Simplicity
From Ars Technica:
Balancing national security with the public’s fundamental right to know what the government is doing in its name is a difficult challenge, but no challenge should necessitate abdication of essential checks and balances.
Ryan Paul (the author of the article) is wrong. Balancing national security with the public’s right to know what the government is doing is easy. There is no legitimate business of the republic that cannot be conducted in full view of the public. For example, if the FBI needs to use quiet, possibly questionable methods so as not to spook a suspect before he can be arrested, fine. But once he’s arrested, all the methods and all the reasons for their use must be published. It’s the only way we can ensure that positions of personal power are also positions of personal responsibility. If actions made in the people’s name can be kept secret at will, then “national security” is just a clever euphemism for job security.
