Research Topics: Case Study Crime

CASE STUDY ANALYSIS

Case Study Analysis When you have read the case study above, answer the following questions. 1.      What challenges have you identified in the background information that would have an impact on you as a trainer/facilitator and the way that you would work with the group?             College trainers’ coming from different vicinity; the unfamiliarity of character would bring about collision of ideas from diverse viewpoints. In addition, working on a two hour meeting with two weeks interval for three consecutive sessions would be edgy due to dissimilar strengths and weak points. Lines of communication must be established to maintain the rapport between the trainers and community representatives. The lack of adequate facilities is indeed a problem but not a major concern, since one of the main goals of project planning is to broaden the knowledge through thorough assessment of the problem to identify possible interventions or solutions in order to attain the expected evaluation. The lack of facilities should not hinder the team to work hand in hand for one need to be self-reliant and resourceful enough to obtain what is missing. The major challenge would be the dedication of each person and maintaining a comfortable dialogue atmosphere in the team. 2.      Outline the issues that you feel could affect the group’s learning in relation to the timing of the programme.             Learning is a two way and an on-going process and it varies from one person to another depending on their personal strengths, areas for growth and time management. The said timing of the programme is beneficial to attain a long term goal but the two hour meeting in a two week interval would also mean a delay of progress. Progress is not a result rather a journey to boundless opportunities by embracing it fully and taking risk on whatever challenge is on hand. The team must be willing to cooperate and do away with individual differences. Inability or refusal to compromise would limit the group process ad halts progress. 3.      Describe an activity that you could use as an icebreaker with the group. Explain how it might be used to gain their confidence and establish a learning environment.             In choosing an ice breaker one must bear in mind the purpose of the ice breaker and connect that purpose to which goal one has set to achieve. An example of an ice breaker would be the game called favorite t-shirt. In this activity, the facilitator asks attendees to bring (not wear) their favorite T-shirt to the meeting. Once all participants have arrived, asks each person to state beforehand their names and show the shirt to the group and explain how the T-shirt best resembles their personality.             The importance of an ice breaker in every meeting is to create familiarity and ease everyone within the group thus, promoting cooperation and willingness to participate in the group process. 4.      What use could you make of the college classroom and equipment, and the community centre facilities, to minimize the impact of the challenges that you identified?             In the session 1 and 3, it is to be held in the college classroom knowing that it is well equipped with teaching facilities ergo, detailed discussion of the said project should be done through outlining the goals, and every possible solution should be laid out. However, the facilitators should tackle with the community representatives the basic information beforehand since they know their living condition well enough that they can even extract answers from their own backyard what the trainers could do is to supervise them at the same time promoting the value of self-reliance.             In the community centre where in the second session will be held. What is to be done here is to survey the area in order to verify the assessed problems in the project noting the need for improvement or further development of the said area.             Lastly, everyone must appreciate individual’s capacity to work and handle responsibilities. Working with different concerns is a tough job and energy draining; giving positive feedbacks would promote a productive output and a shift of environment from an edgy one to an ease and good working ambiance. This is mainly due to the fact that you are acknowledging them of their qualities and at the same time, boosting their self-esteem.                                             Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

CASE STUDY ANALYSIS

Case Study Analysis When you have read the case study above, answer the following questions. 1. What challenges have you identifi...

