Patriot Act

The Bourne ultimatum is about a guy that works for the CIA, but at the same time is trying to uncover his identity. The movie represents a variety of political messages that portray a corrupt government who through secrecy utilize their power to better the personage. The Bourne ultimatum shows a variety of political messages such as individuality, corruption, conflict, role of government, power and secrecy. However, the main theme portrayed throughout the movie is the involvement of corruption in the Central Intelligence Agency.

Several individuals were portrayed as having too much power. To understand Bourne ultimatum you may need to watch the first movie (the Bourne identity) as well as the second movie (The Bourne supremacy). The Bourne ultimatum is a movie that transfers the corruption of the CIA. For example, the CIA officers, are officers that protect the nations and investigate terrorism so that it is ceased. How is it possible that there are officers that are complete hypocrites because they betray their nation. The movie also helped demonstrate how the corruption is served by betraying the country.

As the film unravels the involvement of corruption only deepens and the relationship between corruption, secrecy, power and individuality seem synonymous. As the protagonist, Jason Bourne struggles to find his own identity, the involvement of corruption in the CIA worsens. According to Bourne’s head trainer Conklin, Jason Bourne is a “malfunctioning 30 million dollar weapon of the United States government”. He is a highly trained assassin who is suffering from amnesia struggling to find his own identity.

Bourne was involved in a top secret program called “Treadstone”, which went wrong after the program attempted to alleviate a conflict by assassinating of a political leader. The second movie begins before the end of the events in (The Bourne Supremacy). Bourne Ultimatum ultimately reveals the total corruption involved in the CIA and Bourne’s true identity. Bourne then reads an article in The Guardian by Ross about Bourne, Treadstone, and “Operation Blackbriar. ” He then arranges to meet Ross in London at the south entrance of Waterloo Station.

Ross, however, is under surveillance because his use of the word “Blackbriar” in a phone call to his editor was tracked by Echelon, alerting the CIA. CIA section Chief Noah Vosen alerts his staff at the Anti-Terrorism Deep Cover in New York to find out any information on Ross, believing that Operation Blackbriar has been compromised. Vosen orders an assassin, Paz, to kill Ross and his source. Vosen’s team identifies Bourne on a security camera and recognizes him as the original Treadstone assassin, and assumes he is Ross’s source.

While Paz gets into a position with a sniper and kills Ross, Bourne went to Ross body and gets his note and he run away. In this scene, the government’s agents received information that a British news reporter uncovered something about an operation called Blackbriar, so they tried to track him down by looking up his record. They were able to find his personal information including his address, cell-phone numbers, and job location. During this process the agents hacked into the news reporter’s email transactions and discovered that he bought a train ticket so agents were sent to the train station to capture the reporter.

When the reporter arrived at the train station the agents monitored his every move from a room filled with high tech computers and TV screens that were hooked up to the surveillance cameras, and satellite communication system. Surveillance cameras are there to make sure that no shady activities are present. People recognize that they are there, but the CIA used the cameras to help them capture the reporter and Jason Bourne, so their secrets will remain secret. Later in the movie the CIA officials sent an assassin to kill the reporter, and the cameras assisted in locating the position of the reporter.

When the assassin shot him, the security cameras were purposely turned off. This is not acceptable! The cameras are not there to aide murderers. The CIA is protected by the Patriot Act which allows them to access medical records, tax records, and information about the books that one buys or borrow without probable cause, and the power to break into your home and conduct secret searches without warning or probable cause (USA Patriot Act). The Patriot Act is aimed at terrorists or people that are potentially terrorists and it doesn’t give the government the power to kill innocent people.

Even though the reporter was not a British Citizen, the CIA agents were from the US so they should follow American laws. Also the reporter in this movie was not a terrorist. He was harmless to society. He just happened to hear something that he wasn’t suppose to hear. This movie shows what the government is capable of doing, and they could be monitoring the everyday lives of U. S. Citizens, listening in on our phone conversations. Pamela Landy is asked to help capture Bourne. With Landy’s help, Vosen and his team also determine that Neil Daniels is Ross’ source.

By implementing Landy in the films was a successful character, the director attempted to send an important message to his audience. I believe that he tried to instill the idea of separated Landy from the other male characters was corruption, Landy worked to answer questions and find truth. She was portrayed as the ideal CIA official. Vosen and his team also determined that Neil Daniels is Ross’ source. They send a team to Daniels’ office in Madrid, to kill her, but Bourne get first to save her and killing Desh Bouksani that was the guy they send to kill Daniels.

Bourne later found out that Blackbriar was Treadstone’s “dirty little secret”, it provided a way for corrupt CIA officials to cover up their slip ups by sending Bourne to eliminate targets. This would allow the officials to keep their corrupt ways a secret. They utilized their power; Blackbriar, to carry out their own dirty missions. Bourne takes a flight to New York City, he calls Landy while observing her and Vosen from across the street, the same call that was shown at the end of the second movie.

Bourne sends a text message to Landy to arrange a meeting. Vosen and his team intercept the message and follow Landy as she leaves the building. However, the meeting is simply a diversion to allow him to enter Vosen’s office and steal classified Blackbriar documents. Landy gave Bourne the address of the Treadstone R facility in code when Landy gave Bourne his date of birth. Bourne meets Landy and gives her the stolen documents from Vosen’s office before entering the building. Landy finishes faxing away the Blackbriar document that Bourne stole to the FBI.

