Tag Archives: Napolitano

Big Sis in Hot Water?

Kaye Beach

Oct. 4, 2012

The scathing US Senate report released early this week is 141 pages of fascinating reading but it could cause a real confidence crisis for those who still think that trading liberty for security is a decent bargain.

Besides the fact that the Dept. of Homeland Security doesn’t know exactly how much it has given to states and cities for the Fusion Centers or how that money was spent, the Secretary of DHS, Janet Napolitano dubbed “Big Sis” by Matt Drudge, also has trouble getting her facts straight.

Fusion Centers have been at the center of many, many civil liberty scandals since they were created and a wide swath of concerned or active Americans from right to left have found themselves lumped in with or labeled as “extremists” at some point or another by the dubious ‘intelligence’ that the spy centers produce.  I hope they are all enjoying the fact that the Centers and Big Sis herself, are getting a little, long overdue scrutiny but also hope that they take this report to their state legislators and demand that the “pools of ineptitude and civil liberties intrusions” in their states be examined just as closely.

Report: Napolitano misled Congress on terrorism ‘fusion’ centers

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano repeatedly misled lawmakers about one of her department’s signature initiatives, the development of special centers where state and local police could share information about terrorism and other crimes with their federal counterparts, a bipartisan report from the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations states.

Ms. Napolitano failed to report to Congress serious problems with the so-called “fusion center” program, according to the report. She insisted publicly that the program was a success, but two reports from her own department found, what congressman called, “serious problems” with the fusion centers.

“The findings of both the 2010 and 2011 assessments contradict public statements by [Homeland Security] officials” including congressional testimony from Ms. Napolitano, the report states.

Investigators also found that Ms. Napolitano and other officials repeatedly claimed there were 72 fusion centers around the country, when internal documents revealed that there were only 68.

Advertisements

Department Of Homeland Security Announces “If You See Something, Say Something™” Partnership With The City Of Charlotte

Kaye Beach,

The Department of Homeland Security continues to expand it “See Something, Say Something” campaign into every imaginable sector of society.  “See Something, Say Something” is a DHS program designed to encourage ordinary people to report anything they believe to be unusual to the authorities.

Those reports then become a SAR-Suspicious Activity Report, many of which are forwarded on to the FBI to be held in their eGaurdian database for a number of years collecting additional bits of information on the individual.

Think something like this might have a chilling effect on free speech or political participation? Certianly.  That is exactly what such a program is designed for; to keep you fearful and in your place.

“I started to read these files about all the victims in just one region of Germany that the Gestapo had processed,” Gellately says. “It would have taken a large force of secret police to collect information on so many people. I needed to know just how many secret police there really were. So I asked an elderly gentleman who would’ve lived through those times, and he replied, ‘They were everywhere!'”

That was the prevailing myth.

“But I had evidence right there in my hands that supported a different story,” Gellately explains. “There were relatively few secret police, and most were just processing the information coming in. I had found a shocking fact. It wasn’t the secret police who were doing this wide-scale surveillance and hiding on every street corner. It was the ordinary German people who were informing on their neighbors.” -Robert Gellately, Earl Ray Beck Professor, Department of History

05/21/2012 07:00 AM EDT

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: 202-282-8010

CHARLOTTE, N.C. – The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) today announced the expansion of the “If You See Something, Say Something™” public awareness campaign to the city of Charlotte, N.C. Earlier today, DHS Assistant Secretary for Intergovernmental Affairs Betsy Markey joined Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx and officials from the Charlotte Area Transit System, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, Charlotte Motor Speedway and NASCAR, at the NASCAR Hall of Fame to announce the partnership between DHS and the city of Charlotte.

“If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign materials will be visible throughout Charlotte – in the Charlotte Area Transit System, in public buildings, on the city website and at the NASCAR Hall of Fame. In addition, a 30-second “If You See Something, Say Something™” Public Service Announcement will be broadcast on the local Charlotte government access television station.

DHS also separately announced the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign partnership with the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) International, an international federation of more than 100 local associations and affiliated organizations. The partnership will begin in eight different metropolitan areas including Baltimore, Denver, Ft. Lauderdale, Minneapolis, Orlando, St. Paul, Southwest Florida, and Washington, D.C. with plans to expand to other cities in the future.

The “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign – originally implemented by New York City’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority and now licensed to DHS for a nationwide campaign – is a simple and effective program to engage the public and key frontline employees to identify and report indicators of terrorism and terrorism-related crime to the proper transportation and law enforcement authorities.

The Department launched the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign in conjunction with the Department of Justice’s Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative – an administration effort to train state and local law enforcement to recognize behaviors and indicators related to terrorism and terrorism-related crime; standardize how those observations are documented and analyzed; and ensure the sharing of those reports with the Federal Bureau of Investigation-led Joint Terrorism Task Forces for further investigation.

Recent expansions of the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign include partnerships with numerous sports teams and leagues, transportation agencies, private sector partners, states, municipalities, and colleges and universities. DHS also has Public Service Announcements which have been distributed to television and radio stations across the country.

DHS will continue to expand the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign nationally to ensure America’s businesses, communities, and citizens remain vigilant and play an active role in keeping the country safe.

For more information, visit www.dhs.gov.

###

Secretary Napolitano Meets with State, Local, and Tribal Law Enforcement on Countering Violent Extremism

Kaye Beach

Jan 18, 2011

Get ready for more top down imposition and pressure on our police forces in order to “prevent violent extremism”

As near as I can tell, an “extremist,” in the eyes of this government,  is anyone that takes issue with its policies, actions or aims which means that there is a whole lot of those extremists and more of them are being minted daily.

