 |
| applysense |
Sorry, I couldn't resist that pun
Recent disclosures have illustrated the vastness of the surveillance network of the UKUSA agreement, a joint comprehensive electronic intelligence agreement, amid the fallout from Edward Snowden's revelations. How does an attorney maintain attorney-client privilege amidst the writhing tentacles of the all-knowing Oz? (I know, another bad pun).Many of you in comments here, have expressed acceptance of surveillance in the pursuit of that holy grail; Counter-terrorism. The question now is where do you draw the line? Is blanket surveillance acceptable in the pursuit of trade negotiations? Criminal proceedings? More importantly, can you have one without the other?
I must reaffirm Ben Franklin's sentiment that "They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." How about you, how far are you willing to go?
No comments:
Post a Comment