Patriot act essay 4

Nick Marnocha
Prof. Josh Wood
Eng. Comp. A100
10/19/2014
Civil Liberties or Security? Just 6 weeks after the attacks on 9/11, the Bush Administration put forth an act to help protect and ensure the United States from any further international terrorist attacks that may penetrate U.S. soil. Known as the PATRIOT ACT or “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism,” Act, It had been proposed and created with the wise intentions to find and intercept terrorists operating on American soil as well as protecting it on an international scale; yet, many Americans and citizens see fault within our government and the limitations of the patriot act of obstructions to our very own constitution set forth by our founding fathers. “After the act was passed, the executive argued that these broader powers would be used to put terrorist behind bars. In fact, several of the acts provisions can be used to gain information about Americans in the context of investigations with no demonstrated link to terrorism.” (Video) Many Americans feel as though the Patriot Act encroaches our 1st and 4th amendments which are the right to free speech and expression, as well as protecting the citizens of unwarranted search and seizures. From the government’s warrantless wiretapping, obtaining personal info from NSL’s or National Security Letters, emails, and phone records or unconstitutional surveillance of the citizens of the USA, free thinking, speech, and typical American lifestyle cannot survive in a nation full of fear and distrust created by our government and their Patriot Act.
One of America’s greatest presidents in history, John F. Kennedy once said that the first and most efficient particles of “individual liberty is the freedom of speech; the right to express and communicate ideas, to set oneself apart from the dumb beasts of field and forest . . .” Many American politicians and lawmakers today seems to have lost sight of the important ideals and morals that Kennedy spoke of and which this country was founded; ideals like civil rights, personal freedom, and the right to privacy. For example, A newspaper editor is no longer and able to publish an article that is in discrimination or critical of the government, even if legal, without fear that Big Brother aka FBI may begin to survey and monitor them. To most Americans, this is the most frightening aspect and part of the Patriot Act: the fact that the Act allows the government to spy on ANY of its citizens and peoples, not just the bad ones or the even the ones suspected with clear evidence and resources of terrorism. The Act does not demand and or require sufficient proof that “alleged suspects” are engaged in criminal activity before authorizing government surveillance. They can just do it anyway. Even upstanding American citizens in charge of protests or radical movements/parties can become targets of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) surveillance simply because of the manner in which they exercise their First Amendment rights. The FBI director Robert Muller announced “the Bureau had misused the act to obtain thousands of personal records without prior judicial approval as well as mentioning thousands of security letters used and abused to obtain information without traditional search warrants or court orders.”(Robert Muller, FBI Director) According to the ACLU’s report on abuses from the Patriot Act, around 8,500 NSL’s had been distributed in the year of 2000 and 2001, but approximately 192,000 had been issued in the years between 2003-2006 .The Patriot Act fails to secure American liberties; in reality, the Act exposes Americans to potential abuses of power by creating an environment that encourages government corruption, secrecy, fraud and discrimination while using “national security” as a pretense and precast for violating basic Constitutional rights and amendments like privacy and free speech. A good example of a case to banned NSL’s is one that happened in July of 2005 in Windsor CT, at Library Connection and Public Schools Administrative Offices; shared amongst 27 different libraries in the greater Hartford area, that 2 FBI agents delivered a NSL asking to provide information on who had used a computer with particular IP address for a 45 min period, 5 months before in February, that was relevant to an investigation on accounts of terrorism or clandestine intelligence (foreign spies). George Christen, the Exec. Director of Library Connection was confined of a “Gag Order” which prohibits any officer, employee, or agent of yours from disclosing to any person that the FBI has sought or obtained access to information or records…he was troubled because he knew nothing of the suspicious email and that he believes that the NSL invades the privacy of library patrons, which all directors are strong believers in patrons privacy. The FBI responded with Paul McNulty, U.S. Attorney General says, “It’s more of a common sense aspect of trying to conduct an investigation; if the recipients can turn around and tell the person who’s information had been requested, that would defeat the purpose of authorities conducting an investigation and if we used court order, it would compromise and shut down the entire operation and investigation. The person didn’t identify themselves on the email and was sent anonymously, and provided information on potential terrorist threat in CT; so it’s our job to find out who sent it.” Library Connection filed a suit with ACLU (American civil liberties union) in federal court that challenged constitutionality of NSL’s. Case was nationally published when someone forgot to black out “library connection” from all court records to preserve the secrecy of gag orders; 10 months later, the court decided to lift the gag order. As the century drags on, it is becoming painfully obvious that the Patriot Act has actually moved the United States further away from an ideal democratic society since its passage in October of 2001.
But of course, the United States government needs to have the power to monitor suspected terrorists, and they should. No American citizen is arguing about that, but the current situation involves the manner in which government spying occurs. The Patriot Act fails to go over a valuable balance between protecting American lives against the threat of terrorism and protecting our rights as citizens against potential government abuse or “Reform”. Particularly upsetting about the Act are several critical provisions designed to widely expand government power with limited “checks and balances” and nearly unlimited potential for abuse.
One of these provisions: Section 213 of the Patriot Act, which greatly expands the power of the Federal government, enables law enforcement agents or FBI to conduct “sneak-and-peek” operations in a U.S. civilian’s household. The provision violates our Fourth Amendment by failing to require that those persons who are the subject of search orders “be told that their privacy has been compromised” (Reform). If a person doesn’t know that the government has been in their home then they will be unable to verify that the government had conducted a reasonable search using a valid warrant. If the government had overstepped its bounds, that individual will not have a reason to take recourse against the government. After all, how can a person protect their rights if they do not know that their rights have been violated? Section 213 chips away the “sacred rights of western society” as mentioned by Kennedy, which reduces U.S. civil rights to almost the same level as those of the Nazi Socialists in Russia during the 1930s and 40s.
Some Americans may think that they don’t need to worry or mind the Patriot Act because they “have nothing to hide” from the government. This thinking, however, is flawed for many reasons. First, if American people know that all of their communications and actions as well are being monitored, they won’t feel comfortable expressing their thoughts as well as exercising their rights to free speech and free thinking; even so if the person’s thoughts are not what the government wants them to think. Second, by chipping away American civil rights one by one in order to obtain a sense of security and safeness, Americans, I believe are actually helping terrorists to achieve their mission of annihilating democratic ideals in the western world. The last reason to oppose the Patriot Act is the fact that it’s a direct attack on American ideals. The Patriot Act basically annihilates the protections offered by the First and Fourth Amendments and exposes Americans to potential abuses at the hands of Big Brother.
Protecting Americans from foreign threats is critical and 100% necessary; the Federal government should do whatever it takes to keep its citizens safe, but it should never infringe upon our civil rights. The question is how do we respond as a nation? Do we respond without question with retaliation like the government did after 9/11? Or do we stay consistent to the principals upon which this country was founded. No doubt, the Patriot Act represents an emerging trend in American government today—a trend of sacrificing the American Creed’s ideals in exchange for security. Americans fought the Revolutionary War to earn basic liberties that they felt were their God-given rights, rights that no humans should live without. Americans should not so easily give up their rights and liberties cherished for so long as the cornerstone of American society for the mere illusion of security. I agree with the Patriot Act in its quest for protecting America and its citizens against the acts of terrorism on or to American soil, but harshly disagree with the contents at which the Act is exercised and the power given to the government in which the Act should be amended. If we continue to take civil liberties away from American citizens it could be the start of a new war against our own government.
“The best way to take control over a people and control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed” – Adolf Hitler