Foreign+Aid

= = Group members: Garrett Downard, Kristen Couch, and Summer Carpenter

from Garrett: I've been on vacation in backwoods Kentucky this previous weekend, so please excuse the lack of info. I'm working on it tonight.
 * //__Thesis:__ It is necessary to sacrifice some personal freedoms in order to maintain national security//**.

(I am posting some of my info down at the bottom, because some of my links are breaking)**
 * __Reason 1:__ The rising threat of terrorism (isms that threaten a country's safety)

 **[|Actual Interrogation Memos]** **Once you click on this link search "interrogation memos." Then click on the title "2002 memos: intent . . ." Then scroll down until you see the "Don't Miss" links on the left side of the screen. These are the ACTUAL MEMOS and are really worth looking at before forming any opinions on our topic!** Informative websites: [|scu.edu/ethics/publications/briefings/privacy.html] [|networkeuroperadio.cz/feature/human-rights-vs-security-policy-new-anti-terror-laws-in-britian]-a british radio broadcast [|http//:www.stormingmedia.vs/9/2963/4294344.html] [|The Global Common Good vidoehttp://www.democracycorps.com/strategy/2009/05/obama-closes-the-democrats-historical-national-security-gap/http://www.democracycorps.com/strategy/2009/05/obama-closes-the-democrats-historical-national-security-gap/]
 * __Reason 2:__ Keeping government plans/techniques classified has helped to** **protect us. (kristen)**
 * By keeping information about how we "tortured" the terriorist for information classified, the world had no knowledge of the United State's legal limits of torture. Terrorist provide vital first-hand information. In order to obtain the information about techniques, future plans, and involved persons, we need to thoroughly question the terriorist that we have captured. In order to do this, most times it is necissary to intimidate them or inhibit their abilities to withold information from the questioners. However, as of (date of released information, 2009) not only the citizens of the US, but the entire world, realize that the US cannot truly cause any harm to their prisoners.
 * If the information had remained classified, we would still be able to intimidate the prisioners into telling us all the information that they have.
 * We also have to consider that if classified information becomes public, it will also cause huge effects on the military people as well. An example is a recent press slipup (Feb 12, 2009) when Senator Feinstein (Obama adm.) told us all where a Predator aircraft took off and landed from. This is very dangerous because carelessly telling information like that will not only cause tensions between countries but can also result in a foiling of our plans and thus cause military deaths of US soldiers.
 * **THIS PART IS STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION: ** The Real Devices of US "Torture": (Please keep in mind the sufferings of the US prisoners in other countries that are legitamently being tortured.)
 * 1) Limited/fake waterboarding
 * 2) Placing prisioners into chambers with harmless insects/animals
 * 3) Walling (pushing prisioners against a wall that is designed to amplify the sound and not cause injury to the prisioner, thus making them think that their injuries are worse than they are in reality.)
 * 4) Sleep deprivation
 * 5) Witholding food/water from prisioners (but not long enough to cause death or permanent damage.)
 * //__PLEASE CHECK OUT THESE LINKS:__ //**
 * __Reason 3:__ Democracy will continue to survive. (summer)**

Movie pictures:





