Massive invasion of privacy not needed to capture terrorists in Canada

There's an interesting piece on Canada's capture of the alleged terrorists in today's NY Times. While I don't purport to know the details of Canada's surveillance laws, it appears they are more like the FISA rules than the "anything goes" attitude of the Bushies. And, they work! Meanwhile, here in the US, very few real terrorists have been detected since 9/11.

Mike McDonell, assistant commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, which is responsible for criminal investigations, said the successful disruption of the suspected terrorist ring was proof that the current system is adequate.

"I never sought greater authority to conduct monitoring and surveillance," he said in a telephone interview, "and I don't expect to be asking for any more now."

The C.S.E., which has long cooperated with other countries' spy agencies, including the National Security Agency in the United States, is permitted to monitor communications only going in or out of the country. The agency also needs authorization from the minister of defense...

Experts here say that it is unlikely that Canadians would accept a substantial expansion of police powers or the kind of domestic surveillance put into effect in the United States.

"We don't need to go the American route," said Martin Rudner, a professor of international affairs and director of the Canadian Center of Intelligence and Security Studies at Carleton University in Ottawa. "Our security and intelligence community can operate effectively and lawfully without going through many impediments. In effect there is no excuse to break the law, and if they did, they would get caught."