A proposed measure to narrow the far-reaching powers of government surveillance and law enforcement enacted by 2001′s PATRIOT Act, the Security and Freedom Enhanced (SAFE) Act, bill S. 1709, was introduced in the U.S. Senate and House last month. The SAFE Act would provide stronger standards for judicial review and oversight.

The PATRIOT Act was pushed through Congress by the Bush administration in a matter of days, with little debate and few dissenting votes in the wake of the Sep. 11 terrorist attacks. The PATRIOT Act permits the use of “sneak and peek” measures and delayed notification searches, in practically any criminal investigation. The deadline for notifying the subject of the search is indefinite. The bill was followed up with a plethora of similar executive orders, regulations and policies, such as establishing military commissions not adhering to due process norms and denying the right to a fair trial for citizens and non-citizens labeled “enemy combatants.” The Justice Department asserts that these extra measures are necessary to thwart terrorists before they strike.

The new bill has broad bi-partisan support. Sponsors in the senate include Democrats Russ Feingold (WI) and Ron Wyden (OR) and Republicans Larry Craig (ID) and John Sununu (NH). In the house, sponsors include Democrats Dennis Kucinich (OH) and Barney Frank (MA) and Republicans Butch Otter (ID) and Ron Paul (TX). Liberal and conservative organizations alike, sharing a mutual concern for civil liberties, are advocating the SAFE Act. This includes the American Conservative Union, American Civil Liberties Union, American Library Association and Gun Owners of America. Lara W. Murphy, director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office, says on the organization’s website that the strong bi-partisan support is indicative of the vast extent to which the Bush administration has strayed from our traditional system of checks and balances against overreaching government authority.

The SAFE Act would allow the “sneak and peek” authority to be used only in circumstances in which a federal judge rules that without the delayed notification, an individual’s physical safety will be endangered, someone will flee prosecution, or evidence faces destruction. The notification deadline would also be changed to seven days.

However, law enforcement would be able to seek indefinite extensions issued on a weekly basis by a federal judge. The proposed law also requires a semi-annual report to congress from the U.S. attorney general in regard to the status, permitted or denied, of delayed notification searches and extensions. Moreover, the SAFE Act has a provision that repeals its sneak and peek power in 2005, only to be reinstated if voted for in Congress.

Among the most controversial provisions in the PATRIOT Act is section 215, which grants the FBI permission to obtain Americans’ business, library, medical and genetic records without probable cause. Under the SAFE Act, the government must prove to a federal judge that the suspect is an agent of a foreign power to receive this privilege.

The house version of the bill goes further than its senate counterpart by replacing the PATRIOT Act’s broad and vague definition of “domestic terrorism,” which could cover some acts of civil disobedience by non-violent political protestors. The new definition associates domestic terrorism with serious violent crimes such as bombing, kidnapping and hijacking.

More than 200 cities, towns and counties in 34 states, including Chicago, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Oakland, Seattle, Detroit and Baltimore, with a combined population of around 26 million, have passed resolutions in opposition to the PATRIOT Act and declared themselves “civil liberties safe zones.” Local police are forbidden to engage in racial profiling, enforce immigration laws or participate in federal investigations that violate civil liberties. Dozens of state library associations have also passed-anti-PATRIOT-Act resolutions.

