Terrorism

War is unquestionably a noticeable presence throughout the history of the human race. In the last century alone, violence and anger has stretched worldwide twice. Little skirmishes constantly erupt. Even terrorism is a form of war. Everyone wants to be in charge, and have everything go their way, resorting to violence and fear tactics to achieve this. But is it worth it? Are the lives, and economy, including both time and resources, really worth sacrificing in order to gain political achievement? The most obvious waste in war is the lives. Thousands die, on both sides, and even lives that have nothing to do with the issues involved.

In an ideal world, only soldiers and leaders would be the ones to suffer. However, more than just these two groups are injured, and killed in combat. In open war, soldiers, nurses, and animals working for both sides of the army die. Also, civilians, including old men, women, and children that happen to be too near the action, are also slaughtered. The surrounding environment, flora and fauna suffer grievously. Bullets, bombs, gases, poisons, and tanks have all caused more than their share of lives to be ended in the name of benefiting some goal. The worst are all the innocent lives that our lost.

This is not only a modern thing, since warfare began those too close to the front line, or in some way threatening the cause, have been murdered. Their is often wartime “battles” with the word, massacre, attached to the name. In these cases, often soldiers, police, or militia attack and slaughter unarmed civilians, who are often only protesting a simple thing, using non-violentmethods. A well-known case at the moment is in East Timor. They voted for freedom, and our now being hunted down in the streets, shot if seen walking through the town. And when speaking of waste of lives in war time, it is impossible to not bring up World War II.

The notorious death camps can not escape mention. Millions were gathered from their peaceful homes, and brought to these camps to be worked and starved to death, if not immediately beaten, shot, or gassed. Over 6 millions Jews alone lost their lives in this senseless ways. This is not even counting the gypsies, Slavs, and handicapped that were suffering in similar ways in the hopes of reaching a goal, in this case, the goal of purifying Germany. Time is also wasted in several ways. First, the progress forward people could be making usually stops during war, or is at least limited to new weapon making technology.

The government doesn”t support certain organizations as much as in the past, and there are sometimes just not enough people to work the man-hours necessary. Time is also wasted, in a less direct way, by the things people miss out. Like education for example. War time education is of much poorer standards than education in peace. This will later affect the economy, when untaught children make their way into the business world. Resources are also squandered during war. Raw materials, such as those from mines, are often put into making weapons, which serve only one purpose, to kill.

They are then lost in the blood and violence. In history, materials are often recalled to be melted down and reformed into things useful to the war effort. Manufacturing on peaceful items is halted, and turned over to the construction of airplane parts, tank, bullets, etc. Farming suffers, setting back the nation. There is not enough money in the national budget to pay to help small farmers, or farmers families whose main provider went off to work. Money is wasted, going towards the war budget instead of science, education, and other divisions set forth to better the future for the whole of humanity.

It is questionable, however, whether these are truly wasted. It”s is clear, and unarguable that many things are squandered and spent in a time of war. However, if all negotiating fails, perhaps they aren”t such a waste. Lives are a terrible thing to waste, but it is better to lose thousands, than to lose millions. It still is not right that things should die, when they are not even involved. But if the battle that took their lives had not taken place, who knows what their lives would have become.

When you have a person who will not listen to reason, breaks any deal you make, and wholly ignores what”s right and wrong, force is sometimes the only thing they understand. The time spent is one of the most difficult, because there is no way to get it back. If people do not take a break from their jobs to fix the evils in the world, who knows if they”re job would still be there down the road. The resources are not unlimited, but if not spent on materials for war, then the military would stumble, unable to withstand the powerful, better equipped adversary. These things are wasted, but war, as a whole, is not a waste.

The Impact of Terrorism Enforcement on Individual Rights Christine Gontarz Northern Virginia Community College Woodbridge Campus ADJ100 December 2, 2011 Professor: George DeHarde Table of Contents Introduction3 Terrorism and the First Amendment5 Early History7 The Alien and Sedition Acts of 17987 Habeas Corpus Act of 18638 World War I History9 Espionage and Sedition Acts of 1917 and 19189 Schenck v. US -9 Debs v. US10 World War II History11 Alien Registration (Smith) Act of 194011 Japanese-American Internment – Executive Order 9066 of 194211

The History of Today12 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 199612 U. S. A PATRIOT Act – 200113 Conclusion15 Works Cited17 Introduction During times of high crime, terrorism, war, and national crisis, citizens are willing to trade due process for a restriction of individual rights. At the heart of our individual rights are the first ten Amendments of the United States Constitution, the Bill of Rights. Although all the Amendments of the Bill of Rights were written to be of equal importance, to many Americans the most treasured is the First Amendment. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. ” — The First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution Simply stated, the First Amendment guarantees us the freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition. By examining the history of the United States, there have been times when incidents of crime, terrorism, terrorism threats, war, and national crisis have affected the rights of the people of the United States.

There have been actions and reactions to those threats by the government. Restrictions were placed on citizens by limiting their rights; specifically the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. Initially, the people of the United States understood the reasoning behind these limitations; however, as time went by, many felt the need to speak out about the injustices caused by the government and the restrictions of the freedoms of the people.

Although the additional amendments in the Bill of Rights are of equal importance, it is the purpose of this paper to define examples of how the government has violated a the basic rights of the First Amendment during a presence or threat of terrorism in the United States. Terrorism and the First Amendment Freedom, as Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. — The Declaration of Independence is a God-given right provided to United States citizens. By declaring its independence from Great Britain and signing the Declaration of Independence, the Congress of the original thirteen colonies took its first steps to ensure its freedom from King George and British rule. Their goal, self-government and equal rights for the people (Fallon 14). It is because of British tyrannical rule that the United States Constitution was written.

The United States Constitution outlined the rights of the government of the thirteen original colonies, but it was not until the Federalists and Anti-Federalists resolved their differences and adopted the Bill of Rights in 1791 that the people of the United States had the rights and freedoms they so desired to build this country. More than two hundred years later, on September 11, 2001, the United States was targeted by terrorists. This day is marked by atrocities beyond imagination. It is also on this day that many people of this generation say that the individual rights that our forefathers worked to provide have been changed forever.

