1. The way P. Williams writes in her essay the new type of war on terror is that it’s not recognized as a traditional war for example people in war usually recognised uniformed opponents. The author says “the war has been framed as one against ‘terror’ – against unruly if deadly emotionalism … rather than as a war against bodies, specific land, specific resources.” This is what she meant by bodies and from my understanding it’s not about a specific identity. Which is different from traditional to the new type the traditional is seeing and identifying a specific body than unrecognized. Another new type is the domestic implications of intelligence, law enforcement and military. Williams explains that law enforcement agents can spy on us and look into our homes and never tell us how they did it. This details the war not on our soil and then policing at home.  
  2. The amendments that the “roving wiretaps” of the patriot act violate are the first amendment, the fourth. The first is because its very broad on surveillance due to free speech because in the example the article explains that suspected spies and terrorists need to be surveilled. Which can have some people question their first amendment being violated but its need to keep the country safe in the government’s eyes. Now with the fourth amendment being violated due to wiretapping and intercepting people’s communications. The fourth clearly says is the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. 
  3. The sneek and peek warrants seem to violate people’s rights more specifically the fourth amendment, as it lets police enter someone’s home or their place of business without notifying them right away.

Leave a Reply