Intelligence Reform And Terrorism Case Study

The National Foreign Intelligence Program prevents foreign espionage with investigating foreign cases within the U.S. borders. Also the Intelligence Program is involved with threats, weapons in mass destruction, including the nation’s critical infrastructures such as communications, banking systems, and transportation systems.

The various things the congress must insure are being handled properly are the quality of analysis, the legality of actions, operations and making sure the needs of policymakers are met. The first method is the use of the executive branch to monitor covert action and espionage. The head of the executive branch is The President himself. The President also has the power to appoint a commission to assess intelligence topics. One of the Presidents go to is the “Gang of Eight” (made up of the Senate and House Majority and Minority Leaders, and the Chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees). The use of the “Gang of Eight” allows the president to notify only them instead of the entire congressional committee. The President also has a committee known as the President’s Intelligence advisory Board. They are used to initiate analysis activities and investigations the President deems

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 devastated the United States people. As they mourned over the deaths caused by the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York City, Americans began looking for a way to prevent anything like this from happening again. Consequently, an act known as the USA PATRIOT act was passed by Congress. This act opened up many doors previously closed to law enforcement and intelligence agencies. With these new opportunities available to them, they have the capability to obtain information about specific individuals believed to be involved in terrorist activities and organizations. Very beneficial to the United States, the Patriot Act provides easier access for different government law enforcement agencies to share information, allows government agencies investigative tools that non-terrorist crimes already use, and helps to dismantle the terrorist financial network. Although many people claim that the Patriot Act violates the United States Constitution and the freedoms of the American people, it contains many elaborate safeguards to fight against such abuse.

In the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, Congress sprang into action. Within a month, U.S. lawmakers overwhelmingly approved the USA Patriot Act of 2001, giving law enforcement and intelligence agent’s broader authority to fight terrorists operating in the United States.

The position of Director of National Intelligence (DNI) was created under the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA). The position of DNI replaced the Director of the Central Intelligence (DCI) as the senior intelligence official, head of the intelligence community’s 16 agencies, and principal intelligence advisor to the President of the United States (POTUS) and the National Security Council (NSC). The IRTPA of 2004, also established the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) as an independent agency to assist the DNI. The ODNI 's goal is to effectively integrate foreign, military and domestic intelligence in defense of the homeland and of United States interests abroad.

“Prior to September 11th intelligence agencies and law enforcement failed to communicate with each other about terrorist hijackers… This lack of communications had its roots deep in the culture of government… Fortunately, in the Patriot Act, congress began to tear down the walls that cut off communication between intelligence and law enforcement officials” (Gerdes 36)

The dreadful and terrifying events of September 11 necessitated and increased government 's responsibility to take effective measures for preserving lives of the people and ensuring independence of the society. In this context, the Senate, the House of Representatives, and President Bush pledged to respond within boundaries set by the Constitution confronting and preventing terrorist attacks. Through Patriot Act, the law enforcement agencies of the Untied States are given the most effective tools to combat terrorists having intentions or plans to attack the nation. It is, in fact, a significant weapon for nation 's fight against terror. Major purpose of the Patriot Act is to break wall of regulatory and legal polices existing between the law enforcement agencies and intelligence to share essential as well as related information.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Central Intelligence Agency both have a large part in enforcing and implementing the legislation because of their functions being so much related to the legislation. The legislation as a whole plays a larger part in the way that the agencies have implemented the legislation and their responses to more controversial parts of the legislation such as the “Authority for Delaying Notice of the Execution of a Warrant” found in section 213 of the Patriot Act of 2001 (Patriot Act of 2001). The Patriot Act of 2001 plays a major role in the numerous arenas of the two agencies because of the implementation as well as the suggested judicial implications of the law. The Patriot Act of 2001 as states in the article issued by the Department of Justice, “Patriot Act of

Intelligence analysts in the IC, DHS, and FBI are tasked with the primary responsibility of developing threat assessments against the United States and national critical infrastructure. The

After the 2001 September 11th attacks on the world trade center the nations homeland security policies had to be reinforced. The awkwardly titled so as to unite and Strengthening America Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act, or USAPA) presented a plenty of administrative changes which altogether expanded the reconnaissance and investigative forces of law authorization organizations in the United States. The Act did not, in any case, accommodate the arrangement of balanced governance that generally protects common freedoms despite such enactment. Authoritative recommendations in light of the terrorist assaults of September 11, 2001 were presented not exactly a week after the assaults. President Bush marked the last bill, the USA PATRIOT Act, into law on October 26, 2001. Despite the fact that the Act made critical corrections to more than 15 imperative statutes, it was presented with awesome flurry and went with little verbal confrontation, and without a House, Senate, or meeting report. Therefore, it needs foundation authoritative history that regularly reflectively gives important statutory understanding. The Act was a trade off form of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 (ATA), an expansive authoritative bundle planned to fortify the country 's protection against terrorism. The ATA contained a few procurements incomprehensibly growing the power of law authorization and knowledge organizations to screen private

The USA Patriot Act, a backronym for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act, is a vital weapon in fighting terrorism. The basis of the act is to allow law enforcement and intelligence authorities’ unprecedented domestic authority, and the tools already available to wield that authority, in order to thwart plots against the United States and facilitate information sharing among government agencies involving terrorism and foreign intelligence related activities. As a swift reaction of our executive and legislative branches in response to the deadly terrorist attacks that occurred on 9/11, the Patriot Act expanded intelligence gathering capabilities by granting authority

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,

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

Intelligence is a dependable instrument of its own to generate information that establishes the base of National Security in the United States. Intelligence has been used since the beginning of history to provide information on enemy threats and how to prevent a mass disasters. It has been used for wars, national security, military tactics, etc. Intelligence has been available since the revolutionary war and our first president George Washington and other leaders of the world have used intelligence to protect their countries. Intelligence is the dominant and the backbone of homeland Security and it is ceaseless learning about it. National Intelligence agents train tirelessly to fight and create

intelligence, he briefs the President, has authority to develop the budget for the national intelligence effort and manage appropriations made by Congress, and, to some extent, can transfer personnel and funds from one agency to another.3 I believe that the creation of the DNI position had been on the table for a few years, but the intelligence failures of communication between the agencies and being able to connect the dots to see the events leading up to 9/11 was the last drop in the bucket. I do not think that this organization has worked out all there kinks along with the other organizations in the Intelligence Community completely being open with them, however, I do feel that their roles and placement in the chain is a much needed