The attacks of September 11th have caused the freedoms outlined in the Bill of Rights to be restricted by the enforcement of government rules and regulations; First Amendment rights limiting the freedom of speech, Fourth Amendment rights of illegal search and seizure, and Fourteenth Amendment rights of due process come to mind (although others feel that the Fifth and Sixth Amendments have also been affected). There are specific examples in United States history where the effects of terrorism enforcement have impinged individual rights.

In order to relate the impact of government actions on individual rights for the sake of national security, in the name of terrorism, terrorism must be defined. According to the FBI, there is no one definition that is universally accepted by everyone (Office of Public Affairs iv). Their definition of terrorism from the Code of Federal Regulations can be defined as: “the unlawful use of force and 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” (28 C.

F. R. Section 0. 85). By observing a chronological history of the United States there is evidence of terrorism since the beginning of written history. References in the Bible refer to the cleansing of entire groups of people by eliminating the city of Jericho [ (Joshua 6. 1-27) ]. There are examples of terrorism during Greek and Roman times when the first known terror organization, the Zealots of Judea, formed campaigns and carried out assassinations of Roman occupation forces and Jews whom they felt collaborated with the Romans. (Early History of Terrorism) ] Although earlier instances of terrorism impacted the rights of individuals, it was not until the adoption of the Bill of Rights that there was recourse that could be taken by the people. It was then that citizens of the United States could declare that their individual rights were violated. Early History The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 From 1789 through 1799, during the French Revolution, the United States was forced to declare a policy of neutrality to avoid becoming involved in European conflicts and being dragged into another war.

Because of an impending fear of war with France and a fear that “criticism of the government was destine to topple the Constitution,” (Willis 5) the Federalist-dominated Congress of President John Adams enacted the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 (Office of the Historian). Consisting of four acts, they introduced laws intended to suppress political opposition from Anti-Federalists. By enacting these laws, Adams was working to shield the United States from the French enemy and to protect the United States from opposition groups of Anti-Federalists.

The four laws consisted of the Naturalization Act which raised the residency period of aliens from five to fourteen years, the Alien Act of 1798 which enabled the president to deport any alien (even during peacetime) if they were considered “dangerous to the safety of the US. ” The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 enabled wartime arrest, imprisonment, or deportation of any alien for simply being from an enemy country. The last act, The Sedition Act made it a crime to “oppose any measure or measures of the government of the US. It also prohibited “writing, printing, uttering, or publishing any false, scandalous, and malicious writing or writings against the government of the US. It is evident that Sedition Act was the most controversial and most seriously punishable of the acts. Committing an offense against the Sedition Act was punishable by fines up the $5,000 and up to five years in prison and a second offenses were charged with a $2,000 fine and up to two years in jail.

Most of those punished under the Sedition Act were journalists and politicians who aligned themselves with the Anti-Federalist party or the Jeffersonian Republicans (Willis 7). The grandson of Benjamin Franklin, Benjamin Bache who was the founder and editor of the Philadelphia General Advertiser, was the first to be charged under the Sedition Act because of his Anti-Federalist descent against John Adams and the Federalist party. Habeas Corpus Act of 1863 The presidency of Abraham Lincoln can best be described as a presidency of wartime.

Just twelve hours after the president was elected, Major Robert Anderson sent Lincoln a dispatch requesting reinforcements of twenty thousand men to secure Fort Sumter from Confederate attack [ (Dirck 20) ]. It was Lincoln who set the tone for wartime presidents and he took full advantage of this power. During the height of the Civil War, Lincoln ordered a writ suspending Habeas Corpus. Lincoln’s primary focus by ordering the writ was to quell political opposition from pro-Confederate sympathizers.

He justified his decision by stating “Even in such a case, would not the official oath be broken, if the government should be overthrown, when it was believed that disregarding the single law, would tend to preserve it? ” [ (Dirck 25) ] referring to [ (Lincoln) ]. Lincoln believed that public safety was the cornerstone behind his decision. With public safety in mind, Lincoln authorized Winfield Scott to arrest anyone in “an insurrection against the laws of the United States. ” [ (Dirck 25) ] referring to [ (Symonds) ] World War I History

Espionage and Sedition Acts of 1917 and 1918 Once again the United States and its people were preoccupied with war. In April 1917, the United States declared war on Germany and fears of espionage, anarchist activities, and the threat of terrorism loomed over the heads of the United States government. By establishing the Espionage and Sedition Acts of 1917 and 1918, the government prohibited the public from openly demonstrating or passing forth any information deemed to be detrimental to the military or the government during a time of war.

Woodrow Wilson even gave the postmaster rights to restrict distribution of mail and documents that could be construed as harmful to the military of the United States . These offenses could be punishable by death. Because of the fear of harm to the nation and its citizens, the House and Senate almost passed the bill without any debate whatsoever even though the bill trampled on the freedom of speech and freedom of the press [ (Willis 14) ]. Schenck v. US – Led by Oliver Wendell Holmes, this would be the first case in which the Supreme Court handed down a ruling that constituted when the United States government could limit speech.

Charles Schenck, the general secretary of the Socialist party in Philadelphia was arrested for the distribution of political propaganda. These leaflets, which referenced the clause of the Thirteenth Amendment forbidding involuntary servitude, were directed at men who were drafted upon the passage of the Selective Service Act. Schenck encouraged draftees to “Assert Your Rights,” and that the people needed to stand up to the government for entering the war. The government claimed that these flyers contained “false” statements that could ultimately interfere with the effort to win the war.

It was during this case that Oliver Wendell Holmes coined his most memorable rationale for the decision of the Supreme Court to be upheld in the Schenck case, noting that: “The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. ” Debs v. US Eugene Debs, a founder of the Socialist Party in 1901 and a strong opponent to the “Great War,” was no stranger to speaking his mind and being imprisoned because of his actions.

Debs was sentenced to jail for his role as leader of a nationwide boycott of involving the Pullman Palace Car Company in 1894. After serving a two-year prison sentence, Debs held a Sunday afternoon picnic in Canton, Ohio. During his speech, Debs, phrasing his words carefully for fear of being prosecuted by the government for his “right to free expression,” encouraged the crowd to “turn their backs on the Republican and Democratic Party” and “fight for a cause [ (Debs) ]. ” Debs was arrested for violating the Espionage Act and was accused of tampering with the recruiting services of the United States.

