[burke]

It's a fine line, trading freedom for security. Two hypotheticals:

1) NSA monitoring known Al Qaeda operatives while being required to publish public reports detailing the scope of the surveillance (after a predetermined period of secrecy to protect the investigations): unequivocally good.

2) NSA installing video cameras and microphones in every house in America, constantly monitoring streams for suspected terrorist activity: unequivocally bad.

Where is the line? Which side does PRISM fall on? It would be an easier question to answer if the whole program wasn't so carefully kept out of the public eye.