of

1nc pic
We advocate the practice of the affirmative, except in the instance of The
United States DNA surveillance for ongoing sexual assault and murder
cases
This competes biometrics includes DNA surveillance were PIC-ing out
of it
Rouse No Date (Margaret, Search Security, What is biometric verification?,
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/definition/biometric-verification)
Biometric verification is any means by which a person can be uniquely
identified by evaluating one or more distinguishing biological traits.
Unique identifiers include fingerprints, hand geometry, earlobe geometry,
retina and iris patterns, voice waves, DNA , and signatures.
Genetic surveillance is key to counter sexual crime and murder
Kaye 9 [David H. Kaye, Penn State Law Trawling DNA Databases for Partial
Matches: What is the FBI Afraid of? 2009]
Across the globe,

many countries have established DNA databases-collections of

computer-searchable records of the DNA profiles of suspected or
convicted ofenders.' England started the first national criminal DNA database in 1995.2 In the United States, the
state and federal databases as combined in the National DNA Index System (NDIS) hold over
seven million short tandem repeat (STR) profiles from convicted offenders as well as a growing
number of people who were merely arrested or detained. 3 When investigators recover a DNA
sample from the scene of a crime, they can search these databases to
discover if any of the recorded profiles match. Such " cold hits" from these
database trawls have led police to serial rapists and murderers who have
long eluded detection . 4 Indeed, even dead men have been "accused" through this
technology. 5 In addition, database trawls have considerable potential to solve common
property crimes.6 In one case, an observant police inspector in Finland noticed a dead mosquito in a stolen vehicle. 7 The
mosquito's body contained human blood from its last meal. Testing the blood against Finland's database yielded a DNA profile
match, giving the police a likely suspect.8

Using DNA surveillance in ongoing rape and murder cases is good and a
necessary evil for public safety that still limits racist use of dna
Suter 10 (Sonia M. Suter, ALL IN THE FAMILY: PRIVACY AND DNA FAMILIAL
SEARCHING, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology Volume 23, Number 2, Spring
2010, http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v23.2/23HarvJLTech309.pdf)
familial searching should only be used for the crimes most susceptible
to resolution through DNA analysis.484 The anecdotes of success in familial searching could easily persuade policy
Further,

makers that it should be used widely and frequently without considering the possibility that it may offer only marginal benefits in some instances. The
tendency has been to expand the reach of DNA profiling broadly and quickly, without sufficient consideration as to whether these expansions really serve

Without appropriate limits and safeguards on familial searching,

we run the risk of increasing the harms of privacy violations and
exacerbating racial inequities while achieving too few of its promised benefits. A related point is that the
their intended goals or merely offer diminishing returns.485

technique should be limited to solving only violent crimes like rape and
murder .486 For one reason, these are often the kinds of crimes for which DNA
profiling is particularly efective . In addition, it is the resolution of such serious
crimes that ofers the greatest public safety. To put it differently, familial searches in
these contexts most satisfactorily fulfill the requirement that the prima facie duty to
protect the public is serious and weighty enough to justify the violation of the prima
facie duties to protect the privacy and civil liberty interests of those
afected by familial searching.487

1nc k
Their historical analysis of black sufering ignores the primacy of capitalist
exploitation this fractures efective coalitions against capitalism
Pascal Robert 13, Lawyer, Co-founder of the Haitian Bloggers' Caucus, The
Reactionary Nature of Black Politics, www.huffingtonpost.com/pascal-robert/thereactionary-nature-of_b_3260054.html
The main vehicle allowing this constant social and political demobilization
of the Black community stems from the problematic reality that Black
politics has traditionally been grounded in a purely reactionary response
to the phenomenon of racism -- particularly without a clear understanding of the purpose of racism in its
application to Blacks. This stems from a failure to understand basic key aspects of the relationship of Blacks to America and racism,
mostly because the sheer terror used under the guise of racism to maintain the prevailing order has been so atrocious that the
political focus by Blacks has been to concentrate on that terror and attempts to neutralize it without truly addressing its root cause.

Europeans did not bring Africans to the Americas because they

were racist. They brought Africans to the Americas to expropriate labor
from them as workers in an economic system that denied compensation for that labor to
maximize return on investment for the presence of those Africans. The function of Black people in
America was an innately economic one from the start rooted in a politics that was based on protecting
the sanctity of that economic relationship. All the terror and brutality used to maintain that
system was purely ancillary to the goal of protecting that economic
system of exploiting free Black labor. Yet many Blacks, even educated ones, will say that Europeans
brought Africans to the Americas because of racism and White Supremacy. Racism is merely the rationale
and tactic used to justify that exploitative economic relationship , and
White Supremacy is the subsequent accrued benefit of the successful
maintenance of that relationship -- in varying degrees -- over time . A perfect
example of how these realities are confused can easily be shown by attempting to ascertain from most people what the
actual purpose and function of Jim Crow Segregation, which started with the consummation
of Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, and lasted to the end of the Civil Rights Era in 1968, actually was. Many would say
things like: keeping Blacks subjugated, or denying blacks the ability to
compete with Whites, or racism/White Supremacy, or fear of Black male
sexual potency via White women. In reality, Jim Crow was a purely
intentional reaction by White Southern agricultural interests meshed with
Northern industrialists to combat the rising political and economic
militancy and mutual co-operation of Blacks and poor Whites during the
progressive era of the 1890s with the combined eforts of the Farmer's
Alliance and the Colored Farmers Alliance in order to maintain economic
hegemony and cheap exploited labor for capitalist interests in the South ,
primarily Agricultural but also industrial, with the slow but new
development of Southern industrialization. Jim Crow was rooted in
economic control, not simply racism and brutality . Those were the tools
used to keep the system intact. Moreover, few people will admit that the main reason for
the collapse of Jim Crow starting in the 1930s, and expanding rapidly into the post World War II era, had
more to do with three key factors as opposed to the romanticized notions
of how the valiant fight of the ancestors during the Civil Rights Movement
brought us freedom: First, the new methods of mechanized agricultural farming
technology started to make the need for Black farm labor in the South
From the beginning,

obsolete. Hence, the need for the disenfranchisement and related oppression became
more about form rather than substance; second, the rise of Hitler and Nazism
made the notion of race-based exclusion in the United Stated unpalatable, particularly in
the face of Hitler's anti-semitism; thirdly, the Cold War era and the fear of American
racism being an obstacle to the competitive advantage over the Soviet
Union in winning the hearts and minds of the newly independent Black,
Brown, and Yellow third world would rapidly assure desegregation and
ending Jim Crow being an American primary domestic agenda . As African American
political science professor Adolph Reed, Jr. states in his essay "The Color Line Then and Now," found in the anthology, Renewing
Black Intellectual History, when discussing some of the egalitarian social science and legal strategies to end Jim Crow: This
intellectual enterprise was no more responsible for defeating early-twentieth-century race theory than Charles Hamilton Houston's
and Thurgood Marshall's legal arguments were for defeating codified racial segregation, probably much less so. Factors like the
leftward shift in the domestic political climate in the 1930s and 1940s, the embarrassment that Nazi extremism presented for
racialist ideology, and cold war concerns with the United States' international image were undoubtedly more important. An excellent
treatise that explains the relationship between the Cold War and the Civil Rights victories we often wrongly think were a result of
these romanticized protest activities is Cold Civil Rights: Race and the Imagery of American Democracy, by professor of law and
political science, Mary L. Dudziak, in which she states about Brown v. Board of Education: "According to the Justice Department, the
interest of the United States in school segregation was that race discrimination harmed American foreign relations." This is not to
diminish the efforts of the hundreds of thousands of Americans who waged moral protest to the brutal and racist treatment of our
nations Black citizens. To diminish in such a fashion could have the effect of discouraging the belief in the human capacity to make

