|
Americans Divided Between Civil Liberties and National Safety
WASHINGTON, Sept 16 (News Agencies) - Talk of the possibility of having to sacrifice individual freedoms in order to better fight terrorism on U.S. soil has sparked a tense debate in the country, news agencies reported.
Still reeling from the devastating attacks in New York and Washington, Americans are wondering to what extent security should impinge on their civil rights, according to Agence France-Presse (AFP).
"It is clear that the balance between security and liberty ... will now be recalibrated to reflect both new realities and new perceptions," the
New York Times wrote Sunday.
Alan Levine, assistant professor of government at American University, put it more bluntly: "There is a threat civil liberties will now be in danger."
He spoke as U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft called for investigative agencies to be granted increased latitude to better root out potential terrorists.
"We have to find out if people are willing to accept a new way of life, new regulations considering the context of all this," Levine told AFP.
The question, he said, was not simply if there should be more detailed searches at the airports or more frequent identity checks.
Rather, the roots of the debate go deep into U.S. history, he said.
Americans have never forgotten, for example, that during the hysteria surrounding World War II, thousands of innocent Japanese-Americans were interned in camps; or that in the early 1950s hundreds of people were arrested or investigated in the witch-hunt and anti-communist hysteria that became known as McCarthyism; or that black activists in the 1960s were the targets of federal harassment.
With the images of the mass destruction in New York and body bags being pulled out of the Pentagon, fears are emerging that federal powers may once more be extended to the detriment of individual civil liberties.
There have already been attacks all over the country directed against U.S. citizens who appear to be Middle Eastern or Muslim in the aftermath of the Tuesday's tragedy. Businesses, mosques and Islamic centers have been vandalized and have received death threats, and individuals have been harassed and physically and verbally assaulted.
"It's a real dangerous situation," said Democrat Representative Robert Matsui, who recalled the repressive measures taken against Japanese Americans after Japan's bombing of Pearl Harbor.
"The danger, of course, is the public out there, who may not be able to distinguish between somebody who happens to be an Arab American or a Muslim and what people perceive to be the terrorists."
President George W. Bush has appealed to Americans not to fall into such actions.
"These horrific acts cannot and should not become an excuse for violence and hate to be directed against any group of people," warned William Schulz, director of the U.S. chapter of Amnesty International.
But on the ground, changes are apparent as the administration launches an unprecedented investigation into the attacks.
Dozens of suspects have been arrested, questioned by the FBI, then released due to a lack of evidence. Twenty-five suspects are still being held.
Nothing has been left to chance: houses have been searched, credit card receipts are being examined, video tapes of public areas are being reviewed, millions of telephone conversations are being screened, e-mails are being combed through.
But as Levine pointed out, while Americans may be prepared to accept the need to investigate, they would not submit to anything that might resemble a police state.
"Restrictions, OK. But there are limits to what people are ready to accept," he said.
|