American Baptist preacher Jerry Falwell angered many Muslim-Americans with a statement he made about the prophet Muhammad.
“I think Muhammad was a terrorist. I read enough by both Muslims and non-Muslims [to decide] that he was a violent man, a man of war.” Falwell made these comments in a taped interview on”60 Minutes in October.
According to an article from the BBC, when news of the remarks hit worldwide it set off riots, including one in India where it left at least eight people dead. Later, Falwell apologized about his comments and insisted that he’s always respected other faiths and religions. Of course, Falwell is not a stranger to controversial comments. Just last year, right after the attacks, Falwell publicly attacked atheists, gays and civil-rights activists, saying that they had angered God.
While the rest of the nation was marking the one-year anniversary of the attacks last month, three Florida students were being accused of plotting terrorist attacks. Kambiz Butt, Ayman Gheith and Omer Choudhary, all resident student doctors, were dining at a Shoney’s in Georgia when customer Eunice Stone allegedly overheard them talk and joke about the Sept. 11 attacks. Stone got frightened and called the State Patrol. While leaving the area, the students’ cars were pulled off the highway to be sniffed by dogs and robots. An empty bag was blown up that authorities believed may have carried explosive devices. Authorities even accused the students of going through a tollbooth without paying,. Tapes later proved the charge to be false. During this whole ordeal, the students were held for questioning for 17 hours. It was only later, when the students talked to reporters nationwide, that the whole story came out that they were discussing ways to bring a car from Kansas City, MO to Miami, FL.
All of the students were interning at Larkin Community Hospital in South Miami, FL. Unfortunately, the hospital declined to accept them back at this time because of racist threats directed to them and the students. Luckily, the three students were released without any charges against them and a hospital in the Caribbean has decided to take them in.

Muslim-American groups were angered by not only what the students were accused of but also by authorities who assumed that they were terrorists because of their ethnic background and subjected them to a search by nearly 600 officers.
“The whole incident was a complete over-reaction based on stereotypes,” says Attaf Ali, Chairman of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Muslim-Americans are not the only ones who feel this way. Muslim-Canadians reportedly feel similar as well. The Council on American-Islamic Relations Canada (CAIR-CAN) conducted a survey of about 300 participants on how they’ve been treated in the past year. Sixty percent felt they’ve been subjected to discrimination while an overwhelming 80 percent know someone who has. Even some Canadian columns and editorials have described Muslims as “murderous” and”"barbaric.” Nearly half of all non-Muslim-Canadians favored some form of racial profiling or another.
Here in America, much of this is not uncommon. Jewish- and Italian-Americans were discriminated against earlier this century, while Japanese-Americans were detained in interment camps across the west coast during World War II. With the “war against terrorism” going on right now it seems like we, as Americans, haven’t learned a thing about embracing other cultures, only repeating our own mistakes.

by HEBAH AMIN

The events of September 11, 2001 have changed the United States. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the airports.
Stronger x-ray scanning machines, more frequent and random searches—we’ve all heard of them. I had the (mis)fortune to encounter all three implementations during my family’s annual trip to Egypt.
At first glance, Kansas City International Airport looks the same as always, but on second inspection, it’s apparent that the security: traveler ratio is decidedly higher than last year, pre-September 11.
The clerks behind the check-in desk were friendly enough. We had to put our luggage through a high-powered x-ray. A sign warns that the x-rays might damage any film in the luggage. Guess what was buried in the bottom of my luggage, thereby inaccessible? I haven’t developed my film yet, but I suspect it was exposed in the x-ray machine.
The fun part of the airport experience came when I went to enter the gate area. I made sure to take off all of my jewelry, my watch, anything that might possibly set off the metal detector. I walked through. It beeped.
I walked through again. It beeped again. One of the female guards wanded me, and we discovered the cause—my shoes, the ones my family affectionately dubbed “combat boots.” Apparently, the metal detectors for international departures are set to a higher sensitivity, because I wore the same boots through airport security earlier in the summer without setting off a single alarm. Finally, I had to take off my boots so they could be put on the belt and x-rayed. After all that fuss, they decided there was nothing wrong and I put my boots back on to wait to board.
When it was our turn to board, we were diverted to a blocked off area, thanks to the newly implemented “random” searches. The woman collecting passes explained that the “SSSS” printed on the bottom of the boarding pass was the airline’s system for random selection. What we found slightly suspicious about the affair was that four people, traveling together, with Arab-sounding last names, heading for the “Middle East” all got randomly selected.
Another female guard wanded me down and, once again, my boots made the wand beep. For the second time within half an hour, I had to take off my boots. Meanwhile, another guard rifled through my purse. He didn’t find anything dangerous, although he did find lots of gum wrappers, two books, a hand mirror, my wallet, my car key. The good news was that I didn’t have any nail clippers in there. He did flip rather suspiciously through my Wheel of Time book. What he was expecting to find, I have no idea.
In the end, we were declared harmless and were allowed to board.
On the return trip, I wore sandals.