He served a ten-year sentence for his speech. World War II History Alien Registration (Smith) Act of 1940 Representative Howard W. Smith introduced the Alien Registration Act of 1940. This act required aliens to register with the government of the United States within four months of their arrival in the United States. Although the prior acts were made during times of war, the Alien Registration Act was an act proposed and adopted during peacetime [ (Willis 26-27) ]. The main objective of the act was to thwart any attempt by the American Communist Party to weaken the government of the United States.

This act made it illegal to interfere with the loyalty of military personnel, to teach to violently overthrow the United States government, or to conspire to commit or to commit prohibited acts. The act also stated that the government could confiscate materials using the search warrant provision and that punishment of these offenses could result in a conviction of up to ten years in prison and a ten thousand dollar fine. In 1948, Harry Truman invoked this act to contain Soviet supporters and had eleven leaders of the Communist Party U.

S. A. indicted for violations of the Smith Act. During the prosecution of the case of Dennis v. United States, the government used the works of Karl Marx to prove that the eleven men violated the Alien Registration Act stating that they privately planned to overthrow the government of the United States. Japanese-American Internment – Executive Order 9066 of 1942 Eleven weeks after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Executive Order 9066 was signed by Franklin Roosevelt. “Relocation Centers” were set up across the United States.

Approximately 110,000 Japanese-Americans were confined to no more than an American version of Hitler’s concentration camps. Japanese-Americans serving in the military were categorized as enemy aliens and discharged from the armed forces of the United States. Minoru Yasui was the first citizen to bring a case before the government during the time of the Internment. Yasui was denied active duty service by the United States military. Yasui purposely violated curfew orders in order to be arrested.

His case, although initially based on a curfew law was brought to court and a unanimous conviction was handed down to Yasui claiming that his “racial attachments” to his Japanese roots posed a danger of espionage to the American people [ (Baker and Stack 66-68) ]. The History of Today Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 In the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing, the nation was traumatized by such a deplorable act of domestic terrorism. An overwhelming public fear guided the reactions of United States and the government set limitations of individual rights to protect its people.

One week after the Oklahoma City bombing, President Clinton and members of Congress swiftly approved the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty of 1996 (AEDPA). First Amendment rights were again affected. By allowing the Secretary of State to selectively define its meaning of “material support” to foreign organizations, citizens were “guilty by association” based on the purpose of their monetary contributions (Brown et al. 17-20) . The belief was that monetary and logistical contributions to an organization showed support for that organization. This was enough ammunition for the government to hold citizens in violation of the AEDPA.

In a case brought against the Attorney General by the Humanitarian Law Project (HLP), the HLP challenged the ruling that their humanitarianism, peacekeeping training, and support of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) was in violation of the constitutionality of the material support statute. The PKK was determined to be a “terrorist organization. ” By supporting a terrorist organization, the HLP could have faced extensive prison sentences if they had continued to support their mission by providing monetary and logistical contributions even though the contributions were to support peaceful acts.

Eventually the HLP ceased in their support of the PKK. U. S. A PATRIOT Act – 2001 With the attack of the World Trade Center and Pentagon and the takeover of Flight 93, the scope of terrorism in the United States had changed since even the bombings in Oklahoma City. Once thought to be a crisis of foreign countries, the United States was now faced with a new brand of terrorist attacks unlike ever before. As a result, acts aimed at preventing further attacks and protecting the security of society were invoked.

The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act (USA PATRIOT Act), was adopted in October 2001 to assist the government in gaining information on future terror attacks. Many feel that since the adoption of the PATRIOT Act, First Amendment rights have been violated in an unprecedented way. Not only does the government have the ability to limit the size and nature of demonstrations, conduct racial profiling, but they also may limit the information which can be publicized to the citizens of the United States claiming “national security interests. The National Archives and Records Administration states that “the number of classification actions by the Executive Branch rose 14 percent in 2002 over 2001 — and declassification activity fell to its lowest level in seven years. ” [ (Posner 220) ] Since September 11, Arab, Muslim, and South Asian populations of the United States have been profiled based on skin color and other physical characteristics. The government has the ability to “stop, interrogate and detain individuals without criminal charge … on the basis of their national origin, ethnicity and religion. (American Civil Liberties Union 1) ]. By looking at the people who were rounded up just after September 11, it is evident that racial profiling based on religion and ethnicity had taken place by the Department of Justice; a clear violation of the First Amendment. In a more recent incident in The Washington Post on October 2008, Maryland State Police revealed that as a result of surveillance operations, the names of fifty-three nonviolent activists had been placed into an unknown federal database used for the purpose of tracking terrorist suspects.

The judgment by the Maryland State Police to include the activists’ names in the terrorist database was met with disapproval and was criticized by senators noting that the “law enforcement officials were oblivious to their violation of the activists’ rights of free expression and association. ” [ (Rein, Lisa A1) ] Conclusion Through historical records, it is evident the intent of the government in times of war is to protect its citizens and prevent aggression on the homeland.

The punishment and imprisonment of citizens for First Amendment violations are based on situations when governing bodies of the United States felt threatened by acts of anarchy, Communism, terrorism, or war. In most instances, the government has been proactive by halting contrary opinions from opposing parties or seeking peacetime acts as a precautionary measure. At other times, they have been reactive by enacting laws after terrorist attacks . In either case, they have adopted rules and laws based upon the fear of the people and the prevention of potential attacks.

Their fears have limited free speech, free assembly, free press, and have punished those for freedom of religion. Historically, as time went by and threats declined, the people of the United States became more conscious of the limitations the government had set forth. In the referenced laws and actions of this paper, court cases brought to the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of First Amendment limitations have been paramount in the repeal or retraction of these acts. The decisions in these cases prove that there is a need for a balance between individual freedoms and protection of the people.