Terrorism
//Last Updated July 19, 2004// Advocates of the war on drugs have used the recent surge in terrorism against the U.S. to urge expansion of the drug war. But is this renewed war against drugs justified? We cannot afford to have our anti-terrorism efforts fail as clearly as the drug war has failed. An honest exploration of the link between drugs and terrorism and a levelheaded response is needed. In the fall of 2001, after the very real experience of terrorism, U.S. Senators rushed to pass the ‘Uniting and Strengthening America Act by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act of 2001.’ Essentially a license for the government to spy on its own people, the Act has become one of the biggest threats to civil liberties. Although it is an anti-terrorism law, the powers granted under the Act have been stretched to pursue defendants for crimes unrelated to terrorism. A [|report] by internal investigators at the Justice Department allegedly identifies dozens of cases where drug violations, credit card fraud and bank theft crimes have been investigated and prosecuted under the PATRIOT Act. During many of these cases Justice Department employees have been accused of committing serious civil rights violations. Because of this frightening use of anti-terror powers to go after American civilians, the PATRIOT Act has since been pushed back by about 150 communities, as well as the legislatures of Alaska, Hawaii and Vermont. The House also recently voted to cut off funding for a type of search warrant authorized by the Act. Known as "sneak-and-peak", the search warrants allow law-enforcement agencies to search people homes without notifying the owners they were there. Senate Republicans are now discussing new legislation that would expand the Justice Department's overbearing PATRIOT Act powers to investigate both terrorists and drug offenders, or "narcoterrorists". Entitled the ‘Vital Interdiction of Criminal Terrorist Organizations Act (VICTORY Act)’, the most recent drafts would provide extra penalties for drug dealers alleged to be connected to terrorist groups, and would dramatically expand the government's power to seize records and conduct wiretaps in any investigation. Early drafts of the bill also indicate that Senate Republicans may try to reverse some of the asset forfeiture reforms that Congress passed several years ago to protect innocent property owners. Several of the measures are believed to be similar to proposals made during the early debate over the USA Patriot Act, but which were removed because they were too controversial. Many suspect that the Bush administration and Senate Republicans are trying to use the terrorist threat to mask broad changes in drug trafficking laws. The VICTORY Act is yet to be introduced and there have already been several proposed drafts of the bill. Broadly, however, it represents a major expansion of laws that allow the government to conduct surveillance, asset forfeiture, racial profiling and other powers under the guise of terrorism threat.
 * The PATRIOT Act and Drugs:**
 * Drugs and Terrorism Laws**

There is a real link between drugs and terrorism. The United Nations reports that the illegal drug trade is worth $400 Billion a year - more than the U.S. Department of Defense budget. Indeed, illegal drugs make up 8% of all international trade while textiles make up 7.5% and motor vehicles just 5.3%. This mass traffic in illegal drugs has greatly contributed to violence across the globe. Before drug trafficking was blamed for international terrorism, it was financing the arms race on America's streets. Similarly, any terrorist group with a militant agenda can tap into the huge resource. Yet it is the drug war itself that creates the drug-terror link, not visa-versa. Just as liquor bootleggers waged deadly turf battles during alcohol prohibition, drug gangs wage deadly turf battles under today's drug prohibition. Afghanistan’s Taliban profited from the opium trade because of drug prohibition, not in spite of it. Prohibition forces drugs into an underground, unregulated market which creates a highly lucrative source of funding and personnel in the armed and violent actions against civilians and governments around the world. The White House stopped running its series of anti-drug ads blaming drug users for terrorism after DPA ran a nationwide counter-campaign complete with our own [|parody ads]. "Drug money supports terror," the Office of National Drug Control Policy's ads proclaimed. Young actors confess to helping terrorists blow up buildings, obtain a fake passport, murder police officers, and teach other kids how to kill. "Where do terrorists get their money?" the ads asked. "If you buy drugs, some of it might come from you." But this leap from demand of drugs to support of terrorism is little more than propaganda. It is not the demand for drugs that sustains repressive regimes nurturing and harboring terrorists, but prohibition. Prohibition pushes drugs into an underground market making them highly profitable. Indeed, most of the financing of terrorist groups appears to come from underground markets and illegal trading. The U.S. General Accounting Office reports that financing for Al-Qaeda operations come from many sources including subscription/membership fees, false contracts, counterfeiting/forging currency, robbing state banks/bank employee and kidnapping. The Treasury Department has even linked three Yemeni honey companies to Osama bin Laden's terrorism-financing operation. Attempts to limit the supply of illegal drugs while there is demand actually increases the profitability of drug trafficking. An intensification of the drug war in South America (which is largely funded by the U.S.) has only increased the level of violence and boosted the amount of money Colombia’s combatants can make from illicit drug production and sale. In terms of the domestic drug war in the U.S., ever increasing efforts to incarcerate more and more citizens for drug offenses diverts scarce resources from the war on terrorism. It costs roughly $25,000 a year to imprison a drug offender on top of the resources and staff time taken from enforcement agencies. Any increase in what is already the highest incarceration rate in the world will have no real impact on the ability of terrorists to profit from drugs. It will only stretch resources further, worsening the drug war being fought in U.S. soil and undermining the country's struggle with terrorism.
 * Evidence for the Link Between Drugs and Terrorism:**
 * What About the Ads Saying that Drug Users Support Terrorists?**
 * Will an Intensification of the War on Drugs Help Win the War Against Terrorism?**