EDM 501 TUI Issues Affecting the United States Regarding Security Response

Discussion Requirements

Active participation in all discussions is required.

Post comments at least 3 times during each module.

Before writing your comments:

Review the Discussion grading rubric to see what is expected for an excellent discussion, in order to earn full credit.

Review some resources to help you synthesize, such as the following:

Sullivan, J. (2011). Strategies for Synthesis Writing. Retrieved from http://www.findingdulcinea.com/features/edu/Strategies-for-Synthesis-Writing.html

Second post for each module discussion:

A substantive comment should be approximately 300 words or more for all responses.

Read the initial comments posted by your classmates and reflect upon them.

Formulate one new comment of your own. It must be a logical and thoughtful response that synthesizes the comments of at least 3 classmates into one comment. Be sure to synthesize; do not simply reply to each of the 3 classmates or restate their comments

NOTE: You are required to cite sources and include a reference list for the second post if it is simply your opinion. However, if your opinion is based on facts (as it should be), it is good practice to strengthen your position by citing sources.

Be sure to meet all of the criteria in the rubric, as noted in the instructions above.

Third post for each module discussion:

Read the initial and secondary comments posted by your classmates and reflect upon them.

Directly respond to at least one classmate in a way that extends meaningful discussions, adds new information, and/or offers alternative perspectives.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

MY DISCUSSION

Classmate and Professor,

The terrorist threat to the United States is more dynamic and diffuse as a growing number of networks, groups, and persons exploit global trends. Prominent terrorist organizations, mainly ISIS and al-Qa’ida, repeatedly express the intent to attack homeland and United States interests while recruiting more people within the United States borders to perform ill acts. Domestic terrorists are motivated by extremists of environment, militia, animal rights, and race to reinforce their agendas through violent acts (Department of Justice (n.d.).

Currently, the United States’ status enables it to counter acts of domestic terrorism due to its sovereignty, military power, and governance. Its economic, social, and political status gather information and monitor potential threats within the state. The Federal Bureau of Investigation is the leading law enforcement agency given the responsibility of investigating counterterrorism. Therefore the sovereignty power of the United States helps curb terrorism threats. Its resourcefulness is a significant factor that contributes towards investigations of domestic terrorism acts (Bjelopera, 2013).

The state also has Joint Terrorism Task Forces, linguists, analysts, SWAT experts, and a team of investigators that terrorism and terrorism-related crime investigations. For this reason, the FBI considers JTTFs as the states’ frontline on acts of terrorism. The presence of these groups in the United States helps safeguard United States citizens from domestic terrorist attacks. The JTTFs protect the U.S interests, property, and citizens; also, the economic status of the U.S helps fund the FBI agency expenses in terms of requirements that help safeguard the United States. Therefore, in the recent past, the FBI formed a series of reforms that transform it into a better Bureau that prevents acts of terrorism (Los Angeles Police Department’s Counter-Terrorism and Criminal Intelligence Bureau (n. d.). The divisional operational sections and intelligence field offices effectively target, disrupt, and dismantle terrorist groups. The state also dedicates its resources to address any emerging internet-based terrorist threats and acts (Congressional Research Service, 2016).

The information-sharing capability aspect through the various intelligence fields enhances smooth communication to and from the various specialists. It, therefore, promotes the exchange of appropriate information regarding arising issues on terrorism. An example is FBI participation in joint centers, the National Counter-terrorism Centre. The NCTC performs strategic, operational planning, connectivity, and IT access allowance and serves as a central vault for terrorism intelligence. NCTC Online website also serves as a base for disseminating terrorism information produced by the NCTC and other field agencies (Liu, & Doyle, 2015).

Some of the steps the U.S takes to manage terrorism entails terrorism financing. The Terrorism Financing Operations Section’s reason for establishment entails centralizing tracking and shutting down financial efforts done by terrorists in financing their acts (McAdams, 2007). TFOs builds on the FBI’s expertise by performing complex criminal financial investigations and monitoring and freezing terrorist assets. The FBI’s overriding priority entails the protection of America from terrorist attacks. It aims to identify and disrupt potential terrorist plots and freezing finances while sharing information with other intelligence fields in the state (Morris, 2014).