Landy realizes that the man she is working with to find Bourne is also corrupt. The CIA director Noah Vosen was Blackbriar’s “operational chief,” and DR. Albert Hirsch was the “alleged mastermind of the program” She wasn’t able to prove this if Bourne had acquired the files needed to prosecute the corrupt CIA officials. By achieving these files and confronting the officials Bourne was able to find his true identity. In this movie we have the opportunity of see how the CIA, works in their secrets case.

I believe the director may want to teach the audience showing example of how the government works and as well making to see not matter how important can be the agency there still haven individual that there dishonest. Also the director included political messages and carefully placed cameras in order to capture the real life possibilities of corruption, secrecy, power in our government. The camera angles were set as if the movie were a documentary, everything was set up so that it all seemed real and was happening now. This method made the film seem more real and believable.

It greatly highlighted the quality and sense of reality throughout the film. In the sense of corruption the film is pretty accurate in its representation of the political system. For example, corruption among high levels of government like those involved in the Watergate and the occasional CIA leaks that we see on CNN and FOX news channels are established in the Bourne movies. All of these ideas are introduced and incorporated into the Bourne films which furthermore increase the films realistic and documentary feel. In effect, the director successfully increases the validity of the film’s material. Another aspect The U.

S. Government takes a lot of safety precautions to protect its property and people, but sometimes they go too far even as far as to invade the privacy of its citizens. In the new film Bourne Ultimatum many example of privacy invasion is demonstrated. Some of these examples of privacy invasion are acceptable under extreme circumstances, but others are not. Otherwise what increased the films reality was Bourne’s ability to use anything in order to complete his tasks. He worked with what he was given and it made the audience really appreciate his craft and skill with his ability to maneuver things to work in his favor.

Another example are the fighting scenes, he was seen using not only guns, but also cords, towels, books, to defend himself and neutralize his opponents. He used whatever it took to get the job done and stay alive. This is important because according to field operation officers like Bourne were highly trained in areas such as, self defense, weapons handling, high speed driving, disguise, and secret writing communications, which all represent an entire array of what CIA calls the trade craft skills.

A good fields’ officer makes anything his weapon. The more trained you are with weaponry, more missions will be completed. The film reflected a negative outlook on American politics. It demonstrated the U. S. government particularly the CIA as being a corrupt agency that utilized their reserved powers to resolve not only regular but also personal conflicts through secrecy to better their individual selves.

The idea of imperfection, political messages like corruption, and from a general standpoint accurate portrayal of an operations field officer, qualifies the trilogy as a representative piece of American politics. The Bourne films give a realistic point of view; government is not perfect! Contrary to most films the Bourne movies show that the government too is vulnerable to issues like corruption, secrecy, and abuse of power. By filming as if the film were a documentary on Jason Bourne, the film ultimately delineates imperfection amongst our levels of government.

Disadvantages to the Patriot act (USAPA); There are six flaws to the act that was passed into law on October 26th, 2001: It takes away civil rights, by doing so it destroys the definition of what it means to be an American Citizen [ (talkradio101, 2010) ]. The feeling is that by destroying our way of life is the best way to reward or give victory to the terrorist [ (topix, 2012) ]. Secondly, Constitutional protections are violated, the U. S. Constitution is the most lasting, well-written document, and this is why our nation has become the most successful nation [ (talkradio101, 2010) ].

People from all over the world have migrated here for the freedom of religious practice, now you can be tracked to your place of worship which violates the 1st Amendment violation), you can be held without trial, without representation or facing the witnesses against them which are violations of the 6th and 7th Amendments. Third is potential for abuse by current administration and future administrations, this “War on Terror” potentially has no end; there will not be a cease fire or peace treaty signed to officially end the war like in nation-vs. nation wars [ (talkradio101, 2010) ]. This means that the “time of danger” will never end and that the government will continue to violate our rights [ (NPR, 2012) ]. Fourthly is the act increases the possibility for racial profiling or other means of discrimination and harassment, we have many law-abiding loyal Americans who are of Arab decent, have Muslim Beliefs and work in high profile careers, such as nuclear scientist and biowepons experts [ (NPR, 2012) ].

We have come a long way in our many civil rights abuses of the past and something like this could cause a detrimental slip backwards for our nations [ (talkradio101, 2010) ]. Fifth flaw is the use of gathered information by government for non-terror/political purposes, this information could be used for blackmail, embarrassment of rivals to further a career or gain the upper hand in a political race. This information could be used to bring down anyone who would chose to speak out against the country or even someone in political power.

Lastly all of the first flaws could lead to the abuse of Muslims and other groups causing a shift in viable sources of information to locate terrorist and possibly creating new terrorist [ (topix, 2012) ] [ (NPR, 2012) ].

Works Cited

1. NPR. (2012, October 29). NPR. org.
2. Retrieved from www. npr. org: www. npr. org/news/specials/patriotact/patriotactprovisions. html talkradio101. (2010, May 18).
3. Retrieved from www. talkradio101. com: http://www. talkradio101. com topix. (2012, October 29). www. topix. com.
4. Retrieved from Topix. com: www. topix. com/forum/us/patriot-act/TUPOA5NOIQKIFN8FE/p3

Every sane individual would agree with the assertion that what occurred on September 11, 2001 is indeed a tragedy for the American public. With this grief came the awareness and fear that terrorism has become a global dilemma. In line with such events, the US government led by President George W. Bush Jr. initiated an all out war against terrorism (global war on terror). The latter called for measures within and outside the United States that would supposedly crack down on terrorist groups and safeguard national security (Ahmed, 268).

