Fusion Centers To Obtain Access To Classified Military Intelligence
Via ACLU.org.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced Monday that it was giving state and local fusion centers access to the classified military intelligence in Department of Defense (DOD) databases. The federal government has facilitated the growth of a network of fusion centers since 9/11 to expand information collection and sharing practices among law enforcement agencies, the private sector and the intelligence community.
Allowing fusion centers access to DOD classified information appears to be a shift in policy. The New York Times reported in July that “Janet Napolitano, the homeland security secretary, said … that fusion centers were not intended to have a military presence, and that she was not aware of ones that did.”
The American Civil Liberties Union has long warned the government about the dangers posed by fusion centers without proper oversight and, in 2007, released a report entitled, “What’s Wrong With Fusion Centers?” The report, which was updated last year, identifies specific concerns with fusion centers, including their ambiguous lines of authority, the troubling role of private corporations, the participation of the military, the use of data mining and their excessive secrecy.
According to DHS, there were 70 fusion centers in the United States as of February 2009. It is unknown how many include military personnel.
More
here.
Expert: Fusion Centers Should Be Dismantled
Matthew Harwood writes on Security Management:
A constitutional and international lawyer told lawmakers yesterday that the United States should dismantle state-run intelligence fusion centers, which have grown dramatically since 9-11 with the assistance of the federal government. Police and federal officials defended fusion centers and described measures being taken to protect citizens’ privacy and civil liberties.
Bruce Fein, of Bruce Fein & Associates and The Lichfield Group, compared [.pdf] state fusions centers to the Soviet Union’s KGB and East Germany’s Stasi and called for the United States to “abandon fusion centers that engage 800,000 state and local law enforcement officers in the business of gathering and sharing allegedly domestic or international terrorism intelligence."
Fusion centers bring together law enforcement and intelligence personnel from state, local, and federal government to collect, analyze, vet, and disseminate intelligence to first responders on the ground in an effort to disrupt terrorist or criminal activity. The Department of Homeland Security recognizes 70 fusion centers nationwide but because states operate fusion centers, no two are exactly alike.
Fein was also critical of suspicious activity reports (SARs), whereby police officers and concerned citizens report unusual behavior that may indicate a terrorist or criminal conspiracy. These reports typically flow to fusion centers.
“To an intelligence agent, informant, or law enforcement officer,” Fein said, “everything unconventional or unorthodox looks like at least a pre-embryonic terrorist danger.”
More
here.
Virginia Universities 'Hotbeds of Terrorist Activity'? Give Me a Break
Via ACLU.org.
A recently published “terrorism threat assessment” from a Virginia fusion center says the state’s universities and colleges are “nodes for radicalization” and encourages law enforcement to monitor First Amendment-protected activities of educational and religious foundations as terrorism threats. The document, which drew concern today from the American Civil Liberties Union over its constitutional implications, also characterizes the “diversity” surrounding a Virginia military base and the state’s “historically black” colleges as possible threats. The March 2009 document, which claims there are currently at least fifty active “terrorist and extremist” groups in Virginia, is posted on the website www.cryptome.com.
The federal government has facilitated the growth of a network of fusion centers since 9/11 to expand information collection and sharing practices among law enforcement agencies, the private sector and the intelligence community. There are currently 70 fusion centers in the United States.
“If we are to believe this exaggerated threat assessment, Virginia’s learning and religious institutions must be hotbeds of terrorist activity,” said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. “This document and its authors have displayed a fundamental disregard for our constitutional rights of free expression and association. Unfortunately, it’s not the first time we’ve seen such an indifference to these basic rights from local fusion centers. Congress must take the necessary steps to institute real and thorough oversight mechanisms at fusion centers before we reach a point where we are all considered potential suspects.”
The Virginia threat assessment comes on the heels of two recently publicized and troubling documents from Texas and Missouri fusion centers. From directing local police to investigate non-violent political activists and religious groups in Texas to advocating surveillance of third-party presidential candidate supporters in Missouri, there have been repeated and persistent disclosures of troubling memos and reports from local fusions centers. Last week, the ACLU sent five letters to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties urging investigations into five troubling incidents, several of which have stemmed from DHS-funded fusion centers.
More
here.
Fusion Centers Face 'Insufficient' Terrorist Activity
Steven Aftergood writes on Secrecy News:
Fusion centers are collaborative law enforcement and intelligence organizations that were established all over the country after 9/11 to share intelligence and counterterrorism information. But in the absence of a widespread domestic terrorist threat, they have not consistently demonstrated their value, according to a recent study.
