According to Richards (2013), it is illegitimate and pernicious to establish an underground and comprehensive surveillance in the society. First, individual privacy, which should be granted and well protected by the law, is now violated. Under PRISM, personal details, including thoughts, movements, communication, transaction and health record, is being systemically and consistently collected without a permit from the owners. The right to hold these details is shifted from the individuals to the state. The state then can make use of the information for certain political purposes like filtering criminal/ terrorist-related suspects out of the government or even country.
Malware is exploited by hackers and governments to steal personal, financial or state secrets. Malware is typically used against hackers to gain information like personal identification numbers, credit card passwords. As malware steal information from people and companies more frequently, computer experts think malware is too dangerous to affect people’s life. It is necessary in order to anti- malware for people and society. Some computer experts
The nation can only protect itself to a certain extent but when it comes to terrorist they cannot protect themselves from such people so it is the duty of National Security to step in and to do so they use certain procedures like torture to gain information from the terrorists. If National Security did not use torture to retrieve some of the information it has, then many citizens would be in danger because of timed bombing, assassinations and planned attacks. Not using torture only makes it difficult for National Security to attain information because nobody would be afraid of the treatment they would receive from withholding important information and not only making it difficult but the process of attaining the information without using torture would take longer and for all we know there could be a ticking bomb. Torture is an advanced interrogation technique and people need to understand this. The world is developing and techniques will always change and become better just like technology does.
With the advancement of surveillance technology, many citizens feel that their privacy rights have been violated due to homeland security and the threat of terrorism. Throughout history our government has implemented domestic and international surveillance as a way to safeguard our society from other countries. Now the question that seems to arise within our society is if the government is infringing on our civil liberties? Or is this indeed protecting our nation from imminent danger? The balance between national security and the rights of American citizens was forged in 1791 with The Fourth Amendment.
Hobbes argument can be used to justify government surveillance because the government is monitoring information in order to uncover terrorist plots. In doing so, the government is doing its job by preventing an attack and ensuring the safety of its citizens. James Rachels states that the first tenant of social contract theory is “that people will not harm one anther-people must be able to work together without fear of attack” (Rachels, 143). This means that social contract theorist would argue in favor of the Patriot Act because it ensures the safety of its citizens by targeting individuals who want to harm
Cyber Warfare: General Information Cyber warfare has been defined as the use of hacking by a nation or a state, to conduct attacks on the strategic or tactical resources of the nation or state’s target. Cyber warfare is going to target any sensitive industry in the opponent's infrastructure. This means that the military, defense and weapons manufacturers, the civilian factories that make weapons, mines, and the national power grid that gives all of the above its necessary electricity. In other words, cyber warfare is the actions of a nation or a state to penetrate another nation's computers or networks, with the result of causing damage. Most first world countries can defend themselves from basic cyber attacks.
I’m watching you. I can find out where you are, who you are with, and even listen in on your conversation. If someone came up to you and said this you could call the police and get a restraining order, but that will not work here because it isn’t a person doing this to you, it is a government agency. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, the power hungry National Security Agency has used terrorism as an excuse to ignore the American people’s rights and is collecting information illegally on everyone. They claimed that they are collecting information to protect us from terrorism.
“The governments collection of this sensitive information is itself an invasion of privacy.But its use of this data is also rife with abuse” (ACLU, 2018). The quote is explaining how the use of our information by the government is morally abusive to us and our
On the other hand, media censorship is also used for wrong motives, mostly by the government who is trying to protect themselves from anti-politics ideas or any other movement against them. Censorship became at some point a weapon apply to keep citizens ignorant, by denying the entry or spread of sensitive information inside the country, authorities assure the status quo remaining, prohibiting to their nation the opportunity to learn more and to think differently, all because this could cause the loss of their power. Media censorship is a delicate matter where there is not a perfect position about it. As is known, media is one of the most important instruments use to communicate opinions in a short period of time to a big part of the world, this makes it a very power device with the capacity to change everything just with one word and give to the society great benefits, but it can also be used in negative ways, affecting directly the good relationship between communities, all critical aspects that make you think it is imperative to establish rational basic rules and boundaries to avoid the media become a dangerous threat to
Governments are extremely wary about the public being sympathetic towards terrorists, even if the grievances arise from oppression or injustice. This can be seen as the “inclination in counterterrorism policy making is to deny legitimacy to oppositional violence and to discourage the media from granting too public a voice to those who resort to sympathize with terrorism” (Turk, 2004). For example, a study of major terrorist attacks in the United States showed that they were a result of American involvement in other countries, which led to despair and adverse human conditions (Eland, 1998). However, this study was not widely publicized in the US media in order to curb the amount of empathy given to terrorist groups. In conclusion, this essay shows how different sociologists have different viewpoints towards terrorism, as they attempt to theorize the difficulties as well as the implications that terrorism has on society, such as increased fear and racial discrimination.
As you listen and watch, one has learned that the national security grounds the government started to illegally spying on citizens’ transaction and communication. I must say, that this brought reason for concern; because the Patriot Act bars such behavior. To add injury the government had no justification why their new surveillance method was not covered by the U.S. Patriot Act. However, I understand that the country is at high terrorist risk, but it is unjustifiably and unnecessary for the American government to infringe on our
Social media collect information about our daily life which is sold to other companies for profit, including the government. Government created agencies like the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency)and NSA( National Security Agency) to commit espionage towards their own citizens. Immediately, right after the terrorist attack in New York, the United States government have grown paranoid. In response they have decided to tighten the security within and out of the country. The “CIA’s primary mission is to collect, analyze, evaluate, and disseminate foreign intelligence to assist the President and senior US government policymakers in making decisions relating to national security… ”(“What We Do” 1).
Here is a clear cut example of why the government should limit their use of surveillance. It invades people 's privacy as Snowden found it and breaks people’s basic liberties. It is another thing to do this kind of activity, but a whole another thing to do this activity in secret, be accused of it, and then lie that you are not doing any
The patriotic Act has been highly controversial and widely citied The act provides sweeping power to government agencies. That is in monitoring the personal habits of terrorism suspects and anyone residing in the United States, or a U.S. citizen residing abroad. Individuals fear that this can be power can be abused. Many Americans feel that their privacy is being invaded, due to the fact that this act allows phones to be taped and records pulled, plus the ability to intercept Internet messages. The Patriotic Act has taken away our liberties, it gives federal government unprecedented power to monitor phone calls and emails of U.S. citizens without a warrant.
Not only does this spark rage, but also reveals that the government has been using its resources to data mine at the ignorance of citizens, where a computer algorithm tries to find potential threats in hopes of stopping terrorism. Additionally,