Sources used in this document:

Becker's theory of how social labeling creates and actually fosters "outsider" or criminal groups deemed to be beyond the pale of ordinary society was created long before terrorism became a common fear of everyday Americans and federal law enforcement authorities. But Becker's theory could easily apply to marginalized groups in America that were created in the wake of 9/11 and the Iraqi War, such as Muslims and anti-war activists. These persons, subject to heightened government scrutiny, may feel even more alienated from society as a result of increased government surveillance. According to the White House's official press release on its web site: (http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/):"America is safer today because of the President's policies to strengthen the security of our Nation's infrastructure and our borders." But viewed through Becker's eyes, the attempt to label such individuals as outsiders, deviant, or un-American may actually have a counterproductive effect upon national security.

Also, according to the progressive watchdog group, Moving Ideas: The Electronic Policy Network (http://www.movingideas.org/content/en/on_the_hill/patriot_act2005.htm) the tools used to enforce fears of outsiders, in the hope of bringing 'other' Americans together, violate the very principles of freedom that America stands for as a nation. The Patriot Act "became law only a month after September 11, 2001 -- with little review and amid an atmosphere of fear," an atmosphere counter-productive to positive acts of law enforcement. "The law gave the government sweeping surveillance powers without including accountability and oversight." Non-citizens or 'outsiders' can be indefinitely incarcerated, as a result of the act, and even citizens can find their mail scrutinized and their library and website visitation tracked and documented by the government.

Although security is necessary, these stipulations of the act cause one to ask -- why must certain groups and behaviors be demonized, or deemed suspicious, merely because they are engaged in a free search for information? What is the purpose of protecting freedom, if the means of law enforcement curtail that freedom? Although terrorism may indeed be a threat, limiting the tools that Americans have to express themselves without fear, and selecting certain profiled individuals to be the subjects of heightened scrutiny seems to be a prescription for creating a more hostile and divided environment within America's borders that is more, rather than less conducive to terrorist uprisings.