What ethical change brought about the Bush accessing bank records to track terroist, is this ethical?

Question

Is this issue ethical , how does it effect citizens privacy rights?

Answer 1

It is completely unethical, and illegal.
I don't understand why no one is getting in trouble for this egregious invasion of our privacy and why more people aren't outraged.

It affects us all, in that our rights are being eroded. We are being manipulated by fear-mongering.

"The terrorists are coming, ther terrorists are coming - so I suddenly need to look at your personal bank/phone/library records without going through proper legal procedures". 9/11 and Al Queda are just an excuse by Bush to do anything he wants.

And they use ridiculous arguments demeaning our concerns by implying that only someone with something to hide would mind.
No, innocent people deserve the right to due process just like anyone else.

Answer 2

While I don't want people sniffing at my personal info, I think safety is much more important. You can't have both security and privacy.

If you want to be safe on an airplane you must accept bagagge checks, X-ray scans, etc. If you want to stop criminals we need cops to be able to investigate.

Terrorists are especially diffiduclt to identify. Following the money sounds like a logical thing to do. Anyway, there is nothing wrong in my bank account so I guess if a federal agent looks at it among thousands of others - what is the worst that can happen?

I choose safety over privacy

Answer 3

The New York Times wrote this on September 24, 2001


"September 24, 2001 Monday
Section A; Column 1; Editorial Desk; Pg. 30
Finances of Terror

The Bush administration is preparing new laws to help track terrorists through their money-laundering activity and is readying an executive order freezing the assets of known terrorists. Much more is needed, including stricter regulations, the recruitment of specialized investigators and greater cooperation with foreign banking authorities. There must also must be closer coordination among America's law enforcement, national security and financial regulatory agencies.
...
Washington should revive international efforts begun during the Clinton administration to pressure countries with dangerously loose banking regulations to adopt and enforce stricter rules. These need to be accompanied by strong sanctions against doing business with financial institutions based in these nations. The Bush administration initially opposed such measures. But after the events of Sept. 11, it appears ready to embrace them.

The Treasury Department also needs new domestic legal weapons to crack down on money laundering by terrorists. The new laws should mandate the identification of all account owners, prohibit transactions with "shell banks" that have no physical premises and require closer monitoring of accounts coming from countries with lax banking laws. Prosecutors, meanwhile, should be able to freeze more easily the assets of suspected terrorists. The Senate Banking Committee plans to hold hearings this week on a bill providing for such measures. It should be approved and signed into law by President Bush."

Five years later they "expose" exactly what they were calling for. Give me a break.

There are tons of random people with my financial information. Credit card companies, insurance companies, loan officers, marketing firms, tax officers, am I really supposed to see this as news or even care?

Answer 4

There was no ethical change. The person/newspaper responsible for reporting that under the flimsy excuse of the public right to know should be charged with treason. They have harmed everyone by putting us at risk from terrorists. If that reporter was an Iranian for example reporting that same thing in Iran about the Iranian government he would have immediately been put to death.

Answer 5

They have had the capabilities to do this for years so it's nothing new. Satellites ring a bell. This internet your on is a public domain. Kind of like driving, it's a privilege not a right, so the authorities can search your vehicle when need be. So why not your bank account? Ethical....maybe not but for freedoms sake I'll take one for the team.

Answer 6

It's completely legal and ethical. There was no change. Presidents have been doing such things since people began wiring money overseas.

You have no less privacy now than you had before the story came out - no less privacy than before you opened your first account.

Answer 7

Why not? The IRS does it all the time to gouge money out of me. Why not use the same tactics to track jerkoffs who want to kill people?

The whole thing by the NYT and the Post were much ado about what is normal - just so their dikkhead editors could try to crack on the prez again. People need to get over their hate trips.

Answer 8

We live in a scary world now where people hate you just because of your nationality. It's a shame we have to give up rights to protect ourselves. I think President Bush has good intentions. It's congress we need to watch out for.

Answer 9

It is if you want to keep typing on your little computer and enjoying the AC. It's the government...who cares about ethical they own you.

Answer 10

I think this has gone on since forever, just in small venues. I think this is a good means to catch the bad guys. If someone has a problem with it, what do they have to hide. i,m sure it is not us with the lowest income...