McNerney1 Steven McNerney 11/4/13 College Writing Essay #4 First draft Foreign Surveillance Growing up I have always wanted

to be a foreign diplomat, someone who represents the United States culture and ideals. These Foreign Service officers are the first people to deal with the backlash of any decision America makes that is seen negatively in the international community. When the latest revelations of foreign surveillance arose, these men and womens lives were immediately put at risk. In a country with so much political unrest such as Turkey and Afghanistan just to name a few, where America has many diplomats and businessman, news of foreign surveillance could get these people killed just for being an American citizen. Foreign surveillance has encroached on millions of peoples rights and the United States has now foolishly endangered thousands of people who are supposed to represent the American values of freedom and liberty. The U.S had even gone far enough to spy on our allies leaders including German Chancellor Angela Merkel. It is now diplomats and other Foreign Service members who will have to deal with the wrath of these people who have had their privacy stolen and in some countries people will not be forgiving to those who represent American ideals. To be a Foreign Service Officer, a person is expected to be able to make the correct decision in any scenario as efficiently as possible. These men and women represent any United States citizen who enters the foreign country and many times at the embassy they take in citizens

McNerney2 who are wanted for a crime so that they can get adequate legal counsel and keep the same liberties the US provides them in their home country. As international diplomacy has deteriorated with the ongoing war on terror, so has the relationship between foreign nations and our FSOs. The relationship has been strained so much to the point now that in countries with high political unrest, our men and women are now in harms way with every un popular decision made by the US. In order to understand why American Lawmakers have adopted this persistent paranoia that all countries are trying to knock us off, you have to go back to the years before foreign surveillance was as prevalent as it is now. The Patriot Act of 2003 was Americas first step towards the confiscation of many rights it vowed to protect. The patriot act was passed with good intentions towards keeping the American people safe. However once the law and policies crossed boarders and secret courts gave privileges to lawmakers to spy on foreigners, that is where the law began to deface the American culture. The patriot act nullifies our 4th amendment to some extents and the main reason why it impacts the foreign communities is because America has so many citizens who expect to have their information protected by the countries that are hosting them. Foreign countries normally never make a big deal about it because it is not targeting their citizens although as time has gone on since the bill was passed; the power it gave certain people has been abused to the point where we have begun spying illegally on foreign citizens who we deemed to be a threat to national security. The sentiments towards America was very strong after 9/11/. Countries were willing to sit back and allow the US to take any measures necessary to protect their people and make sure something like that never happens again. As the years passed countries began to grow suspicious towards American policies and in recent years The sentiment has deteriorated. In effect to the deterioration of sentiments, foreign citizens have become

McNerney3 angered by the over spill of spying on American citizens on them. The patriot act has made the international community paranoid of a revamped FISA which with todays technology would legally give the US the power to find records of any single person on the earth.

McNerney4

Steven McNerney 11/4/13 College Writing Essay #4 Second Draft Foreign Surveillance Growing up I have always wanted to be a foreign diplomat, someone who represents the United States culture and ideals. These Foreign Service officers are the first people to deal with the backlash of any decision America makes that is seen negatively in the international community. When the latest revelations of foreign surveillance arose, these men and womens lives were immediately put at risk. In a country with so much political unrest such as Turkey and Afghanistan just to name a few, where America has many diplomats and businessman, news of foreign surveillance could get these people killed just for being an American citizen. Foreign surveillance has encroached on millions of peoples rights and the United States has now foolishly endangered thousands of people who are supposed to represent the American values of freedom and liberty. The U.S had even gone far enough to spy on our allies leaders including German Chancellor Angela Merkel. It is now diplomats and other Foreign Service members who will have to deal with the wrath of these people who have had their privacy stolen and in some countries people will not be forgiving to those who represent American ideals. To be a Foreign Service Officer, a person is expected to be able to make the correct decision in any scenario as efficiently as possible. These men and women represent any United

