- WASHINGTON -- Living under
the continuing threat of terrorism that might prove worse than last September's
attacks, Americans are faced with the dilemma of how much to sacrifice
in civil liberties for safety.
-
- A new poll showing that almost half of 1,000 surveyed
are willing to curtail basic freedoms to protect their country evokes concern
among some civil libertarians, while others assert that a wartime mentality
of survivalism has evolved over the nine months since the terrorists struck.
-
- Former Sen. Gary Hart, co-chairman of the U.S. Commission
on National Security for the 21st Century, said it would be very difficult
to find a balance when a pendulum was swinging between security and liberty.
-
- "A lot will depend on whether there are more attacks.
If there are, we will suspend a lot more liberties," he predicted.
-
- Christopher Edley, a Harvard law professor who is a member
of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, believes that familiar safeguards
of civil liberties might not be up to the current challenge. He suggested
that the proposed Homeland Security Department should include an office
of rights and liberties that would report to the public as well as to the
president.
-
- Neil Livingstone, president of Global Options, a Washington-based
anti-terrorism consulting group, said, "We have to try to preserve
our security without eroding civil liberties, but they will take a back
seat to security, especially in our dealing with foreign nationals who
have no constitutional rights in this country."
-
- The Williamsburg Foundation survey of 1,000 people nationwide
showed that 49 percent took the position that "if we need to relinquish
some of our personal freedoms and privacies to protect our country, we
should be prepared to do that." Another 53 percent agreed that the
FBI should be allowed "greater monitoring powers."
-
- Colin Campbell, foundation president, said, "the
critical question is how Americans are willing to go in giving up freedoms
that they now take for granted. That is my concern."
-
- Campbell is worried that people are not aware enough
of the significance of those liberties they are willing to surrender. He
suggested that a "national dialogue" was needed to make sure
people were not being "cavalier and unaware of vulnerabilities that
would be exposed if they lost some basic freedoms."
-
- "We don't want a situation where people are not
paying attention until it is too late," he said.
-
- But Robert Turner, a professor of international law at
the University of Virginia, said, "What limitations may be placed
on civil liberties is a hard call. I don't like it, but we also have to
remember that to err on the wrong side can put lives at risk."
-
- Turner, who said he had been lecturing on terrorism around
the country, said the findings of the Williamsburg poll troubled him but
did not surprise him.
-
- "I have a 9-year-old son who plays in the front
yard, and if there were a deranged person roaming around, we would have
to take all kinds of precautions we would not normally take. That is what
we are looking at here." he said.
-
- http://www.detnews.com/2002/nation/0207/08/a03-531241.htm
|