Since the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, people worldwide have been debating just who is and who is not a terrorist. The nonpartisan Council on Foreign Relations, as well as Slate magazine and About.com, attempt to define the issue while recognizing that basic civil liberties are at stake. Jim Holt adds to the confusion by discussing the doctrine of double effect, while varying views are presented in this alphabetical list of articles regarding who is a terrorist and who is a freedom fighter.

The U.S. Congress overwhelming passed the USA Patriot Act of 2001 into law, but it immediately drew fire from both domestic and international critics who see it as a victory for those who seek to undermine American civil liberties. U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft defended the Patriot Act, but organizations such as Just Response and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) pointed out that the government's response threatens rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, such as freedom of speech. Political conservatives also criticize the Patriot Act for consolidating too much power at the federal rather than the state or local level. Meanwhile, the Christian Science Monitor provides a history of civil liberty losses in the U.S. during times of war. The Electronic Frontier Foundation provides a detailed analysis of the Patriot Act with regard to online activities using the Internet and World Wide Web.

Please select one of the topics below and use at least one of the Web sites provided above as a starting point for discussion:

Terrorism Topic 1: Domestic Terrorism: Until September 11, most planned attacks on civilians in the United States were carried out by Americans themselves. These included arson and armed assaults on churches and other houses of worship, assassinations of doctors who perform abortions as well as bombings of abortion clinics, and protests against federal authority in Waco and Oklahoma City, resulting in massive injuries and deaths. Political conservatives such as Enter Stage Right and the Center for Defense of Free Enterprise are eager to point out that domestic terrorism in the U.S. includes destruction of private property by extreme environmental groups to protest severe ecological degradation--ecoterrorism. Political liberals, meanwhile, tend to view skinheads and survivalist groups with suspicion, linking them to other forms of domestic terrorism. The case of John Walker Lindh (the American Taliban) brings up some key issues: What legal rights should Americans have if they act as terrorists against other Americans or if they engage in terrorist activity that threatens, injures, or kills anyone worldwide? Should American terrorists be treated any differently by domestic or international courts than terrorists of other nationalities? Please answer at least one of the above questions and use evidence to support your arguments.

Terrorism Topic 2: Bioterrorism: Since the anthrax scare of late 2001, the use of biological agents as a weapon of individual or mass destruction has many Americans worried. In a critical situation, the balance between public health and civil liberties would be tested. The Mayo Clinic provides a list of biological and chemical weapons as well as possible responses to them. The British science magazine New Scientist has a special report on bioterrorism and bioweapons. What plans have been or are being made in your local community to respond in the event of a bioterrorist attack?

Terrorism Topic 3: International Piracy: Piracy of goods aboard ships (and sometimes the ships themselves) is a growing trend in many of the world's waterways. As documented in the Weekly Piracy Report from the International Chamber of Commerce Commercial Crime Services Office, most piracy is conducted by organized crime and terrorist organizations. Based on your reading, should the costs of guarding and fighting against piracy be borne by governments or by private corporations?