The 9/11 attacks forced American citizens and political leaders alike to become much more aware of the worldwide terrorist threat directing its wrath against the United States. Protecting Americans from future catastrophic attacks is now the foremost goal of national security policy. Toward this end, the U.S. government has established a Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The DHS was created by the Department of Homeland Security Act of 2002, and is an outgrowth of the Office of Homeland Security established by President Bush after the 9/11 attacks. Strong congressional support for a new federal department that would unify diverse and overlapping security functions of the federal government led to a White House proposal for the DHS in June 2002, and the legislation was passed later that year. Twenty-two agencies that were formerly in the Deptartments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Justice, Transportation, and Treasury or in independent bodies were combined and reorganized in the new department.
The cornerstone of America's domestic security program is the Patriot Act (enacted in October 2001), whose name is an acronym for "Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism." Most significantly, the Patriot Act removed several Clinton-era restrictions that had erected walls of separation between intelligence officials and law-enforcement officials, preventing them from sharing information and working together on investigations – even if they were both trailing the same suspect who was plotting a terrorist act. This restriction had effectively crippled the government’s ability to fight terrorism, and can arguably be blamed for the government’s failure to avert the 9/11 attacks.
The Patriot Act also gave the Treasury Department more leverage with which to disrupt terrorist financing networks and thereby stem the flow of terrorism's lifeblood; it gave the Attorney General slightly more authority to detain and deport suspected terrorist aliens; it allowed law-enforcement officials to obtain a single search warrant covering any and all localities where they suspected terrorist activity might occur (rather than having to go through the time-consuming process of obtaining separate warrants for each location); and it increased the penalties for those who commit terrorist crimes or harbor terrorists.
The Patriot Act is but one of many homeland security initiatives endorsed by the U.S. government post-9/11. Civil liberties groups have condemned virtually all of these measures as governmental assaults on the rights and freedoms of Americans. For instance, Nancy Chang, senior litigation attorney for the pro-communist Center for Constitutional Rights, claims that the Patriot Act "sacrifices our political freedoms in the name of national security and upsets the democratic values that define our nation by consolidating vast new powers in the executive branch of government"; "portends a wholesale suspension of civil liberties that will reach far beyond those who are involved in terrorist activities"; and "allows for the sharing of information between criminal and intelligence operations and thereby opens the door to a resurgence of domestic spying by the Central Intelligence." This latter criticism is perhaps the most significant, for it condemns the very provision that, had it been in effect prior to 9/11, would likely have prevented the mass murders o that day from taking place.
Homeland security is also closely tied to the issue of immigration, particularly illegal immigration. Estimates of the illegal population in America currently range from 12 million to more than 20 million. According to the Census Bureau, as of 2003 there were approximately 78,000 illegal aliens from countries that were of special concern in the war on terror.
In this section of DiscoverTheNetworks, the category titled Immigration and Terrorism / Homeland Security examines how a lack of immigration-law enforcement, coupled with a resultant rise in the incidence of illegal immigration, makes it easier for terrorists to enter the United States and carry out their attacks.
The category titled Homeland Security Measures Analyzed and Debated examines arguments for and against the various methods used by the U.S. government to derail terrorist plots and to end practices that compromise the safety of the American people.
The category titled Missile Defense examines the arguments for and against America's development and deployment of a defensive shield to guard against incoming nuclear missiles launched by foreign enemies. The left has consistently opposed the development of such technology.
The Military Spending category examines the issue of America's spending on military and national defense-related initiatives. One important article discusses the escalation of entitlement and social welfare spending in recent years -- most notably Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security -- and points out that such programs receive far more funding than do America's military and defense programs.
The category titled United States Military contains resources that examine key facts and figures about the U.S. military and the demographics of its enlisted personnel. It also contains resources that discuss the heroism of America's armed forces, past and present.
The category titled NSA Terrorist-Surveillance Program and FISA examines the controversy that grew out of a December 16, 2005 New York Times front-page story revealing that the Bush administration had been allowing the National Security Agency (NSA) to wiretap calls involving residents of the United States (not necessarily American citizens) without seeking a court warrant, as long as at least one party to the call was overseas and the American was a known al-Qaeda contact. The left characterized this wiretapping program as a violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance act (FISA), and as an assault on Americans' civil liberties and civil rights.