Actual Case Studies – Sexual Offenses

Actual Case Studies – Sexual Offenses             All the cases involved allegations of the crime of rape. To prove the crime, five elements need proof. First is penetration of the male sexual organ of the female sexual organ, regardless of the extent, but there are also jurisdictions that recognize penetration made by other body parts or objects. This makes rape traditionally gender specific or specific to women. Second is force by the perpetrator and resistance by the victim. Both are necessary to constitute evidence of rape since force and resistance reflects the lack of consent to the act. The force should be reasonable that average person would consider this a threat to their free will and the resistance by the victim should likewise be reasonably evident. The existence of resistance comprises a key consideration in investigations of rape. Third is non-consent or lack of consent, which means that the act is against the will of the victim, as opposed to consensual sex. In investigating this element, law enforcement officers consider a number of factors such as the relationship of the victim and suspect, the circumstances of the situation, the state of mind of the victim and suspect, and physical evidence. Fourth is marital exemption, which involves the consideration of the lack or existence of domestic relationship between the perpetrator and victim. However, many states have abolished this element to address the alleged bias against married women. Nevertheless, marital receives regard as less serious. Fifth is mens rea or mental state of the defendant. This means that the defendant should be aware of the lack of consent of the defendant and committed the act with knowledge or recognition of the act as reckless or criminal. (Bloch & Mcmunigal, 2005)             Based on these elements, a consideration of the cases independently shows that only Case Three, the complaint made by a woman of being raped in an alley while waiting for her bus. This was because her statement coincided with the statements of witnesses working at the bus station, medical and physical evidence also corroborated her story, and she positive identified the perpetrator. In the other cases, there was no physical evidence such as in Case One and Two. The other cases, Case Four and Five, some medical and physical evidence but the statements of the victim were uncorroborated or inconsistent. In Case Six, there were no other physical evidence in the crime scene but laboratory reports are still pending since the victim claimed being drugged. Case Seven does not contain detailed reports.             The case reports contained common elements including summary or brief of the subject of the investigation and the situation, the investigating officer, the steps taken upon receiving the call, statements of the victim and witnesses, evidence collected including medical reports and physical evidence, and the comments or conclusions to the report based on the opinion of the investigating officer (Bacigal, 2001). However, there were some cases lacking in some of these details such as medical or laboratory results, which could support the investigation even with inconsistencies in the statements of the victim or that of the victim with witnesses.             Initially, the first two cases appear to have involved false accusations of the suspect that appeared to be different person. However, by going through the rest of the cases collectively, a pattern appears, particularly rape as the crime reported and Richard Verduzco (also known as Ricky Verduzco or Rick). Although the cases involved separate incidents and unrelated victims, the pattern supports a change in impression towards the earlier cases appearing to be false accusations. There needs to be further investigation of the cases given the similar nature of the crime and the suspects identified by the victims. Seven cases of rape against a single suspect by assumed unrelated victims deserve further investigation.             Based on the consideration of the cases singly and collectively, the victim in Case Three and Case Six are telling the truth since evidence corroborated their statements but even in this case, there is yet a report on the processing of the rape kit and the victims dress. This means the rape happened but there is no other evidence pointing to Rick Verduzco as the suspect apart from the fact that both these women were with him during the reported rape incident. The evidence of rape and positive identification of Rick Veruduzco as the perpetrator could support criminal prosecution but waiting for the results of the laboratory tests would strengthen the case.                   It was only during the seventh case that a semblance of collaboration in the investigation occurred. A recommended protocol would be to run a report against a database of resolved cases as well as records of pending investigations. In case of similar criminal reports involving the same suspect, the investigation should be coordinated on the suspect. References Bacigal, R. J. (2001). Criminal law & procedure: An introduction (2nd ed.).  New York: West Legal Studies.   Bloch, K. E., & Mcmunigal, K. C. (2005). Criminal law a contemporary approach: Cases, statutes, and problems. New York: Aspen Publishers.     Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Actual Case Studies – Sexual Offenses

Actual Case Studies – Sexual Offenses All the cases involved allegations of the crime of rape. To prove the crime, five eleme...

Actual Case Studies – Sexual Offenses

Actual Case Studies – Sexual Offenses

Actual Case Studies – Sexual Offenses All the cases involved allegations of the crime of rape. To prove the crime, five eleme...

Actual Case Studies – Sexual Offenses

Actual Case Studies – Sexual Offenses

Actual Case Studies – Sexual Offenses All the cases involved allegations of the crime of rape. To prove the crime, five eleme...