Introduction

WikiLeaks website has changed the profession of journalism in the United States and the media perspective with its flow in the information society. The website is a platform that helps unmask all the corruption activities going on in the government offices. Of all the media platforms WikiLeaks is the most famous for the news updates on political matters happening in the states and around the globe. Wilileaks has contributed to several media conflicts especially between the United States and other nations and that is why the government does not support its activities at all.

In my essay, I am going to explore the various ways in which WikiLeaks has helped unmask several criminal and corruption activities going on in the country. Although some of its news are a bit compromising to the security and dignity of the nation the platform has given light to the people of the United States of America.

 Wikileaks is a non-profitable and non-commercial internet platform that was introduced in 2006 by Julia Assage. It relies on online donation for all its functioning and funding. Its main purpose is to upload documents that help expose the government and corporate institutions to the public. These documents are uploaded anonymously by using an online submission form. The importance of this platform is that it has the potential to make known the scale of brutality and violence especially in the military welfare.

 Political honesty is a virtue that every U S politician should exercise and with the help of Wikileaks they have no option but observe it. In other words, a journalist platform watchdog makes secrets transparent to all and especially those involving the public. Most media organization has tried to view groups like WikiLeaks in several dimensions with most of them considering its concrete actions as one of the online activism and the impacts of its actions.

It is important to first note the relationship between the two groups, media and government. In most incidences the media always seems to be conflicting with the government over issues regarding the people. Platforms like WikiLeaks are great threat to the state government especially in issues of corruption and law (Shirky, 2011, p.41).

Through their online activism, Anonymous and WikiLeaks groups have their power to “unmask” power structures like the corrupt police departments in the US, and all the Armison brutality activities. While WikiLeaks has gained fame as a whistle blowing site since its introduction in 2006, its reputation increased when it released the so-called Iraq and Afghanistan war document in 2010.

This document contained crucial and important information about the events that took place and the people and nations responsible for the war. The United States government was not happy with the release of these documents as they posed great danger of terror attacks by either Iraq or Afghanistan. These two countries are known for their fierce terrorism activities and interfering with them would be like provoking them.

The release of these documents brought about a number of questions concerning the legal implication of journalism freedom with top government officials claiming that too much freedom will lead to misuse of information or misinterpretation of some crucial and sensitive information (Springer, 2014, p.411). Actions of WikiLeaks have affected the media platform in various concrete ways.

The likes of Tambini and Lynch have tried to investigate the implication of WikiLeaks work and the measures to regulate the censorship of related sites especially in the UK and US. They argue that whistle blowing organizations should be awarded protection under the law on their ability to “self-regulate” and “develop” ethical principles to govern their freedom of publication and decisions they make on their work.

The platform poses a great threat to the government and politicians and there are fears that if allowed to continue with its activities it will cause a lot of harm to the US government by exposing sensitive government secrets to the world. Other nations also feel that WikiLeaks should be restricted on some publications because some of the information it exposes might cause a lot of friction especially between nations.

The advancement of WikiLeaks since its establishment up to the publication of the Iraq and Afghanistan document was marked by a degree of media fascination, which made it gain a lot of fame compared to other media platforms. This posed a great threat to the media personalities who felt that WikiLeaks was gaining fame with each passing day making their work very difficult to appeal their audience. Its turnaround moment came in 2010 and continued to 2011 when the organization produced a lot of materials and documents regarding the Iraq war, the Collateral Murder Video and the diplomatic cable.

 There have been several attempts by media organizations to look down on the role of cites like WikiLeaks and deny them the freedom to post confidential documents although these attempts have not succeeded because the platform is under the media authority which protects all its activities. It also describes itself as a watchdog for the people “we believe that it is not only the people of the United States who should keep their government honest but also people from other countries” and that is why other countries are also opposing Wikileaks activities. (Pozen, 2013, p.635).

We can say that wikiLeaks has played a great role in ensuring that congress does not abuse the powers granted to it and its members. He makes information about organizations that abuse powers granted to them available to the public and so they are aware of what their leaders do this makes leaders very keen on what they do. Anonymous submission of analyzed documents about the various activities going on in public offices and organizations are presented on the WikiLeaks website enabling millions of viewers to have knowledge of what is happening behind the curtains of power. The difference between WikiLeaks and other sites like Wikipedia is that it engages mostly in the political struggles.

The use of media has become a trend in the United States making the latter transparent and exposing those who try to abuse office powers granted to them. Today we live in a world where technology is the main aspect to shaping the lives of many people. The internet is now being used as an eye of power to tackle various aspects of crimes performed by leaders especially in third world countries (Coleman, 2014, p.406).

Based on various aspects of tradition we can define power as the “disposition over the means required to influence various processes and decisions in our daily lives.” this means that the power to control several issues like political influences and distribution of resources can be distributed in a more systematic way.

Democracy is the only way to ensure there is equal distribution and exercise of both political and cultural powers. Organizations like WikiLeaks exist because we live in an era where political and cultural powers are not exercised fairly as expected. Any government that exercises its powers as expected should not have any worries about organizations set to scan their activities. They should instead be supporting such groups so that they can display their good work on these sites. The United States government highly opposes such organizations like Wikileaks because they are afraid that their dirty linens will be exposed to the public.

Analysis shows that the most important element of WikiLeaks is to make the Obama government practice transparency in their works and offices, establish a more transparent, and open government. The platform defines itself as a liberal project that protects the rights of the United States people especially freedom of speech because it strengthens democracy by exposing government corruption. He places his emphasis on documenting government and corporate irresponsibility and abuse of powers. Learn when the government uses censorship, it puts a limit on what?

This shows the general public that the corrupt government is the main problem in the world’s economy and is pulling development behind. Instead of improving the livelihood of their nations politicians are busy engaging themselves embezzling funds and resources meant to improve the development of their citizens.

There has been an emerging body geared at seeking a framework to examine the works of WikiLeaks and its impact on the current situation in the U S. The widespread use of technology has made his work a success in various ways and has brought a great impact to the world’s economy. Following the publication of the Iraq documents the United States government heavily criticized WikiLeaks work. The government claimed that these documents were a great threat to the security of their country and could put the citizens at a very high risk of terror attacks by the Afghanistan government (Springer, 2014, p.411).

