When the towers fell on the 11th of September, a culture spanning borders and languages became afraid. I remember wondering if our soaring fighter jets could form a wall to protect us. It was an attack against innocent people by hidden guerrilla forces. Perhaps these unseen fighters would try to hold us hostage or bombard the entire nation. The victims had to be avenged. Defensive actions needed to be taken.
The feeling of uncertainty that washes over a nation, oblitirating its peace, is a dangerous force. A fearful country risks damaging itself irreparably. After 9/11, the American government chose to give up some of the people 's freedom for the sake of protection. A democratic populace must demand for a different course of action if it seems that freedom needs to be sacrificed. By giving up liberty, a democratic nation destroys small parts of itself; just as explosions, bullets, and violent attackers would. It is time to evaluate the hurried solutions. These include mass-intelligence gathering and the practices of the DHS and the TSA. By analyzing these, we can gain insight into the dangers of letting freedom be taken.
This seems like an extreme point of view. Democracy has not been undermined …show more content…
However, it is unacceptable to let inefficient agencies continue working without any input from the public --- especially from people they are most in contact with. It is also important to set limits on secretive policing of intelligence. In "Homeland Security Hasn 't Made Us Safer" Anne Applebaum exposes several incriminating facts about the DHS and the TSA. Airport security agents "fail to spot the majority of fake 'bombs '" (Applebaum 303) and the DHS gives enormous amounts of money to police forces nationwide, some of it unnecessary. "$67,000 worth of surveillance equipment purchased by Marin Country, California [was discovered] in its original packaging"
The feeling of uncertainty that washes over a nation, oblitirating its peace, is a dangerous force. A fearful country risks damaging itself irreparably. After 9/11, the American government chose to give up some of the people 's freedom for the sake of protection. A democratic populace must demand for a different course of action if it seems that freedom needs to be sacrificed. By giving up liberty, a democratic nation destroys small parts of itself; just as explosions, bullets, and violent attackers would. It is time to evaluate the hurried solutions. These include mass-intelligence gathering and the practices of the DHS and the TSA. By analyzing these, we can gain insight into the dangers of letting freedom be taken.
This seems like an extreme point of view. Democracy has not been undermined …show more content…
However, it is unacceptable to let inefficient agencies continue working without any input from the public --- especially from people they are most in contact with. It is also important to set limits on secretive policing of intelligence. In "Homeland Security Hasn 't Made Us Safer" Anne Applebaum exposes several incriminating facts about the DHS and the TSA. Airport security agents "fail to spot the majority of fake 'bombs '" (Applebaum 303) and the DHS gives enormous amounts of money to police forces nationwide, some of it unnecessary. "$67,000 worth of surveillance equipment purchased by Marin Country, California [was discovered] in its original packaging"