NSA, CIA, and FBI Eavesdropping on Domestic Phone Calls or Intercept Emails - Essay Example

Nsa, Cia, And Fbi Eavesdropping On Domestic Phone Calls Or Intercept Emails George W. Bush the previous United s president secretly started unwarranted eavesdropping of citizen’s emails and phone calls in the United States (Janczewski and Colarik 27). This was as a result of fear that terrorists may be using such communication means to plan on how to lounge attacks on the United States. This action did not correspond with the laws of intelligence and security service. It also is a violation of the laws governing messaging service providers (Risen 12). For this exercise to be acceptable by all bodies involved, the bodies conducting the eavesdropping had to obtain a warranty from the United States Foreign Surveillance Court. This could have legalized the whole exercise and no questions could have arisen from the different bodies that raised their concerns (Risen 19). Many laws against this act have been formulated. These include the wireless telegraphy act 2006 and the regulation of investigatory powers act 2000. Although this act of intercepting emails is good for the security of the country, the bodies conducting the interception should look, for a warranty, to do the same. The N.S.A, F.B.I together with C.I.A, argue that taking of warranties will alert the potential terrorists and the search would not be effective. This essay outlines the reasons why use of unwarranted emails eavesdropping is not good (Bamford 145). First is the fact that this is a breach of civil liberty. Individuals are supposed to be covered under civil rights, which gives them freedom to do what is legally right to the extent that they do not interfere with other people’s life (Radden 19). The act of eavesdropping on emails and phone calls is a violation of human rights to expression, interaction, and speech. These laws cover individuals enabling them to interact and communicate freely without others getting concerned about other individuals’ conversation. In addition to this, confrontation of individuals to know whom they were communicating with is a violation of human rights. The security department needs to show proof of a warranty to eavesdrop someone’s emails and a warranty authorizing interviews in regard to the messages intercepted (Radden 64). The act of eavesdropping is a violation of the privacy policy of the company providing the communication (Janczewski and Colarik 128). Companies providing communication services always have privacy policies by which they are supposed to abide. They are supposed to ensure that no third party individual encounters the contents of the message unless warranted officially by the government. It is the right of an individual to sue any company that allows third party individuals to get the contents of his emails without an official warranty (Radden 59). The act of eavesdropping can as well cause safety issues to the contents of the message. Certain email messages and calls are supposed to be private and confidential. Such emails explaining or having monetary discussions can easily be decrypted, and the information be used in a bad way so that the money is diverted (Bamford 125). This is very possible within the security bodies; N.S.A, F.B.I and C.I.A simply because the agencies have employees of varied nature. Individuals who can use such advantage to divert the monetary value of the emails and calls to his account exist. This can be very disappointing to the individual and all the people associated with the transaction. The fact that the interception of the emails is not warranted would make individuals have the privilege of going around the issue without fear from court orders and imprisonment (Janczewski and Colarik 91). It can also be difficult to know the exact person that conducted the transfer of the monetary contents from the email. This is because individuals with the capability to intercept emails may have much more technology to hide any traceable information as to where the money went. This is thus a big problem to the company providing the messaging service and the security agency involved in the act of eavesdropping (Janczewski and Colarik 79). Emails and calls interception can also cause modification to the message being passed. The modification of the message can be intentional or accidental (Radden 67). The modification can be intentional where an officer working for the security agency decides to change the message contents for his own personal gains. He can modify the message with an intention to cancel the relationship between the communicating parties so that he takes over the position of one of the participating parties. This will help him in one way or the other for personal gains. This is a threat to the security agency and the messaging service providers due to the unwarranted eavesdropping. On the other hand, the idea of decrypting a message can cause damages to a message (Radden 22). This will be accidental modification of the message. This is because the decryption exercise uses software that has a nature like malware. In cases where the software has complications or is not in a position to understand the message encryption criteria for the required decryption, the message may be modified. This will cause difficulties to the parties involved in the transaction and more so the receiver of the message. Therefore, an act endangers communicating parties (Radden 21). Continuing on, emails interception can cause a denial of service to the end users of the communication (Janczewski and Colarik 45). Denial of service is a situation where the email address or the phone number of an individual is fed with continuous communication that is so bulky and causes the email or phone not to be, in a position, to receive any form of communication. One of the officers at the security agency having personal gains to make can do this. This will cause the end user not to be able to communicate in the future. This is a threat to the communicating parties, the security agency, and the messaging service providers (Janczewski and Colarik 49). Although, there have been complaints and concerns regarding this system of safeguarding national security, the security agencies argue that this is the only safe way of getting terrorists or potential terrorists (Bamford 83). They argue that obtaining a warranty will alert the terrorists; in that, the terrorists would desist from sending messages, and an alternative means to do it sought. They argue that obtaining a warranty will mean that everything is official and open; a thing that will cause the media to pass the information to the public. This will be an alert to the potential terrorists and the terrorists. A case is cited showing that the use of this system has helped a lot to know most of the Al Qaeda members residing in the United States and other countries (Janczewski and Colarik 93). In my perspective, I find the use of emails interception to be very helpful in protecting a country’s security. However, the security agencies need to make sure they obtain warranties that will give them the lawful access to the emails. The acquisition of the warranties can be done secretly so that the terrorists do not have the knowledge on what is going on. The warranties are to be taken without informing the media of what is going on in the security agency circles. This will help a lot in maintaining the security in the country and the ongoing process of message interception. This will also be healthy for the messaging service providers (Bamford 78). In conclusion, it is unmistakable that the use of unwarranted emails and calls interception has many dangers on communication messages and to the end users in the communication. It is a violation of human rights and privacy policy; moreover, it can cause changes on emails and calls, which can result in emails being diverted. However, the N.S.A, F.B.I and C.I.A are doing a commendable work in terms of ensuring national security but need to look for warranties for their work not to be doubted (Janczewski and Colarik 23). It can be necessary to secretly acquiring the warranties so that the information is not disclosed to the public. Apparently, it is the only solution to correcting the situation without causing more problems to any party involved (Bamford 23). Works cited Bamford, James. The shadow factory : the ultra-secret NSA from 9/11 to the eavesdropping on America. New York: Anchor Books, 2008. Print. Janczewski, Lech. & Colarik, Andrew. Cyber warfare and cyber terrorism. Hershey: Information Science Reference, 2008. Print. Keefe, Radden. Chatter : uncovering the echelon surveillance network and the secret world of global eavesdropping. New York : Random House Trade Paperbacks, 2006. Print. Risen, James. State of war : the secret history of the CIA and the Bush administration. New York : Free Press, 2006. Print. United States Congress House Committee on the Judiciary Staff Democratic. The Constitution in crisis : the high crimes of the Bush administration and a blueprint for impeachment. New York, NY : Skyhorse Pub, 2007. Print. United States Congress House Committee on Government Reform. Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Relations. National security whistleblowers in the post-September 11th era. Washington : G.P.O., 2006. Print. Read More