our desires to romanticize certain periods of

history, especially dealing with African Americans, lead to a limited and
pedestrian understanding of the factors that truly shape events. In the face of the
social or political change. The point is to show that

reactionary nature of Black politics, we can better understand the post Civil Rights dilemma that has plagued the Black political
scene. If the illusion of racial equality is touted as one of the greatest achievements of the 20th century American democratic
experiment via these Civil Rights victories, how do you create a Black politics in a post Civil Rights era when the political traditions
of this group has been rooted in combating or reacting to the racism that society now forces them to accept as no more, when in

the root of the past 45 years of increasing Black political

demobilization -- meaning Black politics being unable to actually achieve
lasting policy that succeeds at remedying the true root of Black sufering:
economic inequality. The ultimate sign of that demobilization is the over
97 percent support of Black America for a president whose agenda is to
introduce neoliberal privatization of government resources at rates never
seen before that might ultimately demolish those same communities that
supported him -- i.e. Barack Obama. This is why Black America is in a crisis, because Black politics is in a
crisis. That crisis is a product of the place from which Black politics was born and grew. We now need a new
politics, if we shall even call it Black politics, that is not rooted in reactionary response to
racism , but seeks to foster cross-racial coalitions with those similarly
situated to crush the barriers to economic equality while allowing Blacks
to maintain social autonomy and ideological integrity in recognition of the
need for nuance in neutralizing the tool of racism that has been used to
distract them from the ultimate problem of economic injustice . This is the work that
fact that is not the case? Now we understand

must be done, but the question is: Who is up to the task?

Capitalism causes inevitable crises, inequality, and dehumanizationthe

alternative is a class-based critique of the systempedagogical spaces are
the crucial staging ground for keeping socialism on the horizon
McLaren, Distinguished Fellow Critical Studies @ Chapman U and UCLA urban
schooling prof, and Scatamburlo-DAnnibale, associate professor of Communication
U Windsor, 4
(Peter and Valerie, Class Dismissed? Historical materialism and the politics of
difference, Educational Philosophy and Theory Vol. 36, Issue 2, p. 183-199)

For well over two decades we have witnessed the jubilant liberal and conservative pronouncements of the demise

history's presumed failure to defang existing capitalist

relations has been read by many self-identified radicals as an advertisement for
capitalism's inevitability. As a result, the chorus refrain There Is No
Alternative, sung by liberals and conservatives, has been buttressed by the symphony
of post-Marxist voices recommending that we give socialism a decent burial
and move on. Within this context, to speak of the promise of Marx and socialism may appear anachronistic,
of socialism. Concomitantly,

even nave, especially since the post-al intellectual vanguard has presumably demonstrated the folly of doing so.
Yet we stubbornly believe that the chants of T.I.N.A. must be combated for they offer as a fait accompli, something

Leftists should refuse to accept namely the triumph of

capitalism and its political bedfellow neo-liberalism, which have worked together
to naturalize sufering, undermine collective struggle, and obliterate hope .
We concur with Amin (1998), who claims that such chants must be defied and revealed as
absurd and criminal, and who puts the challenge we face in no uncertain terms: humanity may let
itself be led by capitalism's logic to a fate of collective suicide or it may
pave the way for an alternative humanist project of global socialism. The
grosteque conditions that inspired Marx to pen his original critique of capitalism are present
and flourishing. The inequalities of wealth and the gross imbalances of power that exist today are
leading to abuses that exceed those encountered in Marx's day (Greider, 1998, p.
39). Global capitalism has paved the way for the obscene concentration of wealth in fewer and
fewer hands and created a world increasingly divided between those who enjoy opulent
affluence and those who languish in dehumanizing conditions and economic misery. In every
corner of the globe, we are witnessing social disintegration as revealed by a rise in abject
poverty and inequality. At the current historical juncture, the combined assets of the 225 richest
which progressive

people is roughly equal to the annual income of the poorest 47 percent of the world's population, while the
combined assets of the three richest people exceed the combined GDP of the 48 poorest nations (CCPA, 2002, p. 3).

2.8 billion peoplealmost half of the world's populationstruggle in

desperation to live on less than two dollars a day (McQuaig, 2001, p. 27). As many as
250 million children are wage slaves and there are over a billion workers who are
either un- or under-employed. These are the concrete realities of our timerealities
that require a vigorous class analysis , an unrelenting critique of capitalism
and an oppositional politics capable of confronting what Ahmad (1998, p. 2) refers to as
capitalist universality. They are realities that require something more than that which is offered by
Approximately

the prophets of difference and post-Marxists who would have us relegate socialism to the scrapheap of history and

Never before has a Marxian analysis of

capitalism and class rule been so desperately needed. That is not to say that everything Marx
said or anticipated has come true, for that is clearly not the case. Many critiques of Marx focus on
his strategy for moving toward socialism, and with ample justification;
nonetheless Marx did provide us with fundamental insights into class
society that have held true to this day. Marx's enduring relevance lies in his indictment of capitalism
mummify Marxism along with Lenin's corpse.

which continues to wreak havoc in the lives of most. While capitalism's cheerleaders have attempted to hide its
sordid underbelly, Marx's description of capitalism as the sorcerer's dark power is even more apt in light of

Rather than jettisoning Marx, decentering

the role of capitalism, and discrediting class analysis, radical educators
must continue to engage Marx's oeuvre and extrapolate from it that which is
useful pedagogically, theoretically, and , most importantly, politically in light of the
challenges that confront us. The urgency which animates Amin's call for a collective socialist
vision necessitates, as we have argued, moving beyond the particularism and liberal
contemporary historical and economic conditions.

that informs the politics of diference. It also requires challenging

the questionable assumptions that have come to constitute the core of
contemporary radical theory, pedagogy and politics. In terms of efecting
change, what is needed is a cogent understanding of the systemic nature
of exploitation and oppression based on the precepts of a radical political
economy approach (outlined above) and one that incorporates Marx's notion of unity in difference in
which people share widely common material interests. Such an understanding extends far
beyond the realm of theory, for the manner in which we choose to interpret and explore the social
world, the concepts and frameworks we use to express our sociopolitical
understandings, are more than just abstract categories. They imply
intentions, organizational practices, and political agendas. Identifying
class analysis as the basis for our understandings and class struggle as the basis for political
transformation implies something quite diferent than constructing a sense of
political agency around issues of race, ethnicity, gender, etc. Contrary to
pluralism

Shakespeare's assertion that a rose by any other name would smell as sweet, it should be clear that this is not the

in politics the essence of the flower lies in the name by

which it is called (Bannerji, 2000, p. 41). The task for progressives today is to seize
the moment and plant the seeds for a political agenda that is grounded in
historical possibilities and informed by a vision committed to overcoming exploitative conditions.
These seeds, we would argue, must be derived from the tree of radical political
economy. For the vast majority of people todaypeople of all racial classifications or
identities, all genders and sexual orientationsthe common frame of
reference arcing across difference, the concerns and aspirations that are most widely shared are those that
are rooted in the common experience of everyday life shaped and constrained
by political economy (Reed, 2000, p. xxvii). While post-Marxist advocates of the
politics of diference suggest that such a stance is outdated, we would argue
that the categories which they have employed to analyze the social are now losing
their usefulness, particularly in light of actual contemporary social movements. All over the
globe, there are large anti-capitalist movements afoot. In February 2002, chants of
Another World Is Possible became the theme of protests in Porto Allegre. It seems that those people
struggling in the streets havent read about T.I.N.A., the end of grand
narratives of emancipation, or the decentering of capitalism. It seems as though
case in political matters. Rather,

the struggle for basic survival and some semblance of human dignity in the mean streets of the dystopian
metropoles doesnt permit much time or opportunity to read the heady proclamations emanating from seminar
rooms. As E. P. Thompson (1978, p. 11) once remarked, sometimes experience walks in without knocking at the

