Unit 1 – Discussion Board 2 Running head: LEGAL APPROACHES TO COUNTERTERRORISMAssignment DescriptionYou are a senior security specialist with the Department of Homeland Security assigned to DHS Headquarters. You are responsible for developing and preparing DHS-wide policies and standards for a DHS Industrial Security Program. You are also responsible for developing and presenting informational briefings. You are a subject-matter expert on all matters related to industrial security.You have been asked to attend a conference on policy issues and have been invited to participate in a round-table discussion with other security professionals to discuss the issue of the due-process approach versus the public-order approach to counterterrorism.Primary Task Response: Within the Discussion Board area, write 400–600 words that respond to the following questions with your thoughts, ideas, and comments. This will be the foundation for future discussions by your classmates. Be substantive and clear and use examples to reinforce your ideas.Answer the following questions: Do you consider yourself more of a public-order advocate or a due-process advocate, in general? What is more important to you, personally: protecting individual rights or making society safer? Why did you not choose the opposite position? What are the positive aspects of your chosen position for purposes of counterterrorism? What are the negative aspects, if any, of your chosen position for purposes of counterterrorism? For this question, you are to assume that your superiors have adopted the position opposite your chosen position. For example, if you answered above that you were a due-process advocate, your superiors have adopted the public-order position. As such, you are to answer this question from the perspective of your superiors: What is the most important concern when developing policies for combating terrorism?

respond to the student’s statements with facts or opinions1)This week I learned that using different steps and methods to revise our paper is very important. One of the things that I found interesting was to take a break from your rough draft. Once our mind is clear, that’s when it’s a good time to go back and revisit your paper. Having a clear mind helps reading your paper over and helping you find the flaws and mistakes.I found that one of my strengths was that once I started writing I did pretty well at keeping a good pace in writing. Something I feel I can use some help on is just getting started, even with an outline, at time I find it difficult as to where to start on my writing.I will be using the techniques that we learned about this week to help refine my paper. I will have a few different people read it and get their opinion as to where I can improve. I will also read it out loud to myself to see if it makes sense and sound grammatically correct. 2)Honestly I have learned that revision is a good thing. Letting several other people read your paper is very helpful because you don’t always see things that need to be changed or revised. I have a hard time with this just because I don’t write well and having someone else read my work is hard. So it’s definitely a learning process for me.I feel my areas of strength is writing my opinion because I am not afraid to put my own opinion or words out there. My areas that need work are organizing the paper better and citing my resources because it’s a little confusing to me about what needs to be where.I will definitely take all the feed back from all my classmates and teacher and apply it to my paper. I will also work a little harder in the areas I need improvement on, so that I make sure it’s correct. I hope to submit a decent read paper that the readers will enjoy and possibly change there opinion on my topic..

I’m trying to study for my Writing course and I need some help to understand this question.

Topical activity: INTERVIEW/DISCUSSION
Find ONE person to interview who is NOT particularly interested in, or studying child development or education.
Look over the 3 basic questions below that you will be asking.
Find a time to sit and chat with the person you will be interviewing. See what this person thinks about the three questions below;
What YOU will write up:
a) WHO you asked (male/female, age, profession/field of study)
b) What was their ANSWER?
c) Based on your readings, what do YOU think about their answer?

Questions that you will ask:
1) How do children learn language? (prompt if it’s by imitation? by interacting with others?, etc.)
2) If children have problems in acquiring language, what might be some reasons?
3) Do children “learn” language or “acquire” language? What’s the difference?

Read “Eddie’s Kind of Mind” and “Bill’s Kind of Mind”
These are short stories that were written to be read BY children. They are intended to help children better understand themselves and others.

Respond to EITHER Eddie’s story OR Bill’s story by Wed night Aug 5th at midnight.
(1) What was your response to the description of either Eddie’s challenges with attention or Bill’s challenges with memory? Did it seem like a realistic situation?
(2) How did you feel about the process of “demystifying” the problem for Eddie/Bill?

Eddie’s kind of mind
(1) What was your response to the description of Eddie’s challenges with attention? Did it seem like a realistic situation?
(2) How did you feel about the process of “demystifying” the problem for Eddie?

Bill’s kind of mind
(1) What was your response to the description of Bill’s challenges with memory? Did it seem like a realistic situation?
(2) How did you feel about the process of “demystifying” the problem for Bill? 

The aim of this short paper assignment is to accurately reconstruct and critically assess the argument described below:Reconstruct Jeffrey Reiman’s argument for abolishing the death penalty. Then, offer your own critical assessment of Reiman’s argument. In order to do this, you must either:i) critique this argument by presenting a strong objection to it, or:ii) defend it by considering a strong objection to it and responding to the objection. Your task will be both to clearly reconstruct an author’s argument (same as the previous argument) and offer your own (positive or negative) critical assessment of this argument. In this essay it is essential that you take a clear position and offer compelling reasons to support it. Below I have attached a Word file labelled, “PHIL 1002- Instructions for Assignment” Please follow everything exactly in that doc. Overall, make sure double-space, 12 font, times new roman preferred, WORD LIMIT IS 800 WORDS. Do not go over!!! That means it should be about 4-5 pages. You NEED to cite the assigned texts that I am attaching to this assignment as it will guarantee my mark higher than 80%. APA style is preferred. I also attached a doc labelled, “Sample Argument Reconstruction Essay”. This is an example of what my prof is looking for BUT this time we need to take a clear position and offer critical assessment thats positive or negative as well.I have also attached a doc labelled, “Lecture notes”- this not only has notes on Jeffrey Reiman’s argument on punishment but also what an argument is and how to put it into standard form. Which can also be used if necessary. I attached another doc labelled, “Jeffrey: course kit” which is the reading given to us on this approach that needs to be USED in the paper to cite. Please use at least a good 3 citations from the course kit and if you can try to put his argument into Standard form. Look at sample!

Topic: the difficulty of the conflict
Write a 6-8 page paper that examines and analyzes why the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has been so difficult to resolve? Drawing on scholarly sources to develop an argument that explains why this conflict has been so intractable. Other seemingly intractable conflicts, such as those in Northern Ireland or apartheid in South Africa, were resolved. In developing your argument, you may consider how parties (e.g., how specific actors, ideologies, or policies inhibit progress), political institutions, or specific issues create barriers to conflict resolution.

In your paper, you should draw on at least 5 to 8 scholarly sources. A scholarly source is a journal article or a book published by a university press You may also use other sources, such as newspaper articles or web-based sources, to supplement your research. These sources, however, do NOT count as scholarly sources.
Make sure that you develop an argument. You should have a clear answer to what makes this conflict so intractable and that answer should be supported, as all good theses are, by a few sub-arguments or reasons. You want to avoid a laundry list of reasons but instead hone in on one claim or possibly two claims. Your thesis/claim/main argument should be clearly articulated in the introduction/beginning of your paper.
Topics to consider adding. Israelis and Palestinians have different religions and cultures and beliefs. Each side has a narrative and identity,
– stubbornness
– lack of trust between Israel and Palestine
– no left-leaning parties on either side
both ethnic groups believes has the right to the land

Avoid writing a historical paper or providing a lot of background. This is an analytical rather than a descriptive paper
This is the main question: Write a 6-8 page paper that examines and analyzes why the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has been so difficult to resolve?.