"Fusion centers emerged almost spontaneously in response to a need by state and local law enforcement for useful and usable intelligence related to the evolving terrorist threat," observed Milton Nenneman, a Sacramento police officer, in a master’s thesis [.pdf] based on a survey of California fusion centers.
But the terrorist threat has turned out to be "insufficient" to justify or sustain the new fusion centers.
"There is, more often than not, insufficient purely 'terrorist' activity to support a multi-jurisdictional and multi-governmental level fusion center that exclusively processes terrorist activity," Lt. Nenneman wrote.
More
here.
Fusion Centers Tap Into Personal Databases
Robert O'Harrow Jr. writes in The Washington Post:
Intelligence centers run by states across the country have access to personal information about millions of Americans, including unlisted cellphone numbers, insurance claims, driver's license photographs and credit reports, according to a document obtained by The Washington Post.
One center also has access to top-secret data systems at the CIA, the document shows, though it's not clear what information those systems contain.
Dozens of the organizations known as fusion centers were created after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to identify potential threats and improve the way information is shared. The centers use law enforcement analysts and sophisticated computer systems to compile, or fuse, disparate tips and clues and pass along the refined information to other agencies. They are expected to play important roles in national information-sharing networks that link local, state and federal authorities and enable them to automatically sift their storehouses of records for patterns and clues.
Though officials have publicly discussed the fusion centers' importance to national security, they have generally declined to elaborate on the centers' activities. But a document that lists resources used by the fusion centers shows how a dozen of the organizations in the northeastern United States rely far more on access to commercial and government databases than had previously been disclosed.
More
here.
DHS: Fire Services Join Fusion Centers
Via UPI.
The Department of Homeland Security wants fire services represented in the growing number of state and local government intelligence fusion centers.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told a fire chiefs conference that the department’s Chief Intelligence Officer Charles Allen “is working to add fire-fighter personnel to state and local fusion centers.”
“Now some people might say, well, wait a second. Why do you want to put firefighters in an intelligence fusion center, which has intelligence officials and police officials?” Chertoff said last week at the International Association of Fire Chiefs conference in Washington.
He said that as firefighters were often first on the scene of an event that might be a terrorist attack, fire services had to be integrated into fusion centers to share whatever they learned.
More
here.
Image source: Defense Horizons
Fusion Centers Suffer Information Overload
Alice Lipowicz writes on Washington Technology:
Dozens of state and local intelligence fusion centers operating nationwide are having difficulties juggling the multiple information systems that provide them with data, according to a new report [.pdf] from the Government Accountability Office.
Forty-three fusion centers were operational as of September and another 15 are in development. They have been created since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks with a goal of advancing information-sharing among law enforcement authorities to improve domestic counterterrorism intelligence.
The centers are receiving federal assistance from the Homeland Security and Justice departments and from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. They are being incorporated into the national Information-Sharing Environment established by Congress in the intelligence reform legislation.
But even with federal aid, the centers are having a hard time managing the inflows of data, the report said.
More
here.
Crime Info Trumps Terror Data at Fusion Centers
Alice Lipowicz writes on Washington Technology:
Anti-terrorism information-sharing and analysis is taking a back seat to criminal intelligence at the more than 40 state intelligence fusion centers, according to a new report from the Congressional Research Service.
State governors created the centers, and the Homeland Security Department provides part of the funding. Their purpose is to fuse federal, state and local intelligence against terrorism, but CRS found the fusion centers have gravitated more toward collecting and analyzing criminal intelligence and all-hazards intelligence.
The service found few indications that the centers have been making efforts to become aware of terrorist plans and foil attacks.
More
here.
GAO Report: State Fusion Centers Struggling
Wilson P. Dizard III writes on Washington Technology:
State intelligence fusion centers, which have received praise and federal funds as a tool for merging terrorism, law enforcement and all-hazard intelligence, are struggling to produce useful information as a result of tangled technology and unclear missions, according to a nationwide study.
The report, titled “Fusion Centers: Issues and Options for Congress” and completed this month by the Congressional Research Service, cited problems with the centers’ lack of connectivity with existing law enforcement databases and poor compliance with federally backed technical data-sharing standards. Federal agencies have contributed to the problems by spewing overlapping data at the centers via uncoordinated and insecure networks that are hard to use, the auditors said.
More
here.
'The Architecture' Reaches Out To Arrest Activist
I don't normally do this (re-post articles in their entirety) , but I know Ryan Singel and Kevin Poulsen won't mind me reproducing this 27B Stroke 6 article here in its entirety, given the enormous importance of the underlying issues -- which should disturb you.
Via 27B Stroke 6.