McNerney5 States citizen who enters the foreign country and many times at the embassy they take in citizens who are wanted for a crime so that they can get adequate legal counsel and keep the same liberties the US provides them in their home country. As international diplomacy has deteriorated with the ongoing war on terror, so has the relationship between foreign nations and our FSOs. The relationship has been strained so much to the point now that in countries with high political unrest, our men and women are now in harms way with every un popular decision made by the US. In order to understand why American Lawmakers have adopted this persistent paranoia that all countries are trying to knock us off, you have to go back to the years before foreign surveillance was as prevalent as it is now. The Patriot Act of 2003 was Americas first step towards the confiscation of many rights it vowed to protect. The patriot act was passed with good intentions towards keeping the American people safe. However once the law and policies crossed boarders and secret courts gave privileges to lawmakers to spy on foreigners, that is where the law began to deface the American culture. The patriot act nullifies our 4th amendment to some extents and the main reason why it impacts the foreign communities is because America has so many citizens who expect to have their information protected by the countries that are hosting them. Foreign countries normally never make a big deal about it because it is not targeting their citizens although as time has gone on since the bill was passed; the power it gave certain people has been abused to the point where we have begun spying illegally on foreign citizens who we deemed to be a threat to national security. The sentiments towards America was very strong after 9/11/. Countries were willing to sit back and allow the US to take any measures necessary to protect their people and make sure something like that never happens again. As the years passed countries began to grow suspicious towards American policies and in recent years The sentiment

McNerney6 has deteriorated. In effect to the deterioration of sentiments, foreign citizens have become angered by the over spill of spying on American citizens on them. The patriot act has made the international community paranoid of a revamped FISA which with todays technology would legally give the US the power to find records of any single person on the earth. FISA is a law that came into effect years before the internet became a major mode of transporting information. After years of fighting the supreme court, the bill finally passed in 1978, giving the American government the ability to wiretap the phones of foreign persons. This law had caused a great amount of criticism from just about everyone who wasnt a federal employee, as the years passed the law was utilized less and less and eventually the technology became to advanced for wiretaps to work successfully. Starting supposedly a few months after 9/11, the NSA used this old law to help strengthen their foreign surveillance. It was justified in the eyes of the American government and its allies, up until revelations were made about the US actually spying on its allies citizens and even worse, spying on the personal phones of political leaders including German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Fancois Hollande. While it is unclear whether or not people in diplomatic positions overseas actually had anything to do with the spying, it is known that they receive a lot of anger, being that they are the ambassador from our country and are supposed to represent freedom and liberty. In most countries, this anger leads to dull threats and minor protests however in a region with so much political unrest such as the Middle East, all it takes is one person to think they are being spied on by the US and decided to kill an ambassador or diplomat because they think that its their fault. The government recklessly puts their overseas employees lives in danger by going back on the ideals they claim to protect, while breaching all of that by spying on foreign people. The

McNerney7 government believes that their snooping will have no negative backlash but unfortunately for many overseas employess that is not the case as they are usually met with hostility. American law makers will suggest that all these measures of foreign surveillance are necessary for national security. General Keith Alexander, who commands the NSA (National Security Agency), claims that on fifty-four separate occasions, foreign surveillance has thwarted terrorist attacks on the U.S or its allies.(Kevin Gostolza, Internet Blog). General Alexander has declined to give specific information regarding these incidents claiming that they are classified information. The surfacing of all these revelations can be attributed to Edward Snowden, the former NSA agent who hacked their databases and took all this information. Snowden made sure to fully encrypt the data and dispersed it to independent journalists throughout the world, most notably Glenn Greenwald the former writer for the Guardian Newspaper in London, England. Snowden took the files from his workplace in Hawaii and fled to Hong Kong, China, from there he escaped to Sheremetevyo airport in Moscow, Russia. After these revelations came to surface the NSA and its British counterpart GCHQ came under heavy criticism for their collection of metadata on foreign citizens. In the beginning the public did not have a strong opinion towards the whole matter, but as more news is released about the seemingly limitless spying, people have started asking the question of how do half the people these agencies spy on have anything to do with national security? Activists all around the world now are more worried about the breach in American civil liberties rather than these supposed threats to national security. Its hard to imagine why the U.S would go out of its way to spy on its own allies and that is where the question of how valid is the national security excuse raised. Its one thing to try and spy on foreign people who are linked to terrorist cells, but spying on innocent people who