The best way to prevent “violent extremism” is to ensure that the ordinary, common garden variety  “extremists” are thoroughly monitored and intimidated. In this way they can be completely disabused of their unacceptable ideas, thoughts or philosophies.   This, my friends,  means nothing good for our rights.  Freedom of speech and association, the right to petition our government for redress of grievances, the right to freely travel and more will keep taking the hits under the guise of keeping us safe.

Congress has a 9% approval rating. 

Only Fidel Castro is more unpopular (at least by this chart) than Congress.  Don’t you think it is odd that in the face of this dismal fact they keep on plowing ahead with travesties like the NDAA?  Isn’t it weird that they keep forcing upon us laws that the majority of us are appalled at?  It’s not so weird really.  They can’t possibly hope to win us over with what they are doing.  I think they are banking on controlling us instead.  Mark my words.  Before long it will be a rare American that will be able to avoid the ugly side of Big Momma Gov. hell bent on rooting out thought criminals.

Happy Hunting Homeland Security and good luck in Oklahoma!  Even our cops will look like extremists to you.

 

Secretary Napolitano Meets with State, Local, and Tribal Law Enforcement on Countering Violent Extremism

Release Date: January 18, 2012

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: 202-282-8010

WASHINGTON—Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano today joined Attorney General Eric Holder and Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism John Brennan at the White House to meet with senior state, local and tribal law enforcement officials to discuss the Obama administration’s Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States—released in December—and engage them on the critical task of preventing violent extremism in their communities. Attendees included sheriffs and chiefs of police from across the country, including representatives from the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Major Cities Chiefs Association, National Sheriffs’ Association, National Native American Law Enforcement Association, Governors Homeland Security Advisors Council, and Criminal Intelligence Coordinating Council.

“Engaging local communities is critical to our nation’s effort to counter violent extremism and violent crime, and this meeting brings together many of our partners,” said Secretary Napolitano. “The Department of Homeland Security will continue to collaborate with our state and local law enforcement partners and engage the public in our efforts to combat violent extremism, while protecting civil rights and civil liberties.”

During the meeting, Secretary Napolitano underscored DHS’ efforts to support local communities by enhancing existing partnerships to focus on information-driven community-based solutions, building government and law enforcement expertise, supporting community oriented policing practices and expanding grant prioritization to counter violent extremism and violent crime regardless of ideology. In addition, DHS is continuing to implement recommendations from the DHS Homeland Security Advisory Council Countering Violent Extremism Working Group, such as developing a curriculum for state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement focused on a community-oriented policing approach to countering violent extremism and violent crime. DHS’ Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties also works to educate communities and state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement on cultural awareness across the nation.

Secretary Napolitano also reiterated President Obama’s call for Congress to take action to prevent layoffs of law enforcement and first responders, and keep our communities safe by passing legislation such as the American Jobs Act. The legislation would provide $5 billion in assistance to states and local communities to create or save thousands of law enforcement and first responder jobs across the country.

Over the past year, DHS has worked with the Department of Justice on the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative (NSI)—an administration effort to train state and local law enforcement to recognize behaviors and indicators related to terrorism, crime and other threats; standardize how those observations are documented and analyzed; and ensure the sharing of those reports with the FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Forces for further investigation.

DHS has also collaborated with federal, state, local, and private sector partners, and the general public, to expand the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign. Originally implemented by New York City’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority and now licensed to DHS for a nationwide campaign, the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign is a simple and effective program to engage the public to identify and report indicators of terrorism, crime and other threats to the proper transportation and law enforcement authorities.

DHS will continue to expand the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign nationally to ensure America’s businesses, communities, and citizens remain vigilant and play an active role in keeping the country safe.

For more information, visit www.dhs.gov/cve.

Who Owns the Fusion Centers?

Kaye Beach

Jan 15, 2012

Part II

This is Part II of my ongoing dissertation on Fusion Centers and the work they do.  You can read Part I, Intelligence Led Policing and Fusion Centers: How the IACP Helped the USA to Cross the Rubicon, which dealt with the flawed and dangerous philosophy of preemptive or Intelligence Led Policing that makes the whole domestic terrorism apparatus, including fusion centers such a threat to the liberties of everyone.

In Part II I am going to explain what the centers really do and who is in control of them and how.

Fusion Centers-State of Federal?

It is all about collecting the data and getting it to the federal government.  The most important function of Fusions Centers is also the most invisible portion of their work; the computer networks and information sharing that takes place through those networks.

Despite claims that the Fusion Centers were created by the states, the truth is that the modern day fusion centers were born of policy established at the federal level and they are largely funded, staffed and  trained by representatives of federal agencies.  The federal government likes to claim that the states are partners with the federal government in this and other programs like it.

Question: If I set the rules and I pay the bills and I own the house that you are currently residing in, are you really my partner?

Answer: only to the degree that I am willing to pretend that you are.

When it comes to state fusion centers, the federal government has been paying the bills, they set the rules and they own the house.

Paying the Bills-Federal Funding

Since 2003 the Department of Homeland Security has given $31 billion dollars to the state and local governments.

