The second part of the question almost answers itself. "Is this surveillance justified if it helps stop terrorist operations?" As in the case of torture, if surveillance were actually to be proven to be successful in stopping terrorism and thus saving lives, it would be hard to mount arguments against it.
But the real issue is that we don't -- can't -- know whether it does or doesn't. We lose our liberties -- or, in the case of torture, allow inhumane punishment -- in a general cause, not for a specific, knowable outcome such as the one in the question. It is so easy to abuse such power granted in a general, untestable cause, that we should not grant it.
Please e-mail PostGlobal if you'd like to receive an email notification when PostGlobal sends out a new question.
Email Me | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
