Shams Khondkar 1/20/10

American History Mr. Kelly

Freedom and security- Can they work together of must we Sacrifice one for the other?

Throughout history there has always been a debate over security and freedom.

Can both of them coexist? Even though we have tried many times to have both we have

failed every time. One such example of this would be airplane security. When we board

airplanes we always demand security. However for this security we have to give up rights

such as the right to bear arms. Likewise, many presidents such as president Lincoln,

President Roosevelt and President Bush have had to compromise freedom for the sake of

our security. President Lincoln had to suspend many different rights for the states to try to

keep the Union together. President Bush suspended the Writs of Habeus Corpus to try to

protect us from terrorism and President Roosevelt did it to try to protect us from Japan

during WWII.

One president that had to abandon our rights for security was President Lincoln.

During the Civil war the border states were extremely important to determine who would

win the war. As a result President Lincoln to help give us security had to suspend many

rights in Maryland such as the Writs of Habeus Corpus. This goes against the

Constitution where it says “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeus Corpus shall not be

suspended”1 President Lincoln said “ That the Writ of Habeas Corpus is suspended in

respect to all persons arrested” and that the people arrested are “all persons discouraging

volunteer enlistments, resisting militia drafts, or guilty of any disloyal practice, affording

1 http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html
aid and comfort to Rebels against the authority of United States”.2 Here in this

proclamation in order to make sure that he can have people in the military for the

protection of the whole nation he had to abandon the writs of habeus corpus. President

Lincoln also violated the people rights of freedom of the press to help keep the Union

together. He censored anti-union newspapers and then jailed the writes to keep the Union

strong.

During WWII President Roosevelt had to suspend the rights of Japanese

Americans for the security of the nation. He did not trust the Japanese American sand

then had to place them in Internment camps. The Japanese had many different right

violated such as the rights freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. The FBI often

searched the homes of Japanese Americans without search warrants seeking any items

identified as being Japanese.3 They also had many other rights denied such as the writs of

habeaus Corpus. Most of them were not told why they were being jailed and were denied

the right to go to court to try to appeal the legality of their imprisonment. In the Bill of

Rights it says “ Excessive Bail shall not be required.. Nor cruel and unusual punishments

inflicted. 4 However to protect the United States from the threat of Japan the Japanese

Americans were taken to internment camps where they were considered cruel and

unusual because the camps were “grossly inadequate”. 5

That was all in the past, but there are even modern time when Habeus Corpus is

suspended. Recently President Bush passed the military Commission Act, which once

2 http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=425
3 http://bss.sfsu.edu/internment/rightsviolated.html
4 http://bss.sfsu.edu/internment/rightsviolated.html
5
again suspends the Writs of Habeus Corpus. In the act is says “ Any alien unlawful

enemy combatant is subject to trial by military commission under this chapter”6 which

basically can hold them indefinitely. The reasoning for this is to protect us from

Terrorism. Here we have to lost some of our freedoms for the sake of protection from

possible terrorism.

However, if though past presidents have not been able to combine freedom and

security we still do keep it together. For example even during times of peace, we are still

protected. We have the same level of security but we can have different types of

freedoms. In the United States even when it is peaceful we have a standing military. In

this military we have at least 1 million people always ready for the security of our

nation.7 And when we have this military we do not have any of our rights violated and we

can continue to live on normally.

However even though we have both security and freedom in the scenario before

the security is compromised. Even though we are expressing out Rights and do not have

any of them compromised our state of security is very low compared with other times in

history. For example during WWII our military had about 16 million people in their

ranks, compared to the 1 million that we have right now. During that time we had an

extremely strong military and a lot of security. However at that time our freedom and our

rights were compromised, especially for the Japanese Americans who had to go to

internment camps. There is never a direct correlation between freedom and security.

6 http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/PL-109-366.pdf
7 http://www.armyg1.army.mil/HR/docs/demographics/FY09%20Army%20Profile.pdf
When one of them increases the other one is compromised, or decreases.

Security and Freedom can not coexist. One must always be compromised for the

other one. The Action of past presidents such as President Lincoln, President Roosevelt,

and President Bush support this notion. President Lincoln had to suspend the Writs of

Habeus Corpus to help keep the Union together, President Roosevelt had to deny

Japanese Americans many different rights to try to reduce the threat of an attack from the

Japanese, and finally President Bush had to suspend the Writs of Habeuas Corpus to try

to protect America from terrorism.