Surveillance: A Threat to Democracy
- A majority of Americans are untroubled by revelations about the National Security Agency’s dragnet collection of phone records.
- The issue is whether security goals can be achieved without trampling on democratic freedoms and basic rights.
- The collection of metadata fundamentally alters the relationship between individuals and their government.
- ベストアンサー
答えられる範囲で構わないので和訳おねがいします
>Surveillance: A Threat to Democracy > A new Washington Post-Pew Research Center poll found that a majority of Americans are untroubled by revelations about the National Security Agency’s dragnet collection of the phone records of millions of citizens, without any individual suspicion and regardless of any connection to a counterterrorism investigation. Perhaps the lack of a border sense of alarm is not all that surprising when President Obama, Senator Dianne Feinstein, the Democratic chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee, and intelligence officials insist that such surveillance is crucial to the nation’s antiterrorism efforts. But Americans should not be fooled by political leaders putting forward a false choice. The issue is not whether the government should vigorously pursue terrorists. The question is whether the security goals can achieved by less-intrusive or sweeping means, without tramping on democratic freedoms and basic right .Far too little has been said on this question by the White House or Congress in their defense of the N.S. A.’s dragnet. The surreptitious collection of “metadata”-every bit of information about every phone call except the word-by-word content of conversations ‐fundamentally alters the relationship between individuals and their government.
- big3king
- お礼率9% (4/41)
- 英語
- 回答数2
- ありがとう数0
- みんなの回答 （2）
- 専門家の回答
質問者が選んだベストアンサー
☆これまでの細切れの和訳をまとめただけです。 監視：民主主義に対する脅威 ワシントン・ポスト-ピュー・リサーチセンターの新たな世論調査によって、個人に対する嫌疑がなく、テロ対策の調査に関わっているかどうかに関わらす、国家安全保障局の捜査網が何百万もの市民の電話記録を集めていたことが暴露されたことに大多数のアメリカ人が、心を乱されていないことが分かりました。 オバマ大統領、諜報特別委員会の民主党の議長ダイアン・ファインスタイン上院議員、情報当局者が、そのような監視が、同国のテロ対策努力にとって極めて重要であると主張するとき、より幅広い警戒感が欠如していることは、おそらく、それほど驚くべきではないのでしょう。 しかし、アメリカ人は、間違った選択を提案している政治指導者によって馬鹿にされるべきではありません。問題は、政府がテロリストを精力的に追跡すべきかどうかということではないのです。問題は、民主主義の自由と基本的な権利を踏みにじることなく、安全保障の目標が、あまり侵入的でない、無差別的ではない手段で達成されうるかどうかということなのです。NSA（国家安全保障局）の捜査網を擁護する際に、ホワイトハウスや議会から、この問題に関しての発言が、これまでのところ、あまりにも少なすぎるのです。 「メタデータ」 — 会話の逐語的な内容以外のあらゆる電話通話に関するすべての情報 — の秘密収集は、基本的に、個人と彼らの政府の関係を変えます。 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/12/opinion/surveillance-a-threat-to-democracy.html?_r=0
その他の回答 (1)
- oignies
- ベストアンサー率20% (673/3354)
最近話題の一件についてのニュース記事です。 センシティブな単語がはいっているので、そこは訳しません。 事件ともなんにも関係ない通話記録まで含めてデータとして蓄積することについて、アメリカ国民は、 問題視していないが（中略）問題は、国防という目標が、より侵襲性のすくないもしくは、なにもかも あらいざいではない方法によることで、民主主義の自由と基本的権利を侵害することなく、達成でき ないのか、という点にある。この点について、議会も政府も、ふれていない。 しかし・・・（以下別項目で翻訳ずみにつき略）
関連するQ&A
- 至急和訳お願いします！！！
Surveillance: A Threat to Democracy A new Washington Post-Pew Research Center poll found that a majority of Americans are untroubled by revelations about the National Security Agency’s dragnet collection of the phone records of millions of citizens, without any individual suspicion and regardless of any connection to a counterterrorism investigation. Perhaps the lack of a broader sense of alarm is not all that surprising when President Obama, Senator Dianne Feinstein, the Democratic chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee, and intelligence officials insist that such surveillance is crucial to the nation’s antiterrorism efforts. But Americans should not be fooled by political leaders putting forward a false choice. The issue is not whether the government should vigorously pursue terrorists. The question is whether the security goals can be achieved by less-intrusive or sweeping means, without trampling on democratic freedoms and basic rights. Far too little has been said on this question by the White House or Congress in their defense of the N.S.A.’s dragnet. The surreptitious collection of “metadata” — every bit of information about every phone call except the word-by-word content of conversations — fundamentally alters the relationship between individuals and their government
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 至急和訳おねがいします!
