recommendations on how to prevent or disrupt your selected group from attacking the United States homeland

User Generated

enhyntbamnyrm

Humanities

American Public University System

Description

Assignment Instructions

For the final assignment, you will take the midterm and the progress assignment and combine the two into one seamless. (I attached the midterm and the progress assignment below). In addition to your first two papers (already provided below), you will make at least three substantive recommendations on how to prevent or disrupt your selected group from attacking the United States homeland. Make sure your recommendations are focused only on the homeland as this is not a foreign policy or international relations course. Also, make sure your recommendations address a role for state and local agencies (as we discussed in week 4). In lieu of an abstract, an executive summary should be included.

The Final paper is due Sunday of Week 8. The completed paper must be double spaced and follow guidelines (parenthetical citation format) and be free of typographical, spelling and grammatical errors (see example paper from the progress assignment).

Compliance with the above directions, quality of your analysis, and the SSGS Assignment Rubric for 300-400 Level Classes will be used to evaluate this assignment. Assignment Rubric Assignment Rubric

Note on the three paper assignment series: The first paper (the midterm) is about the group you select and basically provides a historical perspective about the group. The second paper (the progress assignment) is a red cell where you put yourself in the shoes of the terrorist group by thinking like they would to determine how the U.S. can do intelligence collection on the terrorist group.

For the final assignment, you will combine all that you wrote in the first two papers into one seamless document and you will add at least three recommendations you would provide to a Homeland Security policy maker on how to counter your selected organization. Be sure to improve your writing based on feedback you receive from the midterm and progress assignment.

Requirements:

Written according to the APA style and format;

Use Times New Roman 12 point font;

1 inch margins on all sides

Double space all text (no extra lines or spaces after a paragraph or section heading)

Executive Summary

A respectable number of credible resources used, cited in the paper as in-text citations, and included on the reference page. A good rule of thumb is at least 2-3 scholarly sources per page of content.

