The Patriot Act Is Your Friend 

WN: But the government has mischaracterized how the Patriot Act can be interpreted. For instance, the government has told the American people that in many cases these laws cannot be applied to citizens and in fact some of them have been applied to U.S. citizens.

Dinh: There are a number of provisions within the USA Patriot Act that have a tremendous effect on our war against terror. However, they are tools that can be used in general criminal investigations as well. At no time do I think that anybody intentionally sought to elide the difference between the two. The reason why you need tools of general applicability is that terrorists do not go around wearing an "I am a terrorist" T-shirt, and these normal investigative tools are the ones that allow us not only to deter terrorism but also to investigate crimes.

Story Tools

Story Images

Click thumbnails for full-size image:

See also

• Gore to Bush: Rescind Patriot Act
• Court Rules Against Patriot Act
• A Pledge for Privacy Protection
• Keep an eye on Privacy Matters
• Picture Yourself in Politics

Today's Top 5 Stories

• Extra! Extra! Read All About You
• Jamming Tags Block RFID Scanners
• Living Life in Virtual Reality
• Greenpeace Founder Green No More
• Buy Offline, Get Spammed Online

Tech Jobs Partner

never settle.

WN: Some critics have called you the purveyor of the most sweeping curtailment of freedom since the McCarthy era. Is that an exaggeration?

Dinh: I think it is very easy to employ sweeping rhetoric and personal denunciations. I think it is much harder to back it up with facts and concrete examples. I seek to engage in this conversation by giving as much facts as I can and letting the efforts of the Department of Justice, the administration and my own to be judged by the people, by history and by eternity. Where I err, I obviously am not hesitant in recognizing my mistakes. I wish people who criticize me would just pick up the phone and ask me specific questions, like we are engaging right now, so that we can isolate the issues of difference, so that we can engage in a constructive dialogue rather than a destructive dialogue.

WN: Some Asian Americans have accused you of dishonoring your own struggle and background as a refugee and immigrant. What do you say to charges that the law you wrote is hostile to immigrants and noncitizens?

Dinh: I come to this country having known government that does not work, either through the chaos of war or through the repression of totalitarian communism. In each and every thing that I do in my life -- in the law and as my life as a public official -- I ask myself how can I better serve the cause of freedom and the cause of good government. And while some may disagree with the decisions I make, just as some may disagree with the overall strategy on terror, I hope that people will recognize that there is no dishonor, there is no disconnect, there is no irony -- just an honest effort of a person trying to serve his country at her time of greatest need according to his best ability, however limited that may be.

WN: You once wrote that the rule of government was to maximize the zone of liberty around each person. You said, "Security without liberty -- it's not an America I would want to live in."

Dinh: I firmly believe that liberty should not be traded off for some sense of security. I think the harder task is to determine our best tools we can have in order to protect our security, while at the same time ascertain the safeguards that will be necessary in order to protect against abuse of that tool and misuse of it at the expense of privacy or liberty.

WN: So what do you say to Americans who feel that the Patriot Act has shrunk their zone of liberty?

Dinh: If indeed that is your fear or that is your perception then engage in the democratic process. Back up your argument, back up your belief with facts, marshal evidence in order to convince those who are engaged in the process of governance.

I have the utmost respect for those who engage in this (national conversation), even when I am unfairly maligned because those persons are willing to engage in order to advance the national conversation and contribute meaningfully to our process of governance. Somebody once said that democracy is not a spectator sport. We should all applaud each other for getting into the game and risking injury because of it, because at the end of the day we all win if we do engage.

Have a comment on this article? Send it

More stories written by Kim Zetter