The second part of the question almost answers itself. "Is this surveillance justified if it helps stop terrorist operations?" If surveillance were actually to be proven successful in stopping terrorism and saving lives, it would be hard to argue against it. But the real issue is that we don't -- can't -- know whether it does or doesn't.
» Back to full entry
» Back to full entry


Featured Comments
Torture doesn't stop terror operations. We do know this. Not because this was U.S. military and intelligence doctrine for years, grounded in experience and research. "Enhanced interrogation" (torture) of high-level Al Qaeda prisoners after 2001 usually resulted in fabrications and untruth, as prisoners came to tell their torturers anything they thought the torturers wanted to hear. President Bush even used some of this torture-extracted "intelligence" in a speech, which of course was false. The community of nations, over many years, came to the consensus that torture is NEVER justified. Ends do not justify means. This consensus was crystalized in international treaties and conventions, and also in U.S. Federal law. But in a few short years, Bush threw all of this out the window. Bush is the first American president in history to legitimize and legalize torture. Every legislator, Republican or Democrat, who voted for the Military Commissions Act, which immunizes Bush's torturers, and Bush himself, from prosecution, will bear that disgrace for the rest of their ignominious lives.
August 8, 2007 5:43 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on August 8, 2007 17:43