I attached both papers (midterm paper and progress assignment paper) and course reading material. I will provide additional information in case you need it.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Research Paper: ISIL Terrorist Organization Research Paper: ISIL Terrorist Organization Name Date Class Professor University Research Paper: ISIL Terrorist Organization Introduction and Objective Terrorist organization ISIL was founded in 1999, as a group that allied itself with al-Qaeda and even participated in the Iraqi insurgency soon followed by the 2003 invasion of Iraq by Western forces. The terrorist group declared itself as an Islamic Caliphate that reigns over all Muslims in the world. They follow a Wahhabis doctrine of Sunni Islam and they call themselves the Daesh in Arabic which means that they are Salafist jihadist militant group (Oriental Review, 2014). The group has been classified as a terrorist organization by the United Nations, the department of state, and by many other countries. They became famous by their televised executions of journalists and aid workers and by the destruction of cultural and historical sites. According to the UN, ISIL is responsible for many war crimes, human rights violations and they have been accused of a massive ethnic cleansing on a great scale in northern Iraq (Swanson, 2015). ISIL has stated their objective very clearly, they want to establish a worldwide caliphate or “kingdom” of Muslims in which they control all Muslims, they are currently against any Shiite type of Islam and obviously against any Christians or Jewish. Therefore, they are to perform ethnic cleansing maneuvers everywhere they go. Currently they have been only able to invade some parts of western Iraq and some parts of Syria. Within Syria they have attacked the government forces as well as some opposition forces, being their objective to overtake all Muslim nations they take advantage of weak states in order to invade and make their conquest even larger (Oriental Review, 2014). Research Paper: ISIL Terrorist Organization How does ISIL form Isil forms itself as an independent group allied to al-Qaida on 1999 named Jamaát al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (Organization of Monotheism and Jihad, originally lead by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, which pledge full alliance to al-Qaida on October 2004 They had several mergers with other terrorist groups until on 2006 they finally changed their name to ISI, which stands for the Islamic state of Iraq. The ISI or Isil gains true strength when the 2003 Bush administration decides to dispend the Iraqi army. The normal thing to do after removing Saddam Hussein from power was to just “weed” out the Saddam Hussein’s loyalist while keeping the army’s structure intact and then retrain them and re-assign them after the Iraqi government recuperates its strength and organization. Instead they decided to disband the whole Iraqi army in fears that they would betray the Americans and this created even a major problem. The soldiers obviously had to look out for themselves and being of no use to the United States military forces many in the Iraqi army decided to join alQaida and of course its fresh branch which at the time was called the ISI, what happened is that they even stole the military equipment, such as guns, tanks, trucks and ammunition from the Iraqi army and used it for the ISI. The suspicious detail is that originally the United State’s policy was to keep the Iraqi military intact, but according to some sources this changed when they appointed Bremer, some people even suspect it was Dick Chaney’s decision but still there is no confirmation as to why the policy changed (Thompson, 2015). Some analytics even say that if the Iraqi army would have been kept intact ISIL would not have gained much strengths and its destruction would have been faster. However, due to the disbandment of the Iraqi army ISIL becomes strong, and truly a deadly Research Paper: ISIL Terrorist Organization force capable of overtaking whole countries and even establishing their own government and economy. How does ISIL get its funding ISIL’s funding comes primarily from stolen oil fields and antiquities. From the captured territories they control, they take the oil and sell it to the black market to their surrounding Muslim countries. They also gather capital from extortion, taxation and from the goods they loot every time they invade a territory. Of course, one can never take out the equation wealthy donors that see ISIL as an investment opportunity in the black market, but ISIL is more independent from oligarchs and have their own economy, they have their own schools, hospitals, food business, police, market and even their own consumer protection agency. They generate approximately around 1 million dollars a day, their economy is comparable to the one as a failed state such as Afghanistan or the Democratic Republic of Congo, but as a terrorist organization they look strong. The petroleum fields that have been captured in Syria and Iraq are the basic source of funding for ISIL. While the terrorist do is that they refine oil in small refineries and they ship back the oil by truck to the Turkish border, there the oil brokers purchase it. Because of the illegality of the business oil is sold at cheap prices that often fluctuate a lot. It has been reported that traders even use basic communication systems such as WhatsApp in order to setup the logistics to exchange products (Swanson, 2015). The sale of oil even results in contradicting situations, such as the oil sold on the black market by ISIL sometimes ends being purchased by the Syrian regime of Bashar Al-Asad, which are currently enemies of ISIL. Isil’s oil business has been weakened by several attacks by the United States, in 2014 the U.S. reported to having destroyed almost half of the group’s oil refining capacity, also Isil’s capacity Research Paper: ISIL Terrorist Organization to sell and refine oil has been hurt due to that the engineers and personnel that facilitate these services have fled the area or end up killed. Even like that it has been reported that Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi is currently recruiting scientists, engineers, and professional experts to continue the ISIL oil refining operations (Swanson, 2015). ISIL Operations and threat to the US The ISIL terrorist organization became famous for its beheadings, specially the one for the American journalist James Foley. The groups purpose of this any many other beheadings