The truth about the WikiLeaks documents is that they got the potential and ability to make visible the amount of brutality and violence especially in military horror conflicts during their activities because some use a lot of brutality on their subjects. The site is political based since most of its news come from the political arena, although many view it as a threat to ruling groups and they see it as an enemy. Instead criticizing such cites we should base our efforts in monitoring the governance offered by our political leaders.

We should ask ourselves are our political leaders meeting all our demands and expectations. Do they take advantage of the powers granted to them to abuse office? In fact, we should ensure that we capture every activity they undertake so that we can be sure of what they do with our money. They should be aware that the public is watching their every move and be conscious of their actions.

There has been a problem with scientists arguing that the journalism powers and freedom granted to these sites are too much and they are using them inappropriately to create biased information. Most leaders are unable to verify the facts stated in the articles because they do not have a strong background. This makes the general public doubt their potential and innocence in the accused incidents.

Some of these articles have very confidential information about the government and exposing them is like displaying the secrets of a state. The scientist claims that there should be a certain limit to the freedom of publication of such documents to the internet because they may cause a great damage in future (Gibson 2013, p. 314).

In my study, I have explored several things and have learnt that; journalism benefits from a disclosure of the framework in which it is built. A journalism model is bound to directly or in directly affects the model in which leaking of important documents will be exposed to the public. In my opinion, WikiLeaks models are the most effective journalism models since they abide to the entire ethic. Real life cases are always the best examples to handle and solve situations and that is why it is advisable in some situations to leave behind the easy scenarios to get the best outcome to fit in the world.

Most critiques of Wikileaks have released their anger by claiming that exposing secret documents will pose great danger to Americans. For instance, if you expose concrete information about a certain terror group the group is bound to take revenge on you by conducting a terror attack on you.

Some of the publishers do not look at the possibilities of posing danger to the people but stick to the fact that the public has the right to know what is happening around them regardless of the intensity of the matter. It is therefore advisable that these journalists are cautious of what they publish to the public to avoid any conflicts. I believe that journalists have the right to publish what they want and help the public know about their government on the basis that they abide by the rules put in place to govern their publications.

References

1. Curran, G, & Gibson, M 2013, ‘WikiLeaks, Anarchism and Technologies of Dissent’, Antipode,            45, 2, pp.             294-314, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 November   2014.
2. Springer, S, Chi, H, Crampton, J, McConnell, F, Cupples, J, Glynn, K, Warf, B, & Attewell, W            2012, ‘Leaky             Geopolitics: The Ruptures and Transgressions of WikiLeaks’, Geopolitics,            17, 3, pp. 681-711,             Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 November      2014.
3. Youngblood Coleman, D 2014, ‘United States: 2014 Country Review’, United States Country Review, pp.    1-981, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 November     2014.
4. Coleman, DY 2014, ‘Afghanistan’, Afghanistan Country Review, pp. 2-406, Business Source    Complete,             EBSCOhost, viewed 28 November 2014.
5. Pozen, DE 2013, ‘The Leaky Leviathan: Why The Government Condemns          And Condones           Unlawful Disclosures Of Information’, Harvard           Law Review, 127, 2, pp. 512-635,    Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 28        November 2014.
6. Shirky, C 2011, ‘The Political Power of Social Media’, Foreign Affairs, 90, 1, pp. 28-41,            Academic Search             Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 November 2014.

Tuff’s dismissal could have been resolved through a public apology or a probationary period. The public apology would include a direct quote or endorsement of the company’s forgiveness of his misdeeds. The apology would suit the company’s objective of redirecting the negative press somehow.

As a Marine, Tuff should have spoken directly to the administration in a calm manner to address his distaste with their new policies. His discussions with the media did present a violation in his licensure manual, but his moral judgment was a more confirmed act that could save many lives. The company’s dismissal reflected their crude judgment of Tuff’s moral character to address a problem that may arise because of their new policies.

At the same time, the security guard played a vital role in saving the lives of many on the highways. Morally, Tuff was absolutely right for refuting the new policies to send drunk drivers amongst the roads of innocent travelers. The company’s disregard for public safety was displayed through their negative reaction to his public address regarding their coercion of the security guards. The company, itself, could have changed the policies if they reflected upon Tuff’s complaints in a subjective view. Their dismissal was not a great reflection of the owner’s character or regard for public safety in any way.

If I were in Tuff’s position, I would have expressed my distaste in the company’s new policies in a group manner. His individualistic approach led to his dismissal from the company. In any sense, one must conduct thorough research in order to refute a whole corporation of their policies. This negligence placed Tuff in a bind when he presented his appeal to the Labor Commission.  Moral judgment does not win legal disputes because the facts are placed on paper for everyone to recognize and find the weaknesses in each party’s argument. The Labor Commission emphasized on the aspect of a ‘group appeal’ because this would show a more, definite resistance regarding Blue Mountain’s new policies. 

Read also about one national guard RRNCO

In this case, Blue Mountain could have placed Tuff on a probationary period until they resolved the issue. Tuff’s actions or press leads did show his disregard of company rules to a degree, but it was in hopes of a better outcome. At some point, the probationary period could have been used to discuss better ways to re-evaluate the new policies and how they can harm the community.

I feel that the Labor Commission should have granted Tuff’s appeal because of his ability to recognize public safety. Blue Mountain’s negligence may or may not lead to a preventive accident on the highways due to their new policies. If this were to happen, Tuff could raise another appeal to show his evidence of his previous tries of intervention. The only question to ask is:  What will happen to Blue Mountain when other security guards show this same concern? Is there a way for Tuff to receive unemployment due to his previous legal disputes with the company? An extensive follow up on this case could draw more questions to be answered by the Labor Commission and Blue Mountain’s administration.

Stark industry is a fictional billion-dollar multinational defense firm in the USA. The company specializes in advance weaponry and dedicates its work for improving weapons used in warfare. The company also is directly linked to supply United States army advanced weapons that helps them fight terrorists around the world. The technology used by stark industry is far advanced than any other companies in the world. This is due to the fact that Tony Stark, their CEO is a genius. To give a brief background on the stark industries weaponry, we must first know what makes it unique. Stark industries was established by Tony Stark’s father. Together with business partner Obadiah Stane, Tony’s father created a billion dollar company that supported United States department of defense in its wars. It was stated in the film that stark industries under Tony’s Dad created the nuclear bomb. Unfortunately stark industries was left hanging when Tony’s father and mother was in traffic accident that killed them both.

