Currently, Title II of the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT Act) Act of 2001 appears to be stalled as a result of controversy over the intent and meaning of the law. Proponents of the title advocate the necessity of the act to combat modern terrorism, whereas opponents warn of circumventions of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Using punctuated equilibrium as the theoretical foundation, the purpose of this case study was to explore the dialogue and legal exchanges between the American Civil Liberties Union and the Department of Justice related to the National Security Agency's metadata collection program. In specific, the study sought to explore the nature of resistance to changes needed to mollify the controversies associated with Title II. Data for this study were acquired through publicly available documents and artifacts including transcripts of Congressional hearings, legal documents, and briefing statements from the US Department of Justice and the American Civil Liberties Union. These data were deductively coded according to the elements of PET and then subjected to thematic analysis. Findings indicate that supporters and opponents of the law are locked in a consistent ideological polarization, with supporters of the law touting the necessity of the authorizations in combatting terrorism and opponents arguing the law violates civil liberties. Neither side of the debate displayed a willingness to compromise or acknowledge the legitimacy of the other viewpoint. Legislators who accept the legitimacy of both researched viewpoints could create positive social change by refining the law to meet national security needs while preserving constitutional protections.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2007. / The entire dissertation/thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file (which also appears in the research.pdf); a non-technical general description, or public abstract, appears in the public.pdf file. Title from title screen of research.pdf file (viewed on December 14, 2007) Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

In the period 2004-2007, the highest courts of Australia, the United Kingdom and Canada handed down judgments on the legality of the indefinite detention of non-citizens, specifically non-citizens subject to a removal order whose removal was frustrated. Each of the governments claimed that its intention to remove the non-citizens if and when it became viable to do so sufficed to establish that their detention fell within an ‘immigration’ exception to non-citizens’ rights. The cases thus raised fundamental questions about the relationship between non-citizens’ rights and governments’ power to control national borders. I argue that the indefinite detention of a non-citizen subject to a removal order is illegal. The detention of a non-citizen subject to a removal order is lawful if it can be justified as a proportionate measure to effect his or her removal. Indefinite detention fails this proportionality test and as such is an unlawful violation of a non-citizen’s rights. I develop my argument through case studies from the three jurisdictions. I argue that the law of all three jurisdictions contained ample resources to support a ruling that indefinite detention was unlawful. The question then arises as to why this view did not prevail in every jurisdiction. I demonstrate that, taking into account variations in legal frameworks and doctrines, a judge’s response to indefinite detention is at base determined by his or her answer to the question ‘does a non-citizen, against whom a valid removal order has been made, retain a right to liberty?’ The judge’s answer to this question flows through his or her adjudication on the scope of ‘immigration’ exceptions to legal protections of the personal liberty of non-citizens considered in the case studies. I consider the best justification for the view that a removal order revokes a non-citizen’s right to liberty, provided by John Finnis. I argue that it rests on questionable understandings of citizenship, and in operation inevitably undermines the values of community solidarity it seeks to promote.

In the period 2004-2007, the highest courts of Australia, the United Kingdom and Canada handed down judgments on the legality of the indefinite detention of non-citizens, specifically non-citizens subject to a removal order whose removal was frustrated. Each of the governments claimed that its intention to remove the non-citizens if and when it became viable to do so sufficed to establish that their detention fell within an ‘immigration’ exception to non-citizens’ rights. The cases thus raised fundamental questions about the relationship between non-citizens’ rights and governments’ power to control national borders. I argue that the indefinite detention of a non-citizen subject to a removal order is illegal. The detention of a non-citizen subject to a removal order is lawful if it can be justified as a proportionate measure to effect his or her removal. Indefinite detention fails this proportionality test and as such is an unlawful violation of a non-citizen’s rights. I develop my argument through case studies from the three jurisdictions. I argue that the law of all three jurisdictions contained ample resources to support a ruling that indefinite detention was unlawful. The question then arises as to why this view did not prevail in every jurisdiction. I demonstrate that, taking into account variations in legal frameworks and doctrines, a judge’s response to indefinite detention is at base determined by his or her answer to the question ‘does a non-citizen, against whom a valid removal order has been made, retain a right to liberty?’ The judge’s answer to this question flows through his or her adjudication on the scope of ‘immigration’ exceptions to legal protections of the personal liberty of non-citizens considered in the case studies. I consider the best justification for the view that a removal order revokes a non-citizen’s right to liberty, provided by John Finnis. I argue that it rests on questionable understandings of citizenship, and in operation inevitably undermines the values of community solidarity it seeks to promote.

<p>This dissertation addresses one of the most vexing issues in American foreign policy: Under what circumstances should the United States use military force in pursuit of national interests? Despite not having a policy upon entering office or articulating one throughout its first term, the Reagan administration used military force numerous times. Two-weeks following Reagan's landslide reelection victory, Secretary of Defense Caspar W. Weinberger articulated six tests for when and how to use military force, which surprisingly seemed to call for restraint. Through the examination of three case studies, the Reagan administration's decisions are found to have been influenced by the assimilation of lessons from Vietnam, the reading of public pulse, the desire to placate Congress, and the need to protect the nation's strategic interests. All these factors, ultimately codified by Weinberger, were considered by the leaders in the Reagan administration as they tried to expand the military's ability to help the U.S. meet an increasingly wider range of threats. Thus this dissertation will show that, contrary to what one finds in contemporary scholarship, the Weinberger doctrine was intended as a policy to legitimize the use of military force as a tool of statecraft, rather than an endorsement to reserve force as a last resort after other instruments of power have failed.</p> / Dissertation

No description available.

