Wiretaps and other surveillance could set dangerous precedent
Mike's Politically Right
Michael Culver |
IMAGINE SENDING AN e-mail to a friend about U.S. policies concerning the ongoing issue of domestic surveillance, “I think President Bush’s execution of executive authority is right for our country.”
The next day, a government computer, that automatically scans millions of e-mails everyday for suspicious phrases, kicks out your e-mail to a government agent because it misinterprets the message as, “I think President Bush’s execution is right for our country.”
The following day, agents from the National Security Agency, FBI and Secret Service knock on your door. They confiscate your computer, seize your financial records and freeze your bank accounts. You’re followed, video taped, interrogated and scrutinized to the point where your daily life is so interrupted that you cease to remember what freedom means.
Sound far-fetched, maybe so. Plausible? Definitely. But this raises some interesting questions. Is this legal? Does the Patriot Act give the Bush administration the authority to spy on U.S. citizens? Is it ethical?
And how do your fellow Americans feel about this surveillance?
A recent poll by ABC News/Washington Post found that about fifty percent of Americans consider wiretapping or electronic surveillance an acceptable way for the federal government to investigate terrorism and sixty-five percent said it’s more important to investigate threats than safeguard privacy.
It is important to that the Patriot Act works in conjunction with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and Title 18 of the United States Code. The Patriot Act amends Title 18 of United States Code and FISA to include all types of wire and electronic surveillance. In conjunction, these laws spell out the scope and legality of most, if not all, surveillance performed by U.S agencies with regards to national security.
The need for heightened national security deems the Patriot Act a necessary tool for prevention of terrorist attacks. How else are we to weed out those who wish to commit atrocities such as the Sept. 11 attacks.
Terrorists already have the advantage of surprise, and without intelligence gathering programs they gain another advantage in the war on terror.
Terrorist use computers to research, plan and execute acts of violence worldwide. It has been estimated that the use of the personal computer has cut their covert communication times from months to seconds.
But this does not give the Bush administration the right to circumvent the law. FISA explicitly states in article 1802, “(section 1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that…(B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party.”
The United States has a delicate system of checks and balances. This system was established, in a large part, so that no one branch of government may gain so much power that they can trespass upon the civil liberties of the citizens of our nation. When the president oversteps these boundaries, even under the guise of national security, he is jeopardizing the very foundation of the constitutional rights we deem so precious as a free democratic society.
Even if you buy the argument of the necessity of domestic spying for national security, where will it end?
The implications of these actions are not temporary, and the long-term effects can lead us down a road of unprecedented scrutiny in our personal and professional lives. In the near future, we may be forced to censor our lives and our communications in ways that mimic those who lived under Saddam’s oppressive dictatorial regime.
On another note: I have a challenge for every reader. E-mail your comments pro and con concerning the issue to [email protected]. And each subsequent week I will choose up to two statements that best describe the views of the readers and present these comments in the next weeks issue. Secondly, send comments and concerns about issues you feel need to be discussed.
Comment on this story in the Opinion forum >>
|