3.8 billion was given to the states in 2010 alone.  The programs funded by the DHS, largely focus on countering terrorism but also on natural and man-made disasters are required to be tuned to DHS dictates.  According to the Government Accountability Office, Fusion centers have been received $426 million in general grant funding from fiscal 2004 through fiscal 2009.  Stating the obvious about money and control, “You take the king’s shilling, you become the king’s man”—Tom Cole

This  news article published Nov 27, 2011, Oklahoma’s fusion center has a broad role these daysmakes who is paying the bills pretty clear.

Oklahoma’s federally funded information fusion center has a broader role today than it did when it began operations four years ago.

. . .Oklahoma’s fusion center is housed inside the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation‘s headquarters, 6600 N Harvey Place, and includes a secured room where secret information from the federal government is received.
. . .A central office includes a small room filled with monitors and TV screens, relaying data to an analyst. Its operations are funded, for the most part, by grants from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Stenhouse said the federal agency provided Oklahoma’s fusion center with about $400,000, which he said was used to pay the salaries of four analysts and training purposes. (All emphasis mine) Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahomas-fusion-center-has-a-broad-role-these-days./article/3626735#ixzz1i4z2ZOBQ

Oklahoma has received hundreds of millions of dollars in Homeland Security funds since 911 and the state understands who is in charge even if the officials choose to dance around the truth with the public.

The following is from the Oklahoma Information Fusion Center’s “Privacy Policy.”  It is clearly stated that the Oklahoma Office of Homeland Security oversees the initiatives and mandates of the federal Department of Homeland Security-including our state’s fusion center.

OKOHS (Oklahoma Office of Homeland Security) is directed to continue their efforts in combating terrorism, and shall continue to oversee the implementation of any and all initiatives or efforts mandated by the United States Department of Homeland Security, including the development of a state information fusion center. (Emphasis mine)Read more

 

Federal Personnel Staff state fusion centers-.  According to the Government Accountability Office Report, as of July 2010, the DHS has deployed 58 personnel to fusion centers, and the FBI has deployed 74 personnel to fusion centers.

Setting the Rules

In 2008 we learned that the federal government has no qualms about yanking those strings attached hard and that includes subverting state law intended to protect the citizens of that state in the process.  The Fusion Centers have a job to do and that job requires some changes to be made to pesky state laws meant to provide residents with openness to,  and oversight of,  their government.

EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg said, “the FBI memorandum indicates that the federal government is attempting to shroud the Virginia Fusion Center in secrecy and prevent meaningful public oversight. Virginia citizens deserve an open and transparent state government that is not constrained by federal secrecy policies.”

http://epic.org/press/041108.html

Through the litigation, EPIC uncovered a secret contract between the State Police and the FBI that limits the rights of Virginia citizens to learn what information the State Police collect about them.

http://epic.org/privacy/virginia_fusion/


Fusion centers may be physically located in the states but their guts belong to Homeland Security! 

If you think of Fusion Centers as a place you will miss what the centers are really about.  Fusion Centers are part of a domestic intelligence system and the guts of the fusion centers are the data networks.

The federal government (guided all the way by the International Association of Chiefs of Police) defined the fusion centers and their processed from the start. They drew up the map.

“The National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan, developed by Global in partnership with the IACP, is the first of its kind in this country — and promises to bring us closer to achieving the goal, expressed at your 2002 Summit, of “intelligence-led policing.” . . . it serves as a “roadmap” for our national criminal intelligence sharing initiatives.” –THE HONORABLE DEBORAH J. DANIELS

The question of whether or not these institutions are state or federal entities is a moot point.  Though they physically reside in the states, the federal government aside from defining, funding and staffing the centers, also controls the data networks and they set the standards for how data is collected and shared.

Federal standards equal federal control

Standards are important if you want to:

  • SHARE DATA (speak the same language)

Standards Provide

  • On-demand real time data access

 Navigating the Standards Landscape

A Nationwide Network

You know what is worse for you privacy ant autonomy that a central database?  A distributed network of databases that are constantly updated that the central government can reach into at will.

The DHS intelligence analysis center or the DCI’s counterterrorist center do not need to accumulate and hold all relevant databases to which they may gain access. In other words, there is no need to build one big data warehouse. Instead, the centers should interface with such databases as needed.

—Markle Foundation Task Force Report 2002

Owning the House

In 2008, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and Global jointly published a supplement to the Fusion Center Guidelines called Baseline Capabilities Baseline Capabilities defines the capabilities needed to create a nationwide network of fusion centers and sets forth the minimum standards for a fusion center to be able to perform basic functions. 

The Department of Homeland Security set out an objective to create a network of fusions centers as a unique law enforcement and threat information resource that works across jurisdictions and is supported by multidisciplinary teams dispersed throughout a national network of information hives. Source EPIC

“. . .Fusion Centers will be the centerpiece of state, local, federal intelligence-sharing for the future and that the Department of Homeland Security will be working and aiming its programs to underlie Fusion Centers.” –DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano March 13, 2009

http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/speeches/sp_1236975404263.shtm


Jurisdiction

The Fusion Center Guidelines states that, “nontraditional collectors of intelligence, such as public safety entities and private sector organizations” will be “fused’ with law enforcement data”   The goal is to break down traditional barriers to information sharing. 

These barriers are commonly referred to as “siloes” or “stovepipes”

Those “silos” or barriers can also be thought of as jurisdictions.

From the Legal Information Institute;

Jurisdiction-The term jurisdiction is really synonymous with the word “power” Jurisdiction is the territory within which a court or government agency may properly exercise its power

It is not difficult to understand that when the the lines of authority are blended power will default to the higher level.

