Essay on "Criminal Justice - Counterterrorism Issues"

Quoted Instructions for "Criminal Justice - Counterterrorism Issues" Assignment:

I'm requesting for "*****" to write this essay.

Thank You.

Below are 5 questions in parenthesis with some of the text books answers below. Please use your experience to write an essay, APA style from the 5 answers to the questions using the text book answers and your experience.

Please use one or two citation per questions if needed. Thank you

1. (What is counterterrorism? Why is it important to understand the motivations behind terrorism when engaged in counterterrorism efforts? What kind of general motives might you find among terrorists in this country and abroad?)

Counterterrorism refers to the practices, tactics, techniques, and strategies that governments, militaries, police departments and corporations adopt in response to terrorist threats and/or acts, both real and imputed. Stated by (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-terrorism).

One of the most difficult and enduring issues is current counter-terrorism is whether terrorism should be thought of as criminal activity or as an act of war. The notion of counter-terrorism as law enforcement or as war is a definitional issue with substantial policy implications. The distinction between war and policing involves all the issues associated with democracy under conditions of threats to internal and international security.

Terrorism and counter-terrorism do not stand alone, but are embedded in contexts. These contexts are moral, political, cultural, and international. They involve conflicts among peoples and the way in which those conflicts tend to endure. Oftentimes, groups have sharply different notions of good and bad, right and wrong. And these different notions extend to what constitutes terrorism and what the government should do in the way of countterrorism

2. (Is counterterrorism a tactic of warfare or crime-fighting? What role does due process play in either context? What are the implications when terrorists can be characterized as the "enemy" rather than mere criminals?)

The simplest way to determine whether terrorism is war or crime is by looking at the dangerousness of the threat posed by some terrorist group. Normatively, the distinction between war or crime is tied to the extent of the terrorist threat. If the threat relatively localized or contained, then it can be threat as a crime and prosecuted accordingly. However, if it is too extensive and dangerous to suppressed by the police, then a limited military response involving The National Guard may be necessary. If the National Guard lack the power to deal with the threat, or if the threat has an out-of-country military component, a full-fledged military response may be required.

"Enemy is a strong word, evoking associations of hate, violence, battle and war" -- it's possible to disagree with an enemy without hate, and not all battles involve violence.

(--Awis 04:24, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Societies define crime as the breach of one or more rules or laws for which some governing authority or force may ultimately prescribe a punishment. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime#Definition)

3.(How has surveillance changed from the "traditional" to "new surveillance"? Are these changes potentially problematic for civil liberties in any way in the United States? Should law enforcement be permitted to use all technological resources available to accomplish its mission, including in the fight against terror? Are there limits?)

One of the defining tensions in modern society is that between privacy and surveillance. Surveillance has expanded dramatically since the terrorist attacks on 9/11. One of the central features of the new security environment is the enhancement of crime control surveillance. Proponents of enhanced surveillance argue that the expansion of information will help terrorism experts connect the dot, that is, figure out when and where terrorists are next likely to strike. FISA permit surveillance based on probable cause that the target is a foreign power or an agent thereof. USA PATRIOT Act is associated with the post 9/11 security environment. The USA Provide Appropriate tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism(PATRIOT) Act was approved by Congress and signed into law by President Bush on October 26, 2001. To understand the new surveillance environment, the EFF begins with a review of surveillance under U.S. law. U.S. law recognizes four mechanisms for domestic surveillance. Intercept Orders, Search Warrants, Pen and Trap Devices and Subpoenas for Stored Information.

4.(What is the FISA Court? Explain how it works. What authorities can it grant law enforcement? How is it different from traditional courts? What concerns exist about expanding the use of FISA?)

The FISA Court bridges the pre-and post- 9/11 eras, because it was originally created I 1978, but its authority under-gird the central provisions of both the 1996 Antiterrorist Act and the USA PATRIOT Act. Indeed, these acts are only meaningful in the context of the FISA court. Accordingly, this section provides a detailed discussion of this highly specialized court, created for the specific purpose of anti-terrorism. The Foreign Intelligence Security Act of 1978 established regulations for collecting information about the convert plans or activities of foreign powers that might affect U.S. national interests. This act provided a distinct framework for authorizing surveillance that would result in counterintelligence and counter-terrorism rather than criminal prosecution. While American citizens suspected or accused of criminal activity could continue to expect Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, probable cause was not a prerequisite for FISA authorization of wiretapping electronic surveillance or physical searches provided the target was a foreign or agent of a foreign power.

The Act created a special court, the Foreign Intelligence Security Court (FISC), to authorize such surveillance. Seven federal district court judges, appointed for staggered terms by the Chief Justice, were designated to review applications for counterintelligence warrants that had first been approved by the Attorney General. The basis by which the Attorney General could issue authorization was broad. A targeted individual or group only need be identifies as a foreign power or as or an agent of a foreign power; any facility targeted must be one used by that power or agent. No hostile or criminal intent need be part of the scenario.

The warrant process for the FISA court operates as follows. Each step of the process is carried out in secret. A warrant for electronic surveillance is requested from the Attorney General*****s office and proceedings are based on information provided by the Department of Justice*****s Office of Intelligence Policy and Review. The U.S. Attorney General must personally sign off on all warrant requests.

Surveillance wiretaps are authorize after a non-adversarial meeting of the court. The files collected by the court cannot be revealed even to persons whose prosecutions stem from FISA investigations.

The purpose of the FISA court is markedly different from that of traditional U.S. Courts. Courts have traditionally approved surveillance based on the notion that the fruit of the investigation will result in a criminal prosecution.

The Principle concern of due process advocates is that the FISA court is highly secretive in its behavior. Indeed, so much is hidden that it is sometimes likened to the infamous star chambers. From the view of FISA advocates, security interest outweigh due process concerns associated with the First and Fourth Amendments.

5. (How has aviation security changed since 9/11? What were the provisions of the Aviation and Transportation Act? Did this act changed aviation security in a dramatic way? What role does racial or religious profiling play in securing the aviation industry and its consumers? What role should it play?)

Transportation Security Administration (TSA). It had been established by the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of November 19, 2001, and was originally located within the Department of Transportation. This agency oversees matters concerning the safety of U.S. maritime, air and land travel, such as airport security and the transportation of hazardous materials. On April 19th, 2003, TSA certified 44 airline pilots to carry firearms in the cockpit (The White House, 2003).

The randomness of airport checks led critics to suggest that this reduced the likelihood of catching a terrorist to no more than random luck. X-ray machines at departure gate are added to upgrade security.

This problem characterized all airport security strategies: They depend on secrecy, and so do not tend to work well. Airport procedures involving secrecy include screening passengers, examining luggage, and running the autopilot software. The problem with these procedures is that once someone knows the code, they become transparent.

Profiling racially or in terms of whether someone has a heavy suntan or not, or looks like that, is wrong.