During segment 6, where the professor is detained when arriving back in the United States, I agree with Viet Dinh's point of why he was detained. The professor was exchanging emails with a Islamic cleric. Dinh stated that one of the factors determining why the professor was pulled out of the line was because that cleric may have been placed on a person's of interest list. I think that as a precaution it was good that he was detained. The professor may have been planning something with the man or the man may have passed along valuable information. Because of 9/11, I believe it's a safe precaution but if the professor has no information and it was just purely a friendship then he needs to be let go. He is a US citizen, no matter what.
I disagree with the fact that he may not be able to receive a lawyer for some time. I agree with the man that worked under the Clinton Administration (I can't remember his name.) He disagreed and said he should be entitled to a lawyer right away. I think that the Amendments should not be ignored, especially for a US citizen. If we're willing to ignore rights to citizens, then what else are we willing to ignore? I think that ignoring an Amendment that we are entitled to is one step too far for the government.
I think that some restrictions on civil liberties are good as precautions, but others are not. I do believe that some safety precautions are necessary for the entire country as a whole. For instance, questioning the professor is okay after coming back if his friend was a person of interest. However, it's not okay that he doesn't get a lawyer right away. He's a US citizen and he has the right to a lawyer.
No comments:
Post a Comment