Perhaps the lack of a border sense of alarm is not all that surprising when President Obama, Senator Dianne Feinstein, the Democratic chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee, and intelligence officials insist that such surveillance is crucial to the nation’s antiterrorism efforts.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 至急和訳おねがいします!!
But Americans should not be fooled by political leaders putting forward a false choice. The issue is not whether the government should vigorously pursue terrorists. The question is whether the security goals can achieved by less-intrusive or sweeping means, without tramping on democratic freedoms and basic right .Far too little has been said on this question by the White House or Congress in their defense of the N.S. A.’s dragnet.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳お願いします
Each ten years, the government conducts a national census, which is authorized by the Constitution. Most of us do not object to answering the questions that the census poses, but what if you should decide to refuse to answer the questions? Could you do so on the basis that they represent an invasion of your privacy? This has been answered by the courts, which hold that it is a proper government function and a necessary one to gather reliable statistics that have a bearing on governmental functions, and that intelligent legislation can only be formulated if the government has the facts. It is probable that people answer the census questions because they believe their answers will be kept confidential and that the information will not be used to hurt them. Census answers cannot be utilized by parties in a lawsuit and used without the consent of the party giving the answers. However, general statistics can be used, and the statistics gathered in the census have been used, for the good of all.
- 締切済み
- 英語
- 和訳お願い致します。
Now assuredly we have here a most important issue, and as it is one the discussion of which will constitute a large element of my work, it is perhaps desirable that I should state at the outset the manner in which I propose to deal with it . The question, then, as to whether or not human intelli gence has been evolved from animal intelligence can only be dealt with scientifically by comparing the one with the other, in order to ascertain the points wherein they agree and the points wherein they differ. Now there can be no doubt that when this is done, the difference between the mental faculties of the most intelligent animal and the mental faculties of the lowest savage[savage=wild beast] is seen to be so vast, that the hypothesis of their being so nearly allied as Mr. Darwin's teaching implies, appears at first sight absurd. And, indeed, it is not until we have become convinced that the theory of Evolution can alone afford an explanation of the facts of human anatomy that we are prepared to seek for a similar explanation of the facts of human psychology. But wide as is the difference between the mind of a man and the mind of a brute, we must remember that the question is one, not as to degree, but as to kind ; and therefore that our task, as serious enquirers after truth, is calmly and honestly to examine the character of the difference which is presented, in order to determine whether it is really beyond the bounds of rational credibility that the enormous interval which now separates these two divisions of mind can ever have been bridged over, by numberless inter mediate gradations, during the untold ages of the past.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳していただけませんか？
下の文章を和訳していただけませんか？ Since the 1990s, the democracy movement has declined both within and outside China, which is due to the government's increased suppression of freedom of speech, and economic reforms including the Open Door Policy. During that period, the government gave high priority to economic growth based on political stability, arguing that the democracy movement is counterproductive and leads to radicalism that threatens political and economic stability.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 英作文チェックしてください！！
Although the reading section claimed that it is possible to evaluate people’s intelligence by simply taking IQ test, the lecture said that human intelligence is too complex to evaluate. First, human intelligence is multiple. There are a variety of intelligence exist in the human world. For example, someone has linguistic intelligence and the other people have mathematical intelligence. Second, all human intelligence are not related each other. As I mentioned, a linguistic intelligence and a mathematical intelligence is totally different type of intelligence. So, it can’t evaluate people by just simple test such as IQ test. In addition, the balance of intelligence is not the same. For example, someone has a high score of IQ test, however, it is not simply connected with mathematical skill. ところでHumana intelligence って可算名詞なんですか？ a linguistic intelligence かlinguistic intelligenceどっちですか？
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳お願いします。
The difficulty of course - and this is an 'of course' added by deconstruction - is that this internal drifting is not only a fundamental part of any act of communication, it is also essential. Deconstruction does not create such internal drifting, such moments of indecision and complication in the sign, but it does work to expose them and to acknowledge their existence. 和訳できるかた宜しくお願いします＞＜
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳お願い致します。
こんにちは。 和訳をしていたのですが、どう訳せば自然な日本語になるのか分からず、 止まってしまっています。和訳宜しくお願い致します。 本文：As a designer of clothing and what we call fashion, we must readapt our approach entirely to a world spiraling into chaos by a system of human civilization and philosophies that is not working--and whether humanity likes it or not--will change rapidly. 宜しくお願い致します。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳が分かりません。
下記の英文の和訳をお願いします＞＜ ・It is clear that the starting point for internationalization and the development of a sense of being a world citizen is the attitude each of one of you takes. ・The greater your knowledge and understanding, the more you can contribute, not only by the firmness of your own beliefs, but by your ability to set an example for others. ・No organized system induces people to take the next step to a concern about the world and humanity as a whole, even though ir is now quite evident that the unit of survival is becoming, not the individual country, but the world as a whole. ・It is not at all surprising that the Japanese should have developed one of the most distinctive cultures in the world and particularly strong sense of self-identity.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
