Free Speech Should Be Curtailed To Fight Terrorism

1st Amendment (right to free speech) be granted to "terrorists"?

Anti-terrorism laws are constitutional even when they have an adverse impact on free speech, which makes it a federal crime to knowingly provide material support or resources to a terrorist organization. Anti-terrorism legislation usually includes specific amendments allowing the state to bypass its own legislation when fighting terrorism-related crimes, under the grounds of necessity.
The terrorist strikes of Sept. 11 led to many casualties, including thousands at the World Trade Center in New York City. Those concerned with civil liberties worry that constitutional freedoms may be the latest victim of the attacks and the resulting war on terrorism. Perhaps the most obvious threat to civil liberties in the wake of Sept. 11 was Congress' quick passage of the so-called USA Patriot Act a law that provides great powers to law enforcement officials.To some, this new law epitomizes the assault on our nation's civil liberties. The law allows the government to search a person's home without immediately listing the object of the search. The law also allows the attorney general to deport individuals who engage in any nonviolent activity on behalf of any group deemed a terrorist organization. Other provisions expand wiretapping capabilities for federal law enforcement officials. Still other parts of the law allow the police to obtain information about private Internet communications under a relaxed standard of review.

There needs to be strong protection for a core area of protected speech and advocacy. Americans should be able to make arguments to a court on the behalf of terrorist groups. That is crucial for the legal system to work and for the constitutionality of laws of this kind to be tested. They should be able to print the views of these groups for journalistic purposes, either to report the news or to convey a range of opinions. People also need to be free to speak independently about these groups. These rights need to be made clear in advance. It is not enough for the government simply to say it will not prosecute in these cases. As long as people fear being sentenced to 15 years in prison, they are likely to avoid engaging even in protected speech. Many crimes from blackmail to leaking insider stock information — are committed through words. There is no right to act as a spokesman for a terrorist group or serve as its adviser. Giving advice to a terrorist group, even if it is not about violent activities, is not the same as getting on a soapbox and speaking about politics. It is not necessarily innocent.

 Former House speaker, Newt Gingrich said that by proposing that free speech may have to be curtailed in order to fight terrorism. "This is a serious, long-term war, either before we lose a city or, if we are truly stupid, after we lose a city, we will adopt rules of engagement that use every technology we can find to break up their capacity to use the Internet, to break up their capacity to use free speech, and to go after people who want to kill us to stop them from recruiting people." He also said, "we should propose a Geneva Convention for fighting terrorism, which makes very clear that those who would fight outside the rules of law, those who would use weapons of mass destruction, and those who would target civilians are, in fact, subject to a totally different set of rules that allow us to protect civilization by defeating barbarism before it gains so much strength that it is truly horrendous."

I feel that terrorism is a serious issue in the United States. With all the laws and acts being put into place, are civil liberties are at threat. I rather have federal organizations and special departments keeping a close eye on people and keeping the Unites States safe even if that threatens my civil liberties. The case of that Sudbury man, Mehanna being arrested was good in a way because he was spreading propaganda for Al-Qaeda and promoting violent jihad. Luckily this was all that Mehanna had done that we have been told and has been proven. Hopefully bringing him in stopped another act of terrorism. I rather the FBI act before hand rather than a possibility of people getting hurt.


Facts

1."This is a serious, long-term war, either before we lose a city or, if we are truly stupid, after we lose a city, we will adopt rules of engagement that use every technology we can find to break up their capacity to use the Internet, to break up their capacity to use free speech, and to go after people who want to kill us to stop them from recruiting people."

2. Many crimes from blackmail to leaking insider stock information — are committed through words. There is no right to act as a spokesman for a terrorist group or serve as its adviser. Giving advice to a terrorist group, even if it is not about violent activities, is not the same as getting on a soapbox and speaking about politics. It is not necessarily innocent.

3. Al Qaeda by translating such materials and distributing them on the Internet, allegedly in support of Al Qaeda’s propaganda