| There is video of the SL bomber who attacked the church. The ringleader of the attacks was an extremist known to SL intelligence. In SV you pat yourselves on the back at your virtue when you block your employers from supplying surveillance technology, or undermine and refuse to work on projects that do. What if you were as proactive as spreading security technology as you are at spreading your supposed values? What if SL already had face-recognition surveillance cameras and a system that linked targets to intelligence about threats and notified in real time of their movements? Is it not conceivable that these attackers and their extremist links could not have been so spotted on their way that morning? And stopped? When you talk about surveillance as an enabler of evil, are you quite sure you have your values straight? Or could it be you who has things backwards and, with your certainty of your virtue, costing lives by delaying and denying the spread of useful security technology? https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2019/04/25/sri-lankan-islamist-group-claims-bombing-mastermind-expelled-for-preaching-hate/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa-udwGUkp8 |
You said it yourself. For such cases, law enforcement could easily get warrants from judges. Most judges rubber-stamp most warrants anyway. You'll also find that in the vast majority of recent terrorist attacks, the people doing them were not only "known to intelligence agencies", but had previously been arrested, etc.
The issue many here have is with mass surveillance, which by definition means surveillance of innocents. Not only does this produce a very high "noise to signal" ratio (one of the reasons why the NSA is giving up on the phone records surveillance program now), making it more difficult for them to catch the actual bad guys, but it also sets up a system in which those having that power can easily abuse it.