Reference no: EM133600133

Case Study: The clip focuses on the events of March 8, 1971, when eight people orchestrated the burglary and public distribution of government files from an FBI office in Media, Pennsylvania. The theft was altogether different than the numerous contemporary draft board office break-ins, in which activists (including many of the burglars) burned government draft paperwork to interfere with America's continued participation in the Vietnam War. The group, all of whom were ordinary citizens, called themselves the Citizens' Commission to Investigate the FBI and stole every file in the office. The goal of the burglars was to gather tangible evidence of government surveillance of civilian political activists, which was infringing on First Amendment rights. The stolen files exposed that the FBI was indeed running extensive, illegal operations intended to spread paranoia and distrust among numerous New Left and black civil rights organizations. Over time, the group mailed copies of the files to various newsrooms. Most news organizations returned the files to the FBI and refused to run stories regarding the stolen documents, but the notable exception was The Washington Post, which ran a front-page story on March 24, 1971. Arguably the most significant element in the stolen materials turned out to be a single file mentioning "COINTELPRO", a secret surveillance program that was run by J. Edgar Hoover. Watch the clip below and answer the questions,

Questions:

1. This clip outlines citizen activity in civil disobedience. Connecting this to the Korematsu case in 1942, at what point do you feel it is justified to resist a law or reject a government ruling?
2. This clip brings to mind an analog version of what is contemporarily occurring with Edward Snowden and the NSA. At what point should the public be privy to top secret information or activities of the government? Given that the national budget overwhelmingly favors the Department of Defense ($816 billion approved for 2023), should there or shouldn't there be more transparency in the application of those funds?
3. Consider how this group of individuals were seemingly political yet not radical activists. What does this tell us about the public opinion regarding the Vietnam War in 1971? Is support for a war lost when middle of the road people in this country (meaning not super right or left), start to reject ?