is in retaliation of for the American drone attacks in their regions. Also, the beheadings are used as a recruitment technique and as a display of power between the ISIL ranks, in order to assure obedience within the terrorist’s group forces. The group has also sponsored “lone wolf” attacks such as the one at Ohio State University by Abdul Razak Ali-Artan which stabbed people and ran over people with a car, after the attack ISIL praised his actions claiming Abdul Razak responded to the call of killing infidels or disbelievers in countries the United States (Tognotti, 2014). The group has also expanded operations as wide as the November 2015 Paris attacks in which bombers stuck in the outsides of State de France in Saint Denis during a football march. Then this was suddenly followed several mass shootings and a suicide bombing at different restaurants. Simultaneously some gunmen carried a massacre during the Eagles of Death Metal concert in the Bataclan theater that lead to an incredible battle with the police, the attackers blew themselves up when the police tried to capture them. Ultimately, the attackers killed a grand total of 130 victims, 89 were killed just in the Bataclam theater, and 413 people were injured (Reuters, 2015). Impressively these attacks are considered the worst in France after the second world war. Research Paper: ISIL Terrorist Organization ISIL claimed responsibility for this attack as retaliation for France’s participation in the attacks of some ISIL targets in Syria. Franc Hollande declared this as an act of war and declared a threemonth state of emergency in France that banned all public demonstration allowed the police arrests and raids without a warrant and allowed the shutting down of websites that promoted or sponsored terrorism (Reuters, 2015). It was later discovered that the attack was planned by a terrorist cell in Belgium and that some of the perpetrators had entered the country posing as immigrants. Then on November 15 France launched Operation Chammal, in which they bombed ISIL targets in Raqqa, soon enough on November 18, they killed Abdelhamid Abaaoud which was the mastermind behind the attacks. Conclusion As we can observe the ISI, lately evolved to ISIL is a militant terrorist group with great ambitions to control all Muslims in the world. The group considered a collateral production of Al-qaeda slowly became famous by the terrorist Zarkawi, unfortunately the terrorist organization instead of disappearing gained more strength after Zarkawi’s death, and after the disbandment of the Iraqi army they organized and acquired a better structure. Groups like this pose a danger to the United States and its allies, the group counts with a sophisticated government, economy and military structure comparable to countries such as Afghanistan and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Even though the United States and its allies have inflicted damage to ISIL, they are still operating and remain a strong organization, the major fear is that they infiltrate through immigrants to Europe and to the United States and that something like what happened in Paris also happens in the United States. Research Paper: ISIL Terrorist Organization The groups objective is to establish a worldwide caliphate in which they control all Muslims, the danger is that their Wahhabis doctrine features psychological operations that attract young disturbed teenagers and women into joining in. What makes it harder to detect is that pretty much they turn regular civilians into dangerous terrorist that commit attacks in western countries. The United States Intelligence agency will have to develop a better strategy in order to keep weakening these terrorist organizations and prevent a major attack to happen in American soil Research Paper: ISIL Terrorist Organization References Reuters Staff. (2015) Timeline of Paris attacks according to public prosecutor. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-shooting-timeline/timeline-of-paris-attacksaccording-to-public-prosecutor-idUSKCN0T31BS20151114irected Swanson, A. (2015). How the Islamic State makes its money. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/18/how-isis-makes-itsmoney/?utm_term=.241df56a7f8d Tognotti, C. (2014). Whats ISIS wants, exactly? The terrorists’ Stated Goal has been made clear. Bustle. Retrieved from https://www.bustle.com/articles/38192-what-does-isis-wantexactly-the-terrorists-stated-goal-has-been-made-clear Yourish, K., Watkins, D. & Giratikanon, T. (2016). Where ISIS has directed and inspired attacks around the world. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/06/17/world/middleeast/map-isis-attacksaround-the-world.html Zelin, A. (2014). The War between ISIS and al-Qaeda for supremacy of the Global Jihadist Movement. Washington Institute. Retrieved from http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/uploads/Documents/pubs/ResearchNote_20_Zelin.pd f Reading from week 4 Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Domestic Approach to National Intelligence. Pages 1-24. https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/item/1739-domestic-approach-tonational-intelligence Gerringer & Bart. Law Enforcement Intelligence. Pages 321-325 in AFIO's Guide to the Study of Intelligence. http://www.afio.com/publications/Guide/index.html?page=370 Steiner. Improving Homeland Security at the State Level: Needed: State-level, Integrated Intelligence Enterprises. Studies in Intelligence. https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csistudies/studies/vol.-53-no.-3/improving-homeland-security-at-the-state-level.html Lesson 4: The Role of State and Local Law Enforcement and the Private Sector Welcome to Lesson 4 of Intelligence and Homeland Security. Last week, you examined the intelligence process and how raw data and information are analyzed to become intelligence. week, you will examine the critical role of intelligence for state, local, and private sector entities in homeland security. A great deal of attention is typically focused on the federal government’s role in intelligence activities and the major changes that occurred in the post-9/11 era. This can create the impression that the federal government is the only player in intelligence for homeland security, which is not true. State, local and private sector entities are, by their geographical placement, much more able to gather community level intelligence that the federal government would likely not otherwise have access to. Also, these non-federal partners very important customers or users