McNerney8 are citizens of one of our biggest allies is over the top and puts Americans abroad in danger. National security should not mean that we as citizens should have to give up our constitutional rights just because our government deems it necessary. It is easy for the people in charge to use the fear factor in order to get their own personal agendas across. If the government can get enough people to live in fear that a terrorist could attack at any moment, then they are more likely to get these people to turn a blind eye towards the constraints being put on our civil liberties in the name of national security. The issue of national security isnt so severe that we need to infringe on our own citizens constitutional rights, no less infringe upon the rights of foreign citizens. Foreign surveillance not only nullifies our fourth amendment, but it also has given our enemies even more reason to hate us and puts the lives of innocent service men in unnecessary danger, making them an even more enticing target for terrorist attacks in the future. The very thing we are trying to defeat will end up becoming more powerful than we can imagine if we dont reign in our own misconducts. The erosion of citizens has been drawing parallels to other regimes in the past that used strict laws and cut off their citizens rights in order to exploit them for their own personal agenda.

McNerney9 Steven McNerney 11/21/13 College Writing Final Draft Foreign Surveillance Growing up I have always wanted to be a foreign diplomat, someone who represents the United States culture and ideals. These Foreign Service officers are the first people to deal with the backlash of any decision America makes that is seen negatively in the international community. When the latest revelations of foreign surveillance arose, these men and womens lives were immediately put at risk. In a country with so much political unrest such as Turkey and Israel just to name a few, where America has many diplomats and businessman, news of foreign surveillance could get these people killed just for being an American citizen. Foreign surveillance has encroached on millions of peoples rights and the United States has now foolishly endangered thousands of people who are supposed to represent the American values of freedom and liberty. The U.S has even gone far enough to spy on our allies leaders including German Chancellor Angela Merkel. It is now diplomats and other Foreign Service members who will have to deal with the wrath of these people who have had their privacy stolen and in some countries the people will not be forgiving to those who represent American ideals. To be a Foreign Service Officer, a person is expected to be able to make the correct decision in any scenario as efficiently as possible. These men and women represent any United States citizen who enters the foreign country and many times at the embassy they take in citizens who are

McNerney10 wanted for a crime so that they can get adequate legal counsel and keep the same liberties the US provides them in their home country. As international diplomacy has deteriorated with the ongoing war on terror, so has the relationship between foreign nations and our Foreign Service members. The relationship has been strained so much to the point now that in countries with high political unrest, our men and women are now in harms way with every un popular decision made by the U.S. In order to understand why American lawmakers have adopted this persistent paranoia that all countries are trying to knock us off, you have to go back to the years before foreign surveillance was as prevalent as it is now. The Patriot Act of 2003, which according to Louis Gerdes, was Americas first step towards the confiscation of the many rights it vowed to protect. (12-14) The Patriot Act was passed with good intentions towards keeping the American people safe. However once the laws and policies crossed boarders and secret courts gave privileges to lawmakers to spy on foreign countries, that is where the law began to deface the American culture. The Patriot Act nullifies our fourth amendment to some extents and the main reason why it impacts the foreign communities is because America has so many citizens who expect to have their information protected by the countries that are hosting them. Foreign countries normally never make a big deal about it because it is not targeting their citizens, although as time has gone on since the bill was passed; the power it gave certain people has been abused to the point where we have begun spying illegally on foreign citizens who we deemed to be a threat to national security. The sentiment towards America was very strong after the horrendous attacks on September 11th, 2001. Countries were willing to sit back and allow the U.S take any measures necessary to protect their people and make sure something like that never happens again. As Susan Herman described it, the years passed and countries began to grow suspicious towards