America and Terrorism Case Study

AMERICA and TERRORISM             On the morning of September 11, 2001, terrorists hijacked four commercial jet planes and attempted to fly them into several U.S. targets. At 8:50 a.m., one of the planes, American Airlines Flight 11, crashed into Tower One of the World Trade Center, New York. United Airlines Flight 175 crashed into Tower Two at 9:04 AM. As the world watched Tower Two collapsed to the ground at about 10:00 AM., Unfortunately, this horrible scene was duplicated at 10:30 AM when Tower One crashed to the ground. This terrorist attack brought about the death of approximately 3,000 men, women and children from nations around the world.             [1]The other group of terrorists used American Airlines Flight 77 like a missile and crashed it into the Pentagon at 9:38 AM. The Pentagon caught fire and part of the building collapsed. In this tragic event 189 civilians and military personnel lost their lives. This attack was done in concert with the attack on the World Trade Center.             On the other hand, the terrorists planned to fly United Airlines Flight 93 into a key U.S. target like the capitol building. However, some of the passengers had heard of the events surrounding the other terrorist targets and took action. The heroes of Flight 93 epitomize the sacrifice and courage that the United States of America was founded upon. Although authorities are unclear of the exact sequence of events involving this flight, they are sure these heroes died protecting the lives of countless others.             After the harrowing events of September 11, 2001, the world is a very different place in many respects. Unfortunately, because of the focus of terrorism, to make the general population feel unsafe and thereby bring attention to their cause, fighting this nemesis requires efforts on many fronts. However, terrorism is not a new phenomenon. This event fueled an all-out war against terrorism.             The people of the United States of America has banded together in the aftermath of September 11th attacks like few other times in American history. People responded with donations of blood, effort and money. President George W Bush immediately called for all civilized nations to band together and fight terrorism. The military of the United States mobilized for war in an operation code named Enduring Freedom. The government declared Osama Bin Laden to be the main suspect and sent the military to fight him and his terrorist organization called Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. The military has been able to capture numerous leaders within the terrorist organization but has not been able to capture Bin Laden himself.             A huge controversy arose when President Bush sent troops into Iraq on March 19, 2003 claiming that the country led by Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction and aiding Al Qaeda operatives. As time passed and no evidence of those weapons was found in Iraq, many in America were upset by what they felt were unnecessary reasons to get involved in Iraq. Some argued that the Iraq War drew necessary attention away from the war in Afghanistan.             [2]What then is terrorism? In virtually every society and historical era there have been extremists who have used the tactics of terror to advance their causes. From White Supremacists, the Black Panthers and anti-government militia movements in America, to the anarchists in Europe and America in the early 20th century, to the IRA in Ireland and the Red Army in Japan in the aftermath of World War II, extremists have arisen using bombs and various means of terror to attack others in a way calculated to bring attention to their cause and inflict damage—directly or indirectly—on the perceived enemies of that cause.             Of the thousands of such groups that exist or have existed, the validity of their causes is often questionable or worse. One element remains consistent throughout time and geography, however. These extremists believe themselves denied the resources or opportunity to advance their cause through conventional means. They believe acts of terrorism will gain them access and relief.             The fact that a weak group resorts to terrorist tactics to fight the strong does not excuse the horror and repugnance of their acts, but it is a pattern that is well-established.             The terms terrorists, extremists, insurgents, guerrillas, jihadists and fundamentalists have been used freely and in many cases interchangeably in discussions of al Qaeda, Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine and the Mideast. This has added much confusion and imprecision to the discussions.             Those few Islamic extremist groups who attacked and continuously attacks the U.S commit acts of terrorism not because the U.S is free. The U.S. is, in fact, a secondary target chosen because it support governments and policies that are sources of their oppression, and because attacking the United States brings greater attention to their cause. Al Qaeda’s current rallying cry is the perceived injustice in Palestine and the presence of a non-Muslim military on sacred Muslim soil in Saudi Arabia. Previously, it was the anger over the secular Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, which gave birth to the movement. Hizbollah was formed because Israel was occupying Lebanon. Hamas wants to reclaim lost territory in Palestine. The driving force behind them all is not simply ideology, but rather, achieving specific events and outcomes. Resolve the problem and the motivation fades.             But there are millions among these Muslims who are despairing, disenfranchised and excluded, and are thus vulnerable to the messages and leadership of extremists. Some heed that message; many others become sympathizers, most often because they are looking for nothing more than hope and a better life. Only a small number hate the United States — but that number is rising.             