1
Defense of the Stong Position: Technology should be used for Anti-Terrorism
Gabriel Denson
School of Business, Liberty University
CJUS, Introduction to Homeland Security
Professor Hailey
May 9, 2025
2
Defense of the Strong Position: Technology should be used for Anti-Terrorism Problem
Statement
There is a lot of supporting evidence that technology used in anti-terrorism is beneficial.
The world is becoming a digitally run infrastructure, meaning that as we become more
dependent on technology, more protection and prevention are needed against technological
hazards such as terrorism. This paper is intended to support a stronger position for the use of
technology, meaning that my opening statement is that when the opposing position says,
“borderline overreaches into our constitutional rights.” (Denson, 2025) supported by the
statement made by Zuboff, 2019, “These data points are the same thing encroaching on our civil
liberties.” My correction and support is that the overarching watch of social media and the
metadata collected can and is a vital resource to tracking and detecting persons and events from
happening. We need to create an environment where Americans are educated and trusting of
the use of technology in terrorism prevention.
Review of Literature
Background of the Opposing Position
The opposing position is based on the idea that technology is being used to spy on
American citizens and track people, which would be a violation of the civil liberties that we are
given through the Constitution. The metadata collected is through social media outlets like
Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok. The opposing side used an example of the USA
PATRIOT ACT, which gave agencies access to that information. The opposition’s point was that
privacy is something that all Americans treasure because we are built on a system that was
created for personal freedoms and choices. The government’s job, as the founding fathers
wanted, was for the it to have little to do with preventing these freedoms. The opposition
continues to mention how U.S. agencies’ access over their citizens is overpowered and how
there must be a balance where the protection and privacy become equal for both the
government and its citizens. A note for the opposition is that they do not consider the physical
3
evidence that supports the U.S PATRIOT ACT. Although it has been opined that government
agencies encroach on people’s freedoms, the lack of evidence and reasoning behind privacy
over safety is overlooked, creating a gap that I propose to fill.
Supporting Evidence
The opposition supports limited government intervention, which can be countered by
the Founding Fathers' desire for the government to “serve and protect” its citizens. The use of
technology from the opposition’s view “used software to download data about persons and how
they are” (Denson, 2025). When looking at creating a network of anti-terrorism efforts, you
have to have a basis for what you are looking for. For example,
“Third, terrorists often blend with the targeted population—and in particular, they can
exploit the fundamental values of open societies, such as the United States, to cover and
conceal their planning and execution.” (Terrorism, Privacy, and Technology, 2008)
The way we look for terrorists is by looking for patterns, motive, and religious views;
therefore, the way that we can prevent a terrorist is by having intel on who has these kinds of
behavior. This is why the need for tech and the metadata we collect through these apps can be
meant for good, not to spy, but to protect. This is my rebuttal against the opposing argument.
Speaking in terms of the US PATRIOT ACT, the opposition has a problem with the legality
and the overall usefulness of tech in surveilling the people. An example, “data analytics and
online monitoring contributed to the disruption of at least 42% of all foiled terrorist plots
between 2015 and 2020” (Jenkins et al., 2022, p. 8) this is the proof that not only is it useful for
the united states to use technology, but it also proves out that without it; forty-two percent of
terrorism would or could have been left through and possibly major attacks such as 9/11 would
have happened again. One thing that truly opposes the opposition would be the textbook for
example, “Homeland security strategies must evolve to keep pace with emerging threats.
Refusing to employ available technological tools would be an act of negligence” (Hallow et al.,
2020)
4
This is the understanding that the use of technology is necessary, but sacrifices must be
made when protecting personal privacy.
Conclusion
Although the opposing argument has many well-thought-out and reasonable points. The
position of being in favor of technology in anti-terrorism is the stronger opinion. There are
undeniable proofs on both sides, but there is more concrete evidence that the tech being used
is better for the well-being of both the U.S. government and its citizens. The bible talks all about
freedom as well as free will, protection, and overarching government. The lord showed us in
Genesis that we are allowed to make our own choices and we have to deal with the
consequences; in the same way, we have to choose the greater side, because of the benefits of
protection.
The Bible says, “Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked”
(Psalms 82:4, English Standard Version). Overall, as Christians, we are to pick the greater side,
but keep in mind that there are always two sides to the story. Therefore, although the
opposition may not be wrong, we have to make informed decisions. As my mentor has quoted
many times,
“You made the best decision with the information you had at the time.”
References
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism : the fight for a human future at the new
frontier of power (First edition.). PublicAffairs.
1 Scoping the Issue: Terrorism, Privacy, and Technology." National Research Council. 2008.
Protecting Individual Privacy in the Struggle Against Terrorists: A Framework for
Program Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi:
10.17226/12452
Jenkins, B. M., Morral, A. R., & Frelinger, D. R. (2022). Preventing Domestic Terrorism: The
Role of Intelligence and Technology. RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org
Haddow, G., Bullock, J., & Coppola, D. (2020). Introduction to Homeland Security (6th ed.).
5
Elsevier S & T. https://libertyonline.vitalsource.com/books/9780128171387
Psalms 82:4
https://www.bible.com/bible/111/PSA.82.4
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
