The Role of Weak Ties in US Terrorist Watch List
Recently, The Federal Bureau of Investigation has deemed it acceptable to keep individuals acquitted of terrorism crimes on remain on the government’s terrorist watch list. Though found not guilty in an American court of law, this extension of the Freedom of Information Act enables the government to do anything from investigating these persons with greater scrutiny at airport security or traffic stops to baring certain individuals from flying, or even entering the country. This new update in the Freedom of Information Act essentially opposes the American justice system’s idea of who is and who is not a guilty person. To be proven innocent in a court of law, an individual on trial must be proven not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. By keeping acquitted individuals on the terrorist watchlist, the FBI is essentially stating that their standards of reasonable doubt are not the same as the courts. To be removed from the watchlist, an individual must meet the FBI’s own “reasonable suspicion” standard, which may or may not coincide with a courts ruling. This standard is clearly easier to meet than an American court’s, as it is met by the acquisition of discrediting information about an individual, or an allegation of suspected terrorism, if the suspicion is confirmed by at least one other source.
This newly passed addendum to the Freedom of Information Act relates directly to the Triadic Closure Principle, and the power of bridges. In their definition of reasonable suspicion, the government states someone may either be involved themselves, or acquainted with others involved in terrorist activities. Because their involvement with terrorists or terrorist activates may only be alleged, these people kept on the government watchlist therefore have weak ties to terrorists and acts of terrorism. In this situation, the government confirms the strength that lies in weak ties, as they still feel these minimally suspicious individuals pose a threat. First, weak edges act as bridges between groups of individuals. Therefore, they have the possibility to move information or encourage terrorism in the groups with which he is weakly tied. Their ability to move information directly relates to their status as a weak tie. Because they have this ability to span and influence groups, the government believes these people to be particularly dangerous, and warrant close observation. Clearly, the government believes that weak ties are extremely influential in the natural world.