• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Fighting Terrorism with One Hand behind Our Backs

    On December 25th there was a clear failure to connect the dots that could have prevented Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab from boarding a plane bound for the U.S with a bomb strapped to his body. However, as explained last week at Heritage by former Homeland Security Advisor, the Hon. Kenneth Wainstein, the U.S. would not have even been in the position to try and piece together this intelligence information before the Patriot Act lowered the walls between intelligence and law enforcement.

    Immediately after 9/11, intelligence operators realized that they possessed too small of a tool shed to effectively fight terrorism. As Mr. Wainstein explained, Congress can take a lot of credit for responding with the 2001 passage of the Patriot Act and subsequent amendments of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Yet, there is no way to say that the intelligence and law enforcement community have every tool they need, because the terrorist threat is evolving every day. Add to this fact that criminal investigators often have more powers than national security investigators, due to historic fears of abuse of authority and lack of sufficient oversight, and the result is that in many cases the U.S. is fighting terrorism with one hand behind our backs.

    Now, many of the tools created in response to 9/11 are beginning to weaken even further. For example, on February 28th three key provisions of the Patriot Act are due to expire following a 60-day extension. To avoid another 9/11 or other tragedy Mr. Wainstein suggests several legislative proposals such as making these key provisions permanent. Fighting the long war against terrorism truly demands a “Time for Certainty in Counterterrorism Policies.”

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    One Response to Fighting Terrorism with One Hand behind Our Backs

    1. John, Rhode Island says:

      This is where conservatism gets off track. Calling the Patriot Act quality legislation is a slap in the face to our founding fathers. The law is unconstitutional on so many levels, and anyone who even remotely understands its capabilities knows this, yet supporters turn a blind eye to this blatant disregard for the Constitution (aka the rule book) because it suits us. What happens when what defines a terrorist changes and becomes wider? Will you support that bill then?

      As Ben Franklin so appropriately put it: They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.