In a Christmas Eve followup editorial to an unconvincing and overreaching editorial on the Bush Administration and “warrantless searches,” the Chronicle Editorial LiveJournalists revealed the real cause of their distress:
The absence of a plausible justification for government spying without a warrant has raised suspicions that the targets of such eavesdropping might include journalists researching stories about terrorist groups and attorneys representing clients suspected of terrorist activities.
Question for readers: Are you distressed that, in principle, the federal government could possibly be listening to journalists gathering information from terrorists who might harm the country?
Would it change your mind if you learned that information gained from such spying could not be used in criminal prosecutions without raising real Fourth Amendment issues, but that it could be used to head off deadly attacks on the United States?
I’m curious as to what people think.