The United States also played a significant role in the establishment of Israel in 1948, which to this day helps define the Muslim world’s view of the policies of the West in general and the U.S. in particular. This is not to suggest that the U.S. should not have supported its creation. Rather, as a result of that action, The United States now has a particular responsibility to help bring about a fair, impartial and balanced solution to the dispute between Israel and Palestine. The United States is strongly supportive of the existence and continued health of Israel, but circumstances in Palestine continue to contribute profoundly to concerns and adversarial attitudes between Muslims and the West, with deadly consequences throughout the Middle East, Europe and the world. A balanced resolution to this Palestinian dilemma is one of the keys to reducing global terrorism. That fact has been under recognized.             The U.S. invasion of Iraq—without the support of the United Nations and against the conclusions of U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix about the presence of weapons of mass destruction—has added considerably to the Islamic world’s suspicions. Many hold that the oil fields of Iraq were as much a motivation for the invasion as any other factor. And the horrors that occurred within the Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay prisons profoundly color the current views of many Muslims regarding Western justice and morality. (Ironically, experts have long known that the surest way to get information from prisoners is not through torture, but by establishing trust and rapport.)             A society coping with stress often turns to the certainties of tradition and the past as it confronts the unknown. This helps explain the movement toward fundamentalism within Islam. Fundamentalism strips away the “new.” Fundamentalism lends meaning to an extremist movement. Widespread stress and uncertainty can make the certainty of the fundamentalist message more appealing to a broader audience. Not all fundamentalists embrace terrorism, nor are all terrorists fundamentalists. Nor is the phenomenon of embracing fundamentalism in the face of societal upheaval exclusive to Islam or the Middle East.             All religious traditions contain certain exclusionary tenants, yet practitioners of those religions — Islam, Christianity and Judaism — have found ways to coexist productively with other faiths in society. Examples abound in the history of all three of these great religions. In times of profound change or stress, however, some factions within those three religions have embraced fundamentalist, exclusionary or hostile principles.             All this helps to set the stage for understanding terrorism in the Middle East. But what about terrorism in places like Britain and Spain? As Europe’s own population growth has slowed, and in some countries declined, immigrants—including millions of Muslims—have filled the continued demand for the workers necessary to sustain economic expansion. This population regularly faces discrimination and disenfranchisement in the new countries where they find themselves—exclusion from better jobs, political office, social services and other vital resources.             Whether in their home countries or as immigrants elsewhere, those enduring extreme economic poverty also labor under difficult social pressures. People seek relief. Fundamentalists purport to have solutions and actively market them. It should have surprised no one that when the citizens of Palestine and Egypt finally had a chance to vote, many voted for fundamentalist opposition parties. After all, the current regime was failing them and these parties were offering the promise of a better life.             Two other factors are inextricably intertwined in this equation. The creation of the Israeli state in 1948 and the world’s dependency on oil, both of which have only heightened the stakes and complicated the solutions.              In cases where the cause of the extremists has gained currency among a larger constituency, and where these extremists are carrying out acts of terrorism, the population will only rescind its support if occupation or oppression is addressed. The evidence that this has occurred will be a withdrawal or acceptable compromise with the occupier, or, to replace the oppression, the implementation of government that truly fulfills its basic obligations: providing the affected population with a genuine voice in government, enforcement of property rights, broad opportunity for economic advancement, and personal freedom and safety—along with the absence of large-scale public corruption and suppression of dissenting voices. We cannot reform terrorists, but we can eliminate their appeal. We do not need to appease terrorists, rather we must study closely the plight of the population of those countries that have supported them and use our influence to ease their plight. If we succeed, we deprive terrorists of their sympathizers and their prospective recruits.             Merely moving a government toward democracy is not enough. There must be an equally vigorous effort to develop economic opportunity—a modern day Marshall Plan. Political power cannot become or remain broadly distributed unless economic power and opportunity and assets are also broadly distributed. Progress on either the political or economic front can accomplish much, yet only progress on both together can bring change that is truly enduring.             There are many ways to assist a country in distributing economic opportunity and wealth. Direct aid has its place, yet cannot achieve the job of broadly and sustainably sowing opportunity when it is poorly conceived, coordinated or managed—which is all-too-frequently the case. Such aid often breeds corruption and benefits only the few. Micro lending programs have shown promise, as have special economic zones. Some of the most successful efforts have been built on trade and land reform and distribution.             