McNerney11 American policies and in recent years the sentiment has deteriorated do to the overstepping of boundaries from American agencies.(33) In effect to the deterioration of sentiments, foreign citizens have become angered by the over spill of spying on American citizens to them. The Patriot Act has made the international community paranoid of a revamped FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) which with todays technology would legally give the U.S the power to find records on any single person on the earth. FISA is a law that came into effect years before the Internet became a major mode of transporting information. It allowed for the United States to secretly wiretap other countries and extract information for their own use. After years of fighting in the Supreme Court, the bill finally passed in 1978, giving the American government the ability to wiretap the phones of foreign persons, as long as they obtained clearance from a secret FISA court. (Graham&Hansen 22) This law had caused a great amount of criticism from just about everyone who wasnt a federal employee, as the years passed the law was utilized less and less and eventually, surrounding technology became too advanced for wiretaps to work successfully. Starting supposedly a few months after 9/11, the NSA (National Security Agency) used this old law to help strengthen their own foreign surveillance. According It was justified in the eyes of the American government and its allies, up until revelations were made about the U.S actually spying on its allies citizens and even worse, spying on the personal phones of political leaders including German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande. While it is unclear whether or not people in diplomatic positions overseas actually had anything to do with the spying, it is known that they receive a lot of anger from foreigners, being that they are the ambassador from our country and are supposed to represent freedom and liberty. In most countries, this anger leads to dull threats and minor protests however in a region with so much

McNerney12 political unrest such as the Middle East, all it takes it one person to think they are being spied on by the U.S and decided to kill and ambassador or diplomat because they think its their fault. The government recklessly puts their overseas employees lives in danger by ignoring the basic rights that every person should have. The government believes that their snooping will have no negative backlash but unfortunately for many overseas employees that is not the case as they are usually met with hostility. Law makers and congress will argue that the surveillance is for the health of national security, however they failed to realize what negative effects would occur towards our national security if these secrets of spying were ever confirmed. American law makers will suggest that all these measures of foreign surveillance are necessary for national security. General Keith Alexander, who commands the NSA (National Security Agency), claims that on fifty-four separate occasions, foreign surveillance has thwarted terrorist attacks on the U.S or its allies.(Kevin Gostolza, Internet Blog). General Alexander has declined to give specific information regarding these incidents claiming that they are classified information. The surfacing of all these revelations can be attributed to Edward Snowden, the former NSA agent who hacked their databases and took all this information. Snowden made sure to fully encrypt the data and dispersed it to independent journalists throughout the world, most notably Glenn Greenwald the former writer for the Guardian Newspaper in London, England. Snowden took the files from his workplace in Hawaii and fled to Hong Kong, China, from there he escaped to Sheremetevyo airport in Moscow, Russia. After these revelations came to surface the NSA and its British counterpart GCHQ came under heavy criticism for their collection of metadata on foreign citizens. In the beginning the public did not have a strong opinion towards the whole matter, but as more news is released about the seemingly limitless spying, people have started asking the question of how do half the people

McNerney13 these agencies spy on have anything to do with national security? Activists all around the world now are more worried about the breach in American civil liberties rather than these supposed threats to national security. Its hard to imagine why the U.S would go out of its way to spy on its own allies and that is where the question of how valid is the national security excuse raised. Its one thing to try and spy on foreign people who are linked to terrorist cells, but spying on innocent people who are citizens of one of our biggest allies is over the top and puts Americans abroad in danger. National security should not mean that we as citizens should have to give up our constitutional rights just because our government deems it necessary. It is easy for the people in charge to use the fear factor in order to get their own personal agendas across. If the government can get enough people to live in fear that a terrorist could attack at any moment, then they are more likely to get these people to turn a blind eye towards the constraints being put on our civil liberties in the name of national security. The issue of national security isnt so severe that we need to infringe on our own citizens constitutional rights, no less infringe upon the rights of foreign citizens. Foreign surveillance not only nullifies our fourth amendment, but it also has given our enemies even more reason to hate us and puts the lives of innocent service men in unnecessary danger, making them an even more enticing target for terrorist attacks in the future. The very thing we are trying to defeat will end up becoming more powerful than we can imagine if we dont reign in our own misconducts. The erosion of citizens has been drawing parallels to other regimes in the past that used strict laws and cut off their citizens rights in order to exploit them for their own personal agenda.