of federal intelligence who need to be apprised of threats to protect citizens. Successfully gathering and using intelligence to protect the nation is a true team effort with every player fulfilling a critical role. Topics to be covered include: • • • • • • • Post-9/11 changes at the state and local levels National Strategy for Information Sharing and its goals The role of state and local entities The breadth of state and local responsibilities Philosophies of policing Fusion centers at the state and local level Successes and challenges facing fusion centers Post-9/11 Changes at the State and Local Levels Before 9/11, the domain of national security intelligence was strictly in control of the United States’ Intelligence Community, leaving state and local law enforcement in the dark. Since the attacks of 9/11 and the 9/11 Commission Report that followed, it was determined that the key to prevent another large-scale terrorist attack within the United States was to bridge the gap between national security intelligence and local law enforcement intelligence. New responsibilities of state and local agencies made their officers walk a fine line between protecting the homeland and protecting the civil rights of its citizens. “Long-term success demands the use of all the elements of national power: diplomacy, intelligence, covert action, law enforcement, economic policy, foreign aid, public diplomacy, and homeland defense.” – 9/11 Commission Report The National Strategy and Its Goals While the events of 9/11 made it clear that state, local and private sector entities must become integral players in national intelligence, no national strategy existed to formally address this issue. To resolve this disconnect, in 2007 President George W. Bush issued the first National Strategy for Information Sharing. This strategy marked the first time that the full national vision was articulated into a single document. Like any good strategy, this is a living document that continues to be updated and reflects the currents needs and intelligence environment. The most current version, entitled, National Strategy for Information Sharing and Safeguarding, was released in December 2012 with the following goals: • • Drive Collective Action through Collaboration and Accountability: The United States can best reach its shared vision when its entities work together, using governance models that enable mission achievement, adopting common processes where possible to build trust, simplifying the information sharing agreement development process, and supporting efforts through performance management, training, and incentives. Improve Information Discovery and Access through Common Standards Improving discovery and access involves developing clear policies for making information available to approved individuals. Secure discovery and access relies on identity, authentication, and authorization controls, data tagging, enterprise-wide data correlation, common information sharing standards, and a rigorous process to certify and validate their use. • • • Optimize Mission Effectiveness through Shared Services and Interoperability: Efforts to optimize mission effectiveness include shared services, data and network interoperability, and increased efficiency in acquisition. Strengthen Information Safeguarding through Structural Reform, Policy, and Technical Solutions: To foster trust and safeguard our information, policies and coordinating bodies must focus on identifying, preventing, and mitigating insider threats and external intrusions, while departments and agencies work to enhance capabilities for data-level controls, automated monitoring, and cross-classification solutions. Protect Privacy, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties through Consistency and Compliance Contents: Integral to maintaining the public trust is increasing the consistency by which privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties protections are applied across the government, building corresponding safeguards into the development of information sharing operations, and promoting accountability and compliance mechanisms. The Roles of State and Local Entities While significant overlap exists, local, state, and federal agencies have different responsibilities and uses in relation to intelligence collection, analysis, and dissemination. Intelligence agencies have typically been viewed as necessary in relation to the collection of intelligence outside of the United States. State and local agencies assist federal agencies in the collection of information domestically. The private sector also plays a role by contributing resources and manpower and participating in reporting of suspicious activities. After 9/11 After the events of 9/11 began an evolution in the relationships between federal, state, and local homeland security, law enforcement, and intelligence organizations. At the federal level, the Office of the DNI and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created. Law enforcement and intelligence became more integrated. Some law enforcement organizations were reorganized in manners more closely resembling intelligence agencies. The foreign intelligence community also saw fundamental reform. At the state level, the impact of these changes was even greater. State governments grew into leading roles in homeland security. Most states responded by bringing together existing public security, law enforcement, and emergency response capabilities and opening channels to other states. They also strengthened linkages with federal agencies and sought classified government intelligence to better inform their efforts to protect citizens. Before 9/11 Before 9/11, not one state had a significant capability for intelligence nor security clearance to receive federal intelligence. Now most states and many urban areas have created at least one intelligence cells in existing structures or new fusion centers. For the first time, state and local homeland security and law enforcement, and especially the new intelligence organizations, are connected with federal intelligence agencies through fusion centers located throughout the nation. Also, the federal government invested the time and resources to give select state and local officials security clearances to be able to receive classified federal intelligence. The Breath of State and Local Responsibilities With the United States’ newly recognized need for state and local support, state law enforcement agencies to focus on homeland security and not just common crimes. In addition to