Agency protectiveness over jurisdiction and it is the authority an entity has over that jurisdiction that is the real barrier.  Simply stated, the problem with integrating data systems is not a physical or technical one; it’s political. Until recently, the barrier was both political and technological.  Now that the technological barrier has been removed, some think that the political barrier should follow suit.  But just because something is possible does it mean we should do it?

“National employment databases, national medical databases, national criminal databases, and others have already been created.

The dream is to blend all these separate resources into a single centralized one…the only real impediments to creating the database that now remain are political and cultural: the stubborn assumption of so many Americans that they have rights.”

The State’s Quest for Total Information Awareness by David M. Brown

In the past, the technological or physical barrier acted as sort of a firewall to siloes of data.  Data was shared on a legal right and need to know basis and  the entity wanting it had to ask.  While technology makes it possible to share lots of information in an instant with anyone in the world, there are still plenty of good reasons to protect sensitive  information.

If you really, really want to settle this whole argument about whether or not fusion centers are state of federal, just read about Homeland Security’s Federal Fusion Center initiative.

In 2010 The Department of Homeland Security announced its intention to;

“collect, plan, coordinate, report, analyze, and fuse infrastructure information related to all-threats and all-hazards, law enforcement activities, intelligence activities, man-made disasters and acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other information collected or received from federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial agencies and organizations; foreign governments and international organizations; domestic security and emergency management officials; and private sector entities or individuals into the Department.”

The DHS is creating a federal fusion center by ‘fusing’ information from the   centers.  DHS is laying claim to all of that data to use as they see fit.

The Department of Homeland Security has repeatedly stated that Fusion Centers were  owned by the states, the creation of this new system of records action totally negates that dubious claim.   They didn’t ask anyone’s permission.  Why?  Because they paid the bills, they set the rules and they own the house.  The states are a  “partner” up until the federal government decided they weren’t.

Fusion Centers, for all practical intents and purposes, belongs to none other than Big Momma Gov. and if anyone tells you different,  grab a pitcher because their pants are on fire!


“If You See Something, Say Something” Re-Branding the Brown Shirts



Kaye Beach

Feb 17, 2010

Think the comparison is extreme? It’s your call.

DHS expands ‘see something, say something’ campaign to fusion centers

Sept 15, 2010

Read More Here

DHS Expands If You See Something Say Something Campaign

Nov. 15, 2010

Read More Here

Secretary Napolitano Announces Expansion of “If You See Something, Say Something” Campaign to Walmart Stores Across the Nation

Release Date: December 6, 2010

Read More Here

If You See Something Say Something Expands To Federal Buildings

Dec 8, 2010

Read More Here

Secretary Napolitano Announces “If You See Something, Say Something™” Campaign Partnership with NBA

Release Date: February 15, 2011

Read more Here

When the snitching starts getting in your face at
Wal-Mart, you kind of have to start paying attention.  I’m so glad I quit that great American institution back when they started chipping under drawers. Before the next Homeland Security outrage turns our attention away from Ms. Napolitano’s wally-world endeavor, I’d like to take a little peek behind the curtain.

Where did “If You See Something, Say Something” come from?


See Something, Say Something is just a slogan for a much broader project– Suspicious Activity Reporting or SAR.

What is a SAR?

Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) is the process of documenting the observation of behavior that may be indicative of intelligence gathering or pre-operational planning related to terrorism, criminal, or other illicit intentions.

Nationwide SAR Initiative (NSI)

Integrates state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies’ SAR processes into a nationwide standardized and institutionalized effort

More

The program is tied into the Fusion Centers’ Nationwide SAR Initiative (NSI)


The Fusion Center Guidelines states that, “nontraditional collectors of intelligence, such as public safety entities and private sector organizations” will ‘fused’ with law enforcement data” (formerly known as “criminal justice information” which indicated correctly that “law enforcement data” should be concerned with  legitimate criminal investigations)

“The Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) Initiative (NSI) builds on what law enforcement and other agencies have been doing for years—gathering information regarding behaviors and incidents associated with criminal activity. . .” (Emphasis mine)

This is NOT what law enforcement has been doing for years! Remember “reasonable suspicion“? How about “probable cause”?

Many, many laws and policies have been changed. It used to be that only legitimate criminals and suspects were permitted to be entered into a system of criminal records. The reason for this is obvious.

The Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs (OJP) in 1993 explained the reason very well.

“Because criminal intelligence information is both conjectural and subjective in nature, may be widely disseminated through the interagency exchange of information and cannot be accessed by criminal suspects to verify that the information is accurate and complete, the protections and limitations set forth in the regulation are necessary to protect the privacy interests of the subjects and potential suspects of a criminal intelligence system.” (Emphasis mine)

Things have changed.

The goal is information sharing across all jurisdictions, inter agency, interstate, international, public-private.  This goal is not limited to Fusion Centers or policing, it is ALL information.

Welcome to the ISE!


ISE stands for “Information Sharing Environment”

“The mission of the ISE is to improve the management, discovery, fusing, sharing, delivery of, and collaboration around terrorism-related information to enhance national security. . .”

Partners in the ISE

“The ISE is a partnership of five primary communities—Defense, Intelligence, Homeland Security, Foreign Affairs, and Law Enforcement”. . .These communities, moreover, cut across all levels of government in our federal system, involving state, local, and tribal partners as well as the private sector and international partners. . .”

