This document discusses the debate around national security surveillance by intelligence agencies. It presents arguments on both sides of the issue. The pro argument is that intelligence agencies like the CIA and NSA play a vital role in national security and have helped prevent terrorist attacks since 9/11 through surveillance techniques. However, the con argument is that this surveillance infringes on Americans' right to privacy and civil liberties. Many feel their privacy is violated, and there is public mistrust of intelligence agencies due to past mistakes and covert actions. Additionally, some of this surveillance may violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

1. POL360: McCarthy 1
Kati McCarthy
POL 360: American Foreign Policy / S14 Munsil
March 18, 2014
Introduction of Issue:
The National Security Act of 1947 created the Central Intelligence Agency and National
Security Agency.i
Since their origination during the Cold War, these two agencies have remained
highly controversial. Due to the secretive and covert nature of their work, there has been much
mistrust of intelligence agencies. Recently with the rise in terrorism and new technology,
intelligence agencies have found it necessary to resort to domestic surveillance. The
controversial question is: Do the benefits of national security surveillance prevail over the forfeit
of personal privacy and certain liberties?
Pro:
Intelligence organizations, such as the Central Intelligence Agency and the National
Security Agency, and their surveillance operations are vital to the success of American national
security. After the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, word started to spread that several
federal agencies and local law enforcement were aware that there were threats made by Al Qaeda
concerning attacks on American soil.ii
These agencies had failed to work together and provide
each other with data that may have helped to “connect the dots”.iii
This “intelligence gap”
resulted in a successful terrorist attack on American soil that devastated the entire nation.
Decreasing the intelligence gap by encouraging inter-agency cooperation and gaining better
means of gathering quality intelligence was necessary at a time such as this.

2. POL360: McCarthy 2
These federal agencies have continuously eliminated attempted terrorists attacks since
9/11 through the use of surveillance techniques. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Americans felt
vulnerable and insecure. Hook and Spanier state that “strict new measures were clearly needed to
protect airports, coastlines, electrical utilities, communication networks, and government
buildings from future attacks.” These new measures included invasive searches at airports,
limited public information, increased domestic surveillance, a decrease of legal defenses for
alleged terrorists, and “profiling of minority groups associated with terrorism”.iv
National
security surveillance increased not only for foreign threats, but it also increased domestically.
Grudem refers to surveillance, specifically domestic wiretapping, as an “urgent defense
interest”.v
Part of this urgent defense interest is preventing further terrorist attacks. Anti-
terrorism expert and journalist Ronald Kessler stated that the work of the CIA, FBI, and military
forces are the reason there has not been another terrorist attack since 9/11; he also goes on to say
that since the 2001 terrorist attacks, these groups have found, detained, or eliminated around
five-thousand terrorists.vi
The main area of controversy over surveillance came when a New York
Times article revealed domestic phone call and email monitoring.vii
However, this monitoring has
proven successful in foiling terrorist attacks. One such example given in the Times article is that
of Iyman Faris: “The eavesdropping program had helped uncover a plot by Iyman Faris, an Ohio
trucker and naturalized citizen who pleaded guilty in 2003 to supporting Al Qaeda by planning to
bring down the Brooklyn Bridge with blowtorches”.viii
According to the Heritage Foundation, as
of September 2011 at least forty terrorist attacks have been prevented because of
counterterrorism and intelligence tactics.ix
Comprehensive intelligence is indispensable for the
United States to combat the threats presented by terrorist groups. Federal agency surveillance has
facilitated in decreasing terrorist activity within the United States borders.

3. POL360: McCarthy 3
The legality of agency surveillance has been questioned over the years. The complexity
and urgency of the situation makes it difficult to obtain a warrant prior to monitoring calls. “If
you are listening to a call between terrorists that lasts two minutes, there is no time to go to a
local court and get the nearest judge to issue a warrant for that call because you will miss it.”x
The USA PATRIOT Act has also lent to legality of federal surveillance. This act was put in
place in aftermath of 9/11. The USA PATRIOT Act did three things to aid government agencies
in ascertaining intelligence: (1) “eased government restrictions on domestic surveillance…
allowing federal agents to gain easier access to citizen’s phone and medical records, business
transactions, and email messages”; (2) “allowed ‘sneak-and-peek’ searches of private property
without the owner’s knowledge”; (3) “made it easier for federal agents to detain and deport
foreign citizens suspected of either being or supporting terrorists”.xi
The USA PATRIOT Act
over ruled the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 which was put in place during the
Vietnam War. Although the National Security Agency surveillance program is disputed as highly
invasive, these programs are only being deployed on “targeted computers”.xii
The NSA is posing
as social media sites such as Facebook to gain access to targeted individuals.xiii
Once the target
logs on, the NSA has access to all files and can even remotely control the microphone and
camera.xiv
The National Security Agency is not infecting every citizen’s computers; they are only
targeting the “hard- to- reach” targets, those thought to be an immediate threat to national
security.xv
The National Security Agency is not as invasive as portrayed to the public. They are
simply looking for targeted threats and dismantling terrorist plots before they can be
implemented, and thanks to the USA PATRIOT Act, surveillance for the purpose of national
security has been legally protected.

