The Wrong Way to Fight Terrorism, Essay Example

The controlling idea of the article is for the legislature to revamp the system to allow terrorists the same rights as law abiding citizens such as due process but put some restrictions to their access to evidence and security clearance issues such as attorneys with such access in order to protect the security of our nation.

Due process is afforded all citizens as per the 5^th amendment to the US Constitution.

A person cannot be deprived of life, liberty or property without the due process of law.

Further, a person has a right to an attorney and a speedy and fair trial.

Under the sixth amendment, a person accused of a crime has the right to legal representation and a fair and speedy trial.

The people of the US have the right to be protected against terrorism.

The Commission proposes that air carriers make available PNR data for flights coming to or leaving the EU (in and outbound EU flights) to specialized national units carrying out risk assessments and law enforcement and counter terrorism missions.

Anti-terroristic attacks should be dealt with at the military level as well as at the legal level.

Why do terrorists have the same rights as citizens?

At present terrorists cannot challenge their detention by way of habeas corpus but legislation is considering giving them that right.  These are considered war crimes and Congress should not get involved. This is military business.

What are the views of human rights of terrorists in other countries?

The Muslim presence is all over the UK and the citizens of the UK do not have much faith in the Metropolitan coppers. In 2005 52 British Muslim citizens killed themselves with suicide bombings alone. There is even anger amongst the Muslim citizens of London.

What is the military’s view on anti-terrorism?

There is no advantage to limiting the military’s power and allowing Congress to control anti-terrorism tactics. The military should have full control to stop terrorism which includes the ability to shoot on the spot if they feel there is a potential threat to the security of our country. Law should be a secondary enforcement once a terrorist is captured to act as a deterrent for future terroristic threat to our nation. It is up to the government to enact law that would not sacrifice our safety thus not infringing human rights. Our country’s security should be the number one goal primary to the human rights of terrorists.

Why should the US consider the rights of terrorists?

There is such international law as the Hague Convention, but when anti-extremists do not obey the rules of the Hague all orders are out of the window say to speak. We must still adhere to the law with principalities but not give up our personal freedoms and security. International law will always remain a touchy issue in order to keep peace amongst the nations.

References

Boudreaux, D. (2009) The Wrong Way to Fight Terrorism Retrieved October 12, 2009 from, http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/the-wrong-way-to-fight-terrorism.html

Freedom, Security and Justice (2006) Retrieved October 12, 2009 from, http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/fsj/terrorism/fsj_terrorism_intro_en.htm

Terrorism Law and Policy (2003) Retrieved October 12, 2009 from, http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/terrorism/terrorism3.htm

Wellen, R. (2009) Faced with nuclear attack, why not surrender and live to fight another day? Retrieved October 12, 2009 from, http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2009/06/27/faced-with-nuclear-attack-why-not-surrender-and-live-to-fight-another-day/

Carafano, J. (2007) Rights are Wrong:  Dealing with Terrorists Retrieved October 12, 2009 from, http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed071307a.cfm