This, of
course, does not mean that socialism will inevitably come about, yet a sense of
its nascent promise animates current social movements. Indeed, noted historian Howard
Zinn (2000, p. 20) recently pointed out that after years of single-issue organizing (i.e. the
politics of difference), the WTO and other anti-corporate capitalist protests
signaled a turning point in the history of movements of recent decades, for it was
the issue of class that more than anything bound everyone together. History, to
door, and announces deaths, crises of subsistence, trench warfare, unemployment, inflation, genocide.

paraphrase Thompson (1978, p. 25) doesnt seem to be following Theory's script. Our vision is informed by Marx's
historical materialism and his revolutionary socialist humanism, which must not be conflated with liberal humanism.

a socialist humanist vision remains crucial, whose

fundamental features include the creative potential of people to challenge
collectively the circumstances that they inherit. This variant of humanism seeks to give
For left politics and pedagogy,

expression to the pain, sorrow and degradation of the oppressed, those who labor under the ominous and ghastly

cloak of globalized capital. It calls for the transformation of those conditions that have prevented the bulk of

It vests its hope for change in the development of

critical consciousness and social agents who make history , although not always in
humankind from fulfilling its potential.

conditions of their choosing. The political goal of socialist humanism is, however, not a resting in difference but
rather the emancipation of difference at the level of human mutuality and reciprocity. This would be a step forward
for the discovery or creation of our real differences which can only in the end be explored in reciprocal ways

the enduring relevance of a radical socialist

pedagogy and politics is the centrality it accords to the interrogation of
capitalism. We can no longer afford to remain indifferent to the horror and savagery committed by capitalist's
barbaric machinations. We need to recognize that capitalist democracy is
unrescuably contradictory in its own self-constitution. Capitalism and democracy
cannot be translated into one another without profound efforts at manufacturing empty idealism. Committed
Leftists must unrelentingly cultivate a democratic socialist vision that refuses to
(Eagleton, 1996, p. 120). Above all else,

forget the wretched of the earth, the children of the damned and the victims of the culture of silencea task
which requires more than abstruse convolutions and striking ironic poses in the agnostic arena of signifying

Leftists must illuminate the little shops of horror that lurk beneath globalizations shiny faade;
challenge the true evils that are manifest in the tentacles of global
capitalism's reach. And, more than this, Leftists must search for the cracks in the
edifice of globalized capitalism and shine light on those fissures that give
birth to alternatives. Socialism today, undoubtedly, runs against the grain of
received wisdom, but its vision of a vastly improved and freer
arrangement of social relations beckons on the horizon. Its unwritten text
is nascent in the present even as it exists among the fragments of history and the shards of distant
practices.

they must

memories. Its potential remains untapped and its promise needs to be redeemed.

1nc da
Surveillance checks nuke terror attack now

Pittenger 14

US Rep. Robert Pittenger, chair of Congressional Task Force on Terrorism,

Bipartisan bill on NSA data collection protects both privacy and national security - Washington
Examiner, 6/9/14, http://washingtonexaminer.com/rep.-robert-pittenger-bipartisan-bill-on-nsa-datacollection-protects-both-privacy-and-national-security/article/2549456?
custom_click=rss&utm_campaign=Weekly+Standard+Story+Box&utm_source=weeklystandard.com&
utm_medium=referral
This February, I took that question to a meeting of European Ambassadors at the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. During the conference, I asked three questions: 1. What is the current

What role does

intelligence data collection play in this process, given the multiple platforms for attack
worldwide terrorist threat? 2. What is Americas role in addressing and mitigating this threat? 3.

including physical assets, cyber,

chemical,

biological , nuclear and the electric

grid? Each ambassador acknowledged the threat was greater today than
before 9/11, with al Qaeda and other extreme Islamist terrorists stronger, more
sophisticated, and having a dozen or more training camps throughout the Middle East
and Africa. As to the role of the United States, they felt our eforts were
primary and essential for peace and security around the world. Regarding the
intelligence-gathering, their consensus was, We want privacy, but we must
have your intelligence . As a European foreign minister stated to me, Without U.S. intelligence, we are blind.
We cannot yield to those loud but misguided voices who view the world as
void of the deadly and destructive intentions of unrelenting terrorists. The number of
terrorism-related deaths worldwide doubled between 2012 and 2013, jumping from 10,000 to
20,000 in just one year. Now is not the time to stand down. Those who embrace an
altruistic worldview should remember that vigilance and strength have
deterred our enemies in the past. That same commitment is required today to
defeat those who seek to destroy us and our way of life. We must make careful, prudent
use of all available technology to counter their sophisticated operations if
we are to maintain our freedom and liberties.

Biometrics are growing now but continued support is key theyre key to
counterterror
Woodward 5 (John, former CIA operations officer and senior policy analyst at
RAND, Biometrics: Facing Up To Terrorism, RAND Arroyo Center, 2005,
http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/issue_papers/2005/IP218.pdf)
As the nation recovers from the attacks of September 11, 2001, we must
rededicate our eforts to prevent any such terrorist acts in the future.
Although terrorism can never be completely eliminated, we, as a nation,
can take additional steps to counter it. We must explore many options in this endeavor. Among them, we should examine the
use of emerging biometric technologies that can help improve public safety . While there is no easy,
foolproof technical fix to counter terrorism, the use of biometric technologies might help make
America a safer place. Biometrics refers to the use of a persons
physical characteristics or personal traits to identify, or verify the claimed

identity of, that individual. Fingerprints, faces, voices, and handwritten signatures are all examples of characteristics that have been used to
identify us in this way. Biometric-based systems provide automatic , nearly
instantaneous identification of a person by converting the biometric a fingerprint,
for exampleinto digital form and then comparing it against a computerized
database. In this way, fingerprints, faces, voices, iris and retinal images of the eye, hand geometry, and signature dynamics can now be used to identify us, or to
authenticate our claimed identity, quickly and accurately. These biometric technologies may seem exotic, but their use is becoming increasingly common. In January 2000, MIT
Technology Review named biometrics as one of the top ten emerging
technologies that will change the world. And after September 11th,
biometric technologies may prove to be one of the emerging technologies
that will help safeguard the nation. This issue paper does not advance the argument that biometrics would have prevented the
September 11th attacks. Nor does it present biometrics as a complete solution to the terrorist problem. Rather, it offers recommendations as to how biometric
technologies can be used to improve security and thereby help safeguard our communities against future
terrorist attacks. Specifically, this issue paper discusses how biometric technologies could be used to impede
terrorism in three critical areas: 1. Controlling access to sensitive
facilities at airports, 2. Preventing identity theft and fraud in the use of
travel documents, and 3. Identifying known or suspected terrorists. It further offers a
proposed counterterrorist application that uses a type of biometric known as facial recognition to identify terrorists.