At age 21, Tony was force to become the company CEO and inherit his father’s legacy of weapons development. In term of weaponry, Tony Stark’s input on the creation of high tech weapons helped the company become of the best in making innovative weapons. As an MIT graduate at an age of 19, he was great at weapon creations. In the film, we can see his latest weapon is a rocket that can disengage multiple small rockets that can hit multiply targets in one shot. His weapon engineering skills propels the United States army to fight terrorist and ensure their victory in the war of terrorism.

In the comic world of Iron man, Stark Industries plays a vital role in his weapons. The company provided Tony with equipments in which he uses to create his modified armors and new functions in it. We can see that high technology computers Tony is using in his laboratory of weapon creations beneath his house. The equipments are all from stark industries and it helped him in improving the model he used as Iron Man. The machines that created iron man suit were courtesy of Stark Industries. We can say that without stark industries, Tony stark will have a hard time constructing a suit that is as efficient and good as the iron man suit he created using high tech machinery. Without stark industries, the weapons he used in the film such as the homing missile, the automated artificial intelligence in his suit, the energy source of his armor and the photon rays he used to fly and shoot won’t be possible. Iron man’s successful creation and functions is highly dependent on the technology of Stark Industries. We should also put emphasis on the power source of irom man suit. The power source Tony stark used o power up his heart was said to be stark’s industries long time project. This project was first acknowledged as a useless and untested kind of power. By testing it in his own heart and using it his first prototype of the suit, tony stark used stark industry technology and saved his life as well as make him a perfect armor suit. Iron man’s beginnings were clearly dependent on stark industries resources. Related the strength management program of the national guard

As Ceo of Stark Industries, Tony was a typical happy go lucky billionaire. In the film, he is depicted as a womanizer, gambler, arrogant, rich, mischievous and charismatic billionaire. He was shown to be a credible CEO because of his unique skill to create weapons and his charismatic image toward s the press and public. As CEO of stark industries, tony lived up to the expectations of his father and partner Obadiah stane. He delivered the best weapons to the United States Army and he was helping them in winning the fight against terrorism. As a good friend of James Rhodes, one of the high ranking army officials, Tony ensured stark industries’ support for al military programs. Tony supplied the army with the best technology possible. He was even the one who delivers and presents new weapons to soldier to demonstrate its capabilities. As a CEO, he was a little bit irresponsible in terms of being on time for meeting or social events but he means business when it comes to the real event. He is the face of the stark industries and he delivers when needed.

The Core competency of Tony lies in his character. As a CEO and superhero, Tony has a clear mindset on what he must do. Earlier in the film, before Tony stark became iron man, He was focus and motivated to make good weapons. He was hard working and at the same time knows how to enjoy life. His competency in weapon engineering is far beyond of what is required of him. His genius mind earned him a degree in MIT at an age of 19. He graduated top of his class and then after two years was forced to take on a billion dollar firm. He was hard working, intelligent and driven. He also has good interpersonal skill. As CEO, Tony is very charismatic. In a scene in start of the film, he was able to talk to soldier as if they were his friends even though they were on a mission. His also is intimidating. Being the head of a large organization requires power and respect. His personality is perfect for it. He can easily intimidate people and his presence alone can affect people’s feelings. This is one of his competencies as a leader of Stark Industry. As Iron man, Tony showed us that he had an epiphany. He saw what his weapons were doing to the world. He realized that no matter hoe advance and good his weapons are; there is a chance that it will fall on the wrong hands. After being captured by terrorist, he develops a sense of righteousness. He felt that he has a responsibility to help and change the world. This makes him very competent to be CEO and at the same time part time superhero. He clearly understands what is happening. His gained wisdom and is trying to correct his past mistakes through his decision making.

Tony Stark’s values as a person are simple. He wants to see things happen. He is a person that wants change and he sees to it he will play a big role in making it happen. At first Tony thought that by making great weapons he could change the world. He saw stark industries as a savior and helping humanity by keeping terrorist at bay because the US army had bigger guns. Stark’s values were always towards the greater good. The only difference is that after being abducted and seeing the way his company is dealing with terrorist; he slowly changed to another perspective in how to manufacture and use his company’s weaponry to good use. His manufacturing of iron man made him a hero in his own way. His values did not shift from wrong to right. He always had thought of doing something nice for the country. The difference now is that he saw the reality that arms dealing has a darker side especially with a billion dollar corporation. His company’s stock holders were dealing under the table and he was forced as CEO to take things into his own hands. He craved for justice. Iron man was his way of using his technology and stops the evil of the world. He fought off terrorism and destroyed the perpetrator of stark industry’s below the table agreements with terrorist, Obadiah Stane. For a person that values helping others, he was alone. He did not have anyone but his assistant, Pepper. Surprisingly, everyone thought Stark was a womanizer. He would play around with women and dump them by the end of the day. But by the end of the movie it looks like he values love and companionship also. He found love in his assistant Pepper.

Stark Industry’s SWOT analysis based on the film is very interesting to see. For the company’s strength, stark industry has been one fo the top companies in the world in providing military weapons. Their technology is far advanced than any other company around the world. They have great scientist and Tony on board. This means they can create more powerful machineries in the future. Their Ties to the government and SHIELD is also an advantage. They can know the latest threat and try to develop more sophisticated weapons to fend off terrorist. Being a multinational company, they can ship weapons and products around the world in an instant. They have resources that will enable them to further expand and get richer. They have assets like plants, buildings, and infrastructure that is vital in a company’s future. Heir greatest strength of course is Tony Stark.

The company’s weakness lies in the board of directors. Since not everyone is like Tony, the board of directors is made up of rich and arrogant billionaires. They might have a different perspective and their goal is towards making money. By having this goals, they might later on sell arms to terrorist again. Their strengths of having military connection is also their weakness. They have the pressure of providing the United States army with weapons entail to help them in their pursuit of their military interest. If ever there will coe a time that the army will be doing something unethical, Stark industry will be held liable also since they were supplying them with weapons. The facts that board of directors control the decision making process for the company, Tony will have a hard time in convincing them to always play by the book. They might override Tony’s decision any time they feel it is impropriate for the company.

