Doublespeak and the War on Terrorism

Five years have passed since the catastrophic terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Those attacks ushered in the war on terror. Since some high-ranking government officials and pundits are now referring to the war on terror as the "Long War" or "World War III," because its duration is not clear, now is an appropriate time to take a few steps back and examine the disturbing new vocabulary that has emerged from this conflict. One of the central insights of George Orwell's classic novel Nineteen Eighty-Four concerned the manipulative use of language, which he called "newspeak" and "doublethink," and which we now call "doublespeak" and "Orwellian." Orwell was alarmed by government propaganda and the seemingly rampant use of euphemisms and halftruths -- and he conveyed his discomfort with such tactics to generations of readers by using vivid examples in his novel. Despite our general awareness of the tactic, government officials routinely use doublespeak to expand, or at least maintain, their power. The purpose of this paper is not to criticize any particular policy initiative. Reasonable people can honestly disagree about what needs to be done to combat the terrorists who are bent on killing Americans. However, a conscientious discussion of our policy options must begin with a clear understanding of what our government is actually doing and what it is really proposing to do next. The aim here is to enhance the understanding of both policymakers and the interested lay public by exposing doublespeak

Presidential Succession Act: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the House Committee on the Judiciary, 108th Congress

Examines the need for changes to the Presidential Succession Act which governs the transfer of power in the event that there is a simultaneous vacancy in the office of the presidency and the vice presidency.https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/twentyfifth_amendment_congressional_materials/1001/thumbnail.jp

Supplement to MTI Study on Selective Passenger Screening in the Mass Transit Rail Environment, MTI Report 09-05

This supplement updates and adds to MTIs 2007 report on Selective Screening of Rail Passengers (Jenkins and Butterworth MTI 07-06: Selective Screening of Rail Passengers). The report reviews current screening programs implemented (or planned) by nine transit agencies, identifying best practices. The authors also discuss why three other transit agencies decided not to implement passenger screening at this time. The supplement reconfirms earlier conclusions that selective screening is a viable security option, but that effective screening must be based on clear policies and carefully managed to avoid perceptions of racial or ethnic profiling, and that screening must have public support. The supplement also addresses new developments, such as vapor-wake detection canines, continuing challenges, and areas of debate. Those interested should also read MTI S-09-01 Rail Passenger Selective Screening Summit

2003-2007 Report on Hate Crimes and Discrimination Against Arab Americans

Analyzes rates, patterns, and sources of anti-Arab-American hate crimes and discrimination, including detainee abuse, delays in naturalization, and threats; civil liberties concerns; bias in schools; and defamation in the media. Includes case summaries

Spartan Daily April 17, 2012

Volume 138, Issue 39https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/spartandaily/1038/thumbnail.jp

Electronic Employment Eligibility Verification: Franz Kafka's Solution to Illegal Immigration

In last summer's debate over immigration reform, Congress treated a national electronic employment eligibility verification (EEV) system as a matter of near consensus. Intended to strengthen internal enforcement of the immigration laws, electronic EEV is an Internet-based employee vetting system that the federal government would require every employer to use. Broad immigration reform failed before Congress thoroughly considered national EEV, but the lines of debate have been drawn. Advocates in Congress will try to attach a nationwide worker registration system to any immigration bill Congress considers, and the Bush administration recently announced steps to promote such a system.A mandatory national EEV system would have substantial costs yet still fail to prevent illegal immigration. It would deny a sizable percentage of law-abiding American citizens the ability to work legally. Deemed ineligible by a database, millions each year would go pleading to the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration for the right to work. By increasing the value of committing identity fraud, EEV would cause that crime's rates to rise. Creating an accurate EEV system would require a national identification (ID) system, costing about $20 billion to create and hundreds of millions more per year to operate. Even if it were free, the country should reject a national ID system. It would cause law-abiding American citizens to lose more of their privacy as government records about them grew and were converted to untold new purposes. "Mission creep" all but guarantees that the federal government would use an EEV system to extend federal regulatory control over Americans' lives even further

Public Health Laboratories: Unprepared and Overwhelmed

Addresses the role of public health labs within the public health system and their ability to respond to specific chemical weapon events. Provides recommendations for improving response to terrorism as well as more conventional threats

State of the States 2005

Summarizes major state policy developments in 2004 and projects likely trends for 2005. Includes health care, education, homeland security, tax and budget policy, the same-sex marriage controversy, and profiles of governors elected in November 2004

Voices from Varick: Detainee Grievances at New York City's Only Federal Immigration Detention Facility

Analyzes one year of grievances filed by immigration detainees housed in the Varick Federal Detention Facility. It documents detainee stories of inadequate medical care and mistreatment by the facility's staff. It adds to the growing chorus of voices that have concluded that the federal government has failed in its responsibilities to provide adequate care to detainees housed in immigration facilities