Terrorism Is No Longer a Threat to the U.S.Essay Preview: Terrorism Is No Longer a Threat to the U.S.Report this essayTerrorism Is No Longer A Threat To The U.S.Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, many experts claimed that it only proves the vulnerability of the United States to big and devastating terrorists attacks. This means that even the United States is considered as the most powerful country in the world not only in terms of economic sustainability but also in military and intelligence capabilities, terrorists still can able to do terrorism acts to the country (Scheppler, 2005). Despite of this factor, it leads to the conclusion during those times that terrorism becomes a big threat to the peace and order, and security of the people of the United States. Generally, the even wanted to show that terrorism is a big threat that needs to be addressed by every country in the world.
1
Many people argue that President Bush (2002-2005) made some serious decisions and actions concerning counterterrorism. He said that the government has to keep its promises, but he said in the face of serious threats, that the government can change course and do better. President Obama said it all along, and the U.S. president seems to have changed his approach and also his words and actions. Both Bush and Obama were given the benefit of the doubt in the debate, which I will summarize as follows. I believe that by leaving the Bush administration’s policies the U.S. is more concerned with strengthening the security of Americans and more worried that it will destroy America’s security. There is nothing that President Bush did that in any way hindered peace and stability. President Bush has done it over and over again, but he has given every indication of the importance of doing things that could further the peace and stability of the country that his words are alluding to. President Obama, in my view, is going against what President Bush would have been doing. It seems to me that this attitude from President Obama would be a bad deal for the U.S. and harm American national security. For example, one could say that President Bush would have done things differently by using intelligence and information that was already available on the enemy rather than using it in direct attack and not in indirect attack mode. However, to take that for granted would put American lives at risk — both personally and as a consequence for American security. In the case of President Obama’s behavior, there is a clear difference between what he did and what President Bush did to get us to this point, or to other countries in the world the way he did it in the first place. In the case of President Obama, there is a clear difference. I believe the U.S. president is a liar. He had several lies he told, and the fact that he gave the news to us did more harm than good. At one point, he even said he wanted to end the war, because we had already gotten past the fact that most military targets are civilians. In the case of President Obama, it is an example of the kind of statements he uttered and is an example of his actions. But he is as bad as President Bush in terms of the dangers he is willing to present to the country. I think the question is very important, and I don’t want to go into the history of this issue because that could ruin it. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-201 4-20439 Doc No. C05771412 Date: 08/31/2015 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771414 Date: 08/31/2015 This is a personal matter. I appreciate and respect the decision of the Department of State’s Office of National Intelligence, as well as the decision of the FBI. I had this experience when a lot of the national security, intelligence, and policy issues had come out because of terrorism or national security. There was nothing that President Bush could do because of terrorism. For example, one doesn’t know who his government is and how the Government has got along with the people of the United States. It is very easy to forget that America’s interests are in the interests of a small percentage of the world’s population, and even of those populations that have some form of
[…]
The following discussion is drawn from Michael Gerson’s “Why 9/11 Is the Key to Weakening America’s Will to Protect Its People” published in 1995.
For years, U.S. policymakers argued that the Muslim world was suffering from a lack of support for its political and political leadership. It was an economic phenomenon based on high unemployment, a lack of faith. And so it was that after 9/11 both financial and economic leaders came to view America as a nation whose citizens had given a tremendous amount of energy and hope.
The story of President Bush’s plan to bomb the Twin Towers was the story of those who believed in radical Islam’s role in the 21st Century, or as many of them put it, “The Jihadis”. As the media and American and European media continue their coverage of that fateful day, some of the “Jihadis” will soon reveal a lie. As it is, President Bush, by his own admission in the late 1980s, is an architect of this false narrative. As his family and friends revealed in a documentary produced for Fox News, a 2001 FBI report found that the FBI had provided intelligence suggesting that President Bush was actually planning terrorism inside of the United States. That’s why, after meeting with Attorney General Eric Holder a few months later about the “Jihadis” in the 1990s, and after he made that announcement, President Bush asked the FBI Inspector General about the “Jihadis” in the 1990s. That was a first. But in a 2003 report, released for the first time, the FBI finally issued a full indictment of Mr. Bush for the “Jihadis”. In addition to this, he did not mention the possibility of an assassination attempt on him, no matter how much it was implied that he knew about it. In the 2004 interview with the FBI Inspector General, the first of six interviews for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Richard W. Burt, had concluded that Mr. Bush knew about the false news and wanted to ensure he had everything under wraps before going public – that he was not in control of the media. This means that, in the absence of any real intelligence that the FBI was working on, there was no way to determine if Mr. Bush knew about the false news. In spite of this fact, his wife, Barbara Bush, was not in any way at fault for using the “Jihadis,” as the FBI report states.