Opportunity wise, the company is expanding. With the new governance of Tony Stark, they company might have great opportunities ahead of them. Since James Rhodes has a good relationship with Tony, he might be able to expand their network by providing them opportunities to manufacture better weapons. Tony also has a keen sense of social responsibility. The company has opportunities to help change the world. Examples of good opportunities are donating to charity, making new inventions that can help mankind, establishing new relations with other sectors of society and help in reforming the wrong doings of the company by helping the development of third world countries. The opportunities are infinite as long as Tony can stay focused on helping the world be a better place. Being CEO he has the responsibility to steer the company to the right path.

With their strengths and opportunities said, threats are also found in the company. Since shareholders and other directors are also part of the company, being overthrown is one problem Tony has to face. Being voted out in a decision that can affect the US army is a dangerous one. Influence of other powerful corrupt politicians can be their threat too. If ever Tony will not be around to supervise the company, many people in the company with dark intentions can easily change the coarse the company has chose to take right now. Terrorism and shortage of supply for their resources will also be threats. Since they are using the world’s resources in their production, natural resource’s scarcity can be a threat to their company. External factors like inflation, the rise of prices in the market can also be threats to their company.

The Vision of the company is simple. Starting out as a weapons firm by Tony’s dad, he envisioned it to supply the US army to change the world by making it a better place. The company’s vision was to make the US army so strong that it can protect people around the world from terrorist. The vision of using powerful weapons and technologies made a slight turn by Tony creation of Iron man. The company’s vision still is to provide the world primarily the American people with safety by providing their army great weapons by it is also focused now on making responsible choices.

The mission of the company is to make the world a better place. This is under the rule of Tony as CEO. His mission is to steer the company from a “under the table” “double dealing” corporation to a socially responsible corporation. The mission is to provide humanitarian help to people in need and help the military in honest ways. It is also their mission to make high end weapons to strengthen the US army.

Tony’s relationship with the management is a little bit of trouble some. His sudden change of being a corporate mogul to a humanitarian is not easily accepted by his peers. Although the biggest threat to him was already gone. He will have a difficult time in ensuring his decisions are supported by the management team. He will also find it difficult to ensure their support for his later on projects that will be goaled at helping people and not ensuring profitable decisions. As a billion dollar company, his management will be centered on making money. He can help strengthen his management support by buying out the shares of people he knows that has corrupt intentions and clean his company of these kind of people. He can also get James Rhodes on board since he plays a big role in their sales as an arms dealer. Rhodes has a good heart and can help the company in making right decisions.

Tony Stark compared to his Stark industry in the film is really different. Tony is a dynamic character and knows boundaries in his actions. As a billionaire, he knows how to enjoy wealth and fame. He has a good heart. He sees to it that his company will be helping make a safer place to live on. Tony Stark is a humorous and happy go lucky. He utilizes his riches to enjoy life and make connections to important people. On the other hand, Stark Industries is a world wide famous weapons dealer. The corporation is serious in making weapons and developing new technology. Under many directors, the company is like any other multination company. They are geared to making tons of money. Their primary goal is to generate as much money as possible no matter what methods are used. They have no intentions of giving back their riches to people unlike Stark. The Stark Industry is a corporation. We cannot excuse that fact people in it are for making money. Tony on the other hand is something else. He wants to use his power and money to help people. He is geared to making changes by elimination threats to the world and creating inventions that will help the world. Tony Stark and Stark Industries are quite opposite in terms if interest but they are really dependent of each other. Without Tony Stark, the company will loose their greatest inventor and CEO. Tony stark on the other hand needs the company to facilitate his research and development of new iron man suits to help him in his missions. The mission Tony has for Stark Industry is to keep its integrity intact and at the same time help hi make an impact in the lives of thousand by helping them.

The Irish Republican Army or IRA is Northern Ireland’s most notorious terrorist organization. Like many other groups, the IRA is a militant nationalist group with Marxist tendencies. They use violent attacks such as bombings, assassinations, kidnappings, extortion, and robberies that they used . to send their message. The ultimate goal of the IRA is to use militant behavior to make British rule in Northern Ireland obsolete, thus letting Northern Ireland become an independent republic, instead of two separate countries with different governments.

The IRA was founded in 1919 as a successor to the Irish Volunteers, a militant nationalist organization that was founded in 1913. One of the alias’s for the group is Direct Action Against Drugs, or DADD. The IRA operates independently of any political control or party, and” in some periods actually took the upper hand in the independence movement. ”(Britannica) Unlike some terrorist groups, the IRA does not carry out attacks on countries that are not in close vicinity of Northern Ireland. The majority of their operations are based out if Great Britain, and Ireland.

Some of their most favored targets were senior British Government officials, British military and police in Northern Ireland, and Northern Irish Loyalist paramilitary groups. By attacking these individuals they hoped to demoralize Great Britain to the point of turning Ireland over to the people. The IRA did not want to overthrow the government and run it themselves, they simply wanted to see a change in the government so that it would benefit the people of Northern Ireland. The IRA is organized into small, tightly knit cells under the leadership of the Army Council.

While they only have a few hundred members, they have thousands of sympathizers who contribute by donating money, supplies, shelter, and even weapons. “The IRA Is suspected of receiving funds, arms, and other terrorist-related materiel from sympathizers in the United States. ”(Britannica) the IRA also received a large amount of support at one point from the PLO, a “freedom fighter” group from Libya. Not only do they receive aid from other terrorist groups with similar agendas, but in 2002 three suspected IRA members were arrested in Colombia on charges of assisting the FARC to improve its explosives capabilities.

The IRA was in their prime during the late 1950’s and 1960’s, though they did play a big part in the Irish Civil war of 1922. As a result of this war, the IRA became more closely related to Sinn Fein, which is the Irish Nationalist party. “In December 1969, the IRA divided into “Official” and “Provisional” wings. Although both factions were committed to a united socialist Irish republic, the Officials preferred parliamentary tactics and eschewed violence after 1972, whereas the Provisionals, or “Provos,” believed that violence— particularly terrorism—was a necessary part of the struggle to rid Ireland of the British. (Global Security) This was a result of a Sinn Fein conference that had taken place in August.

