U.S. counter-terrorism policies negatively affected individual rights and liberties of law-Abiding U.S. citizens
US counterterrorism efforts have adversely affected human rights in ways that alarmists had warned. There is a significant degree of government interference for the purposes of security. The most criticized effects relating to civil rights are the operations of Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs) across the U.S. Some of the tactics employed have entrapped human rights as they provide detonators, explosives and other equipment. In such sting operations, individuals are always charged for attempting to acquire illegal firearms and explosives or smuggling. This enables the government to exercise tight control over its citizens by denying them the right to own any firearm. The practice exists on a thin line between protecting the rights of the innocent and protecting civilians (Howell & Lind, 2010).
After the September 11 attack, the federal embraced a range of actions to curtail political freedoms and civil liberties. At this time, the government explained that those actions were meant to help safeguard the country and its population from more attacks. The understanding is that the counterterrorism policies, including the torture during interrogations, mistreatment of prisoners and the rendition of arrested terrorist suspects backfired. The impacts of these intentional policy decisions include the massive deaths of detainees and multiple procedural challenges to prosecuting arrested terrorist suspects in the U.S. All these have served to degrade America's image as a leader in the advocacy of world human rights and discourage other governments from participating in the fight on terror. According to Amnesty International, all these destroyed the human rights of ordinary people (Howell & Lind, 2010). Consequently, it has made the world a more dangerous place.
Most of media coverage focuses on terror and interrogation techniques. One of the sophisticated statistical studies concludes that the terror attacks have led to more government killings and disappearances, as well as government's curbing freedom of speech. Domestic and transnational terrorist activities have prompted the government to deploy counter-terrorism practices to repress...
Even if the torture of these people would save lives it is a slippery slope that we do not want to begin. Once we allow the torture of suspects or terrorists it could begin a landslide witch-hunt in which people who are not terrorists and have not committed any crimes could be tortured based on suspect or circumstantial evidence. While there is justified outrage at what happened in this country we,
Through experience, the FBI has acquired insights into the fact that there are no dividing lines distinguishing foreign intelligence, terrorist and criminal activities. Foreign intelligence, terrorism, and criminal organizations and activities are interdependent and interrelated (Abele, 2005). Files belonging to the FBI are full of investigation cases where the sharing of information between criminal intelligence, counterintelligence, and counterterrorism investigations is essential to the ability of the FBI. This is
According to Reidenberg (2000: 1318), policy in the United States protects personal information according to a market-dominated paradigm, where limited statutory and common law rights are granted for information privacy. In Europe, on the other hand, the privacy protection norm is dominated by privacy rights. The European Union, for example, requires Member States to include comprehensive statutory protections for its citizens when it comes to privacy rights. The fact that
FBI vs. Apple in Relation to the Patriot Act America is divided over the tradeoff between personal privacy and security needs. The focus is, now, on the government surveillance, but there are concerns over how data is being used by businesses. The issue was raised after the federal court was requested to force Apple to assist the FBI to unlock one of the phones used by a suspect in the terrorist
Rational choices are limited in this setting, and may merely consist of making the best of the worst available alternatives. The American public is becoming increasingly frustrated with national policymakers who seem to be firing global broadsides but are not able to hit anything. In fact, Butler even questions whether the war on terrorism is a struggle against Osama bin Laden, his Al Qaeda network, and a few similarly minded
" Prohibiting "a bill of attainder" means that the U.S. Congress cannot pass a law that considers individual or aggregation blameworthy and later discipline them. Disallowing an ex post facto law implies that the U.S. Congress cannot make any given act a crime after the time the act had been committed. It is doubtful that this applies to a few sections of the Patriot Act. Individuals who monitor the Supreme
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now