In an event of a radiological dispersion device (RDD) detonated by terrorists in a high population density area, the hospitals and other medical facilities will be overwhelmed by people who may or may not have been contaminated by radioactivity. Under such circumstances, it would be desirable to identify people who have inhaled radioactive particles and direct them immediately for further treatment. A portable 3 by 3 NaI detector, which is widely available at most universities, was studied as a tool to identify and calculate the activity of unknown radioisotopes for such an RDD event.

The Research of the Relationship between the U.S., China and Taiwan After the 911 Incident Abstract The traditional diplomacy of America puts its main focus on Europe with little attention on Asia, however after having the 911 Attack in the U.S.2001, Bush junior administration has immediately adjusted the pace of global strategies. The main strategy has shifted its focus towards Asia, it shows that the US makes National Defences the first priority and seeks for the support of counter- terrorism from China in Asia. Before the 911 incident, China was not at the very heart of American policy in Asia policy, as a result of 1999 Chinese Embassy bombing in Belgrade in the former Yugoslavia Republic of Serbia and the April 2001 Hainan reconnaissance plane incident, there had been an awkward tension between U.S. and China. After seeking the cooperation of counter terrorism with China, it presented an opportunity that the U.S. and China can use to improve their relationship. Since the normalisation between U.S. and China, it has been through from the ¡§strategy cooperation relations¡¨ which was established to against Russia to the neorealism of ¡§constructive relations,¡¨ Clinton era formed a ¡§comprehensive association¡¨ with mainland China and advanced it into ¡§ constructive strategy partnership,¡¨ yet, before 911 Attack, the relationship of Bush junior Administration and China were ¡§strategic competitors¡¨, then after 911 incident, due to the strategy transformation of U.S., both parties developed ¡§ Constructive cooperation relations, ¡¨ even though there are still conflicts on the benefits, U.S.-China relation has ameliorated to some extent. As far as U.S. concerns, China is regarded a partner of counter terrorism and benefit exchanger by the world, yet U.S. recognises China as a potential strategic adversary, in some ways, U.S. still exposes the threatening gesture to China. Bush junior has indicated to China that U.S. does not support the independence of Taiwan, but if China force invades Taiwan on the premise that Taiwan does not declare independence, U.S. does not rule out the possibility of assisting Taiwan by the means of miliary. It has shown the U.S. strategy has changed from ¡§strategic ambiguity¡¨ to ¡§strategic clear¡¨ since Clinton to Bush junior. After the 911 incident, the relationship of U.S. and China has definitely improved in a short period, in terms of the long run, both parties still have serious differences regarding to the problem of Taiwan, human rights, economics impacts and anti nuclear proliferation. These conflicts still restrain the development of U.S and China relationship, in addition, U.S. has troops in middle Asia, in terms of the military strategy, the benefit of Mainland China is deprived. In terms of long term U.S-China relationship, it represents a cooperative yet defensive relationship, on the basis of that Taiwan does not declare independence, according to U.S.-Taiwan relationship, U.S. will secure the safety of Taiwan, and maintain the peace cross-straits.

Military strategy is in serve to national interests, which is the basic idea underpin this research. The subject of this thesis is ¡§Military Strategy of People's Liberation Army (PLA) toward Taiwan. The context of this thesis divided into six chapters: 1.Motivation, methodology, framework, target of this research and the definition of military strategy. 2. The change of world system and how it impacts the national interests of Mainland China.3.The national strategies of Mainland China.4. Analyzing the military strategies and actions which might be undertaken by PLA to attack Taiwan.5. The strategies of Taiwan's national military strategy against PLA is¡§effective deterrence and strong defense posture¡¨6.Perspective of the Taiwan's future national security .the damage control from Taiwan in the eventual military activities against PLA will be to strike the enemy before it reached the Taiwan's coast.

In the presence of operational uncertainty, one of the greatest challenges in systems engineering is to ensure system effectiveness, mission capability and survivability. Safety management is shifting from passive, reactive and diagnosis-based approaches to autonomous architectures that will manage safety and survivability through active, proactive and prognosis-based solutions. Resilience engineering is an emerging discipline, with alternative recommendations on safer and more survivable system architectures. A resilient system can "absorb" the impact of change due to unexpected disturbances, while it "adapts" to change, in order to maintain its physical integrity and mission capability. A framework of proposed resilience estimations is the basis for a scenario-based assessment technique, driven by modeling and simulation-based (M&S) analysis, for obtaining system performance, health monitoring, damage propagation and overall mission capability responses. For the technique development and testing, a small-scale canonical problem has been formulated, involving a reconfigurable spring-mass-damper system, in a multi-spring configuration. Operational uncertainty is introduced through disturbance factors, such as external forces with varying magnitude, input frequency, event duration and occurrence time. Case studies with varying levels of damping and alternative reconfiguration strategies return the effects of operational uncertainty on system performance, mission capability, and survivability, as well as on the "restore", "absorb", and "adapt" resilience capacities. The Topological Investigation for Resilient and Effective Systems, through Increased Architecture Survivability (TIRESIAS) technique is demonstrated for a reduced scale, reconfigurable naval cooling network application. With uncertainty effects modeled through network leak combinations, TIRESIAS provides insight on leak effects to survival times, mission capability degradations, and on resilience function capacities, for the baseline configuration. Comparative case studies were conducted for different architecture configurations, which have been generated for different total number of control valves and valve locations on the topology.