Surveillance too wide
Regarding Howard B. Slaughter Jr.'s letter “NSA OK” (June 28 and TribLIVE.com): It is just not that simple.
First, I would like to thank Mr. Slaughter for his service. And I am sure all he penned was absolutely correct. However, all the surveillance by the government failed to alert anyone to the murderous intentions of the Tsarnaev brothers, even though they posted incendiary jihadist YouTube videos and attended a mosque that was known to have anti-American propaganda.
Personal and sensitive emails, tweets and photos have been used to further an agenda by embarrassing or otherwise discrediting an opponent (think Gen. Petraeus and Eliot Spitzer). There is indeed a fine line between privacy and national security. There just needs to be more evidence of intent for the surveillance than a “we'll listen to whomever we want to” attitude.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Don’t forget Highmark patients
- AG’s office no place for porn
- Beyond wacky
- Perk in peril?
- A proper salute
- Today’s big lie
- EPA proposal a threat to all
- Bad politics, poor judgment
- Wrong then & now
- License, insure bicycles
- Figures conflict