Spying On The Home Front Essay Example

in New York City, it was reported that 'Al Qaeda' had plans to target several locations including train stations, bus stations, airports, and significant buildings in various cities. Furthermore, in 2003 there was a tip linking 'Al Qaeda' to potential attacks on Las Vegas.

The FBI solicited data from a range of businesses - including hotels, airlines, rental car companies and casinos - regarding visitors to Las Vegas in anticipation of a possible danger. As a result, the personal and financial details of over 250,000 individuals were obtained by the government without legal authorization. This action was both unproductive and an unwarranted invasion of privacy.

Las Vegas investigation did not reveal any terrorists, but the news of government's investigation caused concern among visitors. Many questioned the idea of being innocent until proven guilty and were worried about their legal rights. Stephen Sprouse and Kristin Douglas, who got married during this time in Las Vegas, expressed their dissatisfaction with being included in the FBI dragnet. Douglas stated, "Although I have always been fine with the fact that the government carries out activities unknown to me, learning that I was part of it changed everything." (source: www.pbs)

Some lawmakers, such as those opposed to the Patriot Act and the Bush Administration, cite situations like The Las Vegas incident as evidence for their opposition. (Source: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/homefront.html)

The purpose of implementing a system of checks and balances by the country's forefathers was to avoid the misuse of unlimited power. Nonetheless, the ongoing scenario in which the Bush administration is endeavoring to circumvent established laws and regulations stands in clear defiance of the Constitution.

The NSA, FBI, and CIA conducting warrantless phone call

interceptions, email readings, searches, or surveillance would breach the first, fourth and ninth amendments. As the fight against hidden terrorists persists, government officials express concern about potential implications on our personal freedoms and way of life. Larry Mefford, a previous assistant director at the FBI stressed the importance of balancing security with rights by saying "While I can provide increased security measures, it may require sacrificing some individual rights."

The website www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/homefront.html features a quote expressing a desire for a fair and common-sense balance in the country. The speaker expresses concern for untrained and unsupervised individuals who may inadvertently harm our liberties despite good intentions.

The actions of the Bush administration are deemed illegal and immoral as the means utilized to achieve their end cannot be justified. By invading the privacy of numerous citizens and breaking laws, they have potentially paved the way for further constitutional violations. If individuals cannot communicate without concern over governmental surveillance, it is difficult to maintain our status as "the land of the free." Furthermore, labeling dissenters of the administration's agenda as terrorists has only amplified suspicion towards them, ultimately undermining their efforts in winning the "war on terror."

This administration's enlargement of executive powers could be challenging to control.