Consider briefly the example of Peru, a country of great poverty, which in the 1980s was emerging from a military dictatorship and undergoing rapid change with a concentration of wealth and land ownership among the elite. A terrorist organization known as the “Shining Path” bombed government buildings and attacked citizens. They were terrorists in every modern sense of the word, but in this case they advocated communism as a solution to the despair of Peruvians.             It is economic injustice that fuels global terrorism, writes De Soto, not cultural heritage. As a powerful example, De Soto reports that despite the world’s poor having accumulated over trillion of real estate, it is their lack of property rights— clear title and a legal system to support it— that prohibits them from leveraging these assets into new capital, and thus retards their progress.             Democracy is a powerful instrument. The current Administration is correct in this regard. But merely the ability to vote is not sufficient. The effectiveness of America’s government rests on three principles of limit, each of which acknowledges the corrupting influence of power: <ul type="disc" style="margin-bottom: 0in"> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; line-height: 200%"> 	Explicit limitation of 	government, as embodied in our constitution, especially such keys as 	habeas corpus and property rights</li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; line-height: 200%"> 	Checks and balances created 	by a true separation of powers, including powers over the military</li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; line-height: 200%"> 	Decentralization of 	government so that many decisions can truly be made at the local level.</li> </ul>             Representative government by its very nature is not exclusionary. But we should not be misled by false indicators of open government, staged by some countries to create the impression that they are advancing in the proper direction. These are charades; voters are given no bona fide choices; opposition is suppressed. Government reform, while important, is not sufficient on its own. Broad economic progress must also occur. Sustained, across-the-board economic prosperity cannot occur in a country unless property rights are assured and power is distributed and decentralized.             The United States, in conjunction with the community of nations, should use its economic support, its trade policy, and every other non-military means of positive influence it possesses to encourage countries to migrate in this direction. The path to democracy is complex, and while change will not happen overnight, incremental steps can be taken.             An important additional note must be made. Recent terrorist attacks have occurred in countries like Spain and Britain, where occupation and oppression do not exist in the manner that we have described above. Rather, this terrorism reflects the migration of violence from countries where it does. Palestine is cited more than any other cause. Close behind is the support of countries like Britain for perceived occupiers and oppressors? These acts of terrorism also reflect the scars that result from the colonial legacy and the stark economic disparities in these countries relative to the West. Muslim immigrants from the Middle East residing in London, as one example, have relatives and friends in Palestine, Iraq and elsewhere and often deeply share their concerns. It follows that extremism will not significantly abate in a place like London unless occupation and oppression in the Middle East abate as well.             The extremism in counties like Britain and Spain reflects the plight and alienation of any excluded minority in any society—and in this sense is at least partially akin to the black civil rights movements and race riots in the United States in the 1960s. As America has learned, progressive policies of inclusion—and policies that leave room for the customs and traditions of these immigrants—are a necessary part of addressing the plight of an excluded minority. Properly conceived, these policies will convey a sense of welcome that will bring psychological integration — identification with, and loyalty to that immigrant’s new country. Contrast, for example, the vitriol to be found in America’s newspapers and political speeches in the 1890s regarding Jewish, Italian and other immigrants with the contributions they provide to American society today.              The United States should recognize the true cost of invading Iraq. The war has fueled terrorism. The United States’ invasion has become a powerful rallying point for many in the Muslim world who regard it as unjust. In a national intelligence estimate completed in April 2006, America’s National Intelligence Council concluded that the Iraq war has fueled the growth of Islamic extremism and terror groups and is being used to spread the global extremist message.             Thousands have traveled from around the world to Iraq to fight against this newest perceived aggression. Terrorist organizations across the globe, including Al Qaeda, have won new converts to their cause and their methods because of the invasion. Terrorist attacks are on the rise.             A British Joint Intelligence Committee report from 2006 found that “Iraq is likely to be an important motivating factor for some time to come in the radicalization of British Muslims and for the extremists who view attacks against the U.K. as legitimate.”             As was said by Republican Melvin Laird, secretary of defense under Richard Nixon and architect of “Vietnamization” (the withdrawal of troops from Vietnam), “Our presence is what feeds the insurgency.”             