Heightened security. How tight is security at a federal courthouse September 11, 2002 one year later.

On a normal day at the courthouse, visitors can only enter through the front doors and walk to the security desk. There, you have to produce your photo ID, state why you are there, put all of your belongings on the x-ray belt, turn off and turn in cellular phones and pagers and finally walk through the metal detector. From there you are free to go to your floor and continue your business as usual.

On September 11, 2002, security was a little tighter. More guards both outside and inside the lobby. The biggest change was not the security but the attitudes and the tempers of those at the courthouse. Visitors were told to remain in the lobby for a remembrance service that was going to be held. All were given a red white and blue ribbon and a small American flag. The flags were raised for the moment of silence. The quite ahh of the crowd was almost unnerving as the pictures of the rubble and destruction that were displayed. The devastation in the faces of the people in the pictures was also felt by the people that stood in the lobby.

As the ceremony ended and people dried their eyes and returned to the courthouse, were all reminded of why we were there and how important our job is to the amazing country that we live in.

by DAVID L. PENNER

America, come out, come out, where ever you are.

Hey, look, imagine that. We’re safe and nothing happened to us on September 11.

You can come out of your bunkers and underground homes now because oh, yeah, nothing was going to happen anyway.

Now that you’ve realized that you aren’t going to die, feel free to join the rest of the world and get on with your life.

America is still in a state of mass hysteria and it’s a year after the fact.

I’m not by any means trying to disrespect or make a mockery out of a tragedy. I’m just sick of being bombarded with useless stories and information about the exact same thing, kind of like the O.J. Simpson trial but with more drama.

Has anyone noticed that our supposed “war on terror” is another Vietnam waiting to happen? It’s just on a more global scale.

Now, does anybody remember what happened during Vietnam? We didn’t so much as win that one.

While watching the news a couple of weeks ago, CNN broke a story on how the Taliban was allegedly testing a new chemical weapon on dogs. Honestly all I could think about was how far behind their technology really is, at least the United States can afford to use monkeys when they test new chemicals.

Hey I know we are all going to die sometime but I can guarantee it won’t be from anthrax or any other biological weapon unless you are a refugee living in Northern Iraq.

People can call me cold hearted because they might think I have no sympathy regarding such a disaster but I really do care.

September 11 was one of the worst things to ever happen on American soil and I do think it needs to be remembered, in everyone’s own little way. It does not need to be remembered though with stale stories and media barrages about how bin Laden is going to unleash holy hell on America

Osama should be the least of our worries right now. Instead of looking for a man we can’t catch let’s focus on problems that we can actually take steps to eliminate in our own country like crime, poverty and over crowding in jails.