the need to collect, analyze, and share critical information and intelligence, they recognized the need for protection of critical infrastructure and intelligence that might come as a result of threats of attack on the critical infrastructure they were tasked with protecting. State and local law enforcement agencies investigate crime that could possibly be used as a foundation for terrorist activity. These agencies might conduct surveillance or collect information on suspicious activity in their communities. State and local officers also participate in federal task forces such as the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF). These JTTFs work on the front line in battling terrorism. These groups of locally based investigators, analysts, linguists, SWAT experts, and other specialists from dozens of U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies perform a number of duties involved in that task. These include investigating leads, gathering evidence, arresting suspects, conduct training, collecting and sharing intelligence, and responding to threats and incidents whenever needed. They help to build a shared intelligence base across many agencies and create familiarity among investigators and managers before a crisis, integrating talents, skills, and knowledge from across the law enforcement and intelligence communities into a single team. • • • • • There are task forces located in 104 cities in the United States, and there is at least one task force in each of the 56 FBI field offices. Seventy-one Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTFFs) have been created since the events of 9/11; however the first task force ever was established in New York City in 1980. There are appropriately 4,000 members nationwide, which is a four-fold increase since the events of 9/11. JTFF members come from over 500 state and local agencies and 55 federal agencies, including many components of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of State. The National Joint Terrorism Task Force (NJTTF) is responsible for the coordination all of the 104 regional tasks forces across the United States. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=6-hxnd65C60 Philosophies of Policing Although few people think of them this way, most activities that might counter terrorism are routinely part of an officer’s daily work. There should always be a focus placed on what the police can do to create an environment in which terrorism cannot occur. Officers must maintain community relationships, particularly with immigrant communities, and focus on a range of policing philosophies. These should include community oriented policing (COP), problem oriented policing (POP), and intelligence-led policing (ILP). • • Community Policing: Community policing (COP) is typically characterized by an emphasis on bridging the divide that had previously alienated law enforcement from the communities it served. Unlike the strictly hierarchical traditional form of policing, community policing is more decentralized. This decentralization gives line officers the flexibility and autonomy necessary to develop more intimate ties with their communities. Relationships with the community quickly evolved into partnerships, which are nurtured in several ways by allowing the community access to the police via permanent officer assignments, substations, and nontraditional patrol such as bikes. Officers take ownership in their communities in order to help clean up neighborhoods in an effort to reduce the vulnerability of crime. Through these initiatives, criminals would be less likely to find the area as appealing and would be forced to leave. Problem-Oriented Policing: • Balancing the needs of the community and the need for police agencies to actively reduce crime, a new perspective for addressing community problems was needed. The evolution of COP eventually led to problem orientated policing (POP)—or, more simply, problem solving. Developed by Herman Goldstein, POP required a slight shift in COP practices that began in the 1990s. POP is based on the idea that if the variables involved in a crime could be determined, the police could take away a single variable and could possibly prevent and ultimately reduce crime. Intelligence-Led Policing: Problem solving based on the SARA model of scanning, analysis, response, and assessment allows officers to build on the guardianship premise in order to reduce crime in their community. Studies have shown that lower level officers are able to identify problems to be addressed, but actually implementing a means to address the issues is still lacking. Local law enforcement is more likely to see something suspicious or out of place within their own community before federal officials are. Local law enforcement knowledge coupled with perceptive citizens working together to provide information leading to action has led to the next phase of problem solving known as intelligence-led policing (ILP). Origins of ILP It is important to understand the origins of ILP, as many changes have occurred in recent years. ILP did not originate in the United States and was actually first used in the United Kingdom to reduce burglary and motor vehicle theft with great success. Although U.S. law enforcement is a bit more fragmented than its British counterpart, the philosophy can easily be and has been implemented in the States. ILP is often seen as conflicting with COP, but there are many similarities, and ILP has evolved from the COP philosophy. ILP was initially coined in the United Kingdom by military-style police forces in Kent and Northumbria. Although its initial purpose was targeted at reducing specific crimes such as burglary and motor vehicle theft, the strategy systematically has shown to have a positive decrease in crime rates in high crime areas through locating common offenders. Ultimately, the initiative was seen as a success. American agencies have also found the idea helpful in combating overall crime and specifically terrorism. According to McGarrell et al. (2007), “The arrests following the London subway and the Madrid train bombings, for instance, suggest that intelligence gathered from multiple sources, including surveillance cameras, community informants, and prison officials, was instrumental in post event investigations (p.147).” Local law enforcement played a significant role. Fusion Centers The fusion center concept expanded rapidly after 9/11 and especially after the release of the 9/11 Commission Report. Once it was recognized that state and local agencies need