1. To what degree do we actually have a security problem?
2. Once it's made transparent for us to see that/if there actually is a grave problem:
3. What causes the security problem? What are we doing/what have we been doing that is causing others to think it's worth the sacrifice to launch attacks, instead of living peaceful and happy lives?
Surveillance could never be more than a stupid patch to the real issue at stake. We have to get to the causes, now. Obviously, that means a lot of rich people will lose valuable contracts.
That's because those discussions usually hinge around changing the way we live in some way - be it more expensive consumer goods/utilities or what-have-you.
Either way, any increase in the cost of living (unless directly attached to 'creating jobs' whatever that is) is inherently evil and wrong. Therefore, a close-scrutiny of, in my case, US foreign policy leads down an evil and wrong road.
Beautiful, isn't it? We want increased transparency in public and private areas, we want less violence, we want less exploitation of third-world workers, we want, we want, we want. BUT, as a whole, we're not really willing to sacrifice much of anything.
> "civil liberties vs. security"
1. To what degree do we actually have a security problem?
2. Once it's made transparent for us to see that/if there actually is a grave problem:
3. What causes the security problem? What are we doing/what have we been doing that is causing others to think it's worth the sacrifice to launch attacks, instead of living peaceful and happy lives?
Surveillance could never be more than a stupid patch to the real issue at stake. We have to get to the causes, now. Obviously, that means a lot of rich people will lose valuable contracts.