by ZAHID AWAN

The Pentagon is planning to launch a new media war targeted at both allied and hostile countries. To change the opinion of the war on terrorism around the world, Pentagon officials have proposed a plan to place both true and false news stories in the world media.
The Office of Strategic Influence (OSI), created after the September 11 terrorist attacks, was proposing to expand the information warfare mission against antagonistic and friendly nations in the Middle East, Asia and Western Europe.
The Pentagon had hired the Rendon Group for $100,000 per month to assist OSI in the propaganda war and covert operations. Head of this firm is John W. Redon, Jr., who was a campaign aid to former President Jimmy Carter and worked closely with the CIA, the Kuwaiti royal family and the opposition groups that were trying to eject President Saddam Hussain.
Donald H. Rumsfeld, secretary of defense, strongly supported OSI and referred its proposals to the Pentagon’s lawyer, William J. Haynes for review.
The New York Times broke this story and led the worldwide media bombardment of editorials full of criticism of OSI’s proposals. As a result, the Pentagon announced that the OSI is shutting down. Rumsfeld blamed media for making agency’s functions impracticable.
“While much of the thrust of the criticism and the cartoons and comment has been off the mark, the office has been damaged so much that it could not operate effectively,” he said. He assured that the Pentagon has not engaged in spreading lies and would never do so. President Bush also reiterated, “We’ll tell the American people the truth.”
Rumsfeld contradicted his own statement when he said that the Pentagon would continue its efforts to deliver its word to abroad, without using OSI. The Pentagon closed the new office but not its operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Asia, Africa, Europe and Middle East. He also mentioned that the Pentagon might be continuing its strategic or tactical deception, which help to deceive enemy strategies during war as it has been done in past. Strategic or tactical deception means to divert enemy’s defensive schemes by planting false news reports in foreign media about U.S. troops’ maneuverings.
The United States of America is the primary leader of the world community. Helpless people around the world look to America for help and guidance in peace efforts. If America compromises its credibility by spreading clouds of doubts and disinformation, then where will the world community put its trust?

Nobody will be able to see the difference between truth and lies. In short, everything said by Washington would be looked at with doubt, making it almost impossible for governments and officials to formulate their responses.
Worldwide journalists are questioning the ethical and moral standards of a country that would deliberately promote skepticism rather then establishing trust and goodwill.
We are a nation that pledges to be “… one nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.” To intentionally mislead and lie to our own people and the world is sacrilege to that pledge.
We should not let the rest of the world question our credibility, morality, ethics and standards. I couldn’t understand President Bush’s pledge, “we’ll tell the American people the truth.” Will we tell the rest of the world lies? If we tell our own people the truth, then how is it possible to hide it from others, especially when the world is like a small town? Bush should extend his pledge by saying that the government will always tell the truth to Americans and every nation in the world. If our government will keep hiding the truth like the Enron administration did, the result will not be any different.
Planting false stories in local or world media should be considered a criminal act and those who commit such crimes should be taken to task under criminal law.

This whole world is a peace-loving family but a few black sheep are preventing us from making peace.
They build walls of doubt, distrust and enmity, dividing humanity into racial, religious and political conflicts. The troublemakers seek power and recognition at the expense of innocent lives around the world. The atrocities they commit are crushing millions of human lives that relate in no way to the killers’ agendas.
Meanwhile, millions of apathetic people are just sitting in their living rooms, watching the news and doing nothing to stop it. They believe that it’s not their business to get involved.
How long will we keep on being the audience? It’s time to wake up and fulfill our responsibilities as citizens of this planet.
We, as students, can contribute to bringing change in this world. The majority of the students around the world have the same dreams. Our cultures are different but our hopes are the same. The taste of the food may be different but after eating, everyone desires peaceful sleep. No one enjoys seeing brothers, sisters, mothers or fathers killed or threatened. No one is born a killer.
We are all human beings, arranged as a giant, colorful bouquet in an enormous vase. We should spread our fragrance of freedom, happiness and joy everywhere. We have to stand up, break down walls and communicate with the rest of world directly. We should not make our judgements about others by only watching electronic media because sometimes media don’t show both sides of the picture.
We have the gift of high technology and via the Internet we can talk, see and communicate with anyone, anywhere in the world. We can share our pain and sorrows and exchange the beauty of our cultures. We have to stop listening to the hatemongers.
We should start a campaign at this college as a family today to make a new friend from a different culture without discrimination of race, religion or ethnicity. When we bond as a college family, we expand our message across the world and hold out hope to bring the lost ones back to the fold. With love and an open heart, we can remove the doubt, distrust and enmity created by the black sheep. If we plant the seeds of peace and love on this planet today, our coming generations will play with joy and happiness under the tree of our creation.

