SWA #20: Rhetorical Analysis Outline

Ted Lipowicz

English 102-111

March 19, 2012

Essay #3 Outline

Title: The Price of Freedom: What People Pay to Say Safe.

Thesis: In today’s age of terrorism, which transcends national borders, the question has appeared whether or not someone is willing to trade their liberties for safety. Four groups that have developed views on this issue include civil liberty activists, national defense activists, Republicans and President Barack Obama.

I.               Those who are strong civil liberty activists have taken a strong stance against both the Patriot Act and the NDAA for the Fiscal Year of 2012.

a.     Civil liberty activists have shown a strong opposition to the Patriot Act of the United States.

                                                        i.     Timothy Edgar points to the fact that during the enactment of the Patriot Act numerous suspected terrorists have been detained with no communication with lawyers or anything for months on end before they found out their innocence and freeing them Edgar and Rosenzweig).

                                                       ii.     Civil liberty proponents also point to the fact that the Patriot Act is against the 4^th Amendment of the US Constitution, which rules against unreasonable searches and seizures (Bill of Rights).

                                                     iii.     Civil liberty proponents state that the right given to Americans in the 4^th Amendment in the Constitution is being broken by wire tapping and other tools of surveillance used against American citizens (Zeljak).

b.     Civil liberty activists have also spoken out against the government’s decision to pass the National Defense Authorization Act

                                                        i.     Joseph Hoar and Charles Krulak urge president Obama in their article to repeal the NDAA, stating that such a law only allows Osama bin Laden to win in his death (Hoar and Krulak).

                                                       ii.     Hoar and Krulak also state that civilian courts in the previous system have been significantly more successful in convicting terrorists as opposed to military tribunals, which the act suggests using more of (Hoar and Krulak).

II.             Those who are proponents of national defense are in favor of the provisions of both the Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization Act.

a.     Proponents of National Defense have shown their support for the Patriot Act

                                                        i.     In his side of the article, which contrasts Edgar’s viewpoint, Rosenzweig shows support for the Patriot Act. Rosenzweig states that the manner in which the Patriot Act is written shows that the government is very conscious about civil liberty abuses (Edgar and Rosenzweig).

                                                       ii.     Rosenzweig also makes the statement that there is a point where preserving the safety of one’s country is worth the sacrifice of some of one’s personal rights (Edgar and Rosenzweig).

b.     Proponents of national safety speak in favor of the National Defense Authorization Act

                                                        i.     Proponents of national security suggest that the way the article is written only simply reaffirms rights that they already had to detain terrorists and in no way puts American citizens in any sort of trouble (International Debates 10.1).

                                                       ii.     Many of these proponents point to other conditions of the bill in order to garner support for it. Senate Armed Service Committee member, Jim Inhofe stated reasons such as the bill’s funds toward active duty soldiers (Tulsa Today).

III.           Republicans are a group that traditionally sides in favor with laws regarding the increase in national security, however there is small base of libertarian republicans that are strongly against such provisions.

a.     Republicans have traditionally been very supportive of national defense legislature.

                                                        i.     Former Secretary of Defense and Republican politician, Donald Rumsfeld was one of the heavy proponents of the Patriot Act. He was the one who fought for the act’s provisions in his case against Yaser Hamdi in court, which he lost on the grounds that Hamdi’s constitutional rights give him the right to a fair trial as a citizen (Hamdi vs. Rumsfeld).

                                                       ii.     There are also many Republicans, like Jim Inhofe, who believe that the positive provisions of the NDAA greatly outweigh the area in question. Many feel as if giving further monetary support for active duty service men and women is the main item of concern in the bill (Tulsa Today).

b.     There is a libertarian base of the Republican Party that finds the

                                                        i.     This libertarian base of the Republican Party is lead by longtime Texas Congressman, Ron Paul. Paul states that the NDAA is an attack on one’s 5^th Amendment rights that states that the accused must be told why they are being arrested (Wolverton).

                                                       ii.     Paul also brings into question one of the major gray areas of the document. Paul questions how the document will determine who is closely involved with terrorism, such as supporters of a charity that was led by a known terrorist (Wolverton).

IV.            President Barack Obama’s stance on the NDAA has been less than solid to say the least. He has shown both support and disdain for the NDAA.

a.     President Obama has shown support for the NDAA.

                                                        i.     Obama, although he said he would veto the bill prior to its passing in congress, signed the bill into law (Compromise of Values)

                                                       ii.     Barack Obama’s past actions have also shown that he is not afraid to enact the provisions of the bill. Such is the case with the military’s killing of Anwar Al-Awlaki (Hill).

b.     President Obama has shown disdain for the bill.

                                                        i.     It is obvious that Obama is uncomfortable with many provisions of the bill in its current state, which is why he intended to veto it (Compromise of Values).

                                                       ii.     Obama stated that although he signed the bill into office, he would not enforce it under his presidency. Many saw this action as Obama affirming that there are numerous gray areas of the bill in its current state (Hill).

Conclusion: There is no question that the debate of civil liberties and safety is a very polarizing one. It is a debate that which separate two different groups of people even further, as is the case with civil liberty activists and the proponents of national safety. However, this issue even splits people of the same affiliation, as is the case with typical Republicans and those who belong to the party’s libertarian wing. Lastly it even causes a moral dilemma in one person, as shown in President Barack Obama’s leaning back and forth on the issue.