We seems to be increasingly tested with terror attacks (France), veiled war (Ukraine), all of which seems to show that our judiciary system, which I in principle prize and value very highly, may be running into some kind of limits. The French, and the Americans before them, as well as probably many other state actors, have engaged in routine espionage against their own people and people of other states. Russian leaders, inventors of Maskirovka, are skilled at disappearing evidence and creating competing theories so as to fuel doubt and make executing proper justice impossible.
An article on Albert Speer, a man I have previously seen in the excellent documentary The World at War, a man I even came to like as a tiny morsel of decency in the hell that friends and colleagues of this man unleashed on the world. The article shows that evidence came to light, after this documentary, that he was not nearly a clean as he succesfully claimed to be. The article asks: can we appreciate the art of a man like that? The article shows even more evidence on not only him knowing about the death camps, but even coordinating their construction, which after all was pretty much necessary given his position at or close to Nazi logistics. The article brings forth more evidence still, on his so called artistry, and can do nothing but conclude the man did not even have that to show for himself. He was a cunning opportunist, without scruples or morality, and got away scot free because evidence turned up after his death, of course because the last thing the Nazis did was to destroy as much evidence as they possibly could.
With this in mind, I ask myself what we are to make of this? I do want to live in a world where the law rules. But I also want to live in a world where such people are tried or stopped before they commit their terrible acts. What do we do about such people, seeing that evidence is so much more easily hidden or destroyed, than obtained and used by the judiciary? Are things like wiretapping warrented?