Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

[robertsona]

Okay, this is my first CT thread, so if it sucks, sorry. Also if it's a copy, I'm really sorry too.
When Franklin Roosevelt was President, he set up Japanese Internment Camps. This was because, in the wake of the Pearl Harbor attacks, America was basically afraid that anyone could be an attacker for the Japanese, and an attack from the inside would be devastating. So they took all the Japanese and put them in camps to "prevent" this.
When 9/11 happened, some people suggested that they do the same with Arabs. The idea was promptly shot down by Civil Rights groups, but this is just an example.
My question is: Do you think, during a certain point, should security supercede the civil rights of an individual or groups of people, in order to protect America (or any other country for that matter). You can find examples of this all over American History such as my example and things like wiretapping.
In my opinion, security should almost never come before civil rights, as it is, simply put, "breaking the laws" that this country was founded on. It is outright wrong and should almost never be done.
However, I think, in a complete state of crisis where all of America is put at serious risk, we may need to engage in activities such as this.
What are your thoughts?