The Program Manager of the ISE says;

“The scope of the ISE is best described in terms of end-to-end counterterrorism and homeland security mission processes—such as watchlisting, screening, and suspicious activity reporting—along with supporting core capabilities and enablers.”

Of course a partnership like this is too good to limit to simply terrorism.

“Key to progress in building the ISE, has been a relentless focus on identifying, integrating, and sharing best practices. Broad adoption of best practices raises confidence, lowers risk, and accelerates adoption, use, and reuse resulting in a strong return on investment by mission partners. In particular, the adoption of best practices has utility beyond the terrorism information sharing mission, extending both across complementary missions and into new mission areas unrelated to terrorism.” (Emphasis mine) LINK

America, we are now operating under a New Paradigm.


Here is another peep into the “New Paradigm”


Vision 2015

The Vision is “A Globally Networked and Integrated Intelligence Enterprise”

Enterprise is a buzzword being used throughout government these days. I don’t know about you, but the word “enterprise” brings to mind business and profit for me, not government.

Now the UK got the jump on plastering creepy Orwellian eyes posters all over their public transit centers.  In 2002 UK travelers got treated to these uber-spooky ads


Our government has many new policies that few are aware of but campaigns like “If You See Something, Say Something” have many wondering just what the heck is going on.

SAR (Suspicious Activity Reporting) is a pervasive, nationwide snitching program modeled on LAPD’s Special Order #11.

LAPD Special Order #11 was a Los Angeles Police Department order that compels LAPD officers to begin reporting “suspicious behaviors” to create a stream of “intelligence” about a host of everyday activities that will be fed to the local fusion center.

LAPD Special Order #11, dated March 5, 2008, states that it is the policy of the LAPD to “gather, record, and analyze information of a criminal or non-criminal nature, that could indicate activity or intentions related to either foreign or domestic terrorism,” and includes a list of 65 behaviors LAPD officers “shall” report.

The list includes such innocuous, legal activities as:

– taking measurements

– using binoculars

–  taking pictures or video footage “with no apparent esthetic value”

– abandoning vehicle

– drawing diagrams

– taking notes

– espousing extremist views

Read More about the SARs initiative

But what is responsible for this upending of the presumption of innocence in our country?

There is a connection between the creepy “UK Secure Beneath the Watchful Eyes” and the US’s new snitch mandates.

Intelligence Led Policing or ILP

The ILP strategy was first developed in the United Kingdom and then flourished in Australia. . .  (What do those two countries have in common?)

What or Who has been the driver behind COPS and Intelligence Led Policing?


WHEREAS, the IACP recognizes that in the aftermath of the September 11th atrocities, there is a need to address the deficiencies that exist in this country in the collection, analysis and dissemination of Criminal Intelligence; and

WHEREAS, the Executive Committee of the IACP recognized the need to address these deficiencies and to ensure that state and local law enforcement is involved in the Intelligence process; and

WHEREAS, at the direction of the IACP Executive Board, the Police Investigative Operations Committee convened the IACP Criminal Intelligence Sharing Summit in March of 2002; and

WHEREAS, the findings of that Summit, issued in a report in August of 2002, led to the creation of the Global Intelligence Working Group, which is a Federal Advisory Committee as defined under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA); and

WHEREAS, the Global Intelligence Working Group has created the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan, a plan which is consistent with the IACP Summit Report; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, that the IACP will strongly support the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan as a valuable tool to remedy the deficiencies in the existing methods of collecting, analyzing and disseminating criminal intelligence, that the IACP encourages all law enforcement to utilize this tool in creating and/or bettering its efforts in the area of Criminal Intelligence, and that the Federal Government also support these efforts.
LINK

IACP Resolutions 2002 – 2010

Others have noted the conspicuous placing of new policy that is contrary to our American form of government that was charged with protecting our legal and natural rights first and foremost.

From 2003;

Big Brother Gets Bigger: Domestic Spying & the Global Intelligence Working Group

by Michelle J. Kinnucan

With virtually no media coverage or public scrutiny, a major reorganization of the US domestic law enforcement intelligence apparatus is well underway and, in fact, is partially completed.

. . . A month after September 11, 2001, the Investigative Operations Committee of the International Association of Chiefs of Police recommended that its leadership convene an Intelligence Sharing Summit in March 2002, described above. Summit participants examined closely the 2002 United Kingdom’s National Intelligence Model. (Intelligence Led Policing)
(Emphasis mine)

The primary outcome of the Summit was creation of the Global Intelligence Working Group, which comprised approximately 30 intelligence professionals. This group developed the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan.

. . .The Summit proceedings were compiled by the IACP in a report entitled, Criminal Intelligence Sharing: A National Plan for Intelligence-Led Policing at the Local, State and Federal Levels Recommendations from the IACP Intelligence Summit (IACP Report). The Summit and IACP Report were both partially funded by the DOJ.

. . .The GIWGs intelligence reorganization effort is linked to the Homeland Security Act, but extends far beyond concerns about terrorism. (Emphasis mine)

A main selling point for the greater use of local police in domestic intelligence is the omnivorous spying potential of the widely adopted Community Oriented Policing Services or COPS model. The IACP Report asserts, It is time to maximize the potential for community policing efforts to serve as a gateway of locally based information to prevent terrorism, and all other crimes, through the timely transfer of critical information from citizens to their local police agency and then across the intelligence continuum.

