Is security more important than privacy?

This video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WRlaXbYpH8

White guy tries to explain how he feels about the UK's surveillance society.

Let's discuss this subject properly.

I'll start:
Privacy is more important. A pretext for mass invasion of privacy which only harmed thousands of people in the last decade isn't sufficient. Yes, I'm talking about terrorism.

>Boston Bombings: 3 dead. Whole of Boston under lock down. Nobody can leave home. People don't even feel safe in their OWN HOME. (Picture where a guy in a light tank was pointing his rifle at the cameraman).

>7/7/05 bombings: 51~ dead. Shit ton of CCTV installed, police powers DRASTICALLY improved, less transparency in govt, more fear and tax payer money wasted on keeping the fear, internet monitoring and soon all communications.

>9/11: Almost 3k dead. Patriot Act. (Plus more obviously but that was the main one).

Feel free to continue

>>18

Oh no, I absolutely realize that agency heads are lying to our elected officials about the extent of the programs, and you are right to point that out.

But I would point out the buzzwords in that news article you linked. It says he lied about the intentional collection of "data." See my post on this subject (taking the truth of it with a grain of salt remember).

>>15

The point is, to really argue about this strongly, we must call these programs into doubt, assuming arguendo that what we have been told about how they operate is true. Otherwise, you risk being labeled a conspiracy theorist and the entire push back will suffer when good, informed citizens argue about aspects of these programs that everyone generally postulates as true behind closed doors, but would never admit openly for fear of being branded a wacko.

To really make the change, it will require playing by their rules, to argue the issue smartly and say, "Listen, even if you are telling the truth, you are still violating the Constitution, and how much more so if you are in fact lying."