The main legislative measure employed is through the USA Patriot Act. The said Act extended the powers of U. S. law enforcement agencies for the mentioned purpose of conquering terrorism domestically and abroad. For example, the act increases the ability of law enforcement agencies in terms of surveillances (electronic, medical, immigration or financial records et cetera). As the Max Brenn reports, the USA Patriot Act:

“…furthered foreign intelligence gathering within the United States; expanded the authority of the US Secretary of Treasury to regulate financial transactions involving foreign entities; and permitted a high level of discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities in detaining and deporting immigrants suspected of terrorism-related acts. ” (Brenn, 2007) The term “domestic terrorism” was also included in the definition of terrorism in the said Patriot Act, this means that the exercise of authority of law enforcement agencies covered a larger scope of activities.

This paper asserts that the US Patriot Act should be amended due to its vague policies, the overpower it gives governmental agencies (i. e. the SNL), and the incompatibility of some of its provisions with the American constitution. Further, it must be noted that despite being amended last 2006, a lot of provisions (even those that are permanently stipulated) continue to violate civil liberties; with at least two provisions of the said act already being deemed to be unconstitutional.

Moreover, the USA Patriot act as it is does not meet the urgency it had in 2001, as such it order to be in line with its purpose, it must be amended in accordance to the needs of our time. First, it has been argued that the said law infringes the right of individuals in terms of privacy as well as due process as well as giving too much power to the FBI, CSI etc. This is exemplified by the provisions in the Patriot act that allows for delayed if not with held search warrants.

This goes to say that law enforcement officers have the authorization to conduct “sneak and peek” searches, wherein the owner or person concerned are not given notice nor is asked for permission regarding a search. Moreover it is the case that the NSLs (National Security Letters) are deemed to be used to acquire documents including telephone, email, financial and even library records (all of which are deemed as private) without the proper approval of a judicial court.

It is further the case that most of the public records which the Federal Bureau of Investigations gains access too are supposed to be covered by the fourth amendment of the constitution and not to mention governed by client-company/institutional/professional privilege. Further, in support of the argument that the Patriot Act infringes civil liberties, we may review the current rulings of certain courts. Take for example, last September 6, 2007 the rewritten Patriot Act was held by U. S. District Judge Victor Marrero as offensive to the fundamental principles upheld by our constitution.

A more current blow to the said law is the ruling of a federal judge that at least two provisions of the Patriot act are unconstitutional last September 26, 2007. This is again with regards to the warrantless searches and acquisition of records through the NSL which are in direct violation of the fourth amendment. The constitution is the primary source of the laws that governs the land. In its current state, some aspects of the Patriot Act are contrary to the stipulations of the constitution.

As such, there is a need to amend the Act otherwise, it would be nullified for not coinciding with the things that are upheld and safeguarded by the constitution. A lot of states have already agreed that the legislature contradicts with the fundamental principles of the constitution, one of this states is Montana (Graham-Felsen, 2005). The following are specific parts of the constitution that the Patriot Act needs to take into consideration and uphold at all times. In order for this to happen, the law would have to be amended.

Aside from the fourth amendment, the Patriot act also needs to be amended in order to uphold the sixth amendment of the US constitution which assures the right of individuals to proper judicial processes. The USA Patriot Act warrants the use of shady courts in the sense that people suspected of terrorist activities despite lack of sufficient evidence are tried without due presence of outside juries and proper documentation open to public scrutiny. This directly violates the 6th amendment because it allows underground processing of suspects.

There is also reason to believe that US citizens are subjected to surveillance based on their religion and other affiliations, a direct violation of one’s right to self-determination. This is through the authority given to law enforcement agencies to tap into records of individuals without enough probable cause (ACLU, 2007). Further, Americans and immigrants are subjected to unconstitutional investigations and interrogations even if there is insufficient proof of these persons being actual threats to national security.

There are inconveniences that occur today that manifest the extent to which the Patriot Act is shown to be a hindrance rather than a protection of national security. This can be seen through the incidents reported wherein American citizens are forced to delay flights due to their inclusion to the no fly list by merely bearing the same name as a person suspected by the FBI or Homeland Security. One of the worst incidents perhaps is the wrongful accusation of Brandon Mayfield; whose fingerprints were mistakenly matched with the prints found in the Madrid Train Bombings of 2004 (Molina, 2007).

Nonetheless, these faulty aspects of the Act can be amended to remove the errors it possesses. We cannot deny that there is indeed a need to safeguard our national security in order for us to live; rights do not function in a vacuum. There are certain conditions that have to be met in order for us to practice the liberties we love and cherish. The USA Patriot act and its rigidity is the right legislative course of action in 2001, its effectiveness can be improved to fit our society’s post-9/11 scenario.

Certain provisions like those that continue to override the rights of the people need to be further amended to suit the constitutional system of our country. Some of the provisions are indeed too drastic and need to be re-evaluated and if necessary repealed; however some of the contents of the said Act do address the need to protect our land from terrorism. It must once again be clarified that even if the author deems that some provisions should be repealed, it does not necessarily follow the law in its entirety should be abolished.

Specifically, the US congress could start by setting the limits to the use of NSLs by the FBI. Truly this aspect of the Patriot Act has been proven to be problematic. According to CNN. com, the White House itself expressed its concern regarding this misuse of powers last March 2007 which the FBI director at that time claim responsibility for (Arena & Quijano, 2007). In addition the reauthorization of the Patriot Act includes new policies that once again contain vague and ambiguous terms like, “an offense against the United States” and “reasonable grounds”.

