With the advent of a new era of terrorism sweeping the world following the September 11 attacks on America, a broad debate ensued over whether prevention of terrorist attacks must take precedence over the fundamental civil liberties enjoyed by every civilian in a liberal democracy. If we consider the definition of civil liberties as “fundamental individual rights, such as freedom of speech and religion, protected by law against governmental or other interference,” it is very difficult to imagine a society in which both could exist. The argument in favor of placing greater emphasis on the prevention of terrorism rather than on the protection of civil liberties is obviously the protection of many human lives that the prevention of a serious attack would entail. After the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington, President Bush for the first time allowed the NSA to hack the phones of any U.S. resident in the process of gathering foreign intelligence on terrorism. This was an important step, as it violates residents' Fourth Amendment privacy rights, so it is a clear case of putting terrorism prevention before civil liberties. Professor JC Eastman concluded, in his analysis of Congressional and Justice Department reports, that under the Constitution and indeed endorsed by both historical and Supreme Court precedent, "the President clearly has the authority to conduct surveillance of enemy communications in times of war and of communications to and from those reasonably believed to be affiliated with our enemies. Furthermore, it should be obvious that such activities are a seminal episode of war. Eastman is an eminent law professor and politician. therefore his knowledge and access to information on this topic are clearly... at the heart of the government's agenda, therefore invading the rights of those suspected of terrorist activity were allowed to maintain their civil liberties, then there would be a much greater risk of reoffending on their behalf, as well as a much greater possibility of danger to the country. I believe that to promote my point of view, as well as educate others about Per on the issue, I should seek a wider range of opinions from people with greater knowledge and much more experience regarding such issues, such as former Defense or Home Secretary; I believe these people will have first-hand experience in dealing with such turbulent circumstances; will certainly be able to further my reasoning and beliefs regarding the “right” limitation of civil liberties when the protection of the many is an absolute imperative.