In Hartford, Connecticut at the inauguration parade of new Republican governor Gov. M. Jodi Rell an activist/journalist was arrested by police as he stepped onto the roadway to take photos of the governor,, according to the AP's account. The activist, Ken Krayeske, was on a list of threats compiled by police and the Connecticut Intelligence Center, a multi-agency homeland security group. He was arrested for breaching the peace. Officers recognized him prior to the arrest thanks to the list and photograph of the Green Party activist, who was the campaign manager for Cliff Thornton, the Green Party's candidate for governor. To her credit, Governor Rell has asked for an investigation.
This is the exact scenario I envisioned the other day when I asked what it was that state and local "fusion centers" actually fused? Given that there seems to be no real Al Qaeda cells inside the United States, the laws of bureaucracies dictate that other threats will need to be invented or elevated. Of course now that the Dems are in charge, they'll take a look at these centers and wonder if they are really useful, right?
Wrong.
In fact, H.R. 1, the bill passed by Congress Tuesday night to implement more of the 9/11 recommendations, actually increases the number and funding of these so-called fusion centers. Expect to see more fusion of legitimate political groups with terrorist groups in the future. These are the kinds of bureaucratic mechanisms that lead police to label Quakers as "criminal extremists," to infiltrate anti-war groups, peaceful protests and Critical Mass bike rides, and to file reports on anti-war protesters in Pentagon databases.
It's the architectural imperative.
Link.
FBI Nudges State 'Fusion Centers' Into The Shadows
Declan McCullagh writes on the C|Net "Iconoclast" Blog:
The FBI is pressuring states to become more secretive and limit even routine oversight of the bureau's data-sharing arrangements with local police, a new document shows.
A memorandum of understanding [.pdf] written by the FBI and signed by the state of Virginia in February 2008 aims to curb congressional and press oversight of a joint venture called a Fusion Center. Here's more on Fusion Centers.
The memorandum, obtained by the Electronic Privacy Information Center and released on Friday, says that any "disclosure" to Congress of information shared with the Fusion Center can happen only "after consultation with the FBI." It also says that requests from media organizations even for non-classified material made under Virginia's open government laws will be referred to the FBI and then strongly opposed.
It also indicates that the FBI is responsible for a Virginia state bill called HB1007 -- introduced two days after the FBI signed the memorandum on January 6 -- that would exempt the Fusion Center from open government laws.
More
here.
No Surprise Here: 'Fusion' Centers Losing Anti-Terror Focus
An AP newswire article by Eileen Sullivan, via Google News, reports that:
Local intelligence-sharing centers set up after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks have had their anti-terrorism mission diluted by a focus on run-of-the-mill street crime and hazards such as hurricanes, a government report concludes.
Of the 43 "fusion centers" already established, only two focus exclusively on preventing terrorism, the Government Accountability Office found in a national survey obtained by The Associated Press. Center directors complain that they were hampered by lack of guidance from Washington and they were flooded by often redundant information from multiple computer systems.
More
here.
Image source: Robert A. Reeder / The Washington Post
Localities Operate Intelligence Centers To Pool Terror Data
Mary Beth Sheridan and Spencer S. Hsu write in The Washington Post:
Frustrated by poor federal cooperation, U.S. states and cities are building their own network of intelligence centers led by police to help detect and disrupt terrorist plots.
The new "fusion centers" are now operating in 37 states, including Virginia and Maryland, and another covers the Washington area, according to the Department of Homeland Security. The centers, which have received $380 million in federal support since the 2001 terrorist attacks, pool and analyze information from local, state and federal law enforcement officials.
But the emerging model of "intelligence-led policing" faces risks on all sides. The centers are popping up with little federal leadership and training, raising fears of overzealousness such as that associated with police "red squads" that spied on civil rights and peace activists decades ago. The centers also face practical obstacles that could limit their effectiveness, including a shortage of money, skilled analysts, and proven relationships with the FBI and Homeland Security.
More
here.
Fed Tells States to 'Name One Fusion Center'
Via UPI.
The departments of Justice and Homeland Security have asked every state to designate a single "fusion center" for terrorism and law enforcement intelligence.
"Sharing information -- whether it is from one government agency to another, or from all of us to our citizens -- is a vital part of being prepared against all threats," Attorney General Michael Mukasey told a conference of state attorneys general Thursday.
To maximize the efficiency of that effort, Mukasey said, he and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff had sent every governor a request that the state "designate a primary fusion center to coordinate the gathering, processing, analysis, and dissemination of terrorism, law enforcement and homeland security information."
More
here.
Note: On the heels of
reports that the scope of the DHS Fusion Centers has slipped to local crime enforcement, this is not a good development.