Nuke terror kills billions and turns the af

Vladimir Z. Dvorkin 12 Major General (retired), doctor of technical sciences,
professor, and senior fellow at the Center for International Security of the Institute
of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
The Center participates in the working group of the U.S.-Russia Initiative to Prevent
Nuclear Terrorism, 9/21/12, "What Can Destroy Strategic Stability: Nuclear Terrorism
is a Real Threat,"
belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/22333/what_can_destroy_strategic_stability
.html
Hundreds of scientific papers and reports have been published on nuclear terrorism. International conferences have
been held on this threat with participation of Russian organizations, including IMEMO and the Institute of U.S. and
Canadian Studies. Recommendations on how to combat the threat have been issued by the International
Luxembourg Forum on Preventing Nuclear Catastrophe, Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs,
Russian-American Elbe Group, and other organizations. The UN General Assembly adopted the International
Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism in 2005 and cooperation among intelligence services of

these efforts fall short for a number of

reasons, partly because various acts of nuclear terrorism are possible. Dispersal of
radioactive material by detonation of conventional explosives (dirty bombs) is a
method that is most accessible for terrorists. With the wide spread of radioactive
sources, raw materials for such attacks have become much more accessible than
weapons-useable nuclear material or nuclear weapons. The use of dirty bombs will
not cause many immediate casualties, but it will result into long-term radioactive contamination,
contributing to the spread of panic and socio-economic destabilization . Severe
consequences can be caused by sabotaging nuclear power plants,
research reactors, and radioactive materials storage facilities. Large cities
are especially vulnerable to such attacks. A large city may host dozens of
research reactors with a nuclear power plant or a couple of spent nuclear
leading states in this sphere is developing. At the same time,

fuel storage facilities and dozens of large radioactive materials storage

facilities located nearby. The past few years have seen significant efforts made to enhance
organizational and physical aspects of security at facilities, especially at nuclear power plants. Efforts have
also been made to improve security culture. But these efforts do not preclude the
possibility that well-trained terrorists may be able to penetrate nuclear
facilities . Some estimates show that sabotage of a research reactor in a metropolis
may expose hundreds of thousands to high doses of radiation. A formidable part of
the city would become uninhabitable for a long time . Of all the scenarios, it is building an
improvised nuclear device by terrorists that poses the maximum risk. There are no
engineering problems that cannot be solved if terrorists decide to build a
simple gun-type nuclear device. Information on the design of such devices, as
well as implosion-type devices, is available in the public domain. It is the acquisition of
weapons-grade uranium that presents the sole serious obstacle. Despite numerous preventive measures taken, we

such materials can be bought on the black market. Theft

of weapons-grade uranium is also possible . Research reactor fuel is
considered to be particularly vulnerable to theft, as it is scattered at sites in dozens
of countries. There are about 100 research reactors in the world that run on
weapons-grade uranium fuel, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA). A terrorist gun-type uranium bomb can have a yield of least 10-15 kt,
which is comparable to the yield of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima . The
explosion of such a bomb in a modern metropolis can kill and wound hundreds of
thousands and cause serious economic damage. There will also be long-term
sociopsychological and political consequences. The vast majority of states have
introduced unprecedented security and surveillance measures at transportation and
other large-scale public facilities after the terrorist attacks in the United States, Great
cannot rule out the possibility that

Britain, Italy, and other countries. These measures have proved burdensome for the countries populations, but the

A nuclear terrorist attack will make the public accept

further measures meant to enhance control even if these measures significantly
restrict the democratic liberties they are accustomed to. Authoritarian states could
be expected to adopt even more restrictive measures . If a nuclear terrorist act occurs,
nations will delegate tens of thousands of their secret services best personnel to
investigate and attribute the attack. Radical Islamist groups are among those
capable of such an act. We can imagine what would happen if they do so, given the anti-Muslim
sentiments and resentment that conventional terrorist attacks by Islamists have
generated in developed democratic countries. Mass deportation of the nonindigenous population and severe sanctions would follow such an attack in what will
cause violent protests in the Muslim world. Series of armed clashing
terrorist attacks may follow. The prediction that Samuel Huntington has made in
his book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order may come
true. Huntingtons book clearly demonstrates that it is not Islamic extremists that are the cause of the Western
public has accepted them as necessary.

worlds problems. Rather there is a deep, intractable conflict that is rooted in the fault lines that run between Islam

This is especially dangerous for Russia because these fault lines run
across its territory. To sum it up, the political leadership of Russia has every reason to revise its list of factors
and Christianity.

that could undermine strategic stability. BMD does not deserve to be even last on that list because its effectiveness
in repelling massive missile strikes will be extremely low. BMD systems can prove useful only if deployed to defend
against launches of individual ballistic missiles or groups of such missiles. Prioritization of other destabilizing factors
that could affect global and regional stabilitymerits a separate study or studies. But even without them I can

The threat of nuclear terrorism

is real, and a successful nuclear terrorist attack would lead to a radical
transformation of the global order . All of the threats on the revised list must become a subject

conclude that nuclear terrorism should be placed on top of the list.

of thorough studies by experts. States need to work hard to forge a common understanding of these threats and
develop a strategy to combat them.

1nc t subs
Substantially means 40% --- strict quantification avoids vagueness
Schwartz 4 (Arthur, Lawyer Schwartz + Goldberg, 2002 U.S. Briefs 1609, Lexis)
In the opinion below,

the Tenth Circuit suggested that a percentage figure would be a way to

avoid vagueness issues . (Pet. App., at 13-14) Indeed, one of the Amici supporting the City in this case,
the American Planning Association, produced a publication that actually makes a
recommendation of a percentage figure that should be adopted by municipalities in establishing zoning
[*37] regulations for adult businesses. n8 The APA's well researched report recommended that the
terms "substantial" and "significant" be quantified at 40 percent for floor space or
inventory of a business in the definition of adult business. n9 (Resp. Br. App., at 15-16)

The US population is 321,536,716 people---the plan has to decrease

surveillance on 150 million people
U.S. Census 15, updated on August 17, http://www.census.gov/popclock/
The United States population on August 17, 2015 was: 321,536,716
Vote neg for limits---they explode the topic to include small decreases in
surveillance---curtailing surveillance on only specific groups or individuals
becomes viable af areas---makes it impossible to be negative and subsets
no-link any neg ofense.

1nc t fisa
Domestic surveillance is defined by legal authorization they must curtail
surveillance explicitly authorized by FISA the plan violates because
theyre a form of law enforcement
O'Connor 15 [Thomas R. O'Connor, Associate Professor of Justice Studies at
North Carolina Wesleyan College, holds a Ph.D. in Criminology from Indiana
University of Pennsylvania, 2015, "Surveillance," Encyclopedia of Intelligence and
Counterintelligence, Edited by Rodney Carlisle, Published by Routledge, ISBN
1317471776, page 628]
Some nations, even Western democracies such as Great Britain and Germany, extend a great deal of discretion to their intelligence services in monitor-ing

FISA , mentioned previously, authorizes surveillance

of U.S. citizens only if the activities drawing suspicion are not activities nor-mally protected
by the First Amendment of the Constitution. FISA is the main exception to the rule that
surveillance for intelligence purposes should be regulated in the same way
as surveillance for law enforcement purposes. In existence since 1978, FISA provides for
the clandestine surveillance of citizens and authorizes intercepts , taps , bugs , and
since 1994, physical searches. An executive branch agency must initiate the process of
requesting such action. A district court (in the Washington, D.C., area) then holds a closed session to decide if the government
should have the authority to conduct such surveillance. This closed session is referred to as the Foreign In-telligence Surveillance Court, or FISC. The
execu-tive branch submits its case to FISC whenever national security
demands domestic surveillance .
their own citizens, but the United States has followed a different path.

