This could be the only time you ever see me link to an article at The Nation:
Granted, I’m not entirely on board with what the article is trying to say. I understand if The Nation had its way, every terrorist would be afforded the same rights as American citizens, Guantanamo would be closed, and we’d holding terrorist trials in NYC. So, I get it.
In fact, I don’t believe terrorists and the people who finance them should get attorneys at all.
However, it also occurs to me that NSA agents who listen to calls like the ones mentioned in this story can also listen to calls between common criminals and their attorneys should they be so motivated. I guess at some point we have to determine that “in defense of national security” doesn’t mean the Government can do anything it wants at any time.
I know what people will say: The NSA and other agencies are doing great work out there; they need to be given some leeway. And, I don’t disagree with the first part of the statement. Regarding the second part of the statement, though, would one of those same people tell me when “too far” is too far? I simply want to know what the boundaries are.
Because, if the Government can get away with listening to you talk to your attorney, then you really don’t have an attorney.
In my Govicide novels, this is exactly the case. There are no “attorneys.” People are charged, always convicted, and executed in most cases. You know, kind of like North Korea. Why? Because the Government is always correct–it would NEVER bring to trial an innocent person, would it?
Of course it would. And that’s why attorney-client privilege can’t be breached–what the NSA is doing is far enough.