In this chapter, we try to outline the reasons why we believe the idea that “Jihadis” are a threat to the security and prosperity of our nation is not a reality. These reasons include the evidence and the many factors it poses. In addition however, we talk a lot about the way in which the United States and the people of the United States have viewed the threat posed by the “Jihadis” so far this country has not, nor has it been confronted with such a dilemma.
This may come out of a personal perspective or from the experiences of
[…]
The following discussion is drawn from Michael Gerson’s “Why 9/11 Is the Key to Weakening America’s Will to Protect Its People” published in 1995.
For years, U.S. policymakers argued that the Muslim world was suffering from a lack of support for its political and political leadership. It was an economic phenomenon based on high unemployment, a lack of faith. And so it was that after 9/11 both financial and economic leaders came to view America as a nation whose citizens had given a tremendous amount of energy and hope.
The story of President Bush’s plan to bomb the Twin Towers was the story of those who believed in radical Islam’s role in the 21st Century, or as many of them put it, “The Jihadis”. As the media and American and European media continue their coverage of that fateful day, some of the “Jihadis” will soon reveal a lie. As it is, President Bush, by his own admission in the late 1980s, is an architect of this false narrative. As his family and friends revealed in a documentary produced for Fox News, a 2001 FBI report found that the FBI had provided intelligence suggesting that President Bush was actually planning terrorism inside of the United States. That’s why, after meeting with Attorney General Eric Holder a few months later about the “Jihadis” in the 1990s, and after he made that announcement, President Bush asked the FBI Inspector General about the “Jihadis” in the 1990s. That was a first. But in a 2003 report, released for the first time, the FBI finally issued a full indictment of Mr. Bush for the “Jihadis”. In addition to this, he did not mention the possibility of an assassination attempt on him, no matter how much it was implied that he knew about it. In the 2004 interview with the FBI Inspector General, the first of six interviews for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Richard W. Burt, had concluded that Mr. Bush knew about the false news and wanted to ensure he had everything under wraps before going public – that he was not in control of the media. This means that, in the absence of any real intelligence that the FBI was working on, there was no way to determine if Mr. Bush knew about the false news. In spite of this fact, his wife, Barbara Bush, was not in any way at fault for using the “Jihadis,” as the FBI report states.
In this chapter, we try to outline the reasons why we believe the idea that “Jihadis” are a threat to the security and prosperity of our nation is not a reality. These reasons include the evidence and the many factors it poses. In addition however, we talk a lot about the way in which the United States and the people of the United States have viewed the threat posed by the “Jihadis” so far this country has not, nor has it been confronted with such a dilemma.
This may come out of a personal perspective or from the experiences of
[…]
The following discussion is drawn from Michael Gerson’s “Why 9/11 Is the Key to Weakening America’s Will to Protect Its People” published in 1995.
For years, U.S. policymakers argued that the Muslim world was suffering from a lack of support for its political and political leadership. It was an economic phenomenon based on high unemployment, a lack of faith. And so it was that after 9/11 both financial and economic leaders came to view America as a nation whose citizens had given a tremendous amount of energy and hope.
The story of President Bush’s plan to bomb the Twin Towers was the story of those who believed in radical Islam’s role in the 21st Century, or as many of them put it, “The Jihadis”. As the media and American and European media continue their coverage of that fateful day, some of the “Jihadis” will soon reveal a lie. As it is, President Bush, by his own admission in the late 1980s, is an architect of this false narrative. As his family and friends revealed in a documentary produced for Fox News, a 2001 FBI report found that the FBI had provided intelligence suggesting that President Bush was actually planning terrorism inside of the United States. That’s why, after meeting with Attorney General Eric Holder a few months later about the “Jihadis” in the 1990s, and after he made that announcement, President Bush asked the FBI Inspector General about the “Jihadis” in the 1990s. That was a first. But in a 2003 report, released for the first time, the FBI finally issued a full indictment of Mr. Bush for the “Jihadis”. In addition to this, he did not mention the possibility of an assassination attempt on him, no matter how much it was implied that he knew about it. In the 2004 interview with the FBI Inspector General, the first of six interviews for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Richard W. Burt, had concluded that Mr. Bush knew about the false news and wanted to ensure he had everything under wraps before going public – that he was not in control of the media. This means that, in the absence of any real intelligence that the FBI was working on, there was no way to determine if Mr. Bush knew about the false news. In spite of this fact, his wife, Barbara Bush, was not in any way at fault for using the “Jihadis,” as the FBI report states.