According to a study by Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist at Columbia University, and Linda Bilmes, of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, by invading Iraq, The United States of America are on course to spend trillion. The Iraq Study Group Report: The Way Forward – A New Approach states that amount might be as much as trillion. That is money that instead could have been used more productively.             War is not de facto wrong because it is expensive. If there are observable and measurable benefits to fighting a war, costs can be tolerated. But we can find no such benefits in the war in Iraq. It does nothing to advance the global search for terrorists. Rather, it breeds them.             The toll of war in purely economic terms has been high. Consider its impact on oil prices. Since the invasion began, the price of oil has increased from per barrel to a price above , and is currently above , due in large part to the disrupted supply and uncertainty the war has created. Some have attributed the price increase to heightened global demand, especially from China and India, but many analysts contend that, absent Iraq and the geopolitical fallout from our confrontations, the price of oil would be significantly lower— or less per barrel.             The national debt has increased by 30 percent to .6 trillion during the war, a result of the record-setting deficits caused by the price of this war.             The toll can be measured in other ways, as well.             We have taken our eyes off Afghanistan, resulting in an increase in insurgency and a dramatic increase in opium production. Terrorists—the Taliban and Al Qaeda—have gained a renewed foothold in Afghanistan. As we have seen elsewhere, the Taliban was initially welcomed because of the services and order they restored to the country. The emergence of democracy there was not accompanied by the sustained resources to enable that government to properly serve the needs of the people. And so the country has “re-devolved” to the warlords and the Taliban.             Another toll has been the loss of enormous reserves of international and domestic goodwill. At home, some soldiers have concluded that we are spending lives and money for a people who do not want our help. And many Americans that were content to let our government lead in this situation now feel differently, as the 2006 elections signaled.             The U.S. invasion has now brought Iraq into a civil war—by any meaningful current definition of the term—and that civil war has been escalating. Over a million Iraqi citizens have fled the country, including disproportionate numbers in the professional classes, creating a potential refugee crisis in Jordan, Syria and elsewhere.             The Iraq war has brought forward the specter of corruption that inevitably accompanies armed conflict. The Iraq Study Group Report cites estimates of losses to corruption per annum in Iraq of to 7 billion. Allegations abound of misspent funds by contractors, and of oil and other resources being diverted to the personal enrichment of Iraqi politicians.             And, finally, this war has cost lives—over 3,000 U.S. military fatalities and a minimum of 46,000 Iraqi casualties and counting. However, this estimate of Iraqi casualties is almost certainly low since a recently released U.N. report counts 34,000 Iraqi deaths in 2006 alone, and respected researchers overseen by Johns Hopkins University have estimated that the Iraqi death toll may be as many as 655,000 people.             Any solution to reducing extremism must incorporate our relationship with all predominantly Muslim countries, not just one or a few. There are 45 predominately Muslim countries in the world — from Morocco in the northwest of Africa, to Syria and the United Arab Emirates, to Azerbaijan on the Caspian Sea, to Indonesia in the Indian Ocean, and more. Our relationship with each of these added together shapes the global            Muslim community’s view and posture toward the United States. Successful relations with Turkey and Morocco, for example, positively affect the perception of America in Syria (as well as among Muslim immigrants in Europe and elsewhere). Negative relations with Palestinians adversely affect our dealings with Muslims in Egypt. It is all deeply interconnected.             As noted in the Pew Global Attitudes Project , a crucial illustration is Indonesia, where in 2000, 75 percent of Indonesians viewed Americans favorably. This number fell to 15 percent after the invasion of Iraq, with 80 percent of Indonesians saying they fear an attack by the United States. However, Indonesian’s approval of the U.S. climbed significantly after extensive U.S. aid to rebuild after the devastating 2004 tsunami.             Other than defense itself, America’s principle obligation to the countries of the world is to be a good and enlightened neighbor—so that America’s citizens and their institutions and enterprises can interact safely, productively and successfully with other countries’ citizens, enterprises and institutions.             Anything the United States can do to incent these governments toward being more representative, and to improve the economic lot of their entire citizenry, is a powerful tool to combat terrorism.             But in almost all cases, the United States of America should seek first to work with those countries that invite us, and provide incentives that motivate other countries to seek us out. We should primarily use a carrot and not a stick. Many of these governments are making positive steps toward more representative government and economic progress. They should be rewarded for what they have accomplished and encouraged to do more. The tools to accomplish this include economic development and trade support, as well as assistance on issues of governmental reform.             After World War II, the United States used its economic prowess to stave off world chaos with the Marshall Plan in Europe, one of history’s most magnanimous and astute initiatives. As part of this plan, the U.S. spent over 0 billion (in today’s dollars) to help rebuild European economies which were in real danger of being taken over by the Soviet Union, or plummeting into economic and social chaos, or both.             