Attorney General John Ashcroft granted freedom to the FBI to break restrictions on domestic surveillance in order to monitor Web sites, churches and political organizations to "detect and prevent terrorism." Although it is important to be suspicious of possible terrorists, opening up these restrictions may incite racial profiling and suffocate free speech. Bush says he is committed to protecting freedom. Doesn't that mean he should be protecting the First Amendment and due process at all costs? These new policies can't help but make us question how much of our privacy and freedom we are willing to give up in the name of security. Since Sept.11, many young people have been subject to lengthy investigations due to racial profiling and having been labeled as engaging in "un-American" behavior. It would be very difficult to make enough guidelines to protect free speech and civil rights while investigating peoples' personal lives according to their reading habits, political affiliations and religions. Are we so afraid of terrorists we are willing to give up our privacy and freedom of speech? Will people stop expressing contradictory views if they are afraid the government is watching and may label them as a dangerous terrorist because of their political or religious views? The government may be too loosely defining a terrorist as anyone who does not agree with everything the government does. Webster's defines terrorism as "the use of force or threats to intimidate." If the Bush administration sees those that disagree with them as a threat, they could be considered terrorists. The way the Bush administration tosses the word terrorist around is often reminiscent of the way the word communist was used in the 1950s. It seems that new laws such as this one will allow the same type of witch hunts seen during the McCarthy era. It is against our principles to investigate those who have not committed crimes. What exactly can be considered terrorism? It now seems that everything on television and in most of the media is too over-concerned with patriotism and patriotic advertising to question anything the Bush administration does. Although there is a need to find real terrorists who want to harm the U.S., lifting restrictions on domestic surveillance may be ringing in the return of McCarthyism. Can lifting surveillance restrictions still protect freedom of speech? How easily are we scared into giving up our freedoms? How far is the government willing to go to seek out people who might be terrorists?
yes - no - abstain