McNerney14 Works Cited Herman, Susan N., and Inc ebrary. Taking Liberties: The War On Terror and the Erosion of American Democracy. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, USA, 2011. Graham, Thomas, and Keith A Hansen. Spy Satellites: And Other Intelligence Technologies That Changed History. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2007. Gerdes, Louise I. The Patriot Act: Opposing Viewpoints. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2005.

McNerney15 Steven McNerney 12/12/13 College Writing Revised Draft Foreign Surveillance Growing up I have always wanted to be a foreign diplomat, someone who represents the United States culture and ideals. These Foreign Service officers are the first people to deal with the backlash of any decision America makes that is seen negatively in the international community. When the latest revelations of foreign surveillance arose, these men and womens lives were immediately put at risk. In a country with so much political unrest such as Turkey and Israel just to name a few, where America has many diplomats and businessman, news of foreign surveillance could get these people killed just for being an American citizen. Foreign surveillance has encroached on millions of peoples rights and the United States has now foolishly endangered thousands of people who are supposed to represent the American values of freedom and liberty. The U.S has even gone far enough to spy on our allies leaders including German Chancellor Angela Merkel. It is now diplomats and other Foreign Service members who will have to deal with the wrath of these people who have had their privacy stolen and in some countries the people will not be forgiving to those who represent American ideals. To be a Foreign Service Officer, a person is expected to be able to make the correct decision in any scenario as efficiently as possible. These men and women represent any United States citizen who enters the foreign country and many times at the embassy they take in citizens

McNerney16 who are wanted for a crime so that they can get adequate legal counsel and keep the same liberties the US provides them in their home country. As international diplomacy has deteriorated with the ongoing war on terror, so has the relationship between foreign nations and our Foreign Service members. The relationship has been strained so much to the point now that in countries with high political unrest, our men and women are now in harms way with every un popular decision made by the U.S. In order to understand why American lawmakers have adopted this persistent paranoia that all countries are trying to knock us off, you have to go back to the years before foreign surveillance was as prevalent as it is now. The Patriot Act of 2003, which according to Louis Gerdes, was Americas first step towards the confiscation of the many rights it vowed to protect. (12-14) The Patriot Act was passed with good intentions towards keeping the American people safe. However once the laws and policies crossed boarders and secret courts gave privileges to lawmakers to spy on foreign countries, that is where the law began to deface the American culture. The Patriot Act nullifies our fourth amendment to some extents and the main reason why it impacts the foreign communities is because America has so many citizens who expect to have their information protected by the countries that are hosting them. Foreign countries normally never make a big deal about it because it is not targeting their citizens, although as time has gone on since the bill was passed; the power it gave certain people has been abused to the point where we have begun spying illegally on foreign citizens who we deemed to be a threat to national security. The sentiment towards America was very strong after the horrendous attacks on September 11th, 2001. Countries were willing to sit back and allow the U.S take any measures necessary to protect their people and make sure something like that never happens again. As Susan Herman described it, the years passed and countries began to grow suspicious towards