Pedro

Reference:

Bjelopera, J. P. (2013, April 24). The Federal Bureau of Investigation and terrorism investigations. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved from http://fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/R41780.pdf

Congressional Research Service (2016, April 13). Surveillance of foreigners outside the United States under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Retrieved from https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R444…

Department of Justice (n.d.). The USA PATRIOT Act: Preserving life and liberty. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/what_is_the_patr…

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/R41780.pdf

https://www.heritage.org/terrorism/report/60-terrorist-plots-911-continued-lessons-domestic-counterterrorism

Liu, E. C., & Doyle, C. (2015). Government collection of private information: Background and issues related to the USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization in brief. CRS. Retrieved from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/R44042.pdf

Los Angeles Police Department’s Counter-Terrorism and Criminal Intelligence Bureau (n. d.). “Counter-Terrorism and Crime Fighting in Los Angeles.” LAPDBLOG. Retrieved from http://lapdblog.typepad.com/files/ctcib-approach-a…

McAdams, J. G. (2007), Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA): An overview, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center [Online ]. Retrieved from https://www.fletc.gov/sites/default/files/imported…

Morris, L.W. (2014). Three steps to safety: Developing procedures for active shooters. Journal of Business Continuity & Emergency Planning. 7(2), 238-244.

The FBI. (n.d.). Ten Years After: The FBI Since 9/11. Retrieved from https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/about-us/ten-yea…

__________________________________________________________________________________________

RESPONSE 1

Safeguarding Against Domestic Terrorist Attacks

Class,

When it comes to terrorist and terrorist organization, there is no fair play, and the limits are endless as to what one would do to carry out an attack to devastate millions to prove a point. The fact is it is challenging to attack the United States in a regular fight so as a result terrorist creates unique fighting strategies in order to have a chance at fighting. There a many different terrorist groups that have different agendas and because the United States is a powerful country terrorist tends to want to attack them to get in the spotlight.

There have been countless attempts by terrorist to attack the United States; some has been more devastating than others; however, one attack is one too many. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the vast recruitment of American people happens via the internet both international and domestic. The recruitment process is done through messaging platforms, videos, publications and online images, and these messages target people who are receptive to extremist messaging (FBI, n.d.).

The fight for terrorist attack prevention is one that is constant and not going anywhere anytime soon; however, everyone has to play his or her part in order to have mission success. There are outreach programs designed to assist communities to entitle “if you see something, say something” (Department of Homeland Security, 2015). This program is designed to raise awareness to the public in order to report suspicious activities and to contact local law enforcement in such case.

The National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS) is also a community-driven program that inform the public, government agencies, airports, and other organizations of potential terrorist threats. With the aid of all the different agencies, it makes it a bit more possible to protect the nation from devastation (Department of Homeland Security, 2015). The fact that the terrorist groups are recruiting people from our community to carry out terrorist attacks means that one has always to expect the unexpected.

Respectfully,

Omar

Refrences:

Department of Homeland Security. (2015, July 16).Preventing Terrorism Overview: https://www.dhs.gov/topic/preventing-terrorism-ove…

FBI. (n.d.).Terrorism: https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism

RESPONSE 2

Mod 3_Post1

Class,

To eliminate domestic terrorism plots, the government has implemented new methods to gather intelligence. These methods were introduced within the USA Patriot Act after the terrorist attack of 9/11. The USA Patriot Act consists of increased sharing of information between intelligence agencies and criminal investigators, roving wiretaps, recording sources of incoming and outgoing communications, and sneak and peek warrants, and increased access to business records. (Bjelopera, 2013). Although these methods might have been created to mitigate terrorist plots on American soil and surveil potential terrorist actors, Many American citizens have argued that the USA Patriot Act has infringed upon civil liberties.

The Sneak and Peek search warrants allow federal law enforcement officers to enter and conduct a search of premises without notifying the owner (Bjelopera, 2013). This provision is a direct violation of the Fourth Amendment rights protects against unreasonable searches and seizures in someone’s own home. I think when it comes to domestic issues that are not related to terrorism, a notice of any search should be present to protect the lives of families and the agents conducting the search, as well as their civil liberties.