Indeed the latter would be significant in the sense that the said law warrants also the forming of a secret/special police force are given power to arrest and keep out people at their own discretion in lieu of a “special event of national significance” present (Roberts, 2006). The latter again is left undefined. These limitations, and the necessary provisions that safeguard the rights of the people, within reason, would be resolved through an amendment of the USA Patriot Act. The law needs to adapt to the necessity of the time on which it is suppose to serve its purpose.

The aforementioned are samples of the provisions of which our congress could start reviewing and amending. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness would regain its fullest meaning if and only if, we accept the need to safeguard, first and foremost, this country. Works Cited Ahmed, Nafeez M. The War on Freedom: How and Why America was Attacked September 11, 2001. CA: Tree of Life Publications, 2002 Arena, Kelli and Quijano, Elaine. “Audit: FBI’s Patriot Act snooping broke rules. ” CNN. com. March 9, 2007. Accessed 5 October 2007 <http://www. cnn.

com/2007/LAW/03/09/security. letters/index. html>. Brenn, Max. “Sections of the Patriot Act Unconstitutional- Judge. ” Efluxmedia. September 7, 2007. accessed October 8, 2007 at <http://www. efluxmedia. com/news_Sections_of_the_Patriot_Act_Unconstitutional_Judge_08381. html> Graham-Felsen, Sam. “Sweet Victory: Montana Acts Patriotic. ” The Nation. April 8, 2005. accessed 6 October 2007 <http://www. thenation. com/blogs/edcut? pid=2311>. Molina, Mike R. “Federal judge rules Patriot Act search, surveillance provisions unconstitutional. ” Paperchase news burst.

Jurist; Legal News and Research. September 26, 2007. accessed 6 October 2007 <http://jurist. law. pitt. edu/paperchase/2007/09/federal-judge-rules-patriot-act-search. php>. Roberts, Paul Craig. “Unfathomed Dangers in PATRIOT Act Reauthorization. ” Anti-War. com. January 24, 2006. accessed 3 October 2007 at <http://www. antiwar. com/roberts/? articleid=8434>. “Federal Court Strikes Down Patriot Act Search and Surveillance Provisions. ” American Civil Liberties Union. September 27, 2007. Date accessed 7 October 2007 < http://www. aclu. org/safefree/patriot/31989prs20070927. html>.

Terrorism was viewed in the early days as an act of violence against a limited group of individuals. The acts then were consisted of bombing, kidnapping, killing prominent public officials, and others. The purpose of staging the terrorist act was to catch the government’s attention with the hope that the government may give in to the terrorists’ demands. The demands may be considered political, economical, or ideological. However, no matter the purpose is, the government usually do not heed the terrorist groups for they have been considered as a mere nuisance of the society that can easily be eradicated through military force.

Additionally, terrorist groups were likened to a group of rebels operating as a group of limited members. The terrorist groups were not considered as a major threat to the nation’s security. But then, the horrifying 9/11 terrorist attack have drastically and clearly changed the world’s perception about terrorism. America, on the other hand, has greatly changed in its dealing with terrorism and terror groups. The International Community also realized that terrorism is a real threat to the world’s security. The remarkable 9/11 has indeed revealed the true face of terrorism.

In response to the terrorism, America hunted all those responsible for the bombing by declaring an all out war against terrorism. Concomitant to the war is the enactment of all that would justify the government’s acts against terrorism. The government has enacted the U. S. Patriot Act and the Homeland Security. The president has rapidly heightened all measures to ensure security and to pursue all those responsible for the 9/11 and those who are connected with terrorism. Despite criticisms on the effect of the legislations to civil liberties, the government has been adamant on its stand to battle terrorism.

The vengeance has eventually resulted to the war in Iraq and bombardment of Afghanistan. Likewise, the head of terrorism, Osama bin Laden and Sadam Hussein were apprehended and punished accordingly. Despite the declared death of the prominent architects of terrorism, the fight against terrorism still continues because of the belief that terrorism is still alive. The laws are also controlling within the nation. In line with this, the study will explore the organization of Al-Qaeda and at the same time present an evaluation of the counterterrorism laws. Body

The name Al-Qaeda started to reverberate at the very onset of the 9/11 terrorist attack. The horrifying bombing of the very symbol of economic and military prowess of America, the World Trade Center, was rapidly linked to the Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. Right after the attack, the government of the United States and foreign allies has united to condemn the unjustified act of terrorism. Al-Qaeda was believed to have been established in 1988. The Al-Qaeda was the by-product of the Muslims’ retaliation against the Soviet Union that occupied Afghanistan in 1979 through 1989 (Katzman).

During the war against the Soviet Union, group of Muslims have started to recruit jihadis to fight against the Soviet Union. The recruiting and funding of the jihadis or fighters were initiated by Abdullah Azzam and his former student, Osama bin Laden, by founding the Maktab al-Khidamat which means Services Office (Katzman). This was also known as or Al Khifah. Notably, the Maktab al-Khidamat was believed to be the forerunner of Al-Qaeda. After the war with the Soviet Union, bin Laden and Abdullah Azzam established the Al-Qaeda in 1984 (Katzman). Al-Qaeda is an Arabic word which means “the base” (Katzman).