Media Credit: Dana Fecho Bahmaie, Schimmel, Miller, and Priesendorf(left to right) led a discussion on Afghanistan, the Middle East and Islam

Longview’s Education Center hosted a forum on Afghanistan and Islam in December. Instructors Hossein Bahmaie, David Miller and Carl Priesendorf presented information about the region and the religion to 150 or so people. Elliot Schimmel was the moderator for this event.

The forum educated the students, faculty and community members present.

Priesendorf, geology and geography instructor, spoke about the geography and climate and touched on the religious significance of the Middle East, Africa and Afghanistan in a well-prepared slideshow, saying that the Middle East is a strategically important area to control. Three continents—Africa, Asia and Europe—merge in the area, which helps ideas and goods travel to other parts of the world.

“So much of the basic geography relates to the history and what’s going on there today,” Priesendorf said.

With most of the region desert, water is precious and, where there is water, people will gather. Most people live near the major rivers. Turkey is planning on constructing 20 dams on the Euphrates which will result in a reduction of water flow by 50% downstream. Iraq and Saddam Hussein are down river. One can just imagine what might happen.

Priesendorf pointed out the hotspot cities in Afghanistan that the nightly news mentions. He also discussed physical features of the country.

A map was shown that displayed how many refugees from Afghanistan have fled to neighboring countries. An estimated two million refugees are now living in Pakistan and at least 1.5 million are in Iran. Most Afghans left not only because of fighting but also in part due to drought.

Priesendorf rounded off his presentation with oil. Facts on America’s oil imports and petroleum production flashed on the screen. When most people think of the Middle East, they see oil rigs pumping millions of barrels a day. However, only 26% of the world’s production of oil is from the Middle East. Only 20% of America’s oil imports are from the Middle East.

David Miller, history instructor, lectured about the historical background of the region, particularly European intervention.

“A broader understanding of the many troubles encountered in the world today requires more than a quick review of only the last 10 to 20 years,” Miller read from a prepared script.

Miller started with the Muslim conquest of the seventh and eighth centuries with the help of the vast interest and conversion to Islam. The land ruled by Muslims stretched from Spain to India. The Byzantine Empire and the Persian Kingdom lost most, if not all, of their control to the new leaders.

Turks and Mongols wrote history in the 11th and 12th centuries. Neither is directly related to Arabs, but they did convert to Islam. The Mongols were destructive but the Turks were more significant to the history of the Middle East. The Ottoman-Turkish Empire was enormous, lasted for 500 years and included all of the Middle East, except for the Arabian peninsula.

That empire saw its demise as World War I ended. The English and French imperialized the lands but not for long. By the end of World War II, England and France had moved out of the Middle East.

Afghanistan did not want any outside interference to influence their people or tribal rulers. Britain learned the hard way in dealing with the old-fashioned governing of countries. Afghanistan fought three wars in 80 years to defend their homeland against outsiders.

Only recently has oil been a player in the Middle East, when, after WWI, some European countries began to want the oil. However, by the end of WWII, Europe had grown dependant on the oil.

Miller believes that oil in the Middle East is for the main reason European and American military and political presence.

“New technologies and breakthroughs in the fuel production, however, may lead to a major shift away from dependency on Middle Eastern oil sooner than we expect,” Miller said.

The political formation of Israel on Palestinian-controlled lands upset Arabs and Muslims then, as it still does today. Four wars have been fought by the Arabs and the Israelis over the establishment of the Jewish state.

The United States’ government has to be careful in relations with Israel and the rest of the Middle East. The U.S. government wants to please Arab governments but also support to Israel strongly.

The history of Islam was left to economics instructor Hossein Bahmaie. An overhead projector reflected a timeline of major events throughout Islamic history, from the founding until the 13th century.

