Privacy vs. Security Post-9/11
Debate here. Cousin-in-law Frum appropriately gets top billing.
Topics: GWOT
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 12:36 pm Comments (3) on Friday, May 11, 2007
3 Responses to “Privacy vs. Security Post-9/11”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
May 11th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
London in the UK is blanketed with security cameras, and that didn’t stop the 7/05 homicide bombers. I’m leery of letting the government have a free hand in surveillance of citizens. On the whole, I believe the US government is trustworthy, but how long would that last without our restraints on power in place? So I suppose I have to come down against.
On the other hand, a few kidnappings and murders have been solved because of security cameras (but they were mostly privately owned).
May 11th, 2007 at 9:17 pm
Nadine Strossen, a professor at New York Law School and president of the American Civil Liberties Union, says: “It would be tragic if we let the terrorists terrorize us into abandoning the very ideals that they attacked..
Gosh Nadine, guess we could kinda’ make the same DAMN statement, about the A.C.L.U.
You see Nadine, a hell of a lot about you, is out there already. If I paid a fee, I could find out everything about you.
May 11th, 2007 at 10:31 pm
My ancient and wise grandmother, who was around before income tax, once told me that you never allow the government to get so much as a toe in the door, or you’d soon find it squatting in your living room.
They always start by noting something or someone loathsome to decent people, and before you know it the decent people are also made criminals.