The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

At the trial of the November 13 attacks, the former boss of the DGSI asks the question of surveillance

2021-12-17T19:10:55.317Z


REPORT OF THE HEARING - Called to testify, Patrick Calvar returned to this "collective failure", in a rarely seen context of terrorist risk, before discussing the choices that will be necessary for all, between security and freedom.


“The fight against this scourge is far from over.

We will have to make a choice on our freedoms and on what we want (…) More security, more surveillance - and the technologies exist - or more freedom? ”

Dark suit, light shirt, the man speaking this Friday, the 62nd day of the trial for the November 13 attacks, knows what he is talking about.

Read also

At the trial of the attacks of November 13, the explosive cocktail of jihadists

Patrick Calvar, 66, was from 2012 to 2017 Central Director of Internal Intelligence then Director General of Internal Security (DGSI).

His presentation, presented in a calm voice, illustrates what a

"great witness"

can bring to such a trial.

Not yet another voice to respond to controversies, or the words of a super-investigator suddenly solving things after years of investigations.

But the word of a professional speaking, as a citizen, to the victims, and beyond to the public, to shed light on the past and suggest lessons for the future.

To read also

At the trial of November 13: the Clains, a family fallen into Islamism

The past is of course the failure of November 13th.

“We were able to block three (terrorist) projects…

This article is for subscribers only.

You have 71% left to discover.

To cultivate one's freedom is to cultivate one's curiosity.

Subscription without obligation

1 € THE FIRST MONTH

Already subscribed?

Log in

Source: lefigaro

All news articles on 2021-12-17

You may like

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.