A biography of Muhammad, the founder of Islam, started off the presentation. Bahmaie explained the tribes’ reaction to the new religion. Many were not willing to give up their many gods in favor of one God. This led to many disagreements and eventually forced Muhammad and his followers to leave Mecca for Medinah.

After Muhammad’s death in 632, the Muslim empire began to expand into the lands known as Syria, Palestine, Egypt and Persia. The growth sprawled along the Mediterranean.

The leaders of the empire were discussed, along with the battles they fought. After a big battle, everyone disputed the facts of the war. This eventually led to the Shiite and Sunni sects of Muslims.

Bahmaie believes the split had much to do with types of government. “The question really was what kind of a government the Islamic empire was suppose to have,” he said.

Over time, the differences between the sects have grown beyond leadership. However, the fundamentals of Islam remain the same.

Bahmaie presented a great deal of detail on the beginning of Islam. The sheer amount of information may have overwhelmed some audience members.

The presentation was sprinkled with Arabic words, while Bahmaie tried to explain their meanings.

After all three presentations, an open question and answer session was held. Israel-Palestinian relations, American influence in the Middle East and Osama bin Laden were discussed.

Miller, Schimmel and Bahmaie debated their own opinions on the Israel-Palestinian issue.

America is involved in the Middle East not only for the oil but also because of America’s support of Israel “and this is the problem,” Miller stated.

The reason America supports Israel “might have something to do with the Holocaust,” moderator Schimmel said.

“Why is it that Palestinians are being punished for a crime Germans committed?” Bahmaie questioned.

Audience members had to draw their conclusions based on their previous knowledge and what was presented that night. No easy answers could explain why Sept. 11, 2001 happened.

Despite the mass destruction and grief caused by the incidents of Sept. 11, the greater effect on our lives has resulted from the acts of our national government.

In a media blitz of plastic patriotism, our leaders have flooded our lives with propaganda supporting what is essentially a politician’s war. A person can’t go more than a couple of hours without hearing the latest developments in the Middle East. In this frenzy, our country has begun to mull over the possibility, necessity and justification for instituting a military draft.

This idea should not even be considered. This “war” our nation is currently engaged in is, in fact, a police endeavor more closely resembling the Cold War than any classical understanding of war. War is generally defined as a contest between states, carried on by force.

A contest of force between states, plural. If this is a real war, where are the counter-attacks? Why haven’t the Taliban responded to our aggression? They have certainly had time to plan and execute a counter offensive. The use of force has been one-sided up to this point, us attacking them. Sept. 11 has become an isolated incident.

The “war” on terrorism is actually a security issue. It is the effort of our government to seek out and destroy the threat of terrorism against the U.S. — a noble goal but not one requiring a draft. The draft must be reserved for use during a time of traditional warfare in which the need for troops isn’t being met by volunteer enlistment. Neither of these criteria is being met; this isn’t a war and there is no need for extra personnel beyond what is being provided voluntarily.

The need for security is real, though. Anthrax scares and the fear of more airline catastrophes have resulted in heightened security in post offices and in airports and other centers of travel. But the need for security has been around since before September. The threat of hijacking and other forms of terrorism was no greater in Sept. 2001 than it was last year or last decade. Likewise, the threat from non-citizens is no greater than from natural-born and raised Americans like Timothy McVeigh and Ted Kazinsky.

The need for security should not be confused with the need for war. Security is an on-going process. National security should be treated just like the security for airports, banks, sporting events and any other attractive target. It does not require a draft. Security work is an occupation just like any other in the country. It is a matter of individuals choosing to spend their time and energy in an on-going effort. The pride we feel for those people cleaning up the mess in New York right now would be less if we had had to draft them. The same goes for this “war” on terrorism.

We have an opportunity to stand up for our country’s security as free Americans and show ourselves and the rest of the world that we aren’t going to let terrorism disrupt the natural flow our lives. Interrupting the life goals of our nation’s youth by drafting them to fight a “war” that isn’t really a war would be a victory for an undefined enemy.