The September 11th attacks are the deadliest terrorist attacks in history. On September 11, 2001, 19 terrorists hijacked four U.S. commercial airliners and crashed two into the World Trade Center, one into the Pentagon, and the fourth in a field in Pennsylvania. On this day in history Americans sat in front of their televisions and radios watching helplessly as the 110-story twin towers crumbled to the ground. In a matter of seconds the world had changed. In the aftermath of these horrible events, the U.S. government found it necessary to create new laws so that this sort of atrocity will never happen again. On October 26, 2001 President George W. Bush signed the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001. Also known as the Patriot Act. This act grants federal officials greater authority to track and intercept communication that could possibly be a threat to national security. Sixty years ago, President Roosevelt authorized wire-tapping in order to ensure national security during WWII. From the first uses of wiretapping, to early wire-tapping laws, to the USA Patriot Act, and finally the controversy surrounding this new law, it is evident that the use of wire-tapping goes deep in our nation history and will continue to be in the future.
Since, the debate from 9/11/2001 in order to protect American citizens from supposed terrorist organizations civil liberties have been greatly affected rather than from how they are stated in the bill of Rights. In the U.S. constitution the Bill of Rights, especially protects civil liberties. The value of democracy and civil liberties derived from democracy should be upheld regardless of peace time or war time.
As a result the First and Fourth Amendments have been changed since the implementation of the USA Patriot Act. I believe that many aspects of the Patriot Act violate American civil liberties. The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. Under the Patriot Act the FBI is granted access to medical, financial, educational, and mental health records without providing any information that a possible crime is being committed or that this information has any relevance to terrorism. They can ask for it whenever they please and for whatever they want. Any house in America can be searched without a warrant. I believe this endangers every American. What if we aren't who they believe we are everyone makes mistake. The lives of many innocent people now become endangered.
Although there are still supporters to the law, this makes it very controversial. Others think this doesn’t infringe on the law and that the government sometimes can in order to protect the well-being of others. A Justice Department report to Congress in the fall of 2002 suggested that expanded surveillance allowed by the new law was used to investigate kidnappers, drug dealers, identity thieves and murders, none of whom were involved with terrorism (U.S. Department of Defense). It would be hard to argue that through this law many criminals are being captured and the lives of civilians are being protected. Others also believed the ones that should be worried are the ones that are not obeying the law.
The 1st Amendment is also violated from what the Bill of Rights says. The First Amendment protects rights to freedom of speech and assembly, to petition government for redress of grievances, and to freedom of religion. These rights are essential to a democratic society. Governmental actions have targeted individuals of Middle Eastern descent, South Asian descent and of the Muslim faith in violation of laws prohibiting governmental discrimination against ethnic and religious minorities. I think that when people where singled out because of their religion; this was the bridge point that lost all the faith in America. I do not think everyone has same treatment in the U.S; there is always something that will single you out. Racial and religious racism is still something very present in their society.
Waterboarding does not violate the ban on cruel and unusual punishment. It was regularly practiced as a punishment for misdemeanour offenses at and after the time the Eighth Amendment became law. Cruel and unusual punishment was also defined in law at the time to mean you had to strangle a person before burning them at the stake or drawing and quartering them. Therefore Congress would have to ban waterboarding for it to be illegal at the federal level (Howcott, M.). Our Attorney General nomination seems to know the law and is sticking to it despite from the Senate to violate the law. The debate over torture (“waterboarding”) and terrorism evoke two mutually exclusive provisions of the Constitution. You cannot comply with one without violating the other. Violation of the Constitution is unavoidable. Although we still have a responsibility to “protect each of the states against [both overt and covert] invasion” as required by Article IV of the Constitution. It ends up as a lose/lose situation. If we water board, or not or sit back and do nothing we still violate the Constitution.
References
Howcott, Major, 7 November 2007, “Waterboarding and the Constitution” Accessed 26 February 2012
O’Connor, Karen and Larry J. Sabato. (Eds.) (2009). American government: Roots and reforms. New York: Pearson Longman
United States. Department of Defense. Annual Polygraph Report to Congress. N.p.: n.p., 2002.Department of Defense Polygraph Program. Web. 21 Mar. 2011.