Vote neg
a) limits. Their af opens the floodgates to an unmanageably large
number of other plans that curtail monitoring in sectors like
agriculture, banking, education, environment, etc. Limits incentivize
more nuanced research which is the foundation for productive
debate. Broad interpretations sabotage clash and subvert education.
b) ground. We lose core generics the Wyden counterplan, the Terror
DA, the Five Eyes DA, surveillance critiques, etc.

case

double turn!
The 1AC Gumbs evidence they read endorses a politics of futurism and
afterlife endorses survival as the primary pedagogy and radical act to
challenge antiblackness
[Alicia Gumbs, 2010 We can learn to mother ourselves , the queer survival of
black feminism 1968-1996 pp. 90-96]
Survival. The condition of bare life. The mythology of differential fitness. The continuity of property and properties. But survival is more than this. Survival,
as it emerges as a key word in the theory and poetics of Audre Lorde and June Jordan is a poetic term. It provides the basis for the reconsideration of its
own meaning, and the reconsideration of the meaning of life, that which survival queerly extends despite everything.

Survival is a

pedagogy : secret and forbidden knowledge that we pass on, educating each other into a set of skills and beliefs based on the queer premise
that our lives are valuable in a way that the economization of our labor, and the price of our flesh in the market of racism deny. Survival is a mode of
inquiry, providing a repertoire of critical insights, gained from discerning what approach to a political and economic framework we can afford from one

Survival is an afterlife ; by continuing to exist we challenge the processes that somehow failed to kill us this
time. Survival is a performance, a set of aesthetic invocations that produce belief and resonance. Survival is a poetic
intervention into the simplistic conclusion of the political narrative: we were never meant to survive. The we that was never meant to
moment to the next.

survive is a challenge to the gospel of individualism. The content of that we is at stake because survival redefines who we are. For those of us who
constitute the collection of people addressed by Audre Lordes A Litany for Survival, the meanings of our lives have been slandered within an economy
that uses narratives of racial inferiority, gender determinism, and sexual subjectivity to devalue our bodies, our breathing, our time. If we are survivors,

who we are is the question of survival , and whether we survive depends on the generation of a set of
relationships that prioritizes who we are to each other through our queer acts of loving the possible collectivity represented in each of our bodies.2

Survival is a queer act for oppressed communities because it interrupts the social reproduction of
the sanctioned deaths of those who were never meant to survive. In this chapter I argue that survival as a fact, a
possibility, an act, a tactic and an approach, is a performative and poetic
intervention into a meaning of life that the narrative of capitalism reproduces: the belief that a differential monetary
value can be assigned to the very time of our lives and our labor based on stories about what race, gender, class, place, ability and family mean.

This turns the af a direct contradiction with their 1AC Warrens evidence
endorsement of black nihilism
Calvin L. Warren (Assistant Professor of American Studies at George Washington
University) Spring 2015 [Black Nihilism and the Politics of Hope CR: The New
Centennial Review > Volume 15, Number 1, Spring 2015, muse, loghry]
Throughout this essay, I have argued that the Politics of hope preserve metaphysical structures that sustain black suffering. This preservation amounts to
an exploitation of hopewhen the Political colonizes the spiritual principle of hope and puts it in the service of extending the will to power of an anti-

The Politics of hope, then, is bound up with

metaphysical violence, and this violence masquerades as a solution to
the problem of anti-blackness. Temporal linearity, perfection, betterment, struggle ,
work, and utopian futurity are conceptual instruments of the Political that will never
obviate black sufering or anti-black violence ; these concepts only serve to
reproduce the conditions that render existence unbearable for blacks. Political
theologians and black optimists avoid the immediacy of black sufering , the horror of anti-black
pulverization, and place relief in a not-yet-but-is (maybe)-to-come-social order
that, itself, can do little more but admonish blacks to survive to keep
struggling . Political hope becomes a vicious and abusive cycle of struggleit mirrors the Lacanian drive, and we encircle an object (black
black [End Page 242] organization of existence.

freedom, justice, relief, redress, equality, etc.) that is inaccessible because it doesnt really exist. The political theologian and black optimist, then, propose
a collective Jouissance as an answer to black sufferingfinding the joy in struggle, the victory in toil, and the satisfaction in inefficacious action. We
continue to struggle and work as black youth are slaughtered daily, black bodies are incarcerated as forms of capital, black infant mortality rates are
soaring, and hunger is disabling the bodies, minds, and spirits of desperate black youth. In short, these conditions are deep metaphysical problemsthe
sadistic pleasure of metaphysical dominationand work and struggle avoid the terrifying fact that the world depends on black death to sustain itself.
Black nihilism attempts to break this driveto stop it in its tracks, as it wereand to end the cycle of insanity that political hope perpetuates.

The inclusion of Black nihilism in the 1AC means they cant solve their af
Calvin L. Warren (Assistant Professor of American Studies at George Washington
University) Spring 2015 [Black Nihilism and the Politics of Hope CR: The New
Centennial Review > Volume 15, Number 1, Spring 2015, muse, loghry]
Black nihilism is a demythifying practice, in the Nietzschean vein, that uncovers the
subjugating strategies of political hope and de-idealizes its fantastical object. Once we denude political
hope of its axiological and ethical veneer, we see that it operates through certain strategies: 1) positing itself as
the only alternative to the problem of anti-blackness, 2) shielding this
alternative [End Page 221] from rigorous historical/philosophical critique by placing it in an
unknown future, 3) delimiting the field of action to include only activity recognized and legitimated by the Political, and 4) demonizing
critiques or diferent philosophical perspectives.

bayat
Their theory of power is from a resistance paradigm which
assumes power is a fluid ideological capital that circulates
freely with our declarations that underestimates the state as
a fixed yet flexible node of power which means their model
causes cooption locating the state as a key variable of
analysis is key to create actionable knowledge and organize
collective action
Bayat, Sociology Prof @ University of Illinois, 13
(Asef, Life As Politics: How Ordinary People Change the Middle East, pp. 41-45)
The dearth of conventional collective action in par tic u lar, contentious protests among the
subaltern groups (the poor, peasants, and women) in the developing countries, together with a disillusionment with dominant

pushed many radical observers to discover and highlight diferent

types of activism, however small- scale, local, or even individualistic. Such a quest, meanwhile, both contributed to and
benefi ted from the upsurge of theoretical perspectives, during the 1980s, associated with poststructuralism that
made micropolitics and everyday resistance a popular idea. James Scotts departure,
socialist parties,

during the 1980s, from a structuralist position in studying the behavior of the peasantry in Asia to a more ethnographic method of
focusing on individual reactions of peasants contributed considerably to this paradigm shift .27 In the meantime, Foucaults
decentered notion of power, together with a revival of neo- Gramscian politics of culture (hegemony), served as a key theoretical
backing for micropolitics, and thus the re sis tance perspective. The notion of re sis tance came to stress that power and
counterpower were not in binary opposition, but in a decoupled, complex, ambivalent, and perpetual dance of control.28 It based
itself on the Foucauldian idea that wherever there is power there is re sis tance, although the latter consisted largely of smallscale, everyday, tiny activities that the agents could aff ord to articulate given their po liti cal constraints. Such a perception of re sis
tance penetrated not only peasant studies, but a variety of fi elds, including labor studies, identity politics, ethnicity, womens
studies, education, and studies of the urban subaltern. Thus, multiple researchers discussed how relating stories about miracles
gives voice to pop u lar re sis tance29; how disenfranchised women resisted patriarchy by relating folktales and songs or by
pretending to be possessed or crazy;30 how reviving extended family among the urban pop u lar classes represented an avenue of
po liti cal participation.31 The relationships between the Filipino bar girls and western men were discussed not simply in terms of
total domination, but in a complex and contingent fashion;32 and the veiling of the Muslim working woman has been represented
not in simple terms of submission, but in ambivalent terms of protest and co- optation hence, an accommodating protest.33
Indeed, on occasions, both veiling and unveiling were simultaneously considered as a symbol of re sis tance. Undoubtedly, such an
attempt to grant agency to the subjects that until then were depicted as passive poor, submissive women, apo liti cal peasant,
and oppressed worker was a positive development. The re sis tance paradigm helps to uncover the complexity of power relations
in society in general, and the politics of the subaltern in par tic u lar. It tells us that we may not expect a universalized form of
struggle; that totalizing pictures oft en distort variations in peoples perceptions about change; that local should be recognized as a
signifi cant site of struggle as well as a unit of analysis; that or ga nized collective action may not be possible everywhere, and thus
alternative forms of struggles must be discovered and acknowledged; that or ganized protest as such may not necessarily be
privileged in the situations where suppression rules. The value of a more fl exible, small- scale, and unbureaucratic activism should,
therefore, be acknowledged.34 These are some of the issues that critiques of poststructuralist advocates of re sis tance ignore.35

a number of conceptual and political problems also emerge from this

paradigm. The immediate trouble is how to conceptualize re sis tance, and its relation to power, domination, and submission.
Yet

