The U.S. intelligence community claims it's not spying on citizens until someone actually looks at the data it collects. That argument is deeply flawed.
At this point, the agency has to assume that all of its operations will become public, probably sooner than it would like.
The nation can survive the occasional terrorist attack, but our freedoms can't survive an invulnerable leader like Keith Alexander operating within inadequate constraints.
The public has no faith left in the intelligence community or what the president says about it. A strong, independent special prosecutor needs to clean up the mess.
The scariest explanation of all? That the NSA and GCHQ are just showing they don't want to be messed with.
Technology companies have to fight for their users, or they'll eventually lose them.
NSA apologists say spying is only used for menaces like "weapons of mass destruction" and "terror." But those terms have been radically redefined.
The NSA's surveillance of cell-phone calls show how badly we need to protect the whistle-blowers who provide transparency and accountability.
After Boston, just like after 9/11, the nation is likely to adopt new anti-terror laws. But done wrong, law enforcement can undermine society.
A new bill moving through Congress would give the authorities unprecedented access to citizens' information.
It is easy to feel scared and powerless in the wake of attacks like those at the Boston Marathon. But it also plays into the perpetrators' hands.
Full-body scanners and enhanced pat-downs -- the government has already invested billions in the wrong solutions