Read the entire article

The 2001 IACP Report states that;

“that the real need is to share all – not just terrorism-related – criminal intelligence”

The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) was established in 1994. You may remember the COPS program was supposed to hire 100,000 new police officers around the country. The COPS program has received incredible support and funding from the Obama administration.

Niki Raapana gives us this interesting bit of COPS history;

In the spring of 1999, the City of Seattle began working with COPS to write sustainable development visions for all 37 neighborhoods.

Planning groups followed the guidelines laid out in the WA State Growth Management Act of 1990 combined with suggestions recommended at the 1992 Earth Summit and advisors from COPS.

COMPASS was a COPS creation that expanded the GIS (Geographic Information System) database.

Niki Raapana writes;

One of the core elements of the COMPASS initiative is the creation of a data infrastructure which contains information from a variety of sources. These data will include extant social indicator data (e.g., employment statistics; housing information; land use data; school data; hospital records; asset mapping) and a host of safety information (e.g., incident-based crime data; arrest statistics; calls for service; court and corrections data; victimization surveys; and fear of crime data).”

Read More-“Join the Quiet Revolution” by Niki Raapana

In a 2008 interview then COPS director, Carl Peed talks about the expansion of Community Oriented Policing after 9-11;

“A few months after September 11, the COPS Office funded the International Association of Chiefs of Police to hold a Criminal Intelligence Sharing Summit which led to the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan. Five years later, we held another summit to discuss the progress made and to set the course for the future.”

The International Association of Chiefs of Police with their distinctly utilitarian bent as detestable as it is should not be the focus of outrage though. (Utilitarianism embodies the “the ends justify the means” school of thought) There are an untold number of organizations operating all across our country and meeting with great success in their goals of subverting our Constitution. That they would try is no surprise to anyone. What is astounding is that we have permitted and even embraced their aims.

If we want to restore our country it will be up to us to demand that our representatives stop delegating the authority granted by us over to unaccountable, unelected bureaucrats.

We will have to teach ourselves what is not being taught in our schools and universities-The US Constitution and our Bill of Rights.

We have to know both our legal
and natural rights so that we can demand the appropriate restraint.

See Something, Say Anything You Want (because you won’t get sued)

Kaye Beach

Jan 27, 2011

Not if Pete King gets his way.   He’s a Republican by the way.  It’s hard to tell anymore, isn’t it?


He wants to grant immunity to busy bodies that report you when they think you are acting act weird.


With all of the reports that are sure to pour in since DHS Secretary, Janet Napolitano began her Wal Mart telescreen gig, this bill is bound to be a winner.

Pete might try listening to this expert;

“Director Michael Leiter complained that the NCTC receives ‘literally thousands’ of pieces of intelligence every day. Adding innocuous information about the everyday activities of Americans will only increase this burden on intelligence resources.” link

Instead of this one;  (results yahoo search “Pete King+IACP” first hit)

4:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. – Meet in office with Jim McMahon, the Deputy Executive Director of the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) and former NYS Director of Homeland Security. Good conversation and cooperation on terrorism. Jim is a terrific guy. LINK

Ahhh!  Second hit is worse!

Press Release of Senator Lautenberg

Police Chiefs Endorse Lautenberg, King Bill To Close ‘Terror Gap’

Lautenberg-King Bill Would Restrict Terrorists’ Access To Guns

LINK

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) has announced its support for legislation — the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2007 (S.1237/H.R.2074) — Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Rep. Pete King (R-NY) have introduced to prevent terrorist suspects from purchasing firearms.


JoeFranzese writes;

Republican quislings Peter King of New York, Mark Kirk of Illinois and Mike Castle of Delaware have just introduced a new gun control bill that comes right out of this so-called “Rightwing Extremist” report.  I’m talking about H.R. 2159, the shockingly misnamed “Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009.”  I call it the “Disarming American Citizens Act of 2009.” Read more about this awful bill

Does Pete King’s “R” stand for Ridiculous?  I knew I smelled IACP all over this guy.

But back to his current travesty…

Pete goes on and on  about Muslim extremists.  Has he been under a rock for the past few years?  It’s not just the Muslims that are at the other end of the end of the of the snitch state spy glass.  Not to say that it is a good idea to let Wal Mart people get away with ruining anyone’s life by siccing the feds on them for buying too many diapers or taking photographs, Muslim or otherwise.

…This might be a good time to look at who is working on the domestic “extremism” problem before you buy on to this nonsense. (See below)

It might not hurt to take a short trip back to the recent past either and see who the domestic extremists are in the eyes of Homeland Security and their Fusion Centers.

Here are just a couple of examples (there are many, many, more)

DHS: Rightwing Extremism report

lawmaker aims to protect tipsters on extremists

(AFP) – 1 day ago

WASHINGTON — A top US lawmaker unveiled legislation on Wednesday to protect individuals who tip off authorities to potential extremist threats from lawsuits, in the event that they turn out to finger innocents.

House Homeland Security Chairman Pete King introduced the “See Something, Say Something Act” as a shield for those “acting in good faith” and with “objectively reasonable suspicion” that a plot may be unfolding.

“Good citizens who report suspicious activity in good faith, should not have to worry about being sued,” King, a Republican, said in a statement released by his office, citing “frivolous lawsuits” in 2007.

Read More

Who decides what constitutes an extremist threat?

Experts…of course.

HSAC -The Homeland Security Advisory Council

The HSAC shall provide organizationally independent, strategic, timely, specific and actionable advice to the Secretary and senior leadership on matters related to homeland security.Link

The Council is comprised of experts from state, local and tribal governments, emergency and first responder communities, academia and the private sector. Link

Problems with HSAC?