James Scott seems to be clear about what he means by the term: Class re sis tance includes any act(s) by member(s) of a
subordinate class that is or are intended either to mitigate or deny claims (for example, rents, taxes, prestige) made on that class by
superordinate classes (for example, landlords, large farmers, the state) or to advance its own claims (for example, work, land,

the phrase any act

blocks delineating between qualitatively diverse forms of activities that Scott
lists. Are we not to distinguish between large- scale collective action and
individual acts, say, of tax dodging? Do reciting poetry in private, however
subversive- sounding, and engaging in armed struggle have identical value? Should we not
charity, respect) vis-- vis these superordinate classes.36 [emphasis added] However,

expect unequal aff ectivity and implications from such diff erent acts? Scott was aware of this, and so agreed with those who had
made distinctions between diff erent types of resistance for example, real re sis tance refers to or ga nized, systematic, preplanned or selfl ess practices with revolutionary consequences, and token re sis tance points to unor ga nized incidental acts
without any revolutionary consequences, and which are accommodated in the power structure.37 Yet he insisted that the token re
sis tance is no less real than the real re sis tance. Scotts followers, however, continued to make further distinctions. Nathan

Brown, in studying peasant politics in Egypt, for instance, identifi es three forms of politics: atomistic (politics of individuals and
small groups with obscure content), communal (a group eff ort to disrupt the system, by slowing down production and the like), and

many resistance writers tend to

confuse an awareness about oppression with acts of resistance against it .

revolt ( just short of revolution to negate the system).38 Beyond this,

The fact that poor women sing songs about their plight or ridicule men in their private gatherings indicates their understanding of

This does not mean, however, that they are involved in acts of
resistance; neither are the miracle stories of the poor urbanites who
imagine the saints to come and punish the strong. Such an understanding
gender dynamics.

of resistance fails to capture the extremely complex interplay of

conflict
Indeed,

and consent,

and ideas and action, operating within systems of power .

the link between

consciousness and action

remains a major

sociological dilemma .39 Scott makes it clear that re sis tance is an intentional act. In Weberian tradition, he takes the
meaning of action as a crucial element. This intentionality, while signifi cant in itself, obviously leaves out many types of individual
and collective practices whose intended and unintended consequences do not correspond. In Cairo or Tehran, for example, many
poor families illegally tap into electricity and running water from the municipality despite their awareness of their behaviors
illegality. Yet they do not steal urban ser vices in order to express their defi ance vis-- vis the authorities. Rather, they do it because
they feel the necessity of those ser vices for a decent life, because they fi nd no other way to acquire them. But these very mundane
acts when continued lead to signifi cant changes in the urban structure, in social policy, and in the actors own lives. Hence, the
signifi cance of the unintended consequences of agents daily activities. In fact, many authors in the re sis tance paradigm have
simply abandoned intent and meaning, focusing instead eclectically on both intended and unintended practices as manifestations of
re sis tance. There is still a further question. Does re sis tance mean defending an already achieved gain (in Scotts terms, denying
claims made by dominant groups over the subordinate ones) or making fresh demands (to advance its own claims), what I like to
call encroachment? In much of the re sis tance literature, this distinction is missing. Although one might imagine moments of
overlap, the two strategies, however, lead to diff erent po liti cal consequences; this is so in par tic u lar when we view them in
relation to the strategies of dominant power. The issue was so crucial that Lenin devoted his entire What Is to Be Done? to
discussing the implications of these two strategies, albeit in diff erent terms of economism/trade unionism vs. social demo
cratic/party politics. What ever one may think about a Leninist/vanguardist paradigm, it was one that corresponded to a par tic u lar
theory of the state and power (a capitalist state to be seized by a mass movement led by the working- class party); in addition, it
was clear where this strategy wanted to take the working class (to establish a socialist state). Now,

what is the

perception of the state in the resistance paradigm? What is the

strategic aim in this perspective? Where does the resistance paradigm want to
take its agents/subjects, beyond prevent[ing] the worst and promis[ing]
something better ?40 Much of the literature of re sis tance is based upon a notion of power that Foucault has
articulated, that power is everywhere, that it circulates and is never localized here and there, never in anybodys hands. 41 Such
a formulation is surely instructive in transcending the myth of the powerlessness of the ordinary and in recognizing their agency. Yet

this decentered notion of power, shared by many poststructuralist re sis tance writers,

underestimates state power , notably its class dimension, since it fails to see
that although power circulates , it does so unevenly in some places it is far
weightier , more concentrated, and thicker, so to speak, than in others. In other words, like it or

not, the state does matter , and one needs to take that into account
when discussing the potential of urban subaltern activism. Although Foucault insists that re
sis tance is real when it occurs outside of and in de pen dent of the systems of power, the perception of power
that informs the re sis tance literature leaves little room for an analysis
of the state as a system of power . It is, therefore, not accidental that a theory
of the state and, therefore, an analysis of the possibility of co- optation, are
absent in almost all accounts of resistance. Consequently, the cherished acts of
resistance float around aimlessly in an unknown , uncertain , and ambivalent
universe of power relations, with the end result an unsettled, tense
accommodation with the existing power arrangement . Lack of a clear

to
overestimate and read too much into the acts of the
agents . The result is that almost any act of the subjects potentially becomes
concept of resistance , moreover, often leads writers

in this genre

one of resistance. Determined to discover the inevitable acts of

resistance, many poststructuralist writers often come to replace their
subject.42 While they attempt to challenge the essentialism of such perspectives as passive poor, submissive Muslim
women, and inactive masses, they tend, however, to fall into the trap of essentialism in reverse by reading too much into
ordinary behaviors, interpreting them as necessarily conscious or contentious acts of defi ance. This is so because they overlook the
crucial fact that these practices occur mostly within the prevailing systems of power. For example, some of the lower classs
activities in the Middle East that some authors read as re sis tance, intimate politics of defi ance, or avenues of participation
may actually contribute to the stability and legitimacy of the state.43 The fact that people are able to help themselves and extend
their networks surely shows their daily activism and struggles. However ,

by doing so the actors may

hardly win any space from the state ( or other sources of power, like capital
and patriarchy ) they are not necessarily challenging domination . In fact,
governments often encourage self- help and local initiatives so long as they do not
turn oppositional. They do so in order to shift some of their burdens of social welfare provision and responsibilities onto the
individual citizens. The proliferation of many NGOs in the global South is a good indicator of this. In short, much of the re sis tance