-ferg
Fusion Center Dialogue Continues
Joseph Straw writes on Security Management:
Members of the private task force that has helped guide post-9-11 information sharing efforts addressed lawmakers Tuesday, agreeing with civil libertarians that more must be done to protect privacy amid the effort to detect terrorist plots.
Zoë Baird, president of the nonprofit Markle Foundation and co-chair of its Task Force on National Security in the Information Age, told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security that the country’s new information sharing environment (ISE) cannot succeed without the public’s trust, which can only be gained through proper privacy protections.
Baird recommended establishment of a government-wide privacy policy to eliminate doubts and contradictions about what is and is not acceptable in the effort to discern which activities, taken together, might constitute a terrorist plot.
The hearing came on the heels of several revelations bolstering civil libertarians’ arguments that the ISE and its national network of intelligence fusion centers are fertile ground for abuse of civil liberties, such as unconstitutional police investigations of peaceful political and religious groups.
More
here.
Fusion Watch: ODNI Releases Standards for Suspicious-Activity Reporting
Ben Bain writes on FCW.com:
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence has released for the first time a set of standards for how state, local and federal law enforcement officials should share information on suspicious activity with potential links to terrorism.
The Common Terrorism Information Sharing Standards place state and local intelligence fusion centers at the center of how information on perceived terrorist threats or tips flows among all departments and agencies that use terrorism or homeland security information.
The standards describe suspicious behavior as “observed behavior that may be indicative of intelligence gathering or pre-operational planning related to terrorism, criminal or other illicit intention.” Behavior that could be considered suspicious and potentially tied to terrorism, and thus warrant a report, includes surveillance, photography of facilities, site breaches or physical intrusions, cyberattacks and the examination of security.
More
here.
Obama Administration Seeks to Keep Terror Watch-List Data Secret
Ellen Nakashima writes in The Washington Post:
The Obama administration wants to maintain the secrecy of terrorist watch-list information it routinely shares with federal, state and local agencies, a move that rights groups say would make it difficult for people who have been improperly included on such lists to challenge the government.
Intelligence officials in the administration are pressing for legislation that would exempt "terrorist identity information" from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Such information -- which includes names, aliases, fingerprints and other biometric identifiers -- is widely shared with law enforcement agencies and intelligence "fusion centers," which combine state and federal counterterrorism resources.
Still, some officials say public disclosure of watch-list data risks alerting terrorism suspects that they are being tracked and may help them evade surveillance.
Advocates for civil liberties and open government argue that the administration has not proved the secrecy is necessary and that the proposed changes could make the government less accountable for errors on watch lists. The proposed FOIA exemption has been included in pending House and Senate intelligence authorization bills at the administration's request.
"Instead of enhancing accountability, this would remove accountability one or two steps further away," said Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists' Project on Government Secrecy.
More
here.
Eyeing the Spying to Guard Americans' Privacy
Greg Gordon writes on Nukes & Spooks:
To carry out a recommendation from the Sept. 11 Commission aimed at preventing terrorists from ever again capitalizing on the lack of U.S. intelligence sharing, the Department of Homeland Security has since 2004 quietly facilitated the creation of 58 to 60 "fusion centers" that blend local, regional, state and federal agents.
One pregnant question has been how closely these agencies have been observing state and federal privacy laws as information, sucked up from eavesdropping, informants, surveillance and government records, flows among the feds, state and local agencies down to cops on the beat.
In a Privacy Impact Assessment released today, Homeland Security officials ticked off no fewer than seven ways in which each center, with its own organizational structure, poses risks to Americans’ privacy.
More
here.
Homeland Security 'Network of Networks' Faces Privacy Challenges
Shaun Waterman writes on Government Technology:
A new plan from the U.S. intelligence czar will use state police-run intelligence fusion centers as the hubs for a national network of officials from different agencies and levels of government sharing information about terrorism.
In a move likely to rattle privacy mavens, the three year plan for implementing the congressionally mandated Information Sharing Environment, or ISE, also lays out policy designed to ease sharing intelligence with foreign governments, and proposes to widen the definition of terrorism information that can be shared.
More
here.
Boeing to Staff FBI Fusion Center
Alice Lipowicz writes on Washington Technology:
To advance information sharing against terrorism, Boeing Co. expects to be among the first major corporations — maybe the first — to assign its own analyst to the Seattle FBI Fusion Center intelligence sharing office, according to a senior Boeing official.
The center is one of dozens around the country created by state and local governments to share anti-terrorism intelligence. Boeing wants to set an example of how private owners of critical infrastructure can get involved in such centers to generate and receive criminal and anti-terrorism intelligence, said Richard Hovel, Boeing senior advisor on aviation and homeland security.
More
here.
