technology and national security / privacy issues / Edward snowden The massive 9/11 attacks revealed some obvious flaws in our security system. Terrorists not only managed to slip through the immigration and airports but also managed to live, train and plan within the United States for many years. The resulting fear of other terrorist groups who might have been living and training in U.S. were justifiable. In this regard, congress came close to passing the patriot Act that offered the government more powers to go after the terrorists. Nevertheless, security has since been tightened at the airports, borders and ports. Moreover, department of homeland security has since been created to monitor and control the efforts (Lyon, 2007).

Why government surveillance violates our constitutional rights

The government surveillance has no authority to have round the clock information of our religion, sleeping and waking hours, a person making calls to his friends, people making Christmas calls, our daily life, spying on our social life, the amount of colleagues we have and even knowing our political interests and affiliations. The NSA also keeps track of calls to emergencies, abortion clinics, sexual assault cases, helplines and support groups which is totally illegal and uncalled for. Thus NSA is committing a crime itself and invading the personal lives of Americans for that matter. It is also violating the first amendment in the American constitution. It must be stopped dead in its tracks (McVeigh, 2013).

The increased government power has been blamed on the deprivation of security and civil rights formally enjoyed by the citizens. For instance, people have and still are being put in jail in the absence of trial and access to a lawyer. Another example is, just like Clinton administration, the bush administration began particular local NSA spy operations on Americans without being overseen by the court. According to the civil rights advocates, a dangerous group in the form of government big brother is in the process of being established and is a threat to the way of life of Americans. Impracticable wartime efforts such as palmer raids and Japanese internment have been referenced as justifiable reasons for the present fears. Palmer Raids was an attempt by U.S. Department of Justice to deport and arrest anarchists and leftists from USA once and for all. Nearly, 500 such individuals were taken off American soil during the year of 1919. Thus, these actions are highly questionable under the pretext of American law (Kennedy, 1980). There have been many cases in case of American-Japanese imprisonment due to government detaining citizens in times of war. This is again a case of state committing crime against its own citizens by keeping a watch on them (Irons, 1976). Unfortunately, majority of these policies, including setting up wiretaps in the absence of a court warrant continues even under the presidency of Barrack Obama (Lyon, 2007).

The act of denying people their civil rights essentially interferes with the very definition of being an American really means which in turn hands the terrorists victory. The ability of individuals to lead a life free of government interference, whether one belongs to the majority or minority with the current government, is one of the things that make USA a great country. Therefore, the removal of civil rights disintegrates the very essence of being an American. There is really another better way of awarding the terrorists' actions that destroying Americans' way of life (Michael et al., 2010).

The existing protections offered by the constitution are being violated even as the U.S. constitution being regarded as one of the most enduring and intelligently created documents of all time. This explains why U.S. is the most successful country in the world and also the reason why many people across the globe come to settle here. It is quite unfortunate that the war efforts focused on terror is destroying constitutional force. Individuals are being tracked even in their places of

Additionally, right to place has been violated deeply. It has commonly been said that, in his efforts to fight terrorism, the U.S. attorney general has the U.S. constitution on one hand and a pair of scissors on his other hand (Michael et al., 2010).
Justifying Government Surveillance

In a bid to establish the justifications for government surveillance, a question that remains unanswered is the extent to which our civil rights and privacy should be reduced to fight terrorism. Terrorists never really commit crimes unless they engage in act of terrorism itself. The current system of justice states that a person must commit a crime for them to be arrested. The bad news is that, the very first time a terrorist carries out a crime leads in massive deaths and severe losses, a good example is the 9/11 attack. Terrorists are so fanatical that they are always willing to give up their lives for their course. This being the case, we have limited deterrent. It is so surprising that Al Qaeda manuals have information on how well to blend with the society as a 'law abiding' citizen (Minsky, 2013).

If we failed in our efforts, thousands or millions of people could get killed. More than three thousand people died on 9th November in 2001. Obviously, this number is small compared to the number of people who could die if a chemical, nuclear or biological attack was to happen. Terrorists have not made any effort of hiding the possibilities of such life threatening acts. There are no doubts in the possibilities of terrorists using weapons if they had the opportunity to do so. Jose Padilla was arrested if though he had not technically committed the crime of dispersing a dirty bomb. What happened in his trial can be classified as Federal Conspiracy Law. Herein the government only had to prove what might happen in the future, rather than what actually happened in the past. Padilla was arrested and charged for planning to commit a crime (Revcom, nd). Should we have waited until he had committed the crime for him to be arrested? If we had information that 9/11 terrorists would strike, should they have been arrested prior to committing the crime (Minsky, 2013)?

The economic damage of such attacks is measured by the number of people put out of work and the wealth destroyed. Specifically the 9/11 attacks cost the economy unsaid billions. Many people across the world felt this economic impacts since many nations are dependent on the U.S. economy. Besides the number of lives lost, the effect on the quality of life is worth keeping into consideration. When the economy weakens, people are put out of work, and thousands or even millions of people across the world come close to starvation levels and poverty. In this regard, the costs of failing to act are far higher than those of action (Feldman, 2011).

Agents can rely on circumstantial evidence and intelligence to detect a possible terrorist attack, although they may not be in a position to prove it beyond reasonable doubt. Intelligence gathering is not exactly scientific. Majority of elite terrorists are now experts in avoiding any actions that could get them arrested and it is therefore highly unlikely that agents will be able to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt, most especially when no crime has been committed yet. Although some activities might not constitute to a crime, they are naturally suspicious and agents should at least be in a position to wash or investigate the people involved (Allmer, 2012).

There would be additional tools for dealing with crimes not related to terrorism such as drug trafficking. The wars on drugs, locating kidnappers and fighting organized crime at times facilitate tracking of information related to war on terror. Therefore, the law enforcement would be given another tool in their fight against these things. This has become extremely important as the drug war in Mexico spills goes over the borders (Allmer, 2012).

Some amount of trust has to be awarded to the government if anything is to be accomplished. Some dubious acts and scandals that occurred in the past, including Monica-gate and Watergate have resulted in weakened trust in the government. It is not impossible to not find a government official who has not lied or misled at some point in their career. Nevertheless, things are not like they were in the past as there is a lot of media attention to all the officials say or do that it has become hard for them to abscond any misdeeds. The media makes spectacles out of small government misdeeds while such reports represent only a small proportion of the total work done. Officials need to be accorded even a little trust as they do their work. They need to be given the opportunity to establish how best they can get work done instead of wondering how well to cover their butts (Laidler, 2008).

Terrorists will have no option but to…