Private Interests Influence Homeland Security Agenda: POGO Criticizes Conflicts of Interest & Secrecy of Advisory Council

HSAC -The Homeland Security Advisory Council

The HSAC shall provide organizationally independent, strategic, timely, specific and actionable advice to the Secretary and senior leadership on matters related to homeland security.Link

The Council is comprised of experts from state, local and tribal governments, emergency and first responder communities, academia and the private sector. Link

Check out the membership!

DHS Announces New Initiatives to Counter Violent Extremism in Communities

Six months ago, the Homeland Security Advisory Council’s (HSAC) “Countering Violent Extremism” Working Group–comprised of chiefs of police, sheriffs, community leaders and homeland security experts–made a series of recommendations to the DHS leadership.

HSAC Recommendations

The overarching goal was to incorporate efforts to counter violent extremism into pre-existing, community-oriented violent crime reduction efforts.

There were many great ideas in this report aimed at increasing public awareness of the threat:

– Develop case studies on recent events (Zazi, Ft Hood, Jihad Jane, etc) and use them to train local law enforcement
– Create public service ads to educate public on the threat and how to recognize characteristics of dangerous behavior
– Share threat info and assist with better security practices for faith-based communities
– Create a web sites for parents, caregivers, educators on human trafficking, hate crimes and predators.
– Develop a comment lexicon and definitions for “radicalization”, “extremism”, etc
– More focus on community-oriented policing

Six months later, DHS released the follow on guidance: Next Steps: Supporting Community-Based Efforts to Reduce Violent Crime (dated August 2, 2010)  DHS Fact Sheet
– DHS is developing standardized curriculum for state and local  LE
– Will host regional summits to discuss best practices
– More focus on educating the community on recognizing threats and how to report (expand the “If You See Something, Say Something” campaign)
– More partnering with communities and sharing threat info

Red Light Cameras: Safety Devices or One More Step Toward a Surveillance State?

By John W. Whitehead
12/20/2010

Before Janet Napolitano, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, unleashed full body imaging scanners and enhanced pat downs on American airline passengers, she subjected Arizona drivers to red light cameras. In August 2008, Napolitano, then-governor of Arizona, instituted a statewide system of 200 fixed and mobile speed and red light cameras, which were projected to bring in more than $120 million in annual revenue for the state. She was aided in this endeavor by the Australian corporation Redflex Traffic Systems.

Two years later, after widespread complaints that the cameras intrude on privacy and are primarily a money-making enterprise for the state (income actually fell short of the projections because people refused to pay their fines), Arizona put the brakes on the program. And while other states–including Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, West Virginia and Wisconsin–have since followed suit, many more municipalities, suffering from budget crises, have succumbed to the promise of easy revenue and installed the cameras. As the Washington Post notes:

A handful of cities used them a decade ago. Now they’re in more than 400, spread across two dozen states. Montgomery County started out with 18 cameras in 2007. Now it has 119. Maryland just took the program statewide last month, and Prince George’s is putting up 50. The District started out with a few red light cameras in 1999; now they send out as many automated tickets each year as they have residents, about 580,000.

In most cases, state and local governments arrange to lease the cameras from the Redflex Corporation, with Redflex taking its cut of ticket revenue first, and the excess going to the states and municipalities.

The cameras, which are triggered by sensors buried in the road, work by taking photos of drivers who enter intersections after a traffic light turns red. What few realize, however, is that you don’t actually have to run a red light to get caught. Many drivers have triggered the cameras simply by making a right turn on red or crossing the sensor but not advancing into the intersection.

Each municipality has its own protocol for what happens next, but generally, the photos are reviewed by Redflex, which then issues tickets to the drivers. And this is where your right to a fair and full hearing largely goes out the window. Indeed, while there is a system for challenging a ticket, it is often convoluted and onerous, with the burden of proof resting upon the driver. Even the courts have a tendency to view the cameras as infallible. According to the Washington Post, Montgomery County, in screening the tickets to mail out, has had to kick out 23,266 violations from May 2007 to June 2009 because No violation occurred/operator error. And 10,813 were tossed for reasons including power interruption and equipment malfunction.   Once in court, however, the drivers were invariably found guilty 99.7 percent of the time.

Read More

Object to Naked Scans and TSA Groping? DHS wants to ID these “domestic extremist”

Kaye Beach

12/1/10

On Nov 24th I wrote about a writer who said that he“was contacted by a source within the DHS who is troubled by the terminology and content of an internal memo reportedly issued yesterday.”

The memo in question here has yet to surface and some question whether or not Hagmann’s assertion or factual.  (see comments)

At the same time some are taking the matter seriously;

On Nov. 29th Bob Barr on behalf of the Liberty Guard, a non profit organization,  filed with the TSA a FOIA request for any documents:

“pertaining to instructions to staff, employees or supervisors that affect
the public when members of the public are asked to submit to
full body scans or “pat downs” while attempting to board
aircraft, which have been adopted by the TSA or DHS. I also
request any documents which discuss the aforementioned issue and
contain the terms “national opt-out day,” “Bob Barr”, “Opt Out
Alliance”, “Liberty Guard”, “John Tyner”, “domestic extremists”,“drudgereport.com,” “Matt Drudge”, “prisonplanet.com”, “Alex Jones” and any other term or proper name germane to the
aforementioned terms and matter.”