If the United States of America makes a policy to focus on building up Muslim nations, as opposed to making war, terrorism will begin to recede.             The United States of America’s support should be carefully directed so as not to simply enrich the corrupt. Measures should be in place to gauge the effectiveness of these overall efforts. A scorecard for success in building up and thus combating extremism would be a simple one to create. They could measure the growth in the size of the middle class and the breadth of inclusion of people in the political process in each of these countries. These are readily quantified. If the number of citizens legitimately participating in governmental decisions—especially through bona fide elections — in a given year is greater than the previous year, and if the size of the middle class rises from one year to the next, the underpinnings of terrorism in those countries will begin to abate.             It has not been a mistake to push for democracy in the Middle East. The mistake was pushing for it militarily in Iraq — and without first addressing more fundamental issues. We should instead have done such things as nurtured the fledgling democracy in Afghanistan, encouraged the continued movement toward democracy in Morocco, continued to positively engage and support Turkey in its democratic efforts, and done the like in a number of other countries.             There are risks, of course. In some nations, there has been movement toward democracy but the outcomes have been worrisome. In Palestine, a true election was held, but the citizens voted for extremists. This was to be expected, because the incumbents had not succeeded in staving off military humiliation and creating a path out of economic distress. The citizens of Palestine are among the poorest in the world. Unless we help to equitably relieve and resolve the egregious conditions in the region, we cannot reasonably expect a different outcome. In Egypt, where any movement toward truly free political contests would result in large gains for the Muslim Brotherhood, the situation is similar. Egypt has been highly repressive towards any party that has a genuine chance of unseating those in power. Its citizens are politically restrained and excluded, and poverty is pervasive, so no other result is likely. Yet large-scale efforts to decentralize wealth and economic opportunity could create a more moderate outcome. U.S. priorities should be clear—the true decentralization of power and economic opportunity—even though these electoral risks exist. And most Islamic political parties—including those in Jordan, Kuwait and Morocco—are peaceful.             Many people have mistakenly suggested that the terrorism in the Middle East is somehow related to the intrinsic characteristics of Islam. Some believe there exists an inherent antagonism within Islam against Christians and Jews. We attribute that misperception primarily to fundamentalists and splinter extremists. Though multiple interpretations of the Koran are possible, it is crucial to note that there is not a structurally irreconcilable conflict between Islam and Christianity, or Islam and Judaism. Note the treatment of Jews and Christians under of the Prophet Muhammad, born 552 AD, and under Islam in the years immediately after:             “…Jews throve under Muslim rule, especially after Islam expanded into Byzantine lands, where Orthodox rulers routinely persecuted both Jews and non-Orthodox Christians for their religious beliefs, often forcing them to convert to Imperial Christianity under penalty of death. In contrast, Muslim law, which considers Jews and Christians ‘protected peoples’ ( dhimmi ), neither required nor encouraged their conversion to Islam…Muslim persecution of the dhimmi was not only forbidden by Islamic law, it was in direct defiance of Muhammad’s orders to his expanding armies never to trouble Jews in their practice of Judaism, and always to preserve the Christian institutions they encountered. … warning that ‘he who wrongs a Jew or a Christian will have me as his accuser on the Day of Judgment.’” (Reza Aslan, “No god but God,” Random House, 2005, pp. 94-5, 101)             Heated rhetoric doesn’t mean that the people of these countries are permanently pitted against America. In our revolutionary war, a number of Americans used the term “Great Satan” and worse to describe England and its leaders. This type of propaganda is often part of an attempt to shape a distinct identity and to articulate a new order.             The United States must set an example for the Islamic community by its own conduct. Practicing the values of freedom, friendship and justice that are the spirit of America and rejecting repressive regimes, coups, torture, illegal detention and the murder of civilians sends a stronger message than any act of force or coercion.             As The United States of America have seen, in some instances, their dependence on foreign oil has compromised their judgment and values in dealing with certain foreign governments. Over the long term, they should be making intelligent, concerted investments in alternative fuels. It is not unreasonable to think that the trillion dollars they are spending on Iraq would be sufficient to have brought them to energy independence if spent on alternative fuels development instead. Even with the efforts outlined above, they need to be prepared for setbacks, difficulty and backsliding, and keep our spirit of goodwill and resolve in the face of them.     	 		 		 		[1] http://americanhistory.about.com/od/terroris1/p/wtc_September11.htm 		 		 		[2] http://www.americaspurpose.org/report/whatisterrorism.asp Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

America and Terrorism Case Study

AMERICA and TERRORISM On the morning of September 11, 2001, terrorists hijacked four commercial jet planes and attempted to...

Top