In April 2003, federal agents had a search warrant for a Texas man’s storage unit. They discovered a vast amount of chemical materials to make an improvised weapon. The unit belongs to Joseph Karr, who was sentenced to more than twenty years in prison. He was believed to be plotting an attack with enough materials to kill more than 6,000 people (Reynolds, 2004). I included this example to display that Federal agencies can get a search warrant and prevent terrorist acts from happening. I believe that some incidents are more time-sensitive and may not need a warrant granted.

Stephany,

Reference:

Bjelopera, J. (2013). The Federal Bureau of Investigation and Terrorism Investigations. Retrieved December 23, 2020, from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/R41780.pdf

Reynolds, M. (2004). Homegrown Terror. Retrieved January 12, 2021, from 060006012“>https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.2968/0600…

RESPONSE 3

Module 3 Discussion: Safeguarding Against Domestic Terrorist Attacks

Class,

Our government’s ability to gather intelligence, monitor, infiltrate, and capture or neutralize terrorists on domestic soil involves an incredibly complex series of laws. To begin with, the ability to gather intelligence entails massive cooperation among several agencies such as fusion centers, InfraGard alliances (education), and other national initiatives such as the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) Initiative that allows for federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies to collect information and turn it into actionable intelligence to protect communities and the economy. Moreover, these agencies such as InfraGard integrate the FBI into communities to allow the ease of communication between local and state organizations to federal agencies. They can teach and train local organizations on what to look for and report potential terrorist activities (JRIC, n.d.).

Furthermore, the ability to monitor individuals and keep a pulse on developing threats is outlined in the PATRIOT ACT of 2001 and necessary for the FBI and other law enforcement agencies to take a PROACTIVE approach to our nation’s security. “The Patriot Act allows investigators to use the tools that were already available to investigate organized crime and drug trafficking” (DOJ, n.d.). This means that law enforcement officials can expand surveillance methods against terrorism and conduct investigations without making arrests right away. Perhaps the most significant element of the Patriot Act was updating terminology to address new threats and technology used by terrorists specifically. There are examples such as I mentioned above in my module 2 discussion post about the Boogaloo Bois where the FBI was able to successfully infiltrate their organization and foil their plan to provide support to HAMAS and potentially carry out an attack on domestic soil. Having top tier resources and proactive intelligence and law enforcement agencies is also a deterrent to terrorists. When we can capture attackers before carrying out an incident, we win the psychological war with terrorism. So the question surfaces, were there any civil liberties violated in preventing this incident from developing further?

Methods of gathering intelligence are continually being addressed and modified so that the balance of protection (civil liberties vs. terrorism) remains adequate. The attacks on 9/11 are primarily considered an intelligence failure, and the people criticized the government for allowing an episode of that magnitude to occur. However, the implementation of intelligence reforms doesn’t come easy and faces particular scrutiny at the highest government levels—the development of the “Fusion Cell Concept,” as I mentioned above (Bjelopera, 2013).

Discussing these topics provide great insight into the delicate balance of civil liberties and providing a network of security for Americans. As the Supreme Court states, “the power to secure needed information” (Liu & Doyle, 2015) is necessary to gather the form and develop it into intelligence. With that said, frequently, information ends up being collected that is not necessary at the time. When real-time collection occurs, it is unknown if it is valuable or not and ends up in a database until more data or information can be collected. It’s similar to a very complex jigsaw puzzle, except in this case, there is no picture to reference to see if you have the right pieces. That is where many Americans have concerns that their Fourth Amendment rights are being violated. The Fourth Amendment provides the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures” (Liu & Doyle, 2015). The main objective of this amendment was intended to prevent the government from intrusion into a person’s life and thus placing the burden of providing probable cause back on the government. If a person is not a threat, then it becomes unlawful to gather unreasonable information from them. With that said, how well can the government protect the people? Threats develop over time and require tons of data to produce actionable intelligence.