Purposely, Al-Qaeda was established as a “rapid reaction force available to intervene wherever Muslim were perceived to be threatened” (Katzman). Al-Qaeda is also defined as “a secret, almost virtual organization, one that denies its own existence in order to remain in the shadows” (Atkins, 2004). The Al-Qaeda which was jointly founded was eventually controlled by Osama bin Laden as a result of Abdullah Azzam’s assassination. Meanwhile, the assassination of Azzam was linked to Osama bin Laden. Remarkably, Al-Qaeda came to be known worldwide right after the 9/11 attack.

The firmness of the organization of Al-Qaeda was believed to have been founded on ideology. There has been several controlling ideology of Al-Qaeda. Aside from being a religious duty, the Holy War has been viewed as necessary for the salvation of one’s soul and a means of defending the Muslim nation (Martin, 2006). Second, peace with the West is impossible and the only course of action in defending Islam is through violence (Martin, 2006). Third, the Al-Qaeda considers Muslim government as apostasies and is violently overthrown when they cooperate with the West (Martin, 2006).

Fourth, the Al-Qaeda believes that only two sides exist and that no apocalyptic conflict between Islam and forces of evil exist (Martin, 2006). From the time Al-Qaeda was founded in 1989, several terrorist activities were perpetuated in some other parts of the globe. In October 1993, the World Trade Center was attempted to be blown by Ramzi Ahmed Yusef (Katzman). In June 25, 1996, US Servicemen were killed while hundreds were wounded when a bomb exploded outside the Khobar Towers in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia (Martin, 2006).

Then in August 7, 1998, a bombing was also planned n the US Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Tanzania that caused almost 200 innocent people. The USS Cole was also damaged by suicide bombing in October 12, 2000 where 17 sailors were killed (Martin, 2006). The most damaging terrorist activity was the terrifying 9/11 attack. The 9/11 terrorist attack has totally crashed the World Trade Center in New York. The third plane was directed Pentagon killing hundreds of people and the fourth plane crashed in the Pennsylvania field (Martin, 2006). The 9/11 terrorist attack has drastically changed the world’s perception on terrorism.

Likewise, the attack has changed the world’s perception about Osama bin Laden. Primarily, the target of Al-Qaeda is the US government and the American people. America has been considered as the enemy of the Muslim nation because of the wars perpetrated against them. The economic embargo and the control over the world’s economy have been highly criticized by the Muslim nation. Eventually, the perception that the West is the enemy to Muslim nations has been shaped. Since the West is considered as the enemy, the Al-Qaeda’s target has been the American people.

It is noteworthy that all the attacks have been perpetrated against US embassies and US nationals. Aside from the Americans, the terrorist also targeted citizens of Europe, Israel, Russia and other allies of America. Likewise, the 9/11 is a clear message or expression of hatred of terrorist against the Americans. In order to send a clear and strong message, the terrorist has implemented high-profile target. In addition, they adopted the suicide bombing as a means of carrying out their designs because it is simplified and a means of eliminating last minute flexibility (Mannes, 2004).

In addition, they targeted high officials and use the media in order for the government not to undermine the target. Al-Qaeda also adopted the unconventional means of acquiring information through an extensive research and contacts of professionals. Internet has been essential for Al-Qaeda in penetrating the security, intelligence, and military organizations of other countries. Notably, the information the Al-Qaeda has gathered were used in planning their attacks in several countries. Additionally, Al-Qaeda’s primary goal was to obtain nuclear weapon (Mannes, 2004).

The Al-Qaeda has successfully created their own bomb through the documents they have captured. Besides, professionals were also recruited and being turned into a radical in order to obtain materials from the outside. Interestingly, the group was able to create a biological weapon through the extensive research done by Ayman Zawahari, a medical doctor (Mannes, 2004). The group also studied in order to create their own weapons. Another tactic of the Al-Qaeda in carrying out their mission is to at least impair the economy of other country.

This has been done by terrifying tourists through kidnapping of foreign nationals visiting a particular nation. Furthermore, bombing of public places has also threatened tourists from visiting places occupied by terrorist groups. In assessing the Al-Qaeda organization, it can be observed that the group has been patient and enduring in order to succeed in their plans. The tactics and strategies adopted by the group can be considered to have been brilliantly drafted and carried out. However, the group was molded and blinded by extremism. On the part of the American government, the 9/11 attack cannot just be disregarded.

Right after the attack, the administration of Bush formed the 9/11 Commission. Primarily, the Commission was directed to conduct an investigation on the bombing. Thereafter, the name of Al-Qaeda appeared. In response to the 9/11 attack, Bush administration has created a new federal office of Homeland Security nine days after the attack (Andryszewski, 2004). Pres. Bush also signed into law the U. S. Patriot Act, 45 days after the 9/11/. In addition, then President Bush also signed the Homeland Security Act of 2002 in November 22, 2002 (Andryszewski, 2004).

All these were the result of the fear of another terrorist attack. Furthermore, these laws have essentially changed the essence of security in the country. Meanwhile, in order to identify the targets of the laws, the government found the need to define terrorism. Terrorism has been defined by Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a Government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (Sauter and Carafano, 2005, p. 65).

From the definition, it is clear that terrorism has been recognized to exist within the country targeting the citizens and outside the country targeting Americans. Hence, the counterterrorism laws have been designed to deal with terrorism within and outside America. One of the weapons of America in fighting terrorism is the Homeland Security which has been referred to; “consists of all military activities aimed at preparing for, protecting against, or managing the consequences of attacks on American soil, including the CONUS and U. S. territories and possessions.