4. POL360: McCarthy 4
Americans should put an end to the criticism they have for intelligence agencies, and be
grateful for the work the intelligence agencies do and the information they provide. Wayne
Grudem says that “Americans should… be thankful for the CIA and the valuable intelligence it
provides for our government”.xvi
Most Americans do not understand the pressure federal agents
endure in their day to day work. They also do not understand that the work of these agencies
provide substantial information that becomes the basis for foreign policy and military action
around the globe. A distain for federal intelligence agencies has risen up especially in the past
few years. Grudem gives two effects of an “anti-CIA mindset”: (1) It is destructive because it
“undermines the morale of CIA employees who often perform extremely dangerous tasks at
great personal sacrifice, largely out of devotion to protecting the nation”; (2) “Opposition to the
CIA… runs contrary to the very ability of the nation to defend itself; it is therefore opposition to
the United States itself”.xvii
With regards to the first effect, when morale is damaged, it becomes
difficult to recruit new employees as well accomplishing its day to day operations.xviii
Low
morale can also lead to information and intelligence leaks such as Snowden which can have
detrimental effects on American foreign policy. With regards to the second effect of an “anti-
CIA mindset”, anti-CIA translates to an anti-American mindset and lines of loyalty are blurred.
The American people should be thankful for the indispensable work of the intelligence agencies
and realized the detrimental effects their criticism can have of American foreign policy.
Con:
Intelligence agencies have become highly controversial in today’s political sphere. Many
feel their privacy is being violated. Others see the secretiveness and covert nature of these

5. POL360: McCarthy 5
agencies coupled with their past mistakes and are wary of their current actions. Another criticism
of federal intelligence agencies is the legality of their actions and the violation of FISA.
Americans highly value their privacy especially from the government. “Domestic spying
was much more controversial (than foreign surveillance) because of the great importance
Americans attached to privacy and freedom from ‘big brother’.”xix
Privacy has become an
unspoken right of the American citizen. Much like the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness, the average American believes they have a right to privacy. There are many
people arguing that domestic surveillance is an infringement on civil rights.xx
Former National
Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden video conferenced into the South by Southwest
Interactive conference in Austin, Texas to “urged technology companies to adopt better methods
of encryption to protect users from government surveillance”.xxi
According to the Wall Street
Journal, “Mr. Snowden's revelations about NSA surveillance prompted Google Inc. and other
companies to strengthen their encryption technology, but he said the firms haven't done enough
to protect the civil liberties of Internet users in the U.S. and abroad.”xxii
Americans are saying
that this is not an issue of national security, but an issue of privacy and civil rights.
The general public is suspicious of the intelligence community. Due to their covert
nature, the mistakes of the past, and recent intelligence leaks, the American public does not trust
the actions of intelligence agencies. The covert actions of these agencies, specifically the Central
Intelligence Agency, were not made known to the public in the formative years of the agency.xxiii
Once made public, they became highly controversial and seen as un-American and against our
exceptional image.xxiv
In recent history, the National Security Agency has been known to be the
most secretive of the intelligence agencies.xxv
Another reason the public doubts the actions of
intelligence agencies is their past errors in analyzing intelligence. In 1961, CIA analysts

6. POL360: McCarthy 6
“assumed that Castro’s army and much of Cuba’s population would welcome the invaders
(American military forces) as liberators”; these calculations were incorrect.xxvi
Castro’s forces
overran the American forces on the coast of the Bay of Pigs. This is just one example of
incorrect analysis or unreliable intelligence gathered by federal agencies over the years. Recently
intelligence leaks by former National Security Agency contractor, Edward Snowden, have left
America vulnerable to enemy attacks and reduced any confidence the American public may have
had in the intelligence community. There is now talk that Snowden has been in communication
with Russian officials.xxvii
In the wake of the global uproar over Russia’s action in Crimea and
Ukraine, the last thing the United States needs is to be roped into this mess because of national
security leaks. “‘I would find it incredulous if they didn't,’ said Clapper (director of national
intelligence), about any efforts to influence Snowden by the FSB, Russia's state security
organization.”xxviii
Past and current actions of the intelligence agencies have damaged their
credibility in eyes of the American public.
Federal intelligence agencies’ surveillance programs are a violation of the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. This act was set in place in the midst of the Vietnam War.
The act “required investigators to seek warrants from a new secret court” before conducting
domestic surveillance.xxix
Intelligence surveillance violates the FISA because “it intercepts
telephone communications without a warrant”.xxx
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is
being grossly ignored by the intelligence community.

