PATRIOT Act II un-American in granting excess power to U.S.

A month or so ago, my father handed me an envelope from UCLA and
told me to read the contents. I opened the envelope and read the
slip of paper that asked parents of UCLA students to contribute
financially to the university. Handing the envelope back to my
father, I asked him what any of this had to do with me.

“You know,” my father began, looking a little
uncomfortable, “I just gave them some money. I didn’t
want anyone to think that I give money to our community Islamic
organizations exclusively. Sending money to UCLA may help clear up
any hints of a misunderstanding.”

My father is probably one of the thousands of Muslim men in
America who are beginning to have to think this way every time they
open their checkbooks. Recently, Islamic organizations have been
suffering as Muslim families hesitate more and more before spending
money on legitimate religious institutions.

Since Sept. 11, 2001, waves of new legislation have been tossed
around in the Department of Justice. Among these new documents are
the USA PATRIOT Act, now referred to as the PATRIOT Act I, and the
Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, now informally known as
the PATRIOT Act II. According to the PATRIOT Act I and Justice
Department assertions, almost anyone suspected of terrorist
activity can be indefinitely detained without the government
issuing a warrant or informing the detainee of why he or she is
being held.

The PATRIOT Act I was passed shortly after Sept. 11, but the
PATRIOT Act II was just recently drafted and is currently being
circulated in Congress under heavy lobbying by the Department of
Justice. If passed, The PATRIOT Act II would strengthen the
governmental powers granted by its predecessor, giving the
government more leeway in terms of surveillance, detainment and
prosecution. Under the new PATRIOT Act, the government would be
allowed to detain American citizens suspected of connections with
terrorist groups without any pressure to disclose the identity or
alleged crime of the detainee; to spy on religious or political
groups with little or no limitation; and to strip an American who
is suspected of supporting (financially or otherwise) organizations
that are deemed “terrorist” by the executive
branch.

Naturally, the PATRIOT Acts I and II are drafted and released
with the protection of the United States in mind. Because our
nation is currently under attack, there is no reason why we should
not take extra precautions to watch for suspicious terrorist
activity brewing in our neighborhoods.

The problem is that, if passed, the PATRIOT Act II would make
almost no distinction between an innocent American citizen and a
terrorist, since the government can evoke the law based on
suspicions rather than hard evidence. Without any significant
limitations on government actions, technically anyone who looks
suspicious could be spied on, detained without the right to a court
trial, and eventually even stripped of his or her citizenship. Our
government may distrust some people, but they have no right to
involuntarily take someone’s citizenship without providing
evidence in court. Murderers, thieves and the like are subject to
criminal punishment, but even they are not subject to
de-nationalization.

In other words, someone like my father, who innocently
contributes annually to law abiding Muslim-American organizations,
might be considered a terrorist supporter and arrested without even
knowing why.

The PATRIOT Act II would provide our government with the power
to pick and choose its citizens; this would reflect a
stereotypically racist, and undemocratic””mdash;no,
un-American””mdash;understanding of what it means to be a part of
this country.

Kholaki is a fourth-year English student.