After 1970, the IRA was slowly slipping into the darkness, as they had stopped attacking as much, and was not as big of a concern anymore. Because of “Bloody Sunday’, when thirteen innocent Catholic protestors were killed by British soldiers, the IRA gained support from the Catholic Church, which gave them their reputation back for a while. Eventually though, they were back where they had left off before Bloody Sunday. The IRA reorganized in 1977 into detached cells to protect against infiltration” and their arms dealing was back in full force. It was said that “in the late 1990s that the IRA had enough weapons in its arsenal to continue its campaign for at least another decade. ”(Britannica) For a long time the IRA tried to use peaceful methods to gain equal treatment for the Catholic minority in the Protestant Northern Ireland. But they were were met with resistance. The Protestants and the British government met the peaceful attempts of the IRA with violence i. e. Bloody Sunday.

The IRA had no other choice but to employ violent methods to gain equality and civil rights for the Catholic Minority in Ulster. The IRA began implementing methods such as Bombings, sniper attacks, and assassinations on British citizens. (www. CFR. org) The afore mentioned Sinn Fein, which means “We Ourselves” first emerged in the early 1900s. It is the oldest political party in Ireland’s history. It was a “federation of nationalist clubs and eventually, all nationalists to the left of the Irish Parliamentary Party at Westminster came to be popularly known as Sinn Feiners. (SinnFein. org) The party, like the IRA, was based on the demand for an Irish Republic. It won the 1918 election by a landslide and set up Dail Eireann which is translated to “Assembly of Ireland. ” Following three years of war, led by an underground republican government, the party split in 1922 on the issue of the Treaty which partitioned Ireland into two separate provinces. The leader of Sinn Fein left the party in 1926, causing the party to lose a lot of credibility.

However, its fortunes recovered and flourished in the late 1950s and early 1960s with its new association to the IRA and their border campaign. During this time the group experienced a substantial amount of electoral success. In present day, Sinn Fein is split into two parties, Sinn Fein and Republican Sinn Fein. The Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) was formed in 1969 as the covert armed wing of Sinn Fein. The members of this group, called, “Provos” were formed from the Official Sinn Fein and the Official IRA.

The Provisional IRA was the largest of the three republican armed resistance groups (Sinn Fein, IRA and PIRA). The policies of Sinn Fein under the new leadership of Gerry Adams led to a split in the Provisional Irish Republican Army in 1997. One side accepted the new “Good Friday Agreement” and the New or Real IRA continuing armed resistance against the British. The PIRA has at this point accepted the ceasefire and is still most commonly confused with the real IRA because of their similar connections and name.

The IRA and PIRA are not totally different groups, but they are actually two groups that used to function as one. It is my opinion that the split of the IRA into two factions is one of the major reasons why their goal was never accomplished. The army was in need of a way to make money and fundraise to support their cause. They became adept at raising money in Northern Ireland through “extortion, racketeering, and other illegal activities” and they policed their own neighborhoods through mock trials and beatings.

As a result of this Mafia like enforcement, Sinn Fein began to play a more prominent role in trying to end the arms problem that the IRA was causing. “Sinn Fein leaders Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness, together with John Hume, head of the Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP), sought ways to end the armed struggle and bring republicans into democratic politics. They were successful in doing so, and in 1994 the IRA declared a cease fire with Britain so that Sinn Fein was able to legally engage in politics with the Irish Parliament.

This ceasefire was shortly ended in 1996 when a bomb that was suspected to be from the IRA killed two civilians. However it was reinstated the following year, returning things back to being civilized between the IRA and Great Britain. Technically the IRA is still a functioning terrorist group, but due to the ceasefire they have been dormant since around 2002 when the final ceasefire was laid out and agreed upon. The IRA has a very important place in Irish history, as well as the history of terrorism because of their prominence in the 1950’s and 1960’s.

Derek Walcott was a black poet writing from within both the English tradition and the history of his people. The speaker is conflicted, on the one hand he loves his native homeland in Kenya and he does not want to see his people being slaughtered and treated the way they are now. He also loves his English home, but if he stays in Britain, He feels that he is letting down his people by not going back to his native homeland to help with defending Kenya from the Kikuyu tribe. This is what the speaker struggles with and it tears him apart inside.

The dilemmas the speaker faces in trying to find a way out of this bind are that he sees his people being slaughtered for no reason and with no compassion. The speaker states in (line7) that statistics justify and scholars seize means that the government is or has educated the Mau fighters what to believe and what to do with the British settlers. In (line 9 and 10) of the short story, the savages represent terrorism from below which are sub-national entities that engage in violence against the British colonial settlers.

The Mau fighters are the individuals that are fighting against the government. The speaker makes reference to a white child being hacked to death in bed and they are expendable as Jews. The speaker makes reference to this because savages are the Mau fighters or in this case the group who is against government. The speaker also sees the corpses are scattered through his beloved homeland which he calls paradise (4). In this poem, the speaker sees the upright man, the Kikuyu, as inflicting pain upon his people in Kenya.

In (lines 15-17) the violence of beast on beast is read as natural law states to me that the Mau fighters and the colonial settlers are the beasts. The upright man takes on the form of terrorism from above, while the beasts are the settlers who take on the form of terrorism from below. (In line 25) The speaker states the gorilla wrestles with superman. Here again the gorilla represents terrorism from below and superman represents terrorism from above. I believe that the Kikuyu tribe is a form of government all in its own because they make up their own laws and abide by them.

Terrorism is meant to cause terror and that is exactly what the Kikuyu tribe did to the African people. I believe the African people on the speaker’s paradise were afraid by the terrorists acts inflicted onto them by the Kikuyu, that they did not know how to defend themselves from the attacks. I believe that Walcott thinks that colonialism in Kenya is horrible, but it is good as long as the Kikuyu tribe leaves them to their peaceful ways of leaving. The speaker sees the British colonialism being overrun and controlled by the Mau fighters.