It includes all actions to safeguard the populace and its property, critical infrastructure, the government, and the military, its installations, and deploying forces” (Larson, et. al. , 2000). As to the military function of the Homeland Security, it has five major key areas of focus. One is the WMD domestic preparedness and civil support (Larson, et. al). Second is continuity of government to ensure or restore civil authority (Larson, et. al. , 2000). Third is border and coastal defense which includes management of large-scale refugee flow and revention of WMD smuggling that may potentially create threat to security (Larson, et.

al, 2000). Fourth is the continuation of military operation (Larson, et. al. , 2000). And, last is the national missile defense (Larson, et. al. , 2000). In domestic preparedness, the FBI and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) can request from the Department of Defense the cooperation of the federal Army (Larson, et. al, 2000). Likewise, the National Guard can also participate in maintaining civil authorities. Interestingly, military has an essential role in all areas of Homeland Security.

In a broader scope, the Homeland Security is defined as “a concerted national effort to prevent terrorist attacks within United Sates, reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur” (Bolt, Colleta, and Shacklford, 2005, p. 433). In order to effectively fight terrorism, the administration of Bush has formed the Department of Homeland Security. The Department is composed of 22 federal departments, agencies, and bureaus from Central Intelligence Agency, FBI, DOD, and Center for Disease Control and Prevention (Andryszewski, 2004).

These different agencies have been divided into Directorates with unique duties and jurisdiction. The first is the Border and Transportation Security Directorate which is responsible for ensuring the borders of America from terrorists coming from the outside of the country (Homeland Security, 2009). Aside from that, the Directorate ensures safety of land, sea, and air transportations. Immigration laws are also attached to the responsibility of the Directorate. The second is the Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate which is tasked to coordinate with federal government in case of attack (Homeland Security, 2009).

The third is Science and Technology Directorate responsible for biological, radiological, and chemical attacks, and nuclear weapons (Homeland Security, 2009). The last is the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate tasked to gather intelligence and information in detecting terrorist activities (Homeland Security, 2009). Furthermore, it is also mandated to identify infrastructures which may be vulnerable to terrorism. An Undersecretary is assigned to administer each Directorate. The Undersecretary has been assigned a task to

“access, receive, and analyze law enforcement information from agencies of the Federal Government, State and local government agencies, and private sector entities, and to integrate such information to identify and assess the nature and scope of terrorist threat to the homeland; detect and identify threats of terrorism against United States; and understand such threat in light of actual and potential vulnerabilities of the homeland” (Bolt, Colleta, and Shackelford, 2005, p. 433). Looking back into the definition, Homeland Security has three major concerns.

First, prevent terrorist attacks in America (Fisher and Green, 2003). Second, reduce the vulnerability to terrorism of America (Fisher and Green, 2003). Third, minimize damages and recovery in case of attack (Fisher and Green, 2003). In preventing terrorist attack, the Department of Homeland Security has enhanced its intelligence and warning devices capable of tracking terrorist activities (Sauter and Carafano, 2005). In addition, national laws have been enacted to deal with domestic terrorism. Security within borders has also been intensified.

Furthermore, transportation has been highly monitored to detect travelling terrorists. In the second duty of the Homeland Security, the Department is tasked to minimize vulnerability by curbing any possibility of bringing any weapon of mass destruction into the country. This way, critical infrastructure and catastrophic terrorism are prevented (Sauter and Carafano, 2005). These kinds of terrorism involve attack through computer. Finally, the third duty is fulfilled by improving the capability of the Department in responding to a terrorist attack.

Response may not only involve military defense but rather, it entails preparedness in rescuing lives of the victims and in containing the place attack to limit the number of victims. Another prevalent counterterrorism law of the government is the U. S. Patriot Act. Since the Act was abruptly enacted into law as it was signed 45 days after the 9/11 attack, the Act was perceived to be an effective means of curbing terrorism. Primarily, the U. S. Patriot Act was enacted to prevent terrorism but has effectively expanded the power of the law enforcement and intelligence agencies in carrying out their duties with regard to terrorism.

There are basically four ways in carrying out the responsibilities of the Act. First, the Act applies to fighting terrorism through the use of investigative tools previously available in fighting other forms of organized crime (Katzman). Second, the Act has eradicated any kind of barriers that hinders the free flow of information between and among law enforcement (Katzman). Third, the act validated the use of new technology and identifying new threats (Katzman). Last, the Act has created new terrorism-related crimes and increased penalties of crimes (Katzman).

Under the first way, the tool that has been accepted or authorized includes electronic surveillances to detect terrorism in full-range and roving wiretaps to be authorized by a federal judge (Katzman). Through the roving wiretaps, the authorities are allowed to use electronic surveillance in response to “time-sensitive criminals or terrorist activities” (Purpura, 2007, p. 176). In addition, federal agents can also conduct investigations secretly under the authority of a valid warrant obtained also secretly. The person being investigated is not also informed about the warrant.

Through this, the federal agents would be able to identify agents, eliminate immediate threats, and coordinate the arrest of suspected individuals (Katzman). Furthermore, business records of individuals linked to terrorism can be examined through the order sought from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Katzman). The information held by one federal agency can also be shared to other agency in order to effectively fight terrorism. Traditionally, each agency kept information confidential from other agencies in adherence to the agency’s independence.

However, through the Patriot Act, the confidentiality of information or record is no longer controlling. In order to fully empower the federal agents in eradicating terrorism, jurisdiction as to warrant has been made general. Warrants can be obtained in any district and may be executed at any place being investigated for terrorist activities. Interestingly, cyber hacking has also been allowed in order to trace communications related to terrorism and at the same time tract hackers (Katzman).