Now to add to the complexity, let’s add in the rights and limitations of the First Amendment. The right to exercise freedom of speech, practicing religion, freedom of the press, peaceful assembly, and petitioning to address grievances is vital to all Americans. Because this right is exercised all across the country every day, naturally, there will be concerns among the people and the government. Observing recent events of censorship brings up an interesting perspective on the matter. On the one hand, identifying the possibility of violent intent being developed through various communication means (i.e., social media) is something that has become a bit of a hot topic. On the other hand, because we as Americans do not see eye to eye doesn’t mean that the views and ideas are dangerous either. This is why a secondary concern when it comes to the government collecting data to prevent an incident from unfolding is that “the broad use of authorities permitting government intrusion may lead to a “chilling” effect on public discourse” (Liu & Doyle, 2015).

Nicholas

References:

Bjelopera, J. P. (2013, April 24). The Federal Bureau of Investigation and terrorism investigations. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved from http://fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/R41780.pdf

Joint Regional Intelligence Center (JRIC). (n.d.) Retrieved from https://www.jric.org/(X(1)S(3stbskg5cbmnvqt3sj1s3ijz))/default.aspx?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

Liu, E. C., & Doyle, C. (2015). Government collection of private information: Background and issues related to the USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization in brief. CRS. Retrieved from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/R44042.pdf

Department of Justice (n.d.). The USA PATRIOT Act: Preserving life and liberty. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/what_is_the_patriot_act.pdf

RESPONSE 4

Professor and Classmates,

We all refer to September 11, 2001, when the thought of terrorism pops into our heads. We all ask each other, “where were you on that day?” In 1998, terrorism classes were being conducted, and I was fresh out of basic training. We took the training very seriously, but I thought in my head if terrorism would ever hit the most powerful country in the world. When the events unfolded on September 11, 2001, I will never forget that exact moment when everyone was scramming to seek guidance on what to do on the installation. Well, we did not have time to think. We had time to react and move fast. Twelve years later, the Boston Marathon bombing occurred. An Improvised Explosive Device on our homeland similar to what I have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan. The thought of bad guys committing such a crime to harm innocent people is gut-wrenching.

The suspects that caused the act of terrorism at the Boston Marathon killed three people and injuring many more. How did the plot become unrecognized? Did the FBI and other federal agencies know to track this plot? Two years prior to the Boston Marathon Bombing, the FBI was tracking down Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Zubeidat Tsarnaeva whether they posed a terrorist threat. The FBI received information from the Russian Federal Security Bureau that the Tsarnaeva family were adherents to radical Islam (Bucci et al., 2013). The Joint Terrorism Task Force (FBI) in Boston monitored Tamerlan Tsarnaev and found no connection to terrorism. Tamerlan Tsarnaev traveled to Russia while the FBI was tracking his movement (Bucci et al., 2013). The FBI discontinued their efforts to monitor Tamerlan as he did pose a threat to national security. After the bombings occurred, the manhunt for the two suspects found both Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev at large. During a firefight with law enforcement, Tamerlan was wounded and pronounced dead at the hospital. Dzhokhar was apprehended and taken into custody. Based on the Office of Inspector General’s investigations found that was known to the United States government well before the bombing occurred. The Office of Inspector General wanted to know if the information was available to the other government agencies before the events leading to the bombings (United States Intelligence Community et al., 2014). The Boston Marathon was the focal point to improve information sharing among all agencies involved from local, states, or federal levels (Garber, 2015.)

The Information Sharing Environment is used widely for projects, systems, and agencies to enable information sharing responsibilities across the national security enterprise (Office of the Director of National Intelligence, 2020). The Information Sharing Environment was established by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 based on the 9/11 Commission recommendations (Office of the Director of National Intelligence, 2020). Today, agencies from local, state, and federal law enforcement and the Intelligence Community personnel rely on timely and accurate information to protect the American people. We must not forget the use of our military. The Intelligence Community and the United States Armed Forces continue to monitor threats to national security and beyond. Both the military and civilian sector intelligence groups collect strategic and tactical intelligence to support military operations in the theater of combat zones or within the United States.

