Menu

Brittany Schneider Professor Loon English Comp 2 June 1

April 26, 2019 0 Comment

Brittany Schneider
Professor Loon
English Comp 2
June 1, 2018

Introduction to Argument
According to the authors’ article “Government Surveillance of Citizens Raises Civil Liberty concerns” National Security Agency has been reported to have several network streams over their networks for communications. This has not just happened by their own efforts but also had help from other telecommunication companies who are providing them with direct access to several streams. With this article, the author has raised many questions of what extents should the government be allowed to go with the public safety. The author, however, explains that the judge approved the method since it only tracks data, but not the calls and that the government is never allowed to listen to any individual telephone calls. In contrast, the need for the government to protect its national security and the citizens, its still going too far with the spying. The article explains that videos, audios, e-mails and other connection logs help the analysts to track any person’s movement over time. With this, they can be able to watch or read all the personal ideas as you type. The authors argue that the governments’ surveillance of citizens program is lawful is unconvincing since the decision is determined by the government, but not the public.
The author of this article should understand that by there should be needs for security and personal privacy. For instance, with the evidence given by Washington post that the FBI and NSA have other programs helping them target the American citizens should show everyone that the act is illegal and the programs do not care about individual privacy. Also, with the idea, they can watch everything and all ideas typed by individual and track the person’s movement should be enough evidence that the program is becoming more of American privacy than their securities. The author does not consider that with time several other telecommunications companies will give permission to NSA for a direct access over their networks with direct streams, this appears that they correct a large volume of American citizens communications. Even if we don’t know what the FBI and NSA are capable of accessing, it still raises the question of whether it is legal in protecting customers data (Katz, Lewis,p.549).
The FISA law should also be taken into account according to the authors’ article concerning the government surveillance. When FISA was accounted for quick actions in need of any security emergency, it required that the government be involved and notified in less than 72 hours and only seven judges to be involved in monitoring, however, those guidelines loosened and the judges were increased to 11, but George Bush simply ignored the act instead of taking it to Congress (Risen, James, Eric Lichtblau, p. A1) In the year 2006 it was reported that George Bush’s administration was wire-tapping individuals phone calls and emails worldwide. Therefore, the author should take into consideration that the use of FISA for the need of quick reaction from the government is also not sufficient enough to justify that it is for government security purposes, but rather the government used it to gain individual data meant for their privacy. Therefore, while the article reflects mostly on the government surveillance of the citizens, it should be concerned on the citizens’ privacy to prove that the NSA and FBI methods of spying on Americans is not illegal.

Work cited
Katz, Lewis R. “In Search of a Fourth Amendment for the Twenty-First Century.” Ind. LJ 65 (1989): 549.
Risen, James, and Eric Lichtblau. “Bush lets US spy on callers without courts.” New York Times 16 (2005): A1.