Read the FOIA request

Bob Barr was one of those named in the MIAC Report (see below) so maybe the idea that DHS is labeling those who dissent as domestic extremists doesn’t seem so far fetched.   I can say after reading intensively over the last few years about DHS and  Fusion Centers, it would not surprise me at all if there is something to Hagmann’s assertions.

Paul Joseph Watson writes;

The Freedom of Information Act request also aims to uncover why the TSA made the decision to “stand down” on its normal security procedures the day before Thanksgiving in what was a blatant public relations ploy to deflate the impact of the national opt out day protest which had been scheduled for the same day.

Read More

We shall see….

Object to Naked Scans and TSA Groping?  DHS wants to ID these “domestic extremist”

Kaye Beach

11/24/2010

Big surprise.  Americans who take issue with the government’s nudie scanners or public groping of their  most personal of effects are being labeled as “domestic extremists” by DHS.

It is important to note that the label is not reserved for violent objectors. The term is used to describe any person, group or alternative media source” that actively objects to, causes others to object to, supports and/or elicits support for anyone who engages in such travel disruptions at U.S. airports in response to the enhanced security procedures. According to Doug Hagmann’s post on Fed Up Flyers dated Nov 23, 2010.

Hagmann says that after he published this article he “was contacted by a source within the DHS who is troubled by the terminology and content of an internal memo reportedly issued yesterday.” by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano

Furthermore the TSA is instructed to identify these individuals and share this information with “Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division, the Extremism and Radicalization branch of the Office of Intelligence & Analysis (IA) division of the Department of Homeland Security.”

Doug Hagmann writes;

The memo, which actually takes the form of an administrative directive, appears to be the product of undated but recent high level meetings between Napolitano, John Pistole, head of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA),and one or more of Obama’s national security advisors. This document officially addresses those who are opposed to, or engaged in the disruption of the implementation of the enhanced airport screening procedures as “domestic extremists.”

Read More

The Anti-TSA Backlash: It Ain’t Just a Right-Wing Thing

Posted by Kevin Carson on Nov 25, 2010 in Commentary23 comments

Well, it seems Homeland Security and the TSA are classifying the anti-TSA backlash as a “domestic extremist” movement. A DHS memo from Janet Napolitano referred to the individuals who tried to “interfere with” the new airport security regime by objecting to it or opting out, along with public commentators and organized movements which encouraged such behavior, as “domestic extremists.” She called on the government to investigate individuals and movements associated with the anti-TSA backlash.

And now MSNBC’s Chris Matthews is dismissing the anti-TSA movement as a bunch of right-wingers. Monday night (Nov. 22) Matthews did a segment on the new back-scatter body scan machines. One of the guests, Ginger McCall of the Open Government Project and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, cited evidence that the machines are ineffective at detecting low-density materials like the powdered explosive carried by the Underwear Bomber, and simply create an “illusion of security.”

Matthews, outraged, demanded her explanation as to why the government would deliberately do something that didn’t work. McCall responded that it might have something to do with the fact that a lot of money was changing hands. When challenged further by the aghast Matthews, she elaborated that former DHS Secretary Chertoff had ties to the companies that manufacture the scanner.

This sent Matthews on a rampage for the rest of the segment, sputtering demands for names and documentation as McCall, attempting to talk in the face of his machine-gun interruption, tried to explain the concept of a revolving door between government agencies and private industry.

Read More

Possibly relevant “extremists” articles;

Missouri Fusion Center Designates 75% of the Population as Subversives, Extremists

TSA: “I Thought Maybe You Might Be Representing a Terrorist Organization”

HB 2810 The Oklahoma Sovereignty Act: Stuck in Liebmanns Craw

Homeland Security Chief Pleads for Patience with TSA’s Peeping and Groping Policies

And what sayeth the people?


The nation’s Homeland Security chief asked for air travelers’ “cooperation” and “patience” with full-body scanning and pat downs this holiday season amid a growing public backlash that the airport tactics are intrusive.

“The public is done with their rights being violated,” says Kate Hanni, executive director of the travel group flyersrights.org. “People are just furious” about the body scanners, which peer beneath clothing, and pat downs of their private areas if they refuse to be scanned.”

Read More

DHS Secretary Napolitano visits OKS

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano today visited Oklahoma City to commemorate the 15th anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing and deliver remarks about the Department’s efforts to protect against evolving threats of terrorism and build resilient communities as part of the Oklahoma City National Memorial Annual Remembrance Ceremony. Her prepared remarks are available here.

Secretary Napolitano also toured the Oklahoma City National Memorial Museum with Oklahoma City Police Chief Bill Citty and Fire Chief Keith Bryant—both of whom responded to the bombing 15 years ago—and Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry.

In addition, Secretary Napolitano met with state and local first responders to discuss the importance of close coordination among all levels of government to support frontline emergency response and management efforts. She stressed her commitment to sharing information with state, local and tribal law enforcement to ensure those charged with protecting America’s communities against violence have access to the information they need about evolving threats of terrorism and violent extremism.

Secretary Napolitano also participated in a panel discussion about the media’s role in informing the public about terrorism—during which she highlighted how media coverage of terrorist acts has continually transformed since she helped lead the domestic terrorism investigation into the Oklahoma City bombing as U.S. Attorney for Arizona. She also emphasized her continued commitment as Secretary of Homeland Security to ensuring the public receives timely and accurate information during an incident while maintaining the security of sensitive data.

For more information, visit www.dhs.gov.