The doctrine is generally associated with the preventive war against Iraq, but it has more than one element. Bush’s doctrine led to the foreign policy stance of interventionism because he he states, "From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime,". This doctrine caused the effect of the USA Patriot Act, NSA Domestic Surveillance, and the Department of Homeland Security. Many people were angered because of this because they felt that their freedom was taken from them and that their 4th Amendment right was violated.
Having to face constant abuse of power from others can trigger a person mentally to drive them to a point where they feel like they need to take drastic immediate action to stop the violence and make a statement by creating new violence. A brief history of the development of the term terrorism was to describe, “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.” (Cancelmo,1) In relation to the term terrorist, it was used to define acts of violence strictly only by Muslims. But once the government had made a public announcement stating that America had labeled the entire Muslim community terrorists.
The main provisions of the Act were to enable the Home Secretary to indefinitely detain, without trial - those suspected of terrorism. It also limited the appeals of foreign nationals that are detained under suspected terrorist offences to a closed special immigration commission. The court of appeal can only take decisions on a point of law. Indefinite detention of ‘suspected international terrorists’ - According to S21 (1) of the Anti-Terrorism Crime and Security Act 2001 (ATCSA) the Secretary of State may issue a certificate in respect of a person if he reasonably believes that the person’s presence in the United Kingdom is a risk to national security and the person is a terrorist.
A good leader would think things through and come to the best solution possible, especially if those actions will be affecting other people. Another example would be that of relationships, when dealing with other people, there are many instances in which we may be frustrated and want to leave that particular person, because of disagreements or fights. If we were to act spontaneously in those cases, every human would be alone for the rest of their lives. The proper thing to do would be to think things over, to look at every angle of the situation and act accordingly. Relationships, whether they are with a significant other or with a direct family member always take much effort.
During times of conflict, the American government often sets limitations on civil liberties. For example, President Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus during the Civil War. Recently, after the attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001, the government has been attempting to strengthen its control on the growing terrorism threat by increasing surveillance on the American people. Some people do not see this increase in security as a violation of their civil liberties.
This allowed citizens to obtain rights that threatened the government’s power. “That it is the right of the subjects to petition the king, and all commitments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal” (English Bill of Rights). The Constitution similarly allows for petitioning of the government, this can be seen as a way to gather constructive criticism from the general public even if it does weaken the integrity of the government (U.S. Constitution Amendment I). The English Bill of Rights and the Constitution both allow for citizens to own arms. (U.S. Constitution Amendment II)
In reference to a bill introduced to Congress forbidding the use of tactics defined by torture; The United States government must consider all of the ethical options and possibilities they have. Torturing anyone is morally unethical but allowing terrorists to murder innocent civilians is against every moral we, as humans possess. As morally just people America needs to find the exceptions in which we are willing to use torture in countering terrorism. As leaders of the free world our government has the responsibility to do everything in their power to protect innocent people and gain the needed information to do so. In order to win the war on terror, officials will occasionally have no choice but to torture the terrorists withholding information to prevent these attacks on humanity.
These viewers will not let themselves be challenged because the audience feels comfortable with the media that favors the same view. However, truth in journalism is a major key, the audience will never have the whole story if the only media the viewers watch are the ones that share the same views as individual. Like Bernie Goldburg states “It is up to the viewer to want to be challenged, to want to find the truth, by following other sources of media, ones that share different views and beliefs.” The truth is plain and simple, it is obvious that bias does exist in media, very strongly and has control on what is said and shown, however bias does also exist in the viewers as well. Viewers mainly stick close to what they believe and share common ground with.
Clash Of The Voices George Washington once said, "If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter"(Grasso). Freedom of speech has been a delicate subject for a while now and it has escalated now because of the Charlottesville attack(Pearce). When it comes down to whether some free speech should be censored I think that it should be censored because if you start censoring people's beliefs and ideology you basically are killing the purpose of free speech. Now imagine our country without the right to say what we want we would have dictators like Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Saddam Hussein running our government. Free speech is needed now more than ever because our country is divided
“Although the government can't stop you from joining with a group of others to make your views known, you must do it in a peaceful manner” (The Right To Gather Has Some Restrictions). Every individual has the right to express their feelings and views, however, it shouldn’t irritate others in general peace or encroach on any other person’s right in the
Freedom of speech is one of the many essential core values that The United States of America was founded on. The United States Constitution and Bill of Rights prohibits the United States government from making laws which may infringe on our natural right to free speech. Without free speech, our generation and future generations alike would lack intellectual vitality. Being exposed to different ideas and beliefs is necessary for people to be able to formulate their own personal beliefs. Taking away or limiting free speech would be living life fearing that you will express an unpopular opinion in the eyes of certain people.
Free Speech The First Amendments is a blessing that the United States is fortunate enough to have. The First Amendment protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference (The First Amendment). The freedom of expression includes the right to free speech, press, assembly, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances (The First Amendment). Redress of grievances guarantees people the right to ask the government to provide relief for a wrong through courts or other governmental action (The First Amendment).
Reflection-Carnell Zhou The founding fathers were revolutionary and implacable in the sense that they endeavored to achieve one goal: American liberty. Thus, they desired to form a country whereby citizens possessed considerable rights, including a significant influence on the government. From what I have read, the founding fathers’ vision has been holistically achieved; however, a few of the amendments that may have seemed imperative during the time of the founding fathers should be tweaked, due to society’s changes since then. To begin with, I must acknowledge that I praised Benjamin Franklin’s advocacy of free speech.
The United States didn’t invent freedom. The Greeks and Romans had their democratic principles and the British had their Magna Carta before we were a nation. We are not even considered the “most free” nation in the world. In fact, we were ranked 20th in the world earlier this year by the Cato Institute in the “human freedom index.”