7. POL360: McCarthy 7
My Position:
In a world of growing technology, threat of cyber-attack, and an innumerable amount of
foes, intelligence gathering is an indispensable function of foreign policy. Surveillance is an
essential part of intelligence gathering. At times, this may include domestic surveillance. Just as
Americans have become adjusted to heightened airport security to ensure safety, they will
become accustomed to intelligence surveillance to guarantee national defense. The way I see it,
unless you have something to hide, you have no need to worry. With the immense amounts of
phone, email, and internet data to sift through, the National Security Agency and any other
intelligence agencies have no interest is checking up on your day to day Facebook posts. The
National Security Agency surveillance programs do not target everyone. The in-depth,
“invasive” programs such as “QUANTUMHAND” and “TURBINE” are only implemented on
known threats and targets; otherwise all internet activity such as emails are run through a word
recognition program to look for certain key words. I do not see how that impedes upon anyone’s
civil liberties. The fact that no major terrorist attacks have been implemented on American soil
since September 11, 2001, is largely due to surveillance performed by federal intelligence
agencies. Intelligence gathering and surveillance are necessary parts of forming national security
and foreign policy. I am pro intelligence agency surveillance because I believe the benefits
outweigh the cost of forfeiture of privacy. Privacy has become exalted as a natural right;
however, there is nowhere in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution where privacy
is mentioned as an inherent right of every citizen. I, one day, hope to work in the intelligence
community, and inevitably will be dealing with conducting surveillance or analyzing
surveillance data. I understand the necessity for domestic surveillance due to the complexity of
the situation: We are not combating an opposing nation, but an ideology. Opposing ideologies

8. POL360: McCarthy 8
have no borders; they can be harbored within our domestic borders. Due to this, domestic
surveillance is often essential to situations such as these.
Conclusion:
The intelligence community is highly controversial and most often disputed in our
modern day. There are pros and cons to federal intelligence agency surveillance programs.
Several pros are the decrease of terrorist attacks on American soil, its legality due to the USA
PATRIOT Act, and the work of federal intelligence agencies are vital to American national
defense. Cons include an invasion of privacy, a violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act, and past mistakes in data analysis. My personal position on domestic intelligence
surveillance is in favor of it. It is a necessary function of national security.

9. POL360: McCarthy 9
Bibliography
Hook, Steven, and John Spanier. American Foreign Policy since World War II. Los Angeles:
SAGE Publications, Inc., 2013.
Grudem, Wayne. Politics According to the Bible: A Comprehensive Resource for Understanding
Modern Political Issues in Light of Scripture . Zondervan, 2010.
Mears, Bill. "U.S. doesn't rule out possibility Snowden secretly talking to Russians." CNN. .
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/04/politics/u-s-intelligence-
snowden/index.html?iref=allsearch. Accessed March 18, 2014.
Risen , James, and Eric LICHTBLAU. "Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts." The
New York Times. . http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html.
Accessed March 18, 2014.
Couts, Andrew. "NSA pretended to be Facebook to infect millions of computers." FoxNews. .
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/03/12/nsa-pretended-to-be-facebook-in-its-effort-to-
infect-millions-computers/. Accessed March 18, 2014.
Carafano, James, and Jessica Zuckerman. "40 Terror Plots Foiled Since 9/11: Combating
Complacency in the Long War on Terror." The Heritage Foundation. .
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/09/40-terror-plots-foiled-since-9-11-
combating-complacency-in-the-long-war-on-terror. Accessed March 18, 2014.
MacMillan, Douglas. "Snowden: Tech Companies Must Improve Encryption." The Wall Street
Journal. .
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304020104579431431786110884.html?
mod=rss_front_total_headlines?a=1&m=en-us. Accessed March 18, 2014.

10. POL360: McCarthy 10
i
Hook and Spanier, Pg. 49.
ii
Hook and Spanier, Pg. 273.
iii
Hook and Spanier, Pg. 273.
iv
Hook and Spanier, Pg. 275.
v
Grudem, Pg. 411.
vi
Grudem, Pg. 413.
vii
Grudem, Pg. 411.
viii
Risen and Lichtblau, New York Times, Dec. 16, 2005.
ix
Carafano and Zuckerman, Heritage Foundation, Sept. 7, 2011.
x
Grudem, Pg. 411.
xi
Hook and Spanier, Pg. 312.
xii
Couts, Fox News, March 12, 2014.
xiii
Couts, Fox News, March 12, 2014.
xiv
Couts, Fox News, March 12, 2014.
xv
Couts, Fox News, March 12, 2014.
xvi
Grudem, Pg. 424.
xvii
Grudem, Pg. 425.
xviii
Grudem, Pg. 425.
xix
Hook and Spanier, Pg. 312.
xx
Grudem, Pg. 411.
xxi
MacMillan, The Wall Street Journal, March 11, 2014.
xxii
MacMillan, The Wall Street Journal, March 11, 2014.
xxiii
Hook and Spanier, Pg. 70.
xxiv
Hook and Spanier, Pg. 70.
xxv
Risen and Lichtblau, New York Times, Dec. 16, 2005.
xxvi
Hook and Spanier, Pg. 85.
xxvii
Mears, CNN, February 5, 2014.
xxviii
Mears, CNN, February 5, 2014.
xxix
Hook and Spanier, Pg. 312.
xxx
Grudem, Pg. 411.