July 2005: 227-246.
The Web. 4 Dec. 2013. Calamur, Krishnadev. A.P.S. & B.A.S. 5 Things To Know About The NSA's Surveillance Activities. NPR.com - "The New York Times" NPR, n.d. -
The First Amendment protects our rights of free speech and assembly, the independence of the press, and prohibits official establishment or unfair criticism of any particular religion. Free speech rights can be thought of as having two parts, the right to have free access to ideas, and the right to express ideas freely. The right to calm assembly goes with free speech given that demonstrations and other political activity are protected as expressive behavior. While government actions threaten all these rights stated by the First Amendment, it is our free speech and assembly rights which are most at risk. The USA PATRIOT Act contains provisions that will criminalize people's legitimate expressions of their political views. For example, the Act creates a new category of crime; domestic terrorism blurs the line between speech and criminal activity. Section 802 of the Act defines domestic terrorism as "acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of criminal laws" that "appear to be inten...
Edward Snowden is America’s most recent controversial figure. People can’t decide if he is their hero or traitor. Nevertheless, his leaks on the U.S. government surveillance program, PRISM, demand an explanation. Many American citizens have been enraged by the thought of the government tracing their telecommunication systems. According to factbrowser.com 54% of internet users would rather have more online privacy, even at the risk of security (Facts Tagged with Privacy). They say it is an infringement on their privacy rights of the constitution. However, some of them don’t mind; they believe it will help thwart the acts of terrorists. Both sides make a good point, but the inevitable future is one where the government is adapting as technology is changing. In order for us to continue living in the new digital decade, we must accept the government’s ability to surveil us.
With the introduction of the internet being a relatively new phenomenon, the act of cyber espionage is not something that has been properly acknowledged by society. The American Government has done a stand up job of keeping its methods in the shadows and away from the eyes of its people since its documented domestic surveillance began on October 4th, 2001; Twenty three days after the Twin Towers fell President George Bush signed an order to begin a secret domestic eavesdropping operation, an operation which was so sensitive that even many of the country's senior national security officials with the...
Since the terrorist attacks at Sept. 11, 2001, the surveillance issue often has turned away the table in the debate of individual privacy or counterterrorism. By passing the Patriot Act, Congress gave President Bush an immense law enforcement authority to boost U.S's counterterrorism, and the President used his enlarged powers to forward specific programs in order to reduce the threat of terrorism and defend the country’s safety.
Video cameras are being deployed around the nation to help with crime solving, but some people are concerned about their privacy. Having cameras to monitor public areas have shown to be useful in situations such as identifying the bombers of the Boston marathon in early 2013. There have also been issues with these cameras however, as people are concerned they are too invasive of their privacy and have been misused by police officers in the past. Some people want to find a balance in using cameras in public so that they can continue to help with crime solving while making sure they are not too invasive and are properly used.
Privacy is not just a fundamental right, it is also important to maintain a truly democratic society where all citizens are able to exist with relative comfort. Therefore, “[Monitoring citizens without their knowledge] is a major threat to democracies all around the world.” (William Binney.) This is a logical opinion because without freedom of expression and privacy, every dictatorship in history has implemented some form of surveillance upon its citizens as a method of control.
However, government agencies, especially in America, continue to lobby for increased surveillance capabilities, particularly as technologies change and move in the direction of social media. Communications surveillance has extended to Internet and digital communications. law enforcement agencies, like the NSA, have required internet providers and telecommunications companies to monitor users’ traffic. Many of these activities are performed under ambiguous legal basis and remain unknown to the general public, although the media’s recent preoccupation with these surveillance and privacy issues is a setting a trending agenda.
All it took was one Edward Snowden to reveal the NSA’s worldwide data-mining practices. The art of being able to keep a secret is not as easy as many may think. Fifty years ago, this may have been a much easier challenge than in today’s world of an overwhelming curious and influential society, waiting to see the latest headlines the mass news media has to offer. Mass media has played a large part in shaping the current thought process that we see today. Then we throw in a world of social media, Internet and texting.
Gonchar, Michael. “What Is More Important: Our Privacy or National Security?” New York Times. New York Times, 17 Sept. 2013. Web. 22 Feb. 2014.
A major reason the U.S. needs to increase restrictions on the type and amount of data collected on individuals from the internet is due to the fact that the United States government can track communications and browsing histories of private citizens without warrant or cause. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, ...