McNerney17 American policies and in recent years the sentiment has deteriorated do to the overstepping of boundaries from American agencies.(33) In effect to the deterioration of sentiments, foreign citizens have become angered by the over spill of spying on American citizens to them. The Patriot Act has made the international community paranoid of a revamped FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) which with todays technology would legally give the U.S the power to find records on any single person on the earth. FISA is a law that came into effect years before the Internet became a major mode of transporting information. It allowed for the United States to secretly wiretap other countries and extract information for their own use. After years of fighting in the Supreme Court, the bill finally passed in 1978, giving the American government the ability to wiretap the phones of foreign persons, as long as they obtained clearance from a secret FISA court. (Graham&Hansen 22) This law had caused a great amount of criticism from just about everyone who wasnt a federal employee, as the years passed the law was utilized less and less and eventually, surrounding technology became too advanced for wiretaps to work successfully. Starting supposedly a few months after 9/11, the NSA (National Security Agency) used this old law to help strengthen their own foreign surveillance. According to political leaders their actions were justified in the eyes of the American government and its allies. When it became known about the extents of American foreign surveillance, many people across the world protested against America and its imperialistic ideals. Der Spiegel, which is a German equivalent to the New York Times, is a major critic of United States foreign surveillance and they have helped tremendously in releasing this sensitive information to the public. Der Spiegel were the first to report on the revelations that the U.S had actually been spying on the personal phones of German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French Presdent Francois Hollande.

McNerney18 Up to this point the United States government had insisted that the foreign surveillance was for national security purposes, however after these revelations of spying on some of our closest allies, the reality now is that Americas objective in foreign surveillance is much more sinister than they would like you to believe. American law makers will suggest that all these measures of foreign surveillance are necessary for national security. General Keith Alexander, who commands the NSA (National Security Agency), claims that on fifty-four separate occasions, foreign surveillance has thwarted terrorist attacks on the U.S or its allies.(Kevin Gostolza, Internet Blog). General Alexander has declined to give specific information regarding these incidents claiming that they are classified information. The surfacing of all these revelations can be attributed to Edward Snowden, the former NSA agent who hacked their databases and took all this information. Snowden made sure to fully encrypt the data and dispersed it to independent journalists throughout the world, most notably Glenn Greenwald the former writer for the Guardian Newspaper in London, England. Snowden took the files from his workplace in Hawaii and fled to Hong Kong, China, from there he escaped to Sheremetevyo airport in Moscow, Russia. After these revelations came to surface the NSA and its British counterpart GCHQ came under heavy criticism for their collection of metadata on foreign citizens. In the beginning the public did not have a strong opinion towards the whole matter, but as more news is released about the seemingly limitless spying, people have started asking the question of how do half the people these agencies spy on have anything to do with national security? Activists all around the world now are more worried about the breach in American civil liberties rather than these supposed threats to national security.

McNerney19 Its hard to imagine why the U.S would go out of its way to sp y on its own allies and that is where the question of how valid is the national security excuse raised. Its one thing to try and spy on foreign people who are linked to terrorist cells, but spying on innocent people who are citizens of one of our biggest allies is over the top and puts Americans abroad in danger. National security should not mean that we as citizens should have to give up our constitutional rights just because our government deems it necessary. It is easy for the people in charge to use the fear factor in order to get their own personal agendas across. If the government can get enough people to live in fear that a terrorist could attack at any moment, then they are more likely to get these people to turn a blind eye towards the constraints being put on our civil liberties in the name of national security. The issue of national security isnt so severe that we need to infringe on our own citizens constitutional rights, no less infringe upon the rights of foreign citizens. Foreign surveillance not only nullifies our fourth amendment, but it also has given our enemies even more reason to hate us and puts the lives of innocent service men in unnecessary danger, making them an even more enticing target for terrorist attacks in the future. The very thing we are trying to defeat will end up becoming more powerful than we can imagine if we dont reign in our own misconducts. The erosion of citizens has been drawing parallels to other regimes in the past that used strict laws and cut off their citizens rights in order to exploit them for their own personal agenda.

McNerney20 Works Cited Herman, Susan N., and Inc ebrary. Taking Liberties: The War On Terror and the Erosion of American Democracy. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, USA, 2011. Graham, Thomas, and Keith A Hansen. Spy Satellites: And Other Intelligence Technologies That Changed History. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2007. Gerdes, Louise I. The Patriot Act: Opposing Viewpoints. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2005.