• 1. CRIMINAL INTELLIGENCE VERSUS NATIONAL SECURITY INTELLIGENCE

At the culmination of the investigation completed by The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States (a.k.a. the 9/11 Commission), many different areas of concern were identified as being deficient or outright failure when it came to identifying, tracking, and potentially disrupting the activities of those who had implemented the attacks. One of the main areas of deficiency noted was that related to information sharing within agencies at the federal, state, and local levels. Many argue that there was sufficient information to indicate an impending attack, but that such information was not shared with the agencies or entities that could have prevented such attacks. Our contemporary intelligence community operates in two basic worlds – one that focuses on criminal intelligence and one that focuses on national security intelligence. These two concepts are similar in some aspects, but dynamically different in others. Please review the information in chapter 14 regarding these two topics and answer the following questions.

• What are two reasons that intelligence agencies (at any level) may not share information with one another?
• What are the fundamental differences between criminal intelligence and national security intelligence? Why can or should these two types of intelligence not be co-mingled? What are the risks of doing so?

2. . DOMESTIC SECURITY VERSUS CIVIL LIBERTIES

In the aftermath of 9/11, the US government implemented several legislative changes, modifications and updates that focused on increasing domestic security. Many argue that these changes were overzealous efforts on the part of the government and resulted in the degradation of civil liberties. When you consider issues such as the increasing use of CCTV surveillance systems, the increased ability of law enforcement to covertly monitor communications, or the looming debate over domestic drone use, there are many different facets to domestic security that inspire debate.

On page 538 of your textbook, White (2012) states:

This [the concept of security versus liberty] is both an ancient and modern principle. When the Athenians were threatened with invasion, they were often willing to suspend the rules of democracy in favor of protection. They shifted the structure of open democracy to grant more authoritarian power to leaders in times of crisis and the power lasted until the threat abated (Finley, 1983, pp. 24-25). The Romans would follow a similar course in the Republic, creating a dictatorship in times of war (Mackay, 2004, pp. 27-28). During the American Civil War, Abraham Lincoln imprisoned opponents without informing them of charges, suspending the right to habeas corpus (Goodwin, 2005, pp. 354-355). In times of emergencies, some societies have been willing to sacrifice personal liberty in the name of security.

With this in mind, please answer the following questions. Are the objectives of ensuring civil liberties and maintaining this domestic security opposing concepts? What are some conditions that contribute to a favorable environment for decreasing civil liberties while increasing domestic security? Conversely, what are the conditions that prompt calls for increased civil liberties and decreased domestic security efforts?

As you craft your response, please ensure that you explicitly state your stance on which of these concepts supersedes the other and why.

Textbook
White, J. Terrorism and Homeland Security Wadsworth Cengage Learning; 9th edition.
ISBN-13: 978-1305633773

Assigned Readings:

• Chapter Fourteen – Organizing Homeland Security
• Chapter Fifteen – Homeland Security and Constitutional Issues
• Chapter Sixteen – Law Enforcement, Homeland Security, and the Future