The Right to Privacy Gone Berserk

By Josh Greenberger, published Oct 18, 2007
Published Content: 43  Total Views: 6,157  Favorited By: 3 CPs
Rating: 3.8 of 5
Does the right to privacy outweigh the right to life? From the way some of our laws are written or interpreted, it seems that way.

Seven U.S. soldiers were kidnapped on May 12 in Iraq by heavily armed al Qaeda gunmen. Four soldiers were killed, three were taken hostage. A search and rescue mission was immediately initiated, but then halted to comply with FISA (The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act), which prohibits tapping cellphones even in foreign countries without approval from the attorney general. The logic being that the communication lines to be tapped go through the U.S.

FISA was created in 1978 after the Watergate affair to provide oversight of covert surveillance activities. It prescribes procedures for requesting judicial authorization for electronic surveillance and physical search of persons engaged in espionage or international terrorism against the United States on behalf of a foreign power.

Over nine precious hours were wasted before approval came. A few weeks later, the body of one soldier was found in the Euphrates River, and an al Qaeda offshoot group claimed the two others were executed and buried.

It seems absurd, to say the least, that soldiers in the battlefield have the right to kill enemy combatants and terrorists on sight but need approval to tap their phones. What's so tragic about this case is not only that these lives may have been saved had rescuers been able to follow through immediately, but that the rationale behind this delay defies logic.

How can a soldier in an active battlefield have less leeway to act on suspicion than civilian law enforcement personnel and firefighters? If a cop suspects someone in a private residence is in imminent danger of being killed, does he need approval or a warrant to "break and enter," which is normally illegal, to avert the tragedy? Of course not. Does a firefighter need approval to break down a wall if he suspects someone on the other side is about to die of smoke inhalation? Would even a civilian be charged with "criminal mischief" if he broke a car window to rescue a baby who was moments away from death after being left in a car in 90-degree weather?

The Right to Privacy Gone Berserk
Location:
 USA
Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
 
 
Jeff Musall: I just looked over the article again. It looks just fine. But in a few months from now I'll look over your comment again and see if still looks as rediculous as it looks now. Thanks for the tip.

Posted on 06/10/2008 at 9:06:09 PM

 
Your assessments are wrong and your analogies are absurd. Perhaps in hindsight you will look back on what you wrote with dismay.

Posted on 06/09/2008 at 9:06:30 AM

 
The liberals are like the British in the Revolutionary War, they want us all to play by the rules even when the enemy doesn't. Of course, that was a very good thing back then because you don't want the oppressive forces to be very bright but that's beside the point. When you go up against people who don't have armies, who blend in with the civilians, and who are completely willing to blow themselves up if they think it will annoy you, you have to deal with things a little differently.

Posted on 10/25/2007 at 8:10:00 PM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
 
Most Commented On