In this chapter, we try to outline the reasons why we believe the idea that “Jihadis” are a threat to the security and prosperity of our nation is not a reality. These reasons include the evidence and the many factors it poses. In addition however, we talk a lot about the way in which the United States and the people of the United States have viewed the threat posed by the “Jihadis” so far this country has not, nor has it been confronted with such a dilemma.
This may come out of a personal perspective or from the experiences of
Today, due to the different efforts and actions made by the United States government since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, it was been claimed that terrorism is no longer a threat for the country. The different laws, programs, and the way the laws were implemented was claimed an effective effort to proactively avoid and eliminate the risk to once again attacked by any terrorists groups.
This study will discussed and give points about the different efforts made the United States government in order to eliminate any threat of terrorists attacks in the country. Different points will be discussed and how it contributes to the conclusion that terrorism is no longer a threat to the country. The different laws implemented by the United States government will be given an emphasis and how it plays as a very important role in preventing another occurrence of terrorists attacks. The latter part of this study will prove that terrorism is no longer a threat to the people and citizen of the United States of America.
After the 9/11 attack, former United States President George Bush and the Congress immediately enacted different laws that will proactively prevent and eliminate the risk of another terrorists attack. In addition to it, the United States government through its military and intelligence efforts conducted different actions to fought terrorists groups that are considerably the source of different terrorists acts. The following discussion will initially discussed and laws implemented by the United States government and eventually the different efforts made to totally eradicate terrorists groups.
The United States government made the announcement of Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) immediately after the 9/11 attacks (Scheppler, 2005). The said announcement showed that the United States government is serious to war terrorism. GWOT initializes efforts from other country and also starts the formation of the different foreign policy not only in the United States but also by other countries that supports GWOT (Scheppler, 2005). Generally, collaboration of United States to other country through foreign policy has been established, in which it helps the country to easily implement military and intelligence efforts to fight terrorism.
For the first law, the United States Congress immediately enacted the USA Patriot Act on October 26, 2001 immediately after the 9/11 attacks. Its acronym stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (Scheppler, 2005). The said act lessens the restrictions of the law enforcement agencies in surveillance, searching, and monitoring the email communication, telephone conversations, different financial, medical, and other important records (Scheppler, 2005). In addition to it, it expands the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury to make regulations regarding different financial transactions specifically for foreign groups and individuals. The act also lessens the restriction of different foreign intelligence gathering in the United States. It also gives expanded authority to the different law enforcement agencies in detaining and deporting immigrants that has been suspected take part of any terrorism acts either in domestic or global settings (Siegel, 2009).
The act also leads to the different changes and amendments of other existing laws. These laws may include the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), Family Educations Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), Money Laundering Control Act (MLCA), Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), Right to Financial Privacy Act (RFPA), Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), Victims of Crime Act of 1984, and the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act (Siegel, 2009). The amendments made of these given laws significantly provides major contribution in proactively eliminate the risk of occurrence of any terrorists acts in the United States.
The enactment of the USA Patriot Act serves as a proactive approach to strictly monitor the different technology and communication devices and tools that might be used by the terrorists groups in plotting their terrorists plans. The said act blocks and restricts the different terrorist groups to make connivance to any American most especially those in authority (Siegel, 2009).
Another effort made the United States government to eliminate the threat of terrorism in the land is the formation and establishment of the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS). This department was established under the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Gaines and Miller, 2006). The department was actually established in response to the September 11 terrorist attacks. It is considered as a cabinet department of the U.S. Federal Government (Gaines and Miller, 2006). Its establishment is associated with specific purpose and objectives. The said department is responsible in protecting and securing the United States territory from terrorist