literature confuses what one might consider coping strategies (when the survival of the agents is
secured at the cost of themselves or that of fellow humans) and efective participation or subversion of
domination . There is a last question. If the poor are always able to resist in many
ways (by discourse or actions, individual or collective, overt or covert) the systems of domination, then
what is the need to assist them? If they are already po litically able citizens, why should we expect the
state or any other agency to empower them? Misreading the behavior of the poor may, in fact,
frustrate our moral responsibility toward the vulnerable. As Michael Brown rightly
notes, when you elevate the small injuries of childhood to the same moral status as suff ering of truly oppressed, you are
committing a savage leveling that diminishes rather than intensifi es our sensitivities to injustice. 44

nihilism bad
action oriented ethics are good ontological debates are a red-herring and
pessimism relies on epistemic certainty which is impossible given
limitations
Gordon, Professor of Philosophy and Africana Studies @ UConn, 15
(Lewis, Race and Gender from the Standpoint of Sartres Philosophical
Anthropology https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UO0amE2oNE, transcribed by
Donald Grasse)
For an identity model, one would have to do something very, very different. Which is
one will have to deal with the complex ways in which a social world is able to
produce meanings. Which means that the meanings, the identities, are not
closed but are the possibilities to come . Which means that the
constellations of identities we have now are only part of the complete
story. Now, this also leads to a problem again if we go back to the afropessimists.
Because if we look at the afropessimist argument and many afropessimists one of
the things by the way, my anger is not to diss afropessimists all over the place but
oh my god, talk about a group that cant take criticism. Whenever you say
anything about afropessimism, its classic bad faith . First response is
youre charactering it. But when you dig into it, the only way you cannot
character it is to agree with it. The second problem, almost always, is that you
have not read enough on it. Its a small body of literature. But the third part that is
very complicated is that some of the people that argue for afropessimism treat
the categories as ontological. And the thing about pessimism is that pessimism
is an epistemic notion. And the problem with an epistemic notion is that
pessimism depends on forecast . You see. Its about trying to figure out what you
should do. And whats missing here is if you go to Marcus Foie (sp? inaudible) you
have a different critique. Because you see from the Magus Foie perspective youre
going to realize there is something wrong with both pessimism and optimism when
you are dealing with issues of social practice. Because optimism depends on
having a form of essence the foreknowledge that will bring the essence
before the existence. Pessimism, on the other hand, optimism on the
other. So in effect the real question that is often raised by existentialists and
we have heard some of it today- is about the commitment you have . Its about
what actually whether it will work or not you are going to be
committed to doing . And thats a very diferent kind of action. Because that
and this is where it actually separates itself from analytical liberal political
philosophy, from some certain ways in which hermeneutics, from certain waves of
poststructuralisms functions, because you see if you are going to disentangle
foreknowledge from action, then you are talking about the question of what kind of
values are brought to it, which brings the existentialist problem of despair and
seriousness to the forefront. Now, from that point on, we now begin to see a very
diferent kind of conversation. Because one of them we see is going to be
manifested in the kind of commitments which are very different from the prediction

models of what we tend to use in theoretical examples. The other one is we see a
critique of something very popular when we talk about race and racism. And to give
you an example lets put it in the gender context. Lets make it heteronormative,
just for the moment. A man and a woman go on a date. Its a great date, everything
is going fine, they are talking they are drinking everything is great. At the end of the
date he drops her off, and then he says to the woman, I had a great time, I had a
great time too, Yeah you know now if I could just stop seeing you as a woman I
could respect you. Will there be a second date? Now, when I give that example
people immediately see the problem. If he needs not to see she is a woman in order
to respect her, he is misogynist because he doesnt respect women. Yet, if we look
at the models we use for race, that is exactly what we demand. The colorblind
model basically says that for people of color to be respected, the non-person of
color needs to not see the color. But if you need not to see someone as black in
order to respect that person, it means you dont respect black people. This is a
different question than the ontological question of are there really people black or
not. The basic point and this is where a lot of people in race theory commit an
error they think the problem of race is around its ontological status . So
they argue does race exist, does it not, should we eliminate race, and all that stuff
they miss the point . The real issue to argue is the ethical issue about I
think the more interesting issue - what if there were race? Does that give you a
license now to do whatever you want and disrespect those people? Does it mean
all bets are of? And so its a red-herring to deal with the ontological
question . Its an interesting question but the other question is going to be
how does one establish an ethical relationship to diference . And in that
book Bad Faith an example I used is something like this. There are human beings
who are able to love that which they can never be. We know this in the sense
of human beings relationships go up and down, or higher to lower. But lower to
higher is different. For instance, the founding religious people whose
conception of God lets just say black women, is not at all that God is a
black woman. Now, on a base level that tells you human beings have the
capacity to love that which is not identical with the self. And this becomes
very crucial because you see it gets to a problem that happens in much race theory
which is we confuse equality with sameness. We all think an ethical relationship
requires similarity but the error we make there is we fail to understand that respect
is a concept that does not require being identical to that which you respect. And
once we begin to maybe we have a completely diferent normative world
to think through and build precisely because at the human reality level
there is already proof that there exist actions that dont match the
received models of how we theorize human action. And this becomes crucial.
One of the things I like about what I was doing that work, and still am is that
existential phenomenology doesnt demand for you in advance to say what your
disciplinary commitment is. It doesnt require for you in advance you are
supposed to go through a process of discovering what it may be or to
discover what youre ethical relationships may be which means you go
through an epistemic and ontological and normative risk.

surv law education good

Civil societys good involvement of individuals and informed citizens in
legal debates is critical to curbing rights abuses the post-9/11 human
rights atmosphere is getting better now, but continued legal activism is
key otherwise conservatives will control the political and commit worse
violations
--conservative hawks will always try to do bad stuff gotta be able to stop it
--situation has markedly improved gitmo rights, judicial oversight, no more torture
--civil society/citizens have unique power that has led even assholes like Cheney to
curtail rights violations

Cole 3/28/16 (David, professor at Georgetown University Law Center, a volunteer

attorney for the Center for Constitutional Rights, the legal affairs correspondent for
The Nation, and a regular contributor to the New York Review of Books, Engines of
Liberty: How Civil Society Helped Restore Constitutional Rights in the Aftermath of
9/11, https://www.justsecurity.org/30249/engines-liberty-civil-society-helpedrestore-constitutional-rights-aftermath-911/)
As Europe reels in reaction to the terrorist bombings in Brussels, amid warnings of future attacks, one thing is certain:
Government officials on both sides of the Atlantic will respond with proposals to abandon basic
principles of civil liberties and human rights. After the Paris attacks in November 2105, French President Franois Hollande declared war and imposed a state of
emergency that remains in effect to this day. After the Brussels attacks, Senator Ted Cruz recommended patrolling all Muslim neighborhoods in the United States, and Donald Trump

The pattern is all too familiar . We saw it in the US in World War I, when anti-war
protestors were jailed for years; in World War II, when 110,000 US citizens and residents of Japanese
descent were interned; and after the September 11, 2001 attacks, when thousands of Arab and Muslim
urged torture of suspected terrorists.

men with no connections to terrorism were nonetheless detained, and many deported. In hindsight, we recognize that government officials overreacted and unjustly trampled on political

the US is still
engaged in practices of questionable legality . Nearly one hundred men are still detained at Guantnamo, the Obama
freedoms and rights. But how do we restore some sense of balance in the wake of terrorist attacks? Its been nearly 15 years since 9/11, and

administration regularly employs armed drones to kill suspects in faraway places by remote control, and the NSA continues to collect massive amounts of data about the private lives of

