Life Changing Events Happened From New York City

An American’s civil liberties are among some of the most important rights awarded to a citizen. After 9/11 some of those liberties were taken away by the expansion of executive power, the National Security

“Since 9/11, the Bush administration has used that tragic event as a justification to rip up our constitution and our civil liberties. And I honestly believe that one or two 9/11s, and martial law will be declared in our country and we're inching towards a police state” -Michael Moore. This quote is the fine definition to describe the film “Unconstitutional: The War on Civil Liberties.” In this short little summary and potential analysis(mostly opinion) will be about how this film describes the after effects 9/11 and the rushed passing of the Patriot Act.

The Writ of Habeas Corpus states that “the Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion, the public safety may require it" (U.S. Constitution. Art. I, Sec. 9). In simpler terms, this means that the government, or its officials, is forbidden to arrest a citizen without allowing the case to be presented to a judge or court. The dictionary defines a writ as "a form of written command in the name of a court or other legal authority." Since the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215, Habeas Corpus has been a pillar of law in America ("FAQs: What Is Habeas Corpus."). It

POL 201 Week 5 Final Paper Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror

Several weeks after the horrible terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act was rushed through Congress by Attorney General, John Ashcroft. This particular Act, however, was established with a ruling hand of fear. Life for Americans changed dramatically in those immediate days, weeks, and months after the attack. America had been spoiled with luxury for so long, that the illusion of control had ingrained itself into our very nature as Americans. That act of terror, on September 11, 2001, brought that belief crashing down, almost immediately. Fear and anger were rampant though out America; a dangerous

During many presidencies there have been many controversial decisions affecting civil liberties during times of national crisis. Throughout American history, the powers granted to the National Government and the President himself have been strengthened and expanded in wartime situations. Although they are sometimes controversial, the authority exerted on the nation through these powers have successfully protected the well-being of America and its national security. The passage of the USA Patriot Act under George W. Bush following terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 and

Food insecurity is defined as “limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or limited or uncertain ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways.”1 Food insecurity data found that in America, 12.7% of households were food insecure at some point and 5% of households had very low food security in 2015.2 The prevalence of food insecurity in Ohio was greater than the national average in 2015, with 16.1% of households reporting food insecurity.2

Since the founding of the United States of America, freedom has been the basis of the governmental and ruling systems in place. Individual freedoms are protected in both the Bill of Rights and the rest of the Constitution, and Schwartz (2009) explains that ‘public liberty ultimately enhances collective rationality—it is a path to heightening our wisdom by increasing access to pertinent information and improving decision making’ (p. 409). However, there have been many times in history when the true freedom of citizens is called into question. There has always been controversy about how much power the government should have, who is keeping the government in check, and if citizens are properly informed about what their elected governed are doing. The passing of the Patriot Act in 2001 was no exception to this controversy. The

When an incident occurs the government and public react in various has changed the mind set of many Americans. Terrorism on the rise around the world made government officials to take proper precautions and changes in protocol. Our nation attempted to prepare for the worse scenarios. Events of 9/11 shocked most citizens and government officials. In response President Bush signed the Patriot Act, however since provisions expired later President Obama had to reactivate the Patriot Act. Most citizens were unaware of reaction from our government. The Patriot Act impacted of America, the Director of National Intelligence, and the agencies that report directly towards the DNI.

After the devastating attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, this country scrambled to take action to provide future protection. New techniques had to be developed to protect the nation from the menace of terrorism. Along with the new techniques came the decision to enact laws that some believed crossed the threshold of violating civil liberties this county and those living in it were guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States. “On October 26, 2001, the Public Law 107-56, Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, also known as the USA Patriot Act, was signed into effect” (Stern, 2004, p. 1112). While speaking to Congress,

A paradox has always exists between the issue of civil liberties and national security. Democracy creates civil liberties that allow the freedom of association, expression, as well as movement, but there are some people use such liberal democracy to plan and execute violence, to destabilize State structures. It illustrates the delicate balance existing between reducing civil liberties to enhance security in a state. States have detained suspects for years and have also conducted extensive privacy incursions as strategies to combat terror, however it risks violation of civil liberties. This essay discusses the extent to which a state should be allowed to restrict civil liberties for the enhancement of national security and not abandon democratic values. It looks at aspects of the legal response to terrorism in the United States after the 9/11 attack.

If growing up in New York City has taught me anything, it is the gift of optimism and to never give up on your dreams. Even at twenty two while being withdrawn from university, I am still always learning important new life lessons and new things that improve me, and make me not only stronger as a business person and entrepreneur, but my own humanity and existence as well. Being in my own corner of the country can feel disorienting at times, especially when visiting family in other parts of the states. It feels like you are given a brief glimpse through a window at a completely different way of life, despite being relatively close. I feel the next step to learning more about my self and giving me even more of a strong edge is to complete my

Benjamin Franklin, one of the founding fathers of the United States, once said “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” In America’s society today, some are willing to sacrifice their civil liberties in order to gain protection and security over some potential threat. Especially after the events of September 11th and several attempted bombings in U.S. cities. This sacrifice of individual freedoms such as the freedom of speech, expression, the right to information, to new technologies, and so forth, for additional protection is more of a loss than a gain. Citizens of the United States deserve equal liberty and safety overall, as someone should not have to give up

On September 20, 2001, President George W. Bush made a speech on the terrorist attack, which took place on September 11, 2001. The people of America needed support and direction on how to handle what just happen. The American people demanded that the President addresses the Nation after the attacks and guide them. Nine days later, President Bush did just that. Over the next few days, emotions ran high in the country. “Will this happen again?” “Is it safe to leave in my home?” many wondered. Everywhere throughout the Nation, airlines had stopped service, the New York Stock Exchange was temporarily suspended, and every tv channel around the country played the latest news about the attack. The American people understandably asked and asked “What’s next?” from their leaders, so when President Bush gave his

For Christmas and my sixteenth birthday present my parents planned a trip for me to go to New York City with my dad. Two days after Christmas me and my dad hopped on the plane and headed for New Jersey and New York City. I was very excited because I had been to New Jersey but I never visited New York City before. I also remember being excited because of that fact that I would actually get to see snow in the winter since it rarely ever snowed in Houston during the winter. Then that next year during my junior year in High School, I had the opportunity to go on a trip to Los Angeles with my drill team. I was very excited to get to go to both of these huge awesome cities in that two year period. Both of these cities were unique in their own way. So what makes a city similar to another city and what makes a city different to another city? The people, the weather, the vibe, the monuments and popular attractions are all some of the components of what makes a city unlike any other city. My two favorite cities besides Houston are New York and Los Angeles. I have visited both and like them both equally for different reasons. While New York and Los Angeles definitely have their similarities, they also have many differences that set them apart from each other.