intelligence and need to partner with federal agencies they spread across the nation. The fusion center is a key concept to integrating state and local entities into a better connected intelligence network. The DHS sponsored fusion centers across the country as a mechanism for intelligence sharing between all levels of law enforcement and the IC. Fusion centers were envisioned as hubs for federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) law enforcement intelligence gathering, analysis, and dissemination. However, fusion centers are owned by the state or city government and none are run by any federal agency. Primary fusion centers, which are located in every state (except Wyoming) can also be found in the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and Washington D.C. One primary fusion centers in each state is designated to serve as the hub for gathering intelligence, analysis, and dissemination in that jurisdiction. Other recognized fusion centers exist and are located in large metropolitan areas or serve regions. As you can see from the map, fusion centers are positioned across the nation and are positioned to receive information from varying sources including all other fusion centers within the national network. One common function for fusion centers is vetting Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs). The Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative (NSI) was developed as a result of the guidance provided by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) of 2004 and the 2007 National Strategy for Information Sharing. The NSI, a collective effort between federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement, ensures that SAR information is gathered, documented, processed, analyzed, and shared in a manner that rigorously protects the privacy and civil liberties of Americans. Fusion centers receive these SARs from anywhere including average citizens and law enforcement officers and vet them. Fusion center check local records and give the SARs a ‘sanity check’ and if they are credible then they are assigned to law enforcement to investigate or forwarded on to the JTTF if there is a terrorism nexus. The private sector is a also source of information that should be leveraged but is not always incorporated effectively. State and local law enforcement must engage the private sector in information gathering because businesses have a vested economic interest in deterring terrorism. Thus, publicprivate partnerships are key elements to the approach. The 2007 National Strategy for Information Sharing mandated the establishment of “baseline operating standards for fusion centers.” The following year, a collective effort between the federal government and the SLTT produced a document entitled Baseline Capabilities for State and Major Urban Area Fusion Centers. Using this document as a guide, in 2010 fusion center directors worked in conjunction with the federal government to identify four Critical Operational Capabilities (COCs) as follows: o o o o Receive: The ability to receive classified and unclassified information from federal partners. Analyze: The ability to assess local implications of that threat information through the use of a formal risk assessment process. Disseminate: The ability to further disseminate that threat information to other state, local, tribal, territorial and private sector entities within their jurisdiction. Gather: The ability to gather locally-generated information, aggregate it, analyze it, and share it with federal partners as appropriate. Functions of Fusion Centers As mentioned previously, the fusion center’s principal role is to compile, analyze, and disseminate information and intelligence about criminal and terrorist activity. It does the same with other information as well, including that concerning threat, public safety, law enforcement, public health, social services, and public works, to support efforts to anticipate, identify, prevent, and monitor criminal and terrorist activity. This criminal information and intelligence should be both strategic and tactical. To be meaningful, the fusion center must do more than just collect information and intelligence for law enforcement. It must also analyze law enforcement information and intelligence with other important information on an ongoing basis, such as public health and transportation, based on a criminal predicate, threat, or public safety need. The goal is to rapidly identify emerging threats, support community-focused problem-solving activities and predictive analysis capabilities, and improve the delivery of emergency and nonemergency services. When successful, the fusion center’s processes should result in the identification of terrorism-related leads. Many experts believe that there is a high probability of identifying terrorists through criminal activity that may seem unrelated to terrorism at first, such as illegal drug operations, money laundering, fraud, and identity theft. The fusion process does not replace mission-specific intelligence and information management, but it does leverage information and intelligence developed through these processes and systems to support the rapid identification of patterns and trends that may reflect an emerging threat. Some of the recommended goals for fusion centers include: • • • • • • Serving as the primary point of contact to report criminal/ terrorist information to the local Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) and DHS’s Homeland Security Operations Center (HSOC). Including the capability of blending law enforcement information and intelligence. Collecting, analyzing, and disseminating “allcrimes” information, so as to identify emerging patterns and trends. Evaluating and reevaluating the process, new data, and emerging threats. Adopting and adhering to a statewide strategy to examine the information exchanges of the states’ law enforcement and homeland security partners, including dissemination of information by the state Homeland Security Advisor to law enforcement. Serving as a receipt-and-dissemination hub for law enforcement information provided by federal entities). Each of these areas can be expanded to include other critical tasks and responsibilities. To successfully achieve these goals, the first responder and private community, along with the public, must be a part of the fusion center concept. Integration is a key component of a fusion center. As you can see, a fusion center’s responsibilities are immense. Guidelines must be developed to assist in establishing