The use of Fusion Centers that are state-owned is the focal point for the “receipt, gathering, and sharing of threat-related information between state, local, tribal and territorial, federal and private sector partners (Department of Homeland Security, 2019). Fusion Centers is the primary hub of the two-way intelligence and information flow with every agency involved during any events of terrorism (U.S. Department of Justice & U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2006). The information within the fusion centers gives the agencies the ability to rapidly identify immediate and long-term terrorism threats and identify any criminals involved. Based on the information given, agencies such as the Joint Terrorism Task Forces are alerted to respond quickly (U.S. Department of Justice & U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2006). As far as infiltrating, capturing, or neutralizing terrorists, the Department of Homeland Security has prevented thousand of terrorists from entering and traveling to the United States (Department of Homeland Security, 2019). DHS employs various tools to detect and prevent them from entering American soil. Units within the Department of Homeland Security deploys agents to patrol various areas to enforce land, air, and sea borders (Department of Homeland Security, 2019).

David

References:

Department of Homeland Security. (2019). STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK FOR COUNTERING TERRORISM AND TARGETED VIOLENCE. Department of Homeland Security. Retrieved on January 19, 2021, from https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/19_0920_plcy_strategic-framework-countering-terrorism-targeted-violence.pdf.

Department of Homeland Security. (2019, September 19). Fusion Centers. Department of Homeland Security. Retrieved on January 19, 2021, from https://www.dhs.gov/fusion-centers.

Garber, L. (2015). HAVE WE LEARNED A LESSON? THE BOSTON MARATHON BOMBINGS AND INFORMATION SHARING (Vol. 67). American Bar Association. Retrieved on January 19, 2021, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/26424828?seq=1.

Office of the Director of National Intelligence. (2020). ODNI Home. Home. Retrieved on January 19, 2021, from https://www.dni.gov/index.php/who-we-are/organizations/national-security-partnerships/ise/about-the-ise.

U.S. Department of Justice, & U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2006). Fusion center guidelines: developing and sharing information and intelligence in a new era. The Department. Retrieved on January 19, 2021, from https://it.ojp.gov/documents/d/fusion_center_guidelines.pdf.

United States Intelligence Community, Central Intelligence Agency, Department of Justice, & Department of Homeland Security. (2014). Unclassified Summary of Information Handling and Sharing Prior to the April 15, 2013, Boston Marathon Bombing. United States Intelligence Community. Retrieved on January 19, 2021, from https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2014/s1404.pdf.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Module 3 – Background

SECURITY AND DOMESTIC ANTI-TERRORISM

Required Reading

Bjelopera, J. P. (2013, April 24). The Federal Bureau of Investigation and terrorism investigations. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved from http://fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/R41780.pdf

Department of Justice (n.d.). The USA PATRIOT Act: Preserving life and liberty. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/what_is_the_patr…

National Response Framework (2019, October 28). FEMA. Retrieved from 1572366339630-0e9278a0ede9ee129025182b4d0f818e/National_Response_Framework_4th_20191028.pdf” target=”_blank”>1572366339630-0e9278a0ede9ee129025182b4d0f818e/National_Response_Framework_4th_20191028.pdf”>https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1572366339…

Los Angeles Police Department’s Counter-Terrorism and Criminal Intelligence Bureau (n. d.). “Counter-Terrorism and Crime Fighting in Los Angeles.” LAPDBLOG. Retrieved from http://lapdblog.typepad.com/files/ctcib-approach-a…

Congressional Research Service (2016, April 13). Surveillance of foreigners outside the United States under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Retrieved from https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R444…

McAdams, J. G. (2007), Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA): An overview, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center [Online ]. Retrieved from https://www.fletc.gov/sites/default/files/imported…

Required Websites

Joint Regional Intelligence Center (JRIC): https://www.jric.org/?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=…

State and Major Urban Area Fusion Centers, DHS: https://www.dhs.gov/state-and-major-urban-area-fus…

Optional Reading

Liu, E. C., & Doyle, C. (2015). Government collection of private information: Background and issues related to the USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization in brief. CRS. Retrieved from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/R44042.pdf

Morris, L.W. (2014). Three steps to safety: Developing procedures for active shooters. Journal of Business Continuity & Emergency Planning. 7(2), 238-244. Available in the Trident Online Library.