Rhetorical Analysis Of Rights In An Insecure World
Harnoor Chatha
Professor Sumstad
English-1002-16
October 19, 2014
Rhetorical Analysis Final Draft Deborah Pearlstein author, of Rights in an Insecure World, is the Director of the United States Law and Security Program at Human Rights First. Pearlstein’s purpose is to elaborate and examine different ways our rights are redefined against us after September 11 attack. The Author emphasize her claim about Liberty and Security after September 11 attack on the United States. Author’s intended audience is informing U.S. citizens and criticizing the Government officials (FBI, CIA, and interrogation team at Guantanamo Bay). Author’s main goal is to elaborate and compare how Liberty and Security rights are being violated before and after the September …show more content…
The logic of this article was well established, maintained, and organized. Her article was organized by different headings that talked specifically about that heading. Pearlstein unfolds the article by examining the possibilities to prevent another attack from happening. She then begins to emphasize Liberty and Security. Author steps further and talks about “Caught in Balance.” Caught in Balance debates the FBI could have posited the Patriot Act. Continues on with “Paradigms Lost” given an example, “If the most important issue we face in the treatment of a suspect who know the location of a ticking bomb is ‘what balance’ to keep between security and liberty, of course liberty will lose.” Saving a life (security) weighs a lot more than the rights of an individual (liberty). The article concludes with “The Moral Equivalent of Law.” Which vaguely interprets that if the regimes are going to escape from balancing the power of security and liberty they shall preserve the regime of the human rights. The audience would be aggravated, annoyed, and disgusted about the actions of our regimes for liberty and security. The author talks about problems with balancing power and tries to find solutions if the regimes do escape the balancing framework how can the regimes provide security and liberty at the same time. Variety of claims of arguments were
Professor Sumstad
English-1002-16
October 19, 2014
Rhetorical Analysis Final Draft Deborah Pearlstein author, of Rights in an Insecure World, is the Director of the United States Law and Security Program at Human Rights First. Pearlstein’s purpose is to elaborate and examine different ways our rights are redefined against us after September 11 attack. The Author emphasize her claim about Liberty and Security after September 11 attack on the United States. Author’s intended audience is informing U.S. citizens and criticizing the Government officials (FBI, CIA, and interrogation team at Guantanamo Bay). Author’s main goal is to elaborate and compare how Liberty and Security rights are being violated before and after the September …show more content…
The logic of this article was well established, maintained, and organized. Her article was organized by different headings that talked specifically about that heading. Pearlstein unfolds the article by examining the possibilities to prevent another attack from happening. She then begins to emphasize Liberty and Security. Author steps further and talks about “Caught in Balance.” Caught in Balance debates the FBI could have posited the Patriot Act. Continues on with “Paradigms Lost” given an example, “If the most important issue we face in the treatment of a suspect who know the location of a ticking bomb is ‘what balance’ to keep between security and liberty, of course liberty will lose.” Saving a life (security) weighs a lot more than the rights of an individual (liberty). The article concludes with “The Moral Equivalent of Law.” Which vaguely interprets that if the regimes are going to escape from balancing the power of security and liberty they shall preserve the regime of the human rights. The audience would be aggravated, annoyed, and disgusted about the actions of our regimes for liberty and security. The author talks about problems with balancing power and tries to find solutions if the regimes do escape the balancing framework how can the regimes provide security and liberty at the same time. Variety of claims of arguments were