Abstract
This paper is on the terrorist group Al-Qaeda and the US Patriot Act. This paper will discuss the history, ideology, structure, targets and tactics of Al-Qaeda. I will discuss the history and goals of the US Patriot Act as well as the controversy that surrounds it. Finally I will discuss how the US Patriot Act serves as a deterrent to Al-Qaeda by enhancing domestic security against terrorism, enhancing surveillance procedures and removing obstacles to investigate terrorism. I hope that after you complete your review of my paper that you will have an appreciation for the creation of the US Patriot Act, because it protects Americans by making it difficult for terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda to operate in the United States.
Homeland Security Policy Paper
The cowardly terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 changed the perception of many Americans. It became increasingly evident that terrorist groups were evolving into a beast that we as a nation have never witnessed. After the attacks it became increasing evident that it was time to strengthen our policies and fight back against terror. Our great nation had to show the terrorist groups that we would not sit back in fear, but instead increase our nation’s resilience and preparedness in response to terrorism activities. A great example of changes to come would be the passage of the US Patriot Act. Just 45 days after the September 11 attacks, with little resistance, Congress passed the US Patriot Act on October 5th, 2001. Charles Doyle stated that “The Act gives federal officials greater authority to track and intercept communications, both for law enforcement and foreign intelligence gathering purposes.” (2001) The US Patriot Act a...
... middle of paper ...
...needed. If we truly want to remain safe from terrorist, we have to give a little to gain ultimate security. As a member of the military I appreciate the efforts of all the men and women who keep our nation safe.
Works Cited
Charles Doyle. “The USA Patriot Act: A Sketch”. Received through the CRS Web. (April 18, 2 (2002)
Thomas, Kim. "More questions than answers." Information World Review (2007). General OneFile. Web. 28 July 2010.
John Ashcroft. (2004, October 26). The Patriot Act: Wise Beyond Its Years. Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition), p.A.24. Retrieved July 28, 2010, from Wall Street Journal. (Document ID: 723908291).
Jane Harman & Susan Collins. (2010, July 22). Al Qaeda Still Wants a Dirty Bomb. Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition), p. A.17. Retrieved July 28, 2010, from Wall Street Journal. (Document ID: 2087779871).
Less than one week after the devastating terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the U.S.A. Patriot Act was introduced to Congress. One month later, the act passed in the Senate with a vote of 98-1. A frightened nation had cried for protection against further attacks, but certainly got more than they had asked for. Russell Feingold, the only Senator to vote down the act, referred to it as, “legislation on the fly, unlike anything [he] had ever seen.” In their haste to protect our great nation, Congress suspended, “normal procedural processes, such as interagency review and committee hearings,” and, “many provisions were not checked for their constitutionality, lack of judicial oversight, and potential for abuse.” Ninety-eight senators were willing to overlook key civil liberty issues contained within the 342 page act. The lone dissenting vote, Wisconsin Senator Russell Feingold, felt that our battle against terrorism would be lost “without firing a shot” if we were to “sacrifice the liberties of the American people.” Feingold duly defended American civil liberties at the risk of his career, truly exemplifying political courage as defined by John F. Kennedy.
McCraw, David, and Stephen Gikow. “The End to a Unspoken Bargain? National Security and Leaks in a Post-Pentagon Papers World.” Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 48.2 (2013): 473-509. Academic OneFile. Web. 5 Dec. 2013.
U.S. Department of Justice. The USA PATRIOT Act: Preserving Life and Liberty. n.d. web. 11 November 2013.
Cole, D., & Dempsey, J. X. (2006). Terrorism and the constitution: sacrificing civil liberties in the name of national security. New York: New Press.
In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks US Congress passed legislation known as the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 commonly known as the USA Patriot Act. This paper will attempt to prove that not only is the USA Patriot Act unconstitutional but many of its provisions do nothing at all to protect Americans from the dangers of terrorism.
Edward Snowden is America’s most recent controversial figure. People can’t decide if he is their hero or traitor. Nevertheless, his leaks on the U.S. government surveillance program, PRISM, demand an explanation. Many American citizens have been enraged by the thought of the government tracing their telecommunication systems. According to factbrowser.com 54% of internet users would rather have more online privacy, even at the risk of security (Facts Tagged with Privacy). They say it is an infringement on their privacy rights of the constitution. However, some of them don’t mind; they believe it will help thwart the acts of terrorists. Both sides make a good point, but the inevitable future is one where the government is adapting as technology is changing. In order for us to continue living in the new digital decade, we must accept the government’s ability to surveil us.