At the same time , its important to acknowledge that the

situation has improved dramatically . And indeed, it did so even before President Obama succeeded George W. Bush. By the time
Bush left office, his administration had released over five hundred men from
Guantnamo, transferred all detainees out of the CIAs secret prisons,
suspended its use of torture as an interrogation tool, halted extraordinary renditions of terrorism suspects to
countries for purposes of torture, afforded Guantnamo detainees access to lawyers, and placed its previously unilateral and
warrantless wiretapping program under judicial supervision. And none of these measures were
undertaken pursuant to court order. What, then, brought about these changes? We know from their memoirs that neither President Bush nor Vice President Dick
Cheney has any regrets about the measures they put in place after 9/11. Yet by the
time they left office, they had significantly curtailed or abandoned nearly all of
them . In my new book, Engines of Liberty: The Power of Citizen Activists to Make Constitutional Law, published this week by Basic
Books, I ask what led the Bush administration to reform substantially its
counterterrorism practices My answer : the credit lies with civil society , as much if
not more than the separation of powers, judicial review, and the formal checks and balances of constitutional government. When civil liberties and
human rights groups formulated their initial responses to the war on terror, they had
little reason for optimism . Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights, who filed the first habeas petition challenging Guantnamo
wholly innocent persons.

detentions, Rasul v. Bush, told me he considered the case completely hopeless. And for good reason. As a matter of history, presidents had been free to do whatever they deemed
necessary to respond to national security crises, especially concerning the enemy or their supporters. The Supreme Court sustained the criminal convictions of anti-war protesters in

World War I and the internment of Japanese Americans in World War II, and did not intervene to protect the rights of suspected Communists in the Cold War until after the Senate had
censured Joe McCarthy and McCarthyism was on the wane. The steel seizure case, Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, is notable principally as the exception that proves the
norm, and in any event involved domestic labor relations, not the presidents power to deal with the enemy. The closest precedent on point to the Guantnamo case was Johnson v.
Eisentrager, which had denied habeas jurisdiction to German prisoners of war in World War II. And the Supreme Court that heard the first Guantnamo case was no foe of the Bush

to nearly everyones surprise,

the Supreme Court ruled that the Guantnamo detainees had a right to judicial
review of the legality of their detentions initially, in Rasul, on statutory grounds, but four years later, in Boumediene v. Bush, on constitutional grounds, after Congress had
expressly denied habeas jurisdiction to the detainees. What explains these decisions? In my view, the results were
driven more by forces outside the Court than by the arguments presented to the Court. Doctrine certainly did not dictate the
administration; indeed, it had installed Bush in office by blocking the Florida recount in the 2000 presidential election. Yet

outcome in either case. The Court in Rasul relied principally on a statutory argument that the petitioners barely advanced. And Boumediene marked the first time in the Courts history
that it extended constitutional rights to foreign nationals outside our borders. But by the time the Court decided the cases, a variety of initiatives outside the Court had framed the

Some of the most

important work involved transnational advocacy , designed to bring pressure to
bear on foreign governments, so that they would in turn lobby the Bush administration for change. Clive Staford Smith of Reprieve,
a UK-based organization, worked with Ratner and Gareth Peirce, a legendary British defense lawyer, to bring attention to
the plight of the British detainees held at Guantnamo. They filed a hopeless habeas suit in the UK, in which a British
court, while understandably denying relief as it had no authority over Guantnamo, nonetheless expressed grave concern lest
the detainees be deprived of all judicial review , essentially encouraging the US courts to exercise jurisdiction.
Stafford Smith and Peirce objected to the kangaroo-court process the Bush administration proposed to
use in a military trial against one of their clients. They generated constant press coverage , and ultimately
created so much public pressure that Prime Minister Tony Blair had to
reverse his initial pro-Bush position and demand the British detainees return. Shortly thereafter, three British detainees, known as
disputes as pitting the rule of law vs. lawlessness and given that choice, its not so surprising that the Court chose the rule of law.

the Tipton Three, became the first to be released from Guantnamo. Upon their release, Gareth Peirce worked with the Tipton Three to recount the abusive treatment they suffered at
the hands of their captors, offering graphic depictions of torture and cruel interrogation tactics. The British press covered these accounts in detail just one month before the US Supreme
Court heard oral argument in Rasul. Even though Rasul itself had nothing to do with torture, at oral argument, Justice Ruth Ginsburg specifically asked about it. Paul Clement,

That very week , The New Yorker and CBSs 60 Minutes II

published the photographs of prisoner abuse from Abu Ghraib, depicting many of the practices the Tipton Three had
described suffering at Guantnamo. Stafford Smith and Reprieve repeated this tactic in the countries of origin of many of their 85 detained clients at Guantnamo, and
ultimately won release of more than 70 of them not one by virtue of a court order. More broadly, human
rights groups worked with foreign governments, officials, and institutions to
bring criticism to bear on the Bush administrations counterterrorism initiatives. Lord Steyn, a former British Law Lord, called Guantnamo a legal black
representing the administration, assured the Court that the US doesnt torture.

hole. More than one hundred members of Parliament filed an amicus brief in the Rasul case. And European institutions and officials harshly condemned the extraordinary rendition
program.

Over time , these criticisms took their toll . Several former Bush security officials, including Ambassador Dan Fried,

NSC and State Department legal advisor John Bellinger, and Matt Waxman, who worked on detainee affairs for the NSC, the Defense Department, and the State Department, told me that

We
were getting beaten up for our unilateral policies all over the world, especially on Guantnamo. We were taking
shots every day. It got in the way of getting anything done. Another civil society initiative that helped frame the Guantnamo cases
began years before 9/11, in the aftermath of World War II. When the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Fred Korematsu for failing to report for internment, civil
liberties groups refused to accept the decision as final. Japanese American groups and the ACLU advocated for decades to
reverse the decision in the eyes of history. More than 40 years later, in 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed the
Civil Liberties Act, which formally apologized for the internment, and paid reparations of
the criticism of foreign government criticism played an important part in convincing the Bush administration to curtail many of its practices in its second term. As Fried said,

$20,000 to each survivor. When the Supreme Court took up the Rasul case, the Brennan Center for Justice filed an amicus brief on behalf of Fred Korematsu himself, asking the Court not
to make the same mistake again. Civil societys hard-fought historical reversal of Korematsu cannot help but have been on the Justices minds as they addressed whether to defer to

these and many other campaigns , most

of them undertaken outside the federal courts, as examples of how executive power
was curbed in the wake of 9/11. I argue that especially in times of crisis , when formal checks on
executive power are likely to be compromised, those who value civil liberties and human rights must
seek out alternative forums for their campaigns. There remains plenty to be critical
about in US counterterrorism policy, especially with respect to secret targeted killing of suspects far from any battlefield. But absent work of
civil society, we would undoubtedly be much worse of . And when one
compares US practices in the first couple years after 9/11 with those in place at the
President Bushs assertion of unchecked executive power. In Engines of Liberty, I recount

today, civil society has much to be proud of . Precisely because the formal
separation of powers is often so anemic in the face of national security crises, human rights and civil liberties groups play
a critically important role in preserving constitutional guarantees in this sphere. But the
point is a more general one. Engines of Liberty also examines the two most successful domestic constitutional
rights campaigns of recent years that of gay rights groups for marriage equality, and that of the National Rifle Association for an
individual right to bear arms. In both settings, citizens with a particular constitutional vision not
reflected in existing doctrine worked through associations to lay the
ground for constitutional transformation . As with the civil liberties and human rights groups, the lions share of the NRAs
and the gay rights advocates advocacy took place outside the federal courts. And as with civil liberties after 9/11, so with
marriage equality and the right to bear arms, the course of constitutional law and practice was
determined more by civil society than by the courts.
end of the Bush administration, much less