Furthermore, in order to fully prevent any terrorist activities and ensure the punishment of terrorists, the Act has increased penalties and added crimes that are categorized as terrorism. Among the crimes includes harboring any person linked to terrorism. Likewise, conspiracy crimes and offenses have been redefined and penalties of such have been increased. There has also been a specific penalty for mass transit attack and attacks using biological weapons. Finally, some terrorist crimes have no statute of limitation while some crimes have a lengthy.

It is noteworthy that the Patriot Act has been criticized because of some acts that are obviously interfering with the rights of the citizens. Through the Act, the security in airports has been intensified and the law enforcers are even authorized to detain immigrants or suspected terrorist within the authorized time of detaining a person for questioning. Profiling has also been prevalent because Arabs, Muslims, and Asians were treated separately. Visas and passport of these people were also subjected to strict scrutiny. In addition, library records have been authorized by the Act to be reviewed by the federal agents.

Furthermore, Emails can also be tracked by the federal agents on the mere basis of suspicion. More importantly, bank transactions suspected of funding a terrorist activity can be legally tracked by the federal agents. This has in fact changed the law on money laundering. Since the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security and U. S. Patriot Act, terrorism has been effectively deterred. The enhancement of security measures within borders and ports have hindered terrorist from pursuing their evil designs. In addition, several crimes such as smuggling have been prosecuted through the implementation of the counterterrorism laws.

Several terrorist suspects have also been arrested through the active fulfillment of the federal agent of their duties. In line with this, suspects were thoroughly investigated due to the expansion of the court’s jurisdiction in trying and hearing terrorism cases. Remarkably, the laws have effectively brought back security within the nation. The fear of another terrorist attack has finally been eradicated. Despite criticisms, the effort of the government in curtailing terrorism has bear fruit. Notably, the people behind the 9/11 attack and other terrorist attacks have been prosecuted and punished accordingly.

The very seat of terrorism has also been bombarded and paralyzed in order to prevent the rise of any sign of terrorism. The measures taken by the U. S. in fighting terrorism has also been adopted by other countries in their own fight to terrorism. The application of the counterterrorism laws has also reached policies of other countries. One of which is the Money Laundering Law which has affected the bank transactions that passes through countries. Meanwhile, financial supports from suspicious donor have contributed to the success of terrorist activities.

In order to avoid the free flow of the funds to support suspicious organizations, the government has strictly monitored bank transactions involving suspicious depositors and suspicious funds through the Patriot Act. Terrorist acts have also been effectively deterred at the very port of entry. The security equipments have been intensified and upgraded to detect any weapon that may be used to perpetrate a terrorist activity. Such equipments include scanners, surveillance cameras, and x-ray machines. The use of such equipments has been legally justified by the counterterrorism laws.

Remarkably, all these measures have been effective in pacifying the nation from the threat of terrorism. Conclusion Traditionally, security can be acquired through the walls erected around houses. Terrorism, on the other hand, was considered as a petty problem yet a crime capable of being curtailed. More importantly, any act of terrorism can be disregarded by the government and responded through defensive military attack. However, the essence of security and terrorism has drastically changed after the 9/11 attack. Terrorism has become real and the injury it causes is unimaginable. Terrorism has also become the main enemy of the whole world.

It also united the international community in curtailing and in eradicating any sign of it. Likewise, the 9/11 has angered America. The architecture of the attack also proved that Al-Qaeda can penetrate and destroy the security of America. The world’s perception of security has also drastically changed. America, on the other hand, has been quite paranoid about its security. However, it cannot be blamed because of the damaged caused by the 9/11 attack. The America viewed threat to have existed within and outside its territory. More importantly, the reality about Al-Qaeda has finally been revealed through the bombing of twin towers.

Al-Qaeda has indeed existed for a very long period. It has been living as a shadow that its existence was doubted by security forces. The organization has also been intelligent in carrying out its mission by extensively and safely planning the attacks. Likewise, the measures it has adopted in implementing the plans are sure yet deadly. But such cannot be considered difficult because of the ideology that has been instilled among the members. On the part of the victim of the attack, the countermeasures that have been adopted are the Homeland Security and U. S. Patriot Act.

The Homeland Security was established as a means of centralizing the effort of the government in curbing terrorism. The Patriot Act, on the other hand, has enhanced the power of the federal agents in carrying their responsibilities with regard to terrorism. Any means that may be effective in tracking any sign of terrorism has been adopted and applied all throughout the country. Above all, the intelligence and security capabilities of the federal government have been heightened to effectively and efficiently eradicate terrorism. Both laws have been directed against terrorism.

Upon the implementation of the counterterrorism laws, several changes have transpired. The enhancement of security has ensured the safety of America and American people. Several terrorist has also been arrested and punished accordingly. More importantly, the fear that has been instilled by the 9/11 attack among the people has been pacified. Peace and security has also been restored. Above all, no terrorist attacked against America followed. Hence, the measures adopted and implemented by the government has been effective and responded to the international problem. References Andryszewski, T. (2004). Terrorism in America.

New York: Twenty-First Century Books Atkins, S. (2004). Encyclopedia of modern worldwide extremists and extremist groups New York: Greenwood Publishing Group. Bolt, P. J. , Coletta, D. V. , and Shackelford, C. G. (2005). American defense policy. Johns Hopkins University Press Homeland Security. (2009). Department Components. Retrieved March 9, 2009, from http://www. dhs. gov/xabout/structure/ Katzman, K. (17 August 2005). Congressional Research Service. Al Qaeda: Profile and Threat Assessment. Retrieved March 9, 2009, from http://fas. org/sgp/crs/terror/RL33038. pdf Larson, E. V. , Peters, J. E. , Arroyo Center, and Rand Corporation.