and operating fusion centers. The State Fusion Center The fusion process incorporates every level and discipline of government, the public, and often private sector entities. However, the level of involvement of some participants will vary based on specific circumstances. Some disciplines, such as law enforcement, represent a core component of the fusion process due to the relationship between crime and terrorism. In addition, law enforcement authorities are typically best suited to coordinate these operations. The fusion process should be organized and coordinated on a state level. These centers regularly collaborate and coordinate with other state fusion centers to ensure integration. These collaborative efforts with federal partner and other fusion centers enhances information and intelligence sharing. Many major urban areas have established a center of its own, ensuring that it is linked with the state center. Other localities, tribal governments, and even the private sector should develop its own process to link to these state fusion centers. The public should be engaged through public education programs. These programs should inform citizens what they should look for and how to respond if they observe suspicious activity; in most cases the entity receiving these SARs is the fusion center. While national guidelines should guide the process, the technologies and operational protocols used by individual jurisdictions should be based on the specific capabilities that are available to that particular fusion center. Successes and Challenges Facing Fusion Centers There are several benefits to state and localities that set up a fusion center. They allow state and local agencies the ability to receive federal intelligence and other information from the rest of the national network. This sharing allows for improved situational awareness of threats and a mechanism to disseminate information within their jurisdiction. Additional funding in the forms of grants is available, and training and overall technical support can be garnered to state and local agencies to support fusion centers. There are numerous success stories associated with fusion centers in the United States. Their accomplishments span the entire country and involve the work of many national and international entities. The three examples that follow all occurred in the year 2014. o Colorado Information Analysis Center (CIAC) Colorado Information Analysis Center, September 2009 In the Najibullah Zazi case, the CIAC provided analytic support to the Denver FBI and the Department of Homeland Security regarding the suspicious activity reported to the CIAC through the public website and 1-800 number. In support of this effort, the CIAC provided personnel to assist the Denver FBI in the investigation and support the field operations. CIAC analysts also assisted in the review and analysis of the evidence obtained during the execution of the search and arrest warrants. CIAC leadership addressed media inquiries regarding the investigation, the threat to Colorado residents, and the threat to national security. o Alabama Fusion Center (AFC) Between January and May, the Alabama Fusion Center (AFC) was instrumental in the success of Project Synergy, a national effort led by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). The AFC provided intelligence and research support to the DEA as well as to 35 other federal, state and local law enforcement agencies involved in the effort. The AFC served as a hub for research and information dissemination, investigating tips and leads submitted by Alabama’s Narcotics Task Force agents for analysis of transnational drug networks, including sources of supply and global money flow. Additionally, AFC intelligence analysts were onsite at the DEA’s operations center, supplying real time information to investigators. Through these joint efforts, Project Synergy resulted in the arrest of more than 38 individuals suspected of being involved with transnational drug networks and the seizure of over two hundred pounds of synthetic drugs, $500,000 in cash and bank accounts and 19 guns. o Southeast Florida Fusion Center (SEFFC) In January, the Miami Gardens Police Department (MGPD) contacted the Southeast Florida Fusion Center (SEFFC) with information concerning two residents of Miami Gardens, Florida whom they suspected of having outstanding arrest warrants in the Bahamas. The SEFFC discovered that both subjects were Bahamian citizens living in the United States illegally. They notified the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)’s Miami Sector, who coordinated with the MGPD to apprehend them. During processing, the CBP INTERPOL Liaison confirmed that one of the subjects was wanted in the Bahamas for the murder of a U.S. citizen. The subject was extradited and turned over to Bahamian authorities. The second subject was issued an order of deportation and removed from the United States. The SEFFC’s ability to support local investigations and share information with its federal partners provided an opportunity to identify and remove “wanted” and possibly dangerous individuals from the United States. o Virginia Fusion Center (VFC) In October 2014, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations in Norfolk, Virginia led a multi-agency drug raid in partnership with CBP, the Virginia Fusion Center (VFC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, and other state and local partners. A lead analyst from the VFC provided case support to the investigation, conducting in-depth analysis to determine the connections among the businesses and individuals involved. Narcotics investigators from the regional Drug Task Force also contributed to disrupting the crime ring. This large-scale investigation resulted in the arrest of 10 individuals in Hampton Roads, Virginia as part of an effort to thwart the proliferation of synthetic narcotics, or “spice.” The drug is meant to imitate tetrahydrocannabinol in marijuana, a hallucinogen. Authorities charged the individuals with several offenses, including money laundering and false branding, as well as conspiracy charges related to trading the drug. As synthetic drugs are often sold under the guise of legal merchandise at commercial businesses, it is becoming increasingly imperative for federal, state and local agencies to continue cooperating to combat this growing homeland security threat. Fusion Center Challenges While there are benefits to fusion centers, there are also challenges. No two fusion centers are alike, and there are a range of