Advanced search    Help

Clear all search criteria

Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

• Long and Winding Road: Post-9/11 Intelligence Reforms a Decade Later

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the thesis abstract: "The establishment of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and passage of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, collectively constitute the most significant bureaucratic shakeup of the national security apparatus since the National Security Act of 1947. Roughly 10 years following the creation of DHS, questions linger as to whether these reforms have addressed the major domestic intelligence shortfalls identified in numerous post-9/11 congressional hearings and in the final report of the 9/11 Commission. This thesis seeks to answer those questions by examining the performance of the U.S. domestic intelligence system since 9/11 along three fronts: intelligence fusion, institutional evolution, and intelligence prioritization. Citing the literature from current and former homeland security practitioners, academic experts, non-partisan analysts, and print media commentators, this paper concludes that while key measures of progress on these fronts have been observed, shortfalls within the domestic intelligence system do nevertheless remain, requiring further oversight and guidance from federal homeland security policymakers."

  Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.)

  Johanson, David R., II

  2013-03
• Defining Cyber and Focusing the Military's Role in Cyberspace

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the thesis abstract: "This strategy research paper proposes definitions for cyber crime, cyber war, and cyber terrorism that possess potential for wide adoption throughout the U.S. government, civilian sector, and international community. Using the proposed definitions, more distinct roles for government agencies and civilian sector emerge. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) retains the lead for overall domestic cyber security with support from the Department of Defense (DoD), Department of Justice (DoJ), Department of State, and the civilian sector. DoD assumes primary responsibility for cyber war, while DHS and DoJ assume primary responsibility for cyber crime and cyber terrorism. The proposed definitions permit DoD to focus on defending, deterring, disrupting, and defeating adversaries that conduct and prosecute cyber war against the U.S. and its allies. The proposed definitions also help to identify cost savings by reducing or eliminating inefficient and duplicative capabilities throughout the government. Lastly, the proposed definitions serve as an aid to decision makers as they work their way through the challenges of Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello when responding to cyber threats."

  Army War College (U.S.)

  Mowery, Samuel P.

  2013-03
• American Jihadist Terrorism: Combating a Complex Threat [January 23, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report describes homegrown violent jihadists and the plots and attacks that have occurred since 9/11. For this report, 'homegrown' describes terrorist activity or plots perpetrated within the United States or abroad by American citizens, legal permanent residents, or visitors radicalized largely within the United States. The term 'jihadist' describes radicalized individuals using Islam as an ideological and/or religious justification for their belief in the establishment of a global caliphate, or jurisdiction governed by a Muslim civil and religious leader known as a caliph. The term 'violent jihadist' characterizes jihadists who have made the jump to illegally supporting, plotting, or directly engaging in violent terrorist activity. The report also discusses the radicalization process and the forces driving violent extremist activity. It analyzes post-9/11 domestic jihadist terrorism and describes law enforcement and intelligence efforts to combat terrorism and the challenges associated with those efforts. Appendix A provides details about each of the post-9/11 homegrown jihadist terrorist plots and attacks."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Bjelopera, Jerome P.

  2013-01-23
• Domestic Terrorist Threat: Background and Issues for Congress [January 17, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11), domestic terrorists--'people who commit crimes within the homeland and draw inspiration from U.S.-based extremist ideologies and movements'--have not received as much attention from federal law enforcement as their foreign counterparts inspired by Al Qaeda. This was not necessarily always the case. The FBI reported in 1999 that '[d]uring the past 30 years, the vast majority--but not all--of the deadly terrorist attacks occurring in the United States have been perpetrated by domestic extremists.' […] This report provides background regarding domestic terrorists--detailing what constitutes the domestic terrorism threat as suggested by publicly available U.S. government sources. It illustrates some of the key factors involved in assessing this threat and concludes by examining potential issues for Congress. This report does not discuss in detail either violent jihadist-inspired terrorism or the federal government's role in counterterrorism investigations. It is meant to be read in conjunction with CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report R41780, 'The Federal Bureau of Investigation and Terrorism Investigations'; CRS Report R42553, 'Countering Violent Extremism in the United States'; and CRS Report R41416, 'American Jihadist Terrorism: Combating a Complex Threat', which provide greater context in these areas."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Bjelopera, Jerome P.

  2013-01-17
• Serial No. 112-122: WMD Terrorism: Assessing the Continued Homeland Threat, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence of the Committee on Homeland Security, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, November 15, 2012

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the November 15, 2012 hearing, "WMD Terrorism: Assessing the Continued Homeland Threat" before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. From the opening statement of Patrick Meehan: "The Aspen Institute's WMD Working Group has assessed that WMD terrorism is a continuing and serious threat to the U.S. Homeland. At today's hearing, we will hear from the Institute on where we are and where we need to go. This report reminds us that some of the building blocks for weapons of mass destruction are appropriately and legitimately used in the U.S. for medical and other peaceful purposes. So we must also ensure that certain biological, radiological, nuclear, and chemical materials never fall into the hands of domestic terrorists or others who would do us harm. [...] The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has also played a large role on ramping up the preparedness apparatus and since 2004 has spent at least $70 million developing more than 20 CBRN [Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear] risk assessments. In March of this year, this Committee marked up legislation I proposed in order to establish weapons of mass destruction intelligence and information sharing functions of the Office of Intelligence and Analysis at DHS and to require dissemination of information analyzed by the Department to entities with responsibilities relating to homeland security. This is a threat that I take very seriously, as the results of a successful CBRN attack on the homeland would be catastrophic." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Patrick Meehan, Brian Higgins, Leonard A. Cole, and Randall J. Larsen.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2013
• Serial No. 112-110: Preventing Nuclear Terrorism: Does DHS Have an Effective and Efficient Nuclear Detection Strategy? Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies of the Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, July 26, 2012

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the July 26, 2012 hearing on "Preventing Nuclear Terrorism: Does DHS Have an Effective and Efficient Nuclear Detection Strategy?," held before the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies. From the opening statement of Daniel E. Lungren: "Nuclear and radiological terrorism is my greatest fear. It would represent an unprecedented catastrophic event, causing enormous death, destruction, as well as long-term economic disruption. So it is critical that we continue our vigilance and oversight efforts in order to address this continuing threat. Our subcommittee hearing today will examine the current nuclear detection strategy of the Department of Homeland Security and assess whether that strategy is both effective and efficient in countering this threat. It was exactly 1 year ago today, in this very hearing room, that the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office informed me that it was cancelling its costly Advanced Spectroscopic Portal Monitoring Program, known as ''A--S--P''. After much promise, testing, and evaluation, the Department cancelled ASP without identifying a new technology replacement. Three months ago, the Department provided its proposed path forward with its Global Nuclear Detection Architecture (GNDA) ''Implementation Plan''. This was a major accomplishment of DNDO by facilitating the interagency cooperation that is essential to the development of such a comprehensive architecture. The plan provides for the first time, a 5-year look-ahead of the needed capabilities for countering our nuclear and radiological threats. While the GNDA plan contains excellent procedures and policies to coordinate our Nation's nuclear defense efforts, it fails to identify the Department's priorities for acquiring its next generation of detection equipment." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Daniel E. Lungren, Yvette D. Clarke, Bennie G. Thompson, Huban A. Gowadia, David C. Maurer, and Vayl S. Oxford.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2013
• Serial No. 113-40: Eyes in the Sky: The Domestic Use of Unmanned Aerial Systems, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, May 17, 2013

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the May 17, 2013 hearing, "Eyes in the Sky: The Domestic Use of Unmanned Aerial Systems" held before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security and Investigations. From the statement of Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.: "Welcome to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security and Investigations' hearing, ''Eyes in the Sky: the Domestic Use of Unmanned Aerial Systems.'' Today we will explore the use of unmanned aircraft within the United States. We will discuss the possible uses and capabilities of such unmanned aircraft, and we will learn about the effect such use may have on the privacy of Americans. We will also discuss the constitutional issues that may arise when the government uses unmanned aircraft for law enforcement and public safety purposes." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Bob Goodlatte, John Villasenor, Gregory S. McNeal, Tracey Maclin, Chris Calabrese, F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. and Robert C. Scott.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2013
• Serial No. 113-2: Assessing DHS 10 Years Later, How Wisely is DHS Spending Taxpayer Dollars? Hearing before the Subcomittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency of the Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Firs Session, February 15, 2013

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is from the February 15, 2013 hearing titled, " Assessing DHS 10 Years Later:How Wisely is DHS Spending Taxpayer Dollars? before the House Subcomittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency of the Committee on Homeland Security. From the opening statement of Jeff Duncan: "Next month marks 10 years since the creation of the DHS through Homeland Security Act of 2002. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, forced us to fundamentally rethink the threats our Nation faces and our approach to defending the homeland. As the 9/11 Commission report documents, before 9/11 no Executive department had as its first priority the job of defending America from domestic attack. That changed with the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. DHS was established to: No. 1, prevent terrorist attacks within the United States; No. 2, reduce America's vulnerability to terrorism; and No. 3, help America recover from any attacks that may occur. DHS, however, has faced the massive challenge of creating a new organization by integrating 22 separate Federal agencies and components into a unified department. It is important to always remember the gravity of the issues DHS faced in its inception and how those experiences affect the Department's current responsibilities to protect critical infrastructure, develop countermeasures against chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear threats, secure our borders and transportation systems, and manage the Federal Government's response to terrorist attacks and major disasters. Today, we seek to assess how wisely DHS is spending American taxpayer dollars. Has it been successful in meeting its mandate established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002? We know that there have been 54 publicly-known attempted terrorist attacks on the United States that have been thwarted since 9/11. However, incidents such as the 2009 attack on Fort Hood that killed 13 Americans, or the 2009 Christmas day underwear bomber, and the 2010 attempted car bombing in Times Square remind us to remain ever vigilant." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Jeff Duncan, Ron Barber, James S. Gilmore, III, Shawn Reese, Rick Nelson, and Cathleen A. Berrick.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2013
• Implications of Refinery Closures for U.S. Homeland Security and Critical Infrastructure Safety, Field Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence of the Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, March 19, 2012

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the March 19, 2012 hearing, "The Implications of Refinery Closures for U.S. Homeland Security and Critical Infrastructure Safety," before the United States House of Representatives, Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. From the opening statement of Patrick Meehan: "At today's hearing, I hope to gain answers to the following critical questions. What are the reasons that refineries are closing in the United States? If the Northeast is the largest gasoline market in the United States, why are particularly East Coast refineries being closed? What are the consequences of the recent refinery closures in the Northeast on the immediate and long-term oil supply? How will these resulting shortages be addressed? What are the security issues raised by greater reliance on pipelines, shipping, and rail for product delivery to the Northeast? What are the National security implications if the loss of refining capacity and expertise that we have here in the United States is allowed to dwindle? What is being done to address those security issues and stresses on our critical infrastructure systems? As we all well know at the local level, the decline of domestic regional refining in our Nation is alarming, and in my view will affect our National and homeland security. On September 6, 2011, Sunoco announced that they would be idling their Marcus Hook and Philadelphia refineries by July 1, 2012, if a buyer could not be found. Just 3 weeks later, ConocoPhillips announced that they planned to idle and sell their refinery in Trainer, Pennsylvania. These three area refineries represent 50 percent of the total East Coast refining capacity." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Patrick Meehan, John Carney, Michael G. Fitzpatrick, Brian Higgins, Howard Gruenspecht, Brandon Wales, Charles Drevna, and Robert Greco.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2013
• CTC Sentinel [January 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This January 2013 issue of the U.S. Military Academy's Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) Sentinel features the following articles: "Tunisia: Signs of Domestic Radicalization Post-Revolution" by Anne Wolf; "Jordan in the Balance: Evaluating Regime Stability" by Sean L. Yom; "Boko Haram's International Connections" by Jacob Zenn; "Countering Islamist Radicalization in Germany" by Dorle Hellmuth; "Algerian Foreign Policy in the Context of the Arab Spring" by Anouar Boukhars; and "A Profile of Lashkar-i-Jhangvi Leader Malik Ishaq" by Daud Khattak.

  Combating Terrorism Center (U.S.)

  2013-01
• Saudi Arabia: Background and U.S. Relations [November 27, 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The kingdom of Saudi Arabia, ruled by the Al Saud family since its founding in 1932, wields significant global political and economic influence as the birthplace of the Islamic faith and by virtue of its large oil reserves. Close U.S.-Saudi official relations have survived a series of challenges since the 1940s, and, in recent years, shared concerns over Al Qaeda-inspired terrorism and Iranian regional ambitions have provided a renewed logic for continued strategic cooperation. The ongoing political upheaval in the Middle East and North Africa is changing the dynamics of long-running reform debates in the kingdom. The full effect of these events on the kingdom and on U.S.-Saudi relations has yet to be determined. Official U.S. concerns about human rights and religious freedom in the kingdom persist, and some Members of Congress have expressed skepticism about Saudi leaders' commitment to combating religious extremism and sharing U.S. policy priorities in the Middle East and South Asia. However, Bush and Obama Administration officials have referred to the Saudi government as an important regional partner in recent years, and U.S. arms sales and related training programs have continued with congressional oversight. In October 2010, Congress was notified of proposed sales to Saudi Arabia of dozens of F-15 fighter aircraft, helicopters, and related equipment and services, with a potential value of $60 billion. Contracts to implement those sales are now being signed. […] Current U.S. policy seeks to coordinate with Saudi leaders on regional issues and help them respond to domestic economic and security challenges. It remains to be seen whether U.S. initiatives and, more importantly, Saudi leaders' efforts will ensure stability. Shared challenges have long defined U.S.-Saudi relations, but questions about political, economic, and social reform may become more pressing in light of the calls for political change that are now swirling around the kingdom."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Blanchard, Christopher M.

  2012-11-27
• Remarks by Ambassador Jeffrey DeLaurentis, U.S. Alternate Representative for Special Political Affairs in the United Nations, at a Security Council Open Debate on the Work of its Counterterrorism Committees

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the statement of Jeffrey DeLaurentis: "Thank you, Mr. President. At the General Assembly in September, President Obama reminded us that terror attacks are not simply an assault on one country but an assault on the very ideals upon which the United Nations was founded. Through concerted action and international cooperation, the world has made significant progress in combating the scourge of terrorism, but we have not yet eliminated it. Though al-Qaeda's core has weakened, we have seen the rise of affiliated groups around the world, such as in the Sahel and the Arabian Peninsula. The Security Council's three counterterrorism Committees exemplify our common efforts and reflect the international community's multifaceted approach to confront this challenge. Thwarting nefarious actors from supporting acts of terror; building national capacity to address terrorism domestically; and working to prevent the most dangerous weapons and materials from falling into the wrong hands -- these are all essential elements of a comprehensive approach to counterterrorism, and they require constant multilateral cooperation. The Council's sustained commitment to promoting implementation of resolutions 1267, 1373, and 1540 has helped build stronger legal, policy, and institutional counterterrorism frameworks at the national and regional levels. We commend the Committees for their dedication, their Chairs for their leadership over the past two years, and the three expert groups for their continued excellent work."

  United States. Mission to the United Nations

  DeLaurentis, Jeffrey

  2012-11-14
• India-U.S. Security Relations: Current Engagement [November 13, 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "U.S.-India engagement on shared security interests is a topic of interest to the U.S. Congress, where there is considerable support for a deepened U.S. partnership with the world's largest democracy. Congressional advocacy of closer relations with India is generally bipartisan and widespread; House and Senate caucuses on India and Indian-Americans are the largest of their kind. Caucus leaders have encouraged the Obama Administration to work toward improving the compatibility of the U.S. and Indian defense acquisitions systems, as well as to seek potential opportunities for co-development or co-production of military weapons systems with India. In a report accompanying the FY2012 Defense Authorization (S.Rept. [Senate Report] 112-26), the Senate Armed Services Committee expressed its belief that a deepened strategic partnership with India will be critical to the promotion of core mutual national interests in the 21st century. […] This report reviews the major facets of U.S.-India security relations with a focus on military-to-military contacts, counterterrorism and intelligence cooperation, and defense trade. It also discusses some of the many obstacles to deeper cooperation in each of these areas. This report will be followed by a companion piece on the strategic aspects of U.S.-India security relations. For a discussion of U.S.-India relations more broadly, see CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RL33529, 'India: Domestic Issues, Strategic Dynamics, and U.S. Relations', coordinated by K. Alan Kronstadt."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Pinto, Sonia; Kronstadt, K. Alan

  2012-11-13
• Sudan and South Sudan: Current Issues for Congress and U.S. Policy [October 5, 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Congress has played an active role in U.S. policy toward Sudan for more than three decades. Efforts to support an end to the country's myriad conflicts and human rights abuses have dominated the agenda, as have counterterrorism concerns. When unified (1956-2011), Sudan was Africa's largest nation, bordering nine countries and stretching from the northern borders of Kenya and Uganda to the southern borders of Egypt and Libya. Strategically located along the Nile River and the Red Sea, Sudan was historically described as a crossroads between the Arab world and Africa. Domestic and international efforts to unite its ethnically, racially, religiously, and culturally diverse population under a common national identity fell short, however. In 2011, after decades of civil war and a 6.5 year transitional period, Sudan split in two. Mistrust between the two Sudans--Sudan and South Sudan--lingers, and unresolved disputes and related security issues still threaten to pull the two countries back to war. […] U.S. relations with South Sudan, which are rooted in years of American activism and disaster relief to the south during the civil war, remain close, though there have been signs of strain in 2012. The United States is the country's largest bilateral donor, but the Administration has expressed concern over certain actions taken by leaders in Juba that have, in its view, further aggravated the relationship between the Sudans and the economic situation in both countries. This report examines the shared interests and outstanding disputes between the Sudans after separation, and gives an overview of political, economic, and humanitarian conditions in the two countries, with a focus on possible implications for U.S. policy and congressional engagement."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Blanchard, Lauren Ploch

  2012-10-05
• Pakistan: U.S. Foreign Assistance [October 4, 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Experts commonly list Pakistan among the most strategically important countries for U.S. policy makers. The 112th Congress has grappled with deeply troubled and even deteriorated U.S.- Pakistani relations, as well as the need to balance Pakistan's importance to U.S. national security interests with U.S. domestic budgetary pressures. In the post-9/11 period, assisting in the creation of a more stable, democratic, and prosperous Pakistan actively combating religious militancy has been a central U.S. foreign policy effort. Global and South Asian regional terrorism, and a decade-long effort to stabilize neighboring Afghanistan, are viewed as top-tier concerns. Pakistan's apparently accelerated nuclear weapons program and the long-standing dispute with India over Kashmir continue to threaten regional stability. Pakistan is identified as a base for numerous U.S.-designated terrorist groups and, by some accounts, most of the world's jihadist terrorist plots have some connection to Pakistan-based elements. With anti-American sentiments and xenophobic conspiracy theories remaining rife among ordinary Pakistanis, persistent economic travails and a precarious political setting combine to present serious challenges to U.S. decision makers. […]The United States has provided significant foreign aid to Pakistan over the nearly 65 years since that country's independence, but at levels that fluctuated widely. Major aid flows during some periods and drastic cuts in others contributed to creating a perception among many in Pakistan that the United States is not a fully reliable ally. At the same time, some U.S. lawmakers continue to question providing large amounts of aid to a Pakistani government that is seen as an unreliable partner in U.S. counterterrorism efforts efforts--as evidenced in 2011 by revelations that Al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden found refuge in a Pakistani city for several years and that the Haqqani Network of Afghan insurgents may continue to receive support for Pakistan's main intelligence service. To many, Pakistan also appears incapable of providing sustainable economic development and security for its own people, and often is unaccountable to the United States for aid results. Beyond these issues, some question whether the aid results in public diplomacy benefits for the United States."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Epstein, Susan B.; Kronstadt, K. Alan

  2012-10-04
• Federal Support for Involvement in State and Local Fusion Centers, Majority and Minority Staff Report, Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, United States Senate

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This Majority and Minority Staff Report was issued by Senators Carl Levin and Tom Coburn of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. From the Executive Summary:"Sharing terrorism-related information between state, local and federal officials is crucial to protecting the United States from another terrorist attack. Achieving this objective was the motivation for Congress and the White House to invest hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars over the last nine years in support of dozens of state and local fusion centers across the United States. The Subcommittee investigation found that DHS-assigned detailees to the fusion centers forwarded 'intelligence' of uneven quality -- oftentimes shoddy, rarely timely, sometimes endangering citizens' civil liberties and Privacy Act protections, occasionally taken from already-published public sources, and more often than not unrelated to terrorism. Congress directed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to lead this initiative. A bipartisan investigation by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has found, however, that DHS' work with those state and local fusion centers has not produced useful intelligence to support federal counterterrorism efforts. The Subcommittee investigation also found that DHS officials' public claims about fusion centers were not always accurate. For instance, DHS officials asserted that some fusion centers existed when they did not. At times, DHS officials overstated fusion centers' 'success stories.' At other times, DHS officials failed to disclose or acknowledge non-public evaluations highlighting a host of problems at fusion centers and in DHS' own operations. Since 2003, over 70 state and local fusion centers, supported in part with federal funds, have been created or expanded in part to strengthen U.S. intelligence capabilities, particularly to detect, disrupt, and respond to domestic terrorist activities. DHS' support for and involvement with these state and local fusion centers has, from the beginning, centered on their professed ability to strengthen federal counterterrorism efforts."

  United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

  2012-10-03
• CTC Sentinel [October 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This October 2012 issue of the U.S. Military Academy's Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) Sentinel features the following articles: "Boko Haram's Dangerous Expansion into Northwest Nigeria" by Jacob Zenn; "The Future of Los Zetas after the Death of Heriberto Lazcano" by Samuel Logan; "Kenya's Muslim Youth Center and Al-Shabab's East African Recruitment" by Christopher Anzalone; "Terrorist Attacks in Kenya Reveal Domestic Radicalization" by Fredrick Nzes; "A Post-Trial Profile of Anders Behring Breivik" by Jacob Aasland Ravndal; and "The Syria Balancing Act: Supporting Transition, Avoiding Blowback" by James Denselow.

  Combating Terrorism Center (U.S.)

  2012-10
• Personal Perspective: Evolution of Intelligence Reform, 2002-2004

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Preliminary accounts explaining how and why major organizational reform of the US intelligence establishment finally occurred after 9/11 have appeared. So far, none has been satisfactory, although I believe Michael Allen (currently the staff director of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) and former senior National Security Council (NSC) official) is preparing a good one. There are some gaps in published knowledge that I can help fill. Before I provide my view of the events that led directly to the passage of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) of December 2004, I wish to offer a perspective on the basic choices that were to be made with intelligence reorganization. Because the legislation itself involved so many points of detail, fundamental issues can be obscured. The basic issues were: How much centralized managerial authority was required? Where should this authority be located in the government? A starting point was the struggle between CIA Headquarters in Langley, Virginia, and the Pentagon. This long-running tug-of-war was complicated by 9/11 and the increased salience of domestic intelligence that followed. Then the issue was complicated again by the Iraq War controversy and arguments about analytical quality and detachment. All three of these concerns influenced the law that emerged at the end of 2004. Apart from the broader reorganization of the Intelligence Community (IC), another significant reform was the establishment of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). This innovation has been important in counterterrorism (CT) work. It has also spurred some attention as a novel way of organizing other joint work, federal and intergovernmental. The NCTC model is also getting some notice from folks puzzling over how to organize cybersecurity work."

  United States. Central Intelligence Agency

  Zelikow, Philip, 1954-

  2012-09
• Community Engagement for Collective Resilience: The Rising System

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the thesis abstract: "Since the inception of the United States Department of Homeland Security, the American public has been told that it has a prominent role to play in the 'War on Terror.' However, this role has not been clearly defined. This thesis explores the viability of community engagement as a tool to promote public safety and homeland security. Research was primarily conducted through a literature review (to understand how engagement impacts safety), and a comparison of four case studies of safety-centric engagement programs in the U.S. and United Kingdom. While several of the programs in the case studies have proven to be effective at developing trust and improving security, the U.S. federal government has not effectively worked with these resources to improve its understanding of the domestic security landscape. This thesis contends that a new system is necessary to connect the federal government to local engagement programs. This may be accomplished with a domestic coordination and engagement system, referred to as the 'Rising System' for the purposes of this thesis. The goal of the Rising System would be threefold: To link federal, state, and local governments; to build on existing community policing and outreach efforts to help at-risk communities identify their greatest challenges; and to provide a forum where community members can safely work with their government to develop solutions."

  Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.). Center for Homeland Defense and Security; Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.)

  Farrell, John L.

  2012-09
• Shaping the National Guard in a Post-War Environment

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the thesis abstract: "The National Guard of the United States is the nation's oldest military service, tracing its roots to the Massachusetts Bay Colony of 1636. Since its inception, the Guard has enjoyed a unique dual-role responsibility of supporting state and federal missions, and while serving in every war since the American Revolution, Guardsmen and women have also supported domestic operations from the southwest border to Hurricane Katrina. Today, the Guard is a fully operational reserve, and a critical part of the national security framework. While fully engaged in the Global War On Terror, the Guard has also made great strides toward becoming the lead military agency in domestic missions, which has always been a key mission of the Guard, and which sets it apart from its Title X counterparts. Recently, the Guard has achieved increased relevance and political victories highlighted by the recent National Guard Empowerment Act that gave the Chief of National Guard Bureau membership on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. As defense spending and the size of the active force is cut in a post-war environment, this thesis reviews the best future use of the Army National Guard, and offers alternative solutions for increased effectiveness, particularly in a domestic capacity."

  Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.). Center for Homeland Defense and Security; Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.)

  Crofts, Shane C.

  2012-09
• Final Report of the William H. Webster Commission on the FBI, Counterterrorism Intelligence, and the Events at Fort Hood, Texas on November 5, 2009: Hearing Before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, August 1, 2012

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This testimony compilation is from the August 1, 2012 hearing, "Final Report of the William H. Webster Commission on the FBI, Counterterrorism Intelligence, and the Events at Fort Hood, Texas on November 5, 2009," before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations. From the opening statement of Frank Wolf: "On November 5, 2009, United States Army Major Nidal Hasan entered the Fort Hood deployment center carrying two pistols. He shouted 'God is great' in Arabic, and opened fire, killing thirteen people and injuring forty-two others. Hasan is awaiting military trial for thirteen counts of premeditated murder and thirty-two counts of attempted murder. The Webster Commission Report was issued publicly on July 19. The report includes extensive factual findings on the FBI's counterterrorism authorities, programs and systems, as well as specifics on the FBI investigation of Anwar al-Aulaqi, and the assessment of Nidal Hasan. The report analyzes the Bureau's actions, and includes 18 recommendations for policy, procedural and other actions. After reading the report, I am concerned that there were warning signs, and that with more aggressive investigation, there is a chance that this incident could have been prevented. I am further concerned that the reason for less aggressive investigation may have been political sensitivities in the Washington Field Office, and maybe even the FBI's own investigating guidelines. An active duty member of the military communicating with a known radicalizer and recruiter should have been taken more seriously than it was. The report shows that the San Diego field office believed that at the time, as is shown by their unusual reaction to how the lead was handled by the Washington Field Office. While the Commission found that the decision not to interview Hasan was flawed, I am concerned that the current FBI guidelines and culture made this the path of least resistance. The Webster Commission makes no recommendations on changing the FBI's Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (DIOG), but if these guidelines were indeed followed in this case, and that failed to prevent all these deaths and injuries, it may be worthwhile to question whether the guidelines themselves are a problem. We want to understand what took place and ensure that agents are empowered to prevent similar attacks in the future." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Frank Wolf and Mark F. Giuliano.

  United States. Congress. House. Committee on Appropriations

  2012-08-01
• Domestic Terrorist Threat: Background and Issues for Congress [May 15, 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The emphasis of counterterrorism policy in the United States since Al Qaeda's attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) has been on jihadist terrorism. However, in the last decade, domestic terrorists--people who commit crimes within the homeland and draw inspiration from U.S.-based extremist ideologies and movements--have killed American citizens and damaged property across the country. Not all of these criminals have been prosecuted under terrorism statutes. This latter point is not meant to imply that domestic terrorists should be taken any less seriously than other terrorists. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) do not officially list domestic terrorist organizations, but they have openly delineated domestic terrorist 'threats.' These include individuals who commit crimes in the name of ideologies supporting animal rights, environmental rights, anarchism, white supremacy, anti-government ideals, black separatism, and anti-abortion beliefs. The boundary between constitutionally protected legitimate protest and domestic terrorist activity has received public attention. This boundary is especially highlighted by a number of criminal cases involving supporters of animal rights--one area in which specific legislation related to domestic terrorism has been crafted. The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (P.L. 109-374) expands the federal government's legal authority to combat animal rights extremists who engage in criminal activity. Signed into law in November 2006, it amended the 1992 Animal Enterprise Protection Act (P.L. 102-346). […] This report provides background regarding domestic terrorists--detailing what constitutes the domestic terrorism threat as suggested by publicly available U.S. government sources. It illustrates some of the key factors involved in assessing this threat and concludes by examining potential issues for Congress."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Bjelopera, Jerome P.

  2012-05-15
• Citizens in the Crosshairs: Ready, Aim, Hold Your Fire?

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the thesis abstract: "The United States has increasingly relied on targeted killing as an important tactic in its war on terror, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Despite its increased use, targeted killing has proved a divisive practice and generated considerable controversy. Many criticized the lethal targeting of a U.S. citizen in 2011 as violative of U.S. law and a deprivation of due process. Still, international and domestic law appear to support the government's ability to lethally target U.S. citizens. To date, however, the government has demonstrated little transparency and no public accountability regarding this contentious and sensitive practice. While some degree of secrecy is warranted, the government must be more forthcoming if it wants to maintain the viability of an increasingly important tactic in the war on terror, especially where the targeting of U.S. citizens is involved."

  Army War College (U.S.)

  Corey, Ian G.

  2012-03-21
• Securing Nuclear Materials: The 2012 Summit and Issues for Congress [March 7, 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "In an April 2009 speech in Prague, President Obama pledged that his Administration would launch 'a new international effort to secure all vulnerable nuclear material around the world within four years.' To motivate world leaders to achieve this goal, the President hosted a Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, DC, on April 12-13, 2010. Leaders of 47 countries attended the summit, including many heads of state. Attendees represented a wide geographic range of states and nuclear capabilities, and include China, India, Israel, and Pakistan. The summit resulted in a joint statement saying that international cooperative action is necessary to prevent an act of nuclear terrorism. Summit attendees also pledged to improve nuclear security standards, bring international agreements into force, and share best practices. A second summit will be held in South Korea in March 2012. Nuclear security measures refer to a wide range of actions to prevent theft or diversion of nuclear material or sabotage at an installation or in transit. […] Congress will continue to decide on funding for the U.S. domestic and international programs focused on nuclear material security and nuclear terrorism prevention. Congress is also likely to assess implementation of the Administration's efforts to secure nuclear materials by the end of 2013. The Obama Administration's FY2011, FY2012, and FY2013 congressional budget requests proposed overall increases in funding for nuclear security-related accounts, with the stated purpose of ramping up programs to meet the President's four-year goal."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham

  2012-03-07
• Pandemic Vaccine Distribution Policy for the Twenty-First Century

  Show summary     Open resource [html]     (open full abstract)

  "Over this past decade, Congress has responded to the growing threat of bioterrorism and risks to US national security with increased funding for biosecurity and public health preparedness. This has included investment in domestic vaccine manufacturing capacity by the United States government. As a result, a policy of vaccine production self-sufficiency has emerged that should cause policy makers to pause and ask: 'what is the next step?' In the near future, this policy may create a surge of efficient vaccine production that current emergency distribution models are ill equipped to manage. This article presents the results of a research project aimed at developing a model that could serve as a strategy for pandemic vaccine distribution. It argues that as the nation readied for its first pandemic in forty years, it benefited from investments in preparedness but still found itself unprepared for the 2009 H1N1 Pandemic vaccination campaign."

  Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.). Center for Homeland Defense and Security

  Russo, Tom

  2012-02
• Algeria: Current Issues [January 18, 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "U.S.-Algerian ties have grown over the past decade as the United States has increasingly viewed Algeria as an important partner in the fight against international terrorism. The Algerian economy is largely based on hydrocarbons, and the country is a significant source of petroleum for the United States and of natural gas for Europe. Congress appropriates and oversees small amounts of bilateral development assistance, and Algerian security forces benefit from U.S. security assistance and participation in bilateral and regional military cooperation programs. […] Domestic terrorism perpetrated by violent Islamists remains Algeria's principal security challenge. Algerian terrorists also operate across the southern border in the Sahel and are linked to terrorism abroad. Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), is an Algerian-led criminal-terrorist network with roots in the 1990s civil conflict. As the dominant economic and military power in the region, Algeria has attempted to take the lead in developing a regional approach to counterterrorism in the Sahel."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Arieff, Alexis

  2012-01-18
• S. Hrg. 112-436; Serial No. J-112-50: Oversight of the U.S. Department of Justice, Hearing Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, First Session, November 8, 2011

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the opening statement of Patrick J. Leahy: "When Attorney General Holder was here in May, details were just emerging about the successful military and intelligence operation that killed Osama bin Laden, which did provide a measure of justice and closure for Americans resulting from the horrific attacks of September 11th. That was not an isolated success; during the last few years, the Obama administration has successfully reinvigorated, retooled, and refocused our National security efforts. Now, the Attorney General, as he is in any administration, is a key member of that national security team. Under his leadership, the Justice Department last month foiled an assassination attempt in the United States of the Saudi Ambassador to the United States and prevented a major act of terrorism on U.S. soil. Last week, four men in Georgia were arrested in a domestic terrorism plot, accused of planning to use guns, bombs, and the toxic poison ricin to kill Federal and State officials. Earlier this year, the Christmas Day bomber, who was convicted in Federal court, pled guilty and faced a possible life sentence. Now, we have to ensure that we do all we can to assist efforts to bring terrorists to justice by providing the administration with the full array of authorities and options we need in our counterterrorism efforts. […] I urge that as they engage in important oversight, Senators respect the need for law enforcement and prosecutors to do their jobs to address the serious threat of violence posed by these brutal drug cartels. I do not think anyone wants to hamper the efforts of law enforcement agents against the Mexican cartels, including the ongoing criminal investigation and prosecution related to the tragic murder of Agent Brian Terry." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Chuck Grassley; Patrick J. Leahy; Eric H. Holder, Jr.; Jon Corzine; Pat Quinn; Robert F. McDonnell; Jack Markell; Chris Collins; Ed Emmett; Pat Quinn; Mitch Daniels; Michael R. Bloomberg; Roosevelt Allen, Jr.; Robert Moore; Lyndon Bode; Stephen Nodine; Sam Cochran; Carlos A. Gimenez; Michael A. Delaney; Sonny Perdue; David A. Paterson; Marlin N. Gusman; Howard R. Bradley; Martin O'Malley; Michel Claudet; Andre J. Spano; Chuck Canterbury; and Ronald Weich.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2012
• Updated NCTC Guidelines - Mission Justification Fact Sheet

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Since the September 11, 2001 attacks, the United States Government has made dramatic progress in information sharing -- particularly in sharing information once it is identified as terrorism information. However, the government continues to address the challenge of correlating disparate pieces of information that reside in various agency systems when the relevance of the information to terrorism is not readily apparent. The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) is the primary organization for analyzing and integrating all intelligence possessed or acquired by the government pertaining to terrorism and counterterrorism, excepting intelligence pertaining exclusively to domestic terrorism. To fulfill its statutory terrorism information responsibilities, NCTC must access and review datasets already lawfully collected by other government entities for national security purposes even if those datasets also include non-terrorism information. For example, certain information regarding visa applications, refugees, and international travelers may have potential connections to terrorism that are not readily apparent to the federal agency that maintains the data. It is often only through NCTC's access to terrorism information held by other government agencies that NCTC is able to correlate disparate information and uncover threats to the nation. In March 2012, Attorney General Eric Holder, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper, and NCTC Director Matthew G. Olsen signed updated guidelines designed to allow NCTC to more effectively analyze certain data already in the government's possession to better address terrorism-related threats, while at the same time increasing the protections for privacy and civil liberties. These guidelines were updated in response to issues identified by the White House, Congress, and Intelligence Community after the 2009 Fort Hood shooting and the Christmas Day 2009 bombing attempt. One such issue was the government's limited ability to query multiple federal datasets residing at different government agencies, and to correlate that information to proactively identify information that might relate to a potential attack. Similarly, the reviews noted that information that is not believed to be relevant could later be recognized as relevant based on subsequent events or information obtained at different points in time."

  National Counterterrorism Center (U.S.)

  2012?
• Army Reserve, Army National Guard and Air National Guard Readiness, Training and Operations, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Readiness of the Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, First Session, Hearing Held September 21, 2011

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the opening statement of J. Randy Forbes: "Just 10 days ago, we marked the 10th Anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on our homeland. That day, as we all know, literally changed our world, and led us into a long-term global war on terrorism, a fight where our reservists and our National Guard members are full partners. In the intervening 10 years, our Reserve Components have been stretched thin as they have been called upon to provide many of the enabling capabilities for the Active Duty Forces in Operation Iraqi Freedom, New Dawn and Operation Enduring Freedom. They provide support, such as intelligence gathering, airlift, close air support and security forces. At the same time, the National Guard still must fulfill their traditional mission of supporting the states during emergencies such as the recent flooding and fires. There is no walking away from either mission. Their significant combat support role in Iraq and Afghanistan makes it clear that we cannot go to the fight without our Reserve Components. According to the Department of Defense's recent study, the 'Future Role of the Reserve Component,' the Reserve Component is an irreplaceable and cost-effective element of overall Department of Defense capability. The report specifically stated, 'Unless we had chosen to dramatically increase the size of the active components, our domestic security and global operations since September 11, 2001 could not have been executed without the activation of hundreds of thousands of trained reserve component personnel.'" Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Madeleine Z. Bordallo, J. Randy Forbes, Raymond W. Carpenter, Jack C Stultz,, and Harry M. Wyatt.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2012
• Serial No. 112-91: Keeping America Secure: The Science Supporting the Development of Threat Detection Technologies, Hearing Before the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, Thursday, July 19, 2012

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the July 19, 2012 hearing on "Keeping America Secure: The Science Supporting the Development of Threat Detection Technologies," held before the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. From the opening statement of Ralph M. Hall: "The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order, and I say to you, good morning and thank you. Welcome to today's hearing entitled 'Keeping America Secure: The Science Supporting the Development of Threat Detection Technologies.' […] The September 11th terrorist attacks forced the American public to confront the daily threat of domestic terrorism, and advancing threat detection technologies, I think, is one of the many ways research and development contributes to keeping our country secure. Recognizing the need to respond quickly when a potential threat is identified and to counter the growing list of threats to our country, the U.S. government and the private sector focused research and development activities on the detection of explosives, firearms, and dangerous materials including chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear matter. Scientific research has advanced the development of technologies to protect the Nation, but the rapidly changing threats that we face require continued research and development to ensure that we keep ahead of our enemies. We recognize that the terrorists only need to get it right once to succeed, whereas we need to get it right every time to ensure the protection of our citizens." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Ralph M. Hall, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Richard Cavanagh, Huban Gowadia, Anthony Peurrung, Thomas Peterson, and Jerry Costello.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2012