"US Spying Prompts Reversal By Architect Of USA Patriot Act, Republican Rep. Sensenbrenner." Canadian Press, The (n.d.): Points of View Reference Center. Web. 9 Feb. 2014.
Since the terrorist attacks at Sept. 11, 2001, the surveillance issue often has turned away the table in the debate of individual privacy or counterterrorism. By passing the Patriot Act, Congress gave President Bush an immense law enforcement authority to boost U.S's counterterrorism, and the President used his enlarged powers to forward specific programs in order to reduce the threat of terrorism and defend the country’s safety.
Since September 11, 2001 many people can say that America has changed. Many people question if America has changed for the better or has it just gotten worse. Since the day those four planes crashed around the United States people’s lives have been changed. Many may not realize how their lives have changed, but with new laws passed life is different within America. The United States Patriot Act is one of the laws passed after 9/11: singed into order on October 26, 2001 just 45 days after the attack. The United States Patriot Act was put in place in order to protect Americans, yet has been affecting American’s civil liberties and caused controversy all over the United States.
September 11th 2001 was not only the day when the delicate facade of American security was shattered, but it was also the events of this day that led to the violation of the rights of millions of American citizens. After relentless reprehension by the American masses on the approach that was taken after the 9/11 attacks ,the Bush administration enacted the Patriot Act on October 26th, 2001, a mere 56 days after this tragic event.The Patriot Act expanded the authority of U.S. law enforcement agencies so that they could hopefully avert future terrorist attacks. Under the Patriot Act The NSA (National Security Agency) could entrench upon the privacy of the citizens of the U.S. without public knowledge, consent or, probable cause. The particular incident which had the general public up at arms was when the NSA illicit surveillance came to public knowledge.
The attacks on American soil that solemn day of September 11, 2001, ignited a quarrel that the grade of singular privacy, need not be given away in the hunt of grander security. The security measures in place were planned to protect our democracy and its liberties yet, they are merely eroding the very existence with the start of a socialistic paradigm. Benjamin Franklin (1759), warned more than two centuries ago: “they that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Implementing security measures comes at a cost both economically and socially. Government bureaucrats can and will utilize information for personal political objectives. The Supreme Court is the final arbitrator of what the ‘law is”, causing a lack of circulated rule. The actual leaders with political purposes jeopardize our individual privacy rights, liberties, and freedoms.
Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization established in Peshawar, Pakistan, between 1988 or 1989 by Osama bin laden and his teacher Abullah Yusuf Azzam. Al-Qaeda is an international terrorist network that considered the top terrorist threat to the United States. Al Qaeda is seeking to get rid of all westerns from Muslims territory and replace their own Islamic regime. They are a group of people who work to gather to plan act of terrorism against Muslim and non Muslim especially United State. Al Qaeda believes that they are fighting a holy war against enemy of their religion. People from many countries have joined this group including Afghanistan, Pakistan and Britain. This paper is going to present a brief historical background of Al Qaeda that how it emerged with their ideology, view, believe, and goals they have and also it presents the Activities which this group has been done before and after the very massive attack they had in US in September 11, 2001 and the international responses to this act of violence. Finally this paper will end up with comparing this Organization (Al Qaeda) with Reverend Mike Bray the Christian terrorist.
BENAC, N. (2011). National security: Ten years after september 11 attacks, u.s. is safe but not
These two articles, one, an address by Attorney General John Ashcroft to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, and the other, an article written by David Cole that appeared on the Amnesty International web site, deal with the ethics and Constitutionality of the United Stated Patriot Act. David Cole, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, argues that the Patriot Act violates citizen’s civil rights and unfairly imprisons innocent individuals. Attorney General John Ashcroft counters that the Patriot Act is justified as a preventive measure to aid in the war on terrorism.
Gonchar, Michael. “What Is More Important: Our Privacy or National Security?” New York Times. New York Times, 17 Sept. 2013. Web. 22 Feb. 2014.