roles and missions they perform based upon the needs of the jurisdiction and stakeholders. Some are purely analytical and some are actively investigative. This has caused some confusion in Congress as well as concerns by privacy advocates like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The ACLU sees fusion centers as a threat to innocent citizen’s freedoms and privacy as they envision intelligence analysts at the state and local level having access to vast amounts of federal intelligence while simultaneously being able to “datamine” all state and local records (taxes, property records, driving records, etc). Small agencies do not have the manpower to allocate an officer to the fusion center, and as a result they often do not submit information or receive important information. The DHS has stood behind the nation’s fusion centers, and has been quick to point to successes such as the ones described above as evidence that the model of integration between the national and state/local levels is an effective one in fighting terrorism. However, a report published in 2012 by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs permanent subcommittee on investigations told a different story. Their two-year investigation found that most information gathered by fusion centers was related to drug and human trafficking or general criminal activity and was unrelated to terrorism. Concerns such as these, as well as those involving civil liberties grounds, must be resolved in the near future if the fusion center model is to be an effective means of protecting the homeland from terrorism and other threats. Conclusion In addition to the significant changes at the federal level following the events of September 11, 2001, state, local and private sector entities also have undergone a significant transformation. They are critical players in the field on intelligence and provide much needed capability and capacity that did not previously exist. In Lesson5, we will address intelligence collection. Sources Cordner, G.W. and Scarborough, K.E. (2010). Police Administration, seventh ed., 2. LexisNexis/Anderson Pub, New Providence, NJ. Department of Homeland Security (2008). Baseline Capabilities for State and Major Urban Area Fusion Centers. Retrieved from http://www.fema.gov/pdf/government/grant/2010/fy10_hsgp_fusion.pdf. Department of Homeland Security (2014). 2014 Fusion Center Success Stories. Retrieved from https://www.dhs.gov/2014-fusion-center-success-stories. Federal Bureau of Investigation (2016) Joint Terrorism Task Forces. Retrieved from https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism/joint-terrorism-task-forces. Federation of American Scientists (2016). The Intelligence Cycle. Retrieved from http://fas.org/irp/cia/product/facttell/intcycle.htm. Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative (2008). Baseline Capabilities for State and Major Urban Area Fusion Centers. U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.it.ojp.gov/documents/d/baseline%20capabilities%20for%20state%20and%20major%20urb an%20area%20fusion%20centers.pdf. Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative (2008). Fusion Center Guidelines: Developing and Sharing Information and Intelligence in a New Era. U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from https://it.ojp.gov/documents/d/fusion_center_guidelines.pdf. Hulnick, A. (2007). What’s wrong with the intelligence cycle? Strategic intelligence 2, Johnson, L., ed. Westport, CT: Praeger Security International. Information Sharing Environment (2007). National Strategy for Information Sharing. Retrieved from https://www.ise.gov/sites/default/files/nsis_book_0.pdf. Keithly, D. (2010). Intelligence Fundamentals. Homeland security and intelligence. Logan, K., ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger Security International. Lowenthal, M. (2012). Intelligence. Secrets to Policy, fifth ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press. McGarrell, E.F., Freilich, J.D., and Chermak, S. (2007). Intelligence-Led Policing As a Framework for Responding to Terrorism. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 23, 142. Retrieved from http://cjresources.com/CJ_Legal_Issues_pdfs/intelligence%20led%20policing%20as%20a%20framework%20for %20responding%20to%20terrorism%20-%20McGarrell%20et%20al%20-%202007.pdf. Nationwide SAR Initiative (2015). About the NSI. Retrieved from https://nsi.ncirc.gov/about_nsi.aspx. Obama, B.H. (2012). National Strategy for Information Sharing and Safeguarding. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2012sharingstrategy_1.pdf. O’Harrow, R. (2012). DHS ‘fusion centers’ portrayed as pools of ineptitude and civil liberties intrusions. Washington Post, October 2. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/dhsfusion-centers-portrayed-as-pools-of-ineptitude-and-civil-liberties-intrusions/2012/10/02/100144400cb1-11e2-bd1a-b868e65d57eb_story.html. Steiner, J.E. (2009). Needed: State-Level, Integrated Intelligence Enterprises. Studies in Intelligence: Journal of the American Intelligence Professional, 53, 3. Central Intelligence Agency. U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (2012). Federal support for and involvement in state and local fusion centers. Retrieved from https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/media/investigative-report-criticizescounterterrorism-reporting-waste-at-state-and-local-intelligence-fusion-centers.
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

Running Head: RECOMMENDATIONS ON TERRORISM

Recommendations on Terrorism
Name:
Institution Affiliation:
Date:

1

RECOMMENDATIONS ON TERRORISM

2

Recommendations on Terrorism
Terror attacks have been happening since the early times of development in the United
States. Various groups have claimed responsibility while others just commit the crimes and keep
silent waiting for the government’s next move. In the previous studies, we researched about the
various terrorist groups and focused on one particular ISIL organization which has connections
with the al-Qaeda. There are definitely other organizations which may be involved in various
attacks or awaiting to perform such activities in future. The government has a role to play in
protecting the people from such issues while also preventing them from happening by getting
ahead of the terrorists.
So far, the government has made important steps in coming up with the Homeland
Security Department (HS...


Anonymous
Just the thing I needed, saved me a lot of time.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags