Intelligence And The Homeland Security

Many of the current differences we see today between the federal, state and local law enforcement intelligence stemmed from prior to the September 11 attack. Prior to this attack many states lacked a robust intelligence capability, as it was the primary role of federal agencies to protect the United States from both foreign and domestic terrorist threats. In an attempt to mitigate future attacks of this nature state, local, and

Homeland Security is characterized by crime control being the primary police function. It is best achieved through a collective effort by all law enforcement agencies. One of the strategies being used is Intelligence Led Policing. This strategy is not new, it can be traced back to the British is the 1990’s (Bailey, 2011). Intelligence Led Policing is an approach to crime that deals with all crimes and threats including terrorism. This approach is unique because it is threat driven instead of incident driven. It also is a long term approach and focuses on causes and conditions that add to crime through a collection of data.

Good evening to all. I hope all is well this week. As many of you have stated, I thought I had a descent grasp of the United States Intelligence oversight. However, to my surprise I found that I actually did not have as good of an understanding as I thought. My shortcoming was in understanding just how convoluted the system is. The system has evolved over the years just as many things do. However, the system still has a long way to go before it’s as effective as it could be. Former Under Secretary Charles Allen noted that “virtually any terrorist attack on the homeland that one can imagine must exploit a border crossing, a port of entry, a critical infrastructure, or one of the other domains that the department has an obligation to

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security was formed more than a decade ago with a very significant mission of safeguarding America's homeland from hazards, threats, and national disasters. This department conducts its mission through securing the country's borders, preventing terror attacks, and responding to incidents or threats to its citizens (Miller, n.d.). Generally, the most important roles of the Department of Homeland Security are to lead a concerted national effort in securing the United States and preserving the American way of life. The department was established in 2002 in reaction to the 9/11 terror attacks and has since developed a nationwide strategic plan for evaluating and updating its mission statement and effectiveness of operations. These plans can be updated and transformed to accomplish the needs of the Department for Homeland Security and the American people.

Later, the federal, state, and local government responses to disasters such as Hurricane Katrina expanded the concept of homeland security to include significant disasters, major public health emergencies, and other events that threaten the United States, its economy, the rule of law, and government operations (2). Homeland security is the combination of law enforcement, immigration, disaster relief, and terrorist activities within the United States’ borders. This would be based on the local agencies and civilian departments to safeguard the people from any threat within while being assisted by the government. In some aspects of terror attacks, there will be a combination of both homeland security and homeland defense. 9/11 is the perfect example as homeland security was responding to the local disasters and threats while the homeland defense, military, was deploying to get to the root of the threats. This is essential to the way homeland security operates because this will stop the attack on the nation’s soil before it reaches the borders and local government agencies are required. The biggest issue with the homeland security aspect is that the

2). Domestic terrorism is usually committed by citizens of the United States, and documentation of terrorist activities on American soil have dated back to the 1950s. The 1970s heighten domestic terrorism by a “rash of skyjacking”, that is, taking a commercial airline hostage (Sauter & Carafano, 2012). Skyjacking incidents compelled the FBI and CIA to develop undercover strategies to enforce terrorist groups; however, these tactics lead to civil right violations. The federal agencies covert tactics and aggressive intelligence collection, “prompted congressional hearings and led to dramatic restrictions on domestic intelligence operations, including the creation of a bureaucratic wall between intelligence gathering and law enforcement” (Sauter & Carafano, 2012, p. 25). The “wall” that was previously stated halted information sharing between the intelligence community and local law enforcement. Communication and information sharing prevents redundancy in high priority investigations, and it could also provide first responders advance notice in life threatening

The 9/11 commission clearly identified a problem with communication between the Intelligence Community and State and Local Law Enforcement which resulted in a new edict (from the IRTPA) of Information Sharing yet clearance levels and accesses quickly became an issue in disseminating information to those with a need to know. To help bridge this gap, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 was passed to crate the DHS by bringing 22 under its umbrella with a primary mission of protecting the homeland from terrorism (Blum, 2010). To do so, DHS’s key mission is to collect, analyze, and disseminate key/related information and share it with the IC and nontraditional partners (state/local governments as well as the private sector) (Blum, 2010). Likewise,

State and local law enforcement have a very big role to play in homeland security intelligence. They are the front line offense and defense since the climate in the United States changed on September 11, 2001. It could be suggested that the key for state and local law enforcement to be successful in the homeland intelligence game is to be employed more frequently and to be kept better informed of what the federal agencies are aware of with regard to intelligence and threats.

Since DHS’s creation it has worked diligently to keep the United States safe from terrorist threats. The department has worked through various challenges coordinating all the agencies under its domain, reporting to congressional committees and working with the Public. One of the main challenges DHS faces in the balance between the need for national security and the need for individuals’ privacy. It is clear that DHS is doing their job, there have been no terrorist attacks on US soil since its creation. The levels of cooperation DHS has achieved with state and local agencies, and the private sector is astounding, which has created a true Homeland Security Enterprise. The men and women in these agencies who work hard and vigilant in keeping

Since the deadly terror attacks of 9/11, intelligence gathering for homeland security has improved immensely. One of the most important developments in our law-enforcement structure that has enhanced our intelligence is the creation of fusion centers. Fusion centers are “state and major urban area focal points for the receipt, analysis, gathering, and sharing of threat-related information between federal; state, local, tribal, territorial (SLTT); and private sector partners” (Department of Homeland Security, 2016). These fusion centers are "owned and operated by state and local entities" and are supported by federal partners in its many aspects which include personnel deployment, capacity building, and important and crucial connectivity to federal systems (Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), 2012, para. 3). For example, the DHS provides over 70 fusion centers access to the Homeland Secure Data Network or HSDN which allows these fusion centers to receive federally generated classified threat information.

and ensure resilience to disasters. In order to achieve these goals, intelligence is necessary. The Office of Intelligence and Analysis, a subsection to the DHS focuses on obtaining and analyzing intelligence and puts them into the Homeland Security Enterprise which primarily

The purpose of this paper is to define and give as much detail information about Homeland Security in the United States and law enforcement and how they are integrated. I hope after reading this paper you will be well informed on the duties and responsibilities of these agencies. People have always lived in fear but with the help of these agencies we will no longer have to live in fear. I will try to give as much detail information as possible to help with any problems or situation that might come up. Homeland Security in the United States and law enforcement have extensive research skills and knowledge in serving and protecting citizens and other important groups and agencies. Homeland

September 11, 2001, shown America how vulnerable they were. We failed short in so many ways, such as the lack of information sharing internally or externally that push us to a new era of concern to protect the United States from terrorism. Intelligence serves as a critical factor in decision making, planning, strategic targeting, and crime prevention. That event sparked a collaborative partnership with state and local law enforcement agencies, the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Field Intelligence Group (FIG) and Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTF), and the National Guard, as well as civilian analysts, members of the military and private companies to form the fusion center to focus on national

To understand the relationship between Intelligence and Homeland Security it is imperative to understand the histories, unique mission differences, and agencies and departments that align under the primary umbrella of both Intelligence and Homeland Security.

The authors are researchers at Rand Corporation, tasked with providing a detailed report on state and local intelligence regarding the war on terrorism. Their purpose is to provide succinct analysis on the current standards of local and state authorities in countering terrorism. The report argues that there are few detailed documents on state and local law enforcement agency (LEA) counterterrorism activities. This report fills such a gap in the field of research. The authors argue that federal level intelligence systems remain disorganized and contend that state and local law enforcement intelligence gathering is crucial in combating terrorism. The report details a survey on LEA preparedness activities on terrorism, authorizations on