(2000). Preparing the U. S. Army for Homeland Security: Concepts, Issues, and Options. New York: Rand Corporation. Mannes, A. (2004). Profiles in terror: the guide to Middle East terrorist organizations. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. Martin, G. (2006). Understanding Terrorism: Challenges, Perspectives, and Issues. New York: Sage Publications. Purpura, P. P. (2007). Terrorism and Homeland Security: An Introduction with Applications New York: Butterworth-Heinemann. Sauter, M. , and Carafano, J. J. (2005) Homeland Security: A Complete Guide to Understanding, Preventing, and Surviving Terrorism. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional.

The United States 9/11 attack has marked a significant event in the history. The attack against USA was a proof that even strong and imperialist countries are never safe at any time. It has severely damaged the US reputation and challenged them further – economically, politically and socially. This system reluctance has made citizens and government more vigilant of their safety, and consequently it led US into formally launching laws and policies that aimed to strengthen their defenses against terrorist activities.

Immediately following the 9/11 attack, the US government was fast into amending the US Patriotic Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism). This act contains 157 sections, which includes legal responses to assist terrorist victims, protect civilians from fake solicitations, and provide benefits for public safety (Perez, 2003).

The act gave more ability to the law enforcement bodies to investigate on cases suspected to involve local and foreign terrorist activities, more power to target monetary transactions that possibly induced terrorist connections and filter against all electronic communication devices that may be infiltrated by terrorist activities (Gable). According to the US government and its supporters, the US Patriot Act shall be able to reveres terrorism efforts and effects in several ways:

(1) The Patriot Act allows investigators to use the tools that were already available to investigate organized crime and drug trafficking; (2) The Patriot Act facilitated information sharing and cooperation among government agencies so that they can better “connect the dots. “; (3) The Patriot Act updated the law to reflect new technologies and new threats and; (4) The Patriot Act increased the penalties for those who commit terrorist crimes (The USA Patriotic Act: Preserving Life and Liberty, pp.

1-4). However, several years have passed since the attack and since the start of the implementation of the act, numerous claims of its inefficacy have emerged; moreover, instead of its benefits being publicized, its negative implications and results are rather more rampant. Shortly two years since the 9/11 occurrence, and even right at the moment that we speak, numerous cases of violations of human liberties have bee n reported to have thwarted the civilian.

More so, it has nourished the feeling of discontent and dissent over concerned citizens as the act continued its “rampage against terrorism. ” What the act has merely done is to limit the privacy of the civilians. The act has legalized all sorts of interferences towards the private messages and way of communication that every individual goes through against their will, and even behind private citizens’ knowledge and consent (Kranich, 2003).

The act, though it has indeed signaled the intensified battle against terrorism, it has also catered the arena that strengthened the backbone for government intervention against private citizens. Ironically though, the same provisions that are supposedly and potentially to be of important use in order to eliminate terrorist activities, are the same provisions that have suppressed the liberty of individuals and have further violated human rights in a number of ways.

Amidst the oppositions from concerned groups against the passage and the continuity of the amendment, still the US government pursued its interest to counter terrorism even against the will and support of a large part of the American citizens, as well as other citizens around the world. Now, looking back at the instances starting from the attack, towards the end wherein the US legalized such provisions for the US Patriot Act – it is only rational to take a look on what it has caused and asses if the result was worth taking the risk once more if the provisions of the act are to be renewed.

Personally, if I were to take a vote on whether the act should be renewed, I would rather have it reassessed first and point out the blunders that have caused too much opposition against it. At one point, the act was passed under limited time and too much pressure from the international community as it was enacted shortly after the 9/11 attack, it is enough to say that it was passed without proper deliberations (Van Bergen, 2002) Moreover, changes are really ought to be done in order to create a just and equal standpoint in battling against terrorism.

One thing that should be changed is the utter disrespect against individual liberty that it encourages. Anything that directly and deliberately limits and suppresses the freedom and privacy of an individual must be opposed just because of mere suspicions. If anything must be done that shall violate the rights of the individuals, proper investigation must take recourse and until sufficient information are gathered, no one holds the right to interfere against anyone’s privacy.

Though the US Patriot Act was implemented in its goal to counter terrorist attacks and to further protect the welfare of the American citizens, as well as other citizens in world but, it should not be forgotten that the basic right to freedom of the individuals should not be put at stake. Countrywide safety is really important, however, to totally violate the human rights is also as dangerous as what terrorism can bring, thus justifying the changes, if not the repeal of the US Patriot Act. References Department of Justice. The USA Patriotic Act: Preserving Life and Liberty.

Retrieved from Life and Liberty database Gable, Garrett. Effects of the USA Patriot Act. Retrieved December 2, 2007 from <http://people. cornellcollege. edu/G-Gable/USAPA. htm> Kranich, Nancy. (2003) The Impact of USA Patriot Act: An Update. Retrieved December 2, 2007 from <http://www. fepproject. org/commentaries/patriotactupdate. html> Perez, Paul. 2003. USA Patriot Act helps efforts to combat terrorism. Retrieved December 2, 2007 from St. Petersburg Times Van Bergen, Jennifer. 2002. Repeal the USA Patriot Act. Retrieved December 2, 2007 from www. truthout. org