9 11 And The Patriot Act example essay topic

The Spy Amongst Us September 11 was a wake up call for the whole country, tragic events on that date brought the world's biggest power to a complete halt. This also brought forth sweeping changes in many sectors, one of them being National Security. Agencies that use to have certain autonomy such as the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and the U.S. Coast Guard, just to name a couple, were grouped into what is now called the Department of Homeland Security. While it is essential to protect the American population and national interests; the goverment is threading the thin line between national security and invasion of privacy.

The whole notion of conspiracy theories and Big Brother has been a hot topic among liberals and civil liberty advocates for quite some time; but with the passing and implementation of the "Patriot Act", the general population has a bigger interest for this topic. Unfortunately, the goverment is doing nothing to shed its new "spy" image, as Barry Steinhardt, a Director at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) states: "the Administration's penchant for secrecy is matched only by its contempt for accountability to the American people and their elected representatives". As in a part of the movie Enemy of the State in which the wife of the persecuted lawyer asks "who is watching the ones who are watching us?" ; we have the right to find out who is watching us and if it is being done appropriately, and hold them responsible. If not there is a possibility that these surveillance tools could create temptations to abuse them for personal purposes (aclu. org). We would have to turn to the Patriot Act, and its main advocate, Attorney General John Ashcroft.

First off, we will focus our attention on is Attorney General John Ashcroft and his background. A hard-line conservative, he lost his Senate seat to the late Mel Carnahan, if this name does not sound familiar, it was the candidate who was killed in a plane crash before elections in 2000 and still one the seat. He was approved by the Senate by one of the slimmest margins in decades and not helping was his aimless travel and negative references to his slim confirmation by the Senate during his first few months in office. Early on, Ashcroft was not looking strong, he was seen as a man that really had no plan and his comments did not validate him with Washington.

As one official put it: "There was no sense of his mission or theme" (qtd in Johnson and Locy). Then, came the unexpected events of 9/11 and the events that followed made Ashcroft's political career seem like a rag to riches story. With the tragic events of 9/11, he went from being a candidate that lost his seat in to a dead opponent, to an Attorney General that was barely approved by the Senate, and finally to one of the key political figures in Washington. Unfortunately, Mr. Ashcroft still remains that same politician who shows us no real direction or plan. Such an example of this is a recent tour which Mr. Ashcroft made across the country addressing the Patriot Act. His speeches were not open to the general public and no time was set aside for a public discussion.

When asked about these circumstances his answer was: "You " ll have to ask somebody else about that" (qtd. in Johnson and Locy). Mr. Ashcroft has the authority to invade our privacy but he has to do it legally, meaning the approval of a guideline or a set of rules that makes him the most powerful Attorney General since the days of J. Edgar Hoover. This power comes in the form of the Patriot Act, which is the other point of focus. As we have seen in the past history of the United States, with the arrival of war or the rise in a threat to the country; actions are taken to insure and preserve national security. It is at these same times that civil liberties and privacy in one way or another are reduced, which can be summed up a trade-off, liberty and privacy for national security. For example, during WWI the Espionage Act was passed in 1918, in it freedom of speech and of the press were suspended and compensated with national security (Steele 325-36).

If we look closely, we see that 9/11 and the Patriot Act have many similarities with WWI and the Espionage Act; the attack on the World Trade Center brought upon us a new threat: terrorism. With the arrival of this new form of enemy came a countermeasure in the form of the Patriot Act. The main problem that arises is summed up in a comment by Executive Director of the ACLU in Washington, Anthony Romero: "Most of the American public doesn't really understand what's in the Patriot Act" (qtd. in Johnson and Locy). What the Patriot Act does is give the goverment new powers to search people's homes without notifying them, arrest individuals who appear to have terrorist ties and hold them for the time the goverment deems neccesary, and check email's or books checked out at libraries, again, without any notification. While the goverment states that the measures are for the well being of its citizens, it may have repercussions on foreign policies and relations. I can relate with this new form of goverment surveillance, being an international exchange student at San Diego State University, I am subject to being in a new goverment database for foreigners called SEVIS.

Also, the goverment can look into what internet sites I was checking at computers terminals in the university's library and any books I might have checked out. While I find some measures neccesary, at the same time I feel my privacy is invaded. I feel the government already did a background check on me, if not, the INS would have not issued me a student visa if they decided I was some kind of threat. A concern with the new surveillance powers the government has is that it creates stereotypes and racial profiling and puts a price on freedom.

These remarks might seem exaggerated, but it is what the new computerized screening system called CAPPS II (Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System) would create. The system would label passengers red, yellow or green based on a mathematical computer ranking of who most closely matches the identities of people on the terror watch lists. "Red"-rated flyers would be detained, while "yellow" travelers would undergo extra bag searches and pat-downs. "Green" passengers would board their planes without further scrutiny (Holdstege).

This, coupled with recent reports that some passengers - especially frequent fliers or businesspeople - were in favor of paying for having a "special" ID card which would make them avoid most of the new searches and questioning, is putting a price on our privacy. While the reasoning for the use of the Patriot Act and new surveillance powers for the goverment is a valid one, being that they are used to combat terrorism and preserve national security; the way they are used is not. In this case, the motive does not justify the acts; privacy and civil liberties should not be canceled when the departments responsible for surveillance are not issuing any kind of statements or showing accountability. Unfortunately, more and more this is looking to be the case, for example, CAPPS II will be run by the government, unlike CAPPS I, which was administered by the airlines under federal guidelines (Dart). We must defend our privacy or at the very least question our authorities, if not, the results would can be summed up in a line from the Oliver Stone film JFK; when the Attorney General who brings the government to trial over the investigation on the assassination of President Kennedy, says in his closing statement: "Democracy is dead".

Bibliography

Aclu. org. "What's Wrong With Public Surveillance". Aclu. org. 22 Aug 2002.
Oct. 28 2003.
Dart, Bob. "Pre-screening travelers threatens privacy, activists say Plan to gather data on passengers stirs fears of being blacklisted without recourse". 2003 The Austin American-Statesman Austin American-Statesman (Texas).
Lexis-Nexis. San Diego State University. 2 Nov. 2003.
Holdstege, Sean. "Feds scale back airport screening; Some passengers, privacy advocates Unimpressed". Media News Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers Tri-Valley Herald (Pleasanton, CA). Lexis-Nexis. 2 Nov 2003.
Johnson, Kevin, and Locy, Toni. "Patriot Act at heart of Ashcroft's influence". USA Today. Lexis-Nexis. 2 Nov 2003.