The US Anti-Terror Laws are meant to inhibit terrorist activities by cutting funding to entities considered terror threats. Anti-Terror Certification is a compliance document that should be signed by all entities receiving US funding affirming that grant funds are not transferred to support and fund domestic and international terrorism activities. The article intends to explain why gaping loopholes exists within the US Anti-Terror laws and are thus misused to allow direct finding of potential terrorist organizations that have openly refused to sign the certification contract.
Error People Commonly Make In Reasoning
Academic reasoning is based on deductive and inductive reasoning. Qualitative and quantitative information is usually used as premises to form opinions. Sometimes, information consulted before making a conclusion may be false and erroneous resulting in factual errors. Fallacies that interfere with logic and truth are common in the media and other organizations that have vested interested funding (Logical Fallacies, 2009). Errors of reasoning are also called fallacies. Examples of errors include error of circular reasoning, otherwise called error of begging the question.
An Example of an Error of Reasoning
Consider the following statement:
“Everybody has a right to protest, therefore protesting should be legal.”
The first premise of the statement maintains that all individuals have the right to protest regardless, thus, the second statement is a conclusion based on the first statement in which the speaker uses the first statement to insist that since all have a right to protest, then it follows that protesting should be legalized. The error with the statement above is that it encourages circular reason whereby one refers to only one premise one to make the conclusion. Therefore, since the first premise does not quantify the reason for protesting, error is introduced by the same statement creating the error of circular reasoning; therefore, the first part of the statement can lead anyone to deduct the last part of the statement: if something is a right, then it has to be legal.
Why the US Law against Funding of Entities Non-Compliant with Anti-Terror Certification (ATC) is Ineffective?
The US Anti-Terror Law clearly states that for an organization to receive government funding, it must sign the ATC. This certification is a declaration of compliance with the regulation that the money will not be used to fund terrorist activities. Entities unwilling to sign this documentation are not supposed to receive any US government funding (Marcus & Crook, 2004). Furthermore, the law exempts some categories of funding such that such recipients bypass ATC law scrutiny. Equally, since the US government lacks mechanism to monitor the funds released, by ignoring the money chain given to international organization like World Bank and UN that also give out money without consulting ATC law.
Recent research, however, has shown serious errors in the practical application of the law. Palestinian Authorities are considered to have ties to terrorists. Despite the Palestine organizations refusal to sign the ATC certification, many Palestine NGOs are receiving funds from the United States through USAID (USAID, 2009). Evidence has suggested that some funds were used to honor terrorist activities that threaten the life of Americans. For example, Matyr Salakh Khalaf Stadium that was sponsored by USAID at a cost of $500,000 is ironically the name after a person who is considered an enemy of the United States (Marcus & Crook, 2004).
A major reason for this could be the different ways in which authorities on both sides define terror. What the US law regards as terror is considered “legitimate resistance” on the other hand, what the US regards as Anti-Terror measures are considered an infringement to the international law on Charitable Organizations which are supportive of humanitarian assistance in situations like those present in Palestine.