Throughout history, the phrase “national security” has often been used as a pretext for massive violations of individual rights. Since the September 11^th attacks on the United States, issues of national security have taken precedence in the agendas of most nations, both in the governments and populations. Unfortunately, for the citizen body, a heightened focus on security usually leads to an erosion of civil liberties. Evidence of this can currently be seen in the United States following the passage of the Patriot Act and in Canada after the Anti-Terrorism and Public Safety Act.

Internal Security Issues:

• Terrorism, internal rebels, internet hacking and viruses constitute a few types of internal security issues, what other types exist?
• Are broader government powers necessary to combat internal threats to security or are there other means of addressing the issue?

External Security Issues:

• Espionage, Terrorism, Nuclear Weapons and Weapons of Mass Destruction are just a few of the external threats facing nations, what other forms exist?
• Much emphasis has recently been placed on Weapons of Mass Destruction, but how valid an assessment is this? Should more attention be given to other forms of security threats and do WMD warrant all the attention they are receiving?

Erosion of Civil Liberties:

• The most common reaction to a security threat is to grant the government wide ranging powers to search, investigate and act with fewer restraints. Quite often, this means governments can detain individuals without charge, search without a warrant, and access private records without informing the individual. What other types of powers are usually granted governments?
• In the pursuit of security threats, citizens come under closer scrutiny and become almost suspects in their own country, with all their records and private files open to government scrutiny. What damage does this do to due process and privacy rights?
• Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Press and Freedom of Assembly are usually held as essential freedoms, but they are also the freedoms most quickly sacrificed in the name of security. Why are those freedoms sacrificed first, despite their supposed importance? Why are people so willing to sacrifice their freedoms to the government when security issues arise?
• The internet now plays a large part in security concerns due to hacking and viruses. It is also the quickest way to access records and monitor citizens’ activity. What part does the internet play in the erosion of civil liberties?
• Minority rights are most quickly sacrificed in the pursuit of security. For example, following September 11^th, individuals of Arab descent have been subject to more invasive and offensive erosions of their liberties. Given that the most recent attacks to security came from individuals of Arab descent, should the rest of the Arab community simply accept this as a fact of life since it may mean more safety for everyone else?
• Can national security threats be fought without eroding civil liberties, or are the two issues inextricably linked given the nature of fighting internal and external security threats?