National Security Letters (Nls)

While the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is one, centralized agency, securing the homeland involves the cooperation and collaboration of many, different agencies and organizations ranging from local law enforcement to national agencies such as the NSA, CIA, and FBI. Each of these agencies contributes to the development of homeland security intelligence. By carefully analyzing and commenting on the objectives, tasks, strengths, weaknesses, and roles of each agency, a larger picture emerges regarding the capabilities and limitation of intelligence in supporting homeland security efforts.

a. In cases when the user has consented to content searching or monitoring of communications or data for personnel misconduct, law enforcement, or counterintelligence investigative searching, (i.e., for all communications and data other than privileged communications or data that are related to personal representation or services by attorneys, psychotherapists, or clergy, and their assistants), the U.S. Government may, solely at its discretion and in accordance with DoD policy, elect to apply a privilege or other restriction on the U.S. Government's otherwise-authorized use or disclosure of such information.

Federal supervision of electronics has been prevalent since the 60's, and has become increasingly intrusive with laws such as the ECPA and USA PATRIOT Acts. These laws authorized the legal surveillance of foreigners, and Americans abroad. However, with the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act requiring communication companies to provide backdoors for government use, agencies such as the National Security Agency have abused their powers in secrecy. More recently, Edward J. Snowden released NSA files that revealed the agency to illicitly engage in unwarranted surveillance of Americans both abroad and at home. (Introduction to Domestic Surveillance: Current Controversies)

National Security Agency (NSA) regulations and tactics’ is an invasion of privacy, an infringement on the Constitutional Amendments, and fails to keep the private or confidential data of Americans safe from hackers.

Moreover, the Patriot Act promotes information sharing among federal, state, and local agencies so that the process of information can be easier, which will hep increase the quality of intelligence products (Department of Justice, n.d.). The Patriot Act also allows federal agents to have a more active role in investigating cybercrimes that are usually carried out by terrorists and it also requires financial institution to report to federal authorities suspicious transactions that could be linked with money laundering as well as money counterfeit crimes (ACLU, 2017) (Congressional Digest, 2004). Although the Patriot Act helps reduce the risk of terrorist attacks and other crimes, it does have an impact on the privacy of law abiding citizens that have nothing to do with terrorism. For example, under the Patriot Act federal agents can easily

To understand why the Patriot Act is a threat to society and freedom, one must understand the basics. First, the most powerful “Tool” under the Act is Title V or “Removing obstacles to investigating terrorism”. Under Title V, any Special Agent who is in charge of a bureau field office of the FBI can issue a National Security Letter, or a demand for information by the FBI which compels the recipient to release private data in relation to an individual who is only suspected of terrorism; no confirmed relationship. NSLs have existed for some time and previously the power to issue these demands were held only by the Director and Deputy Director of the FBI. Additionally, under the Patriot Act, the scope of the NSLs power was made more broad, permitting all sorts of private data to be gathered in secret, such as phone records, computer access records, credit history and banking records. NSLs require no judicial review or probable cause and even contain a clause which forbids the recipient from ever disclosing the letter’s existence; a “gag order”.

The tragic events of September 11th, 2001 showed the vulnerabilities of this country as a whole, reflecting the lack of attention this nation gave to terrorism. Following September 11th, it was clear that drastic preventative measures needed to be taken in order to avoid reoccurrence of a destructive and deadly act of terrorism (Simon, 2009). As a response to the attacks, The Patriot Act was passed in October of 2001 in order to give federal agencies a substantial increase in power in accessing, monitoring, and examining records and citizens who have been identified as, or could potentially be, risks to this country. This act also allowed federal agents to single out and watch potential individuals labeled as terrorists without evidence linking them to an actual terrorist organization, as well as allowing for an increase in wiretapping phones of potential suspects (Banks, 2010).

Before the Obama Administration was in charge of secretly collecting phone records and accessed the internet activity of many, there was the Bush Administration. In late 2005, President George W. Bush authorized the National Security Agency. With this organization, they are able to monitor phone calls and emails without court permission. Just a year later, public support for the

The article I chose was the “The Myth of the National Criminal Database” and “National Crime Information Center”. I knew that the FBI had some large amounts of information, but never knew they worked with other branches of law enforcement that actively. The National Crime Information Center, or NCIC was created mainly to share important information to the criminal justice professionals around the country. Currently there have been over 12 million transactions of files every day in the NCIC system. When the files are put in the system than its store in a data system. It ensures that the NCIC system is safe. The people who are part of the justice system can only access the system. The only way they are going to access the system is by beginning

According to Pizzo (2015), the most criticized was the act’s section 215 of Title II, which gave the FBI access to the personal records of US citizens, including medical, financial, telephone, and library records. To obtain records, the FBI would issue a national security letter (NSL), which demanded the handover of relevant communication records and included a gag order to preemptively prohibit discussing the receipt of the NSL and challenging the NSL in court. The ACLU charged that section 215 and its gag order violated the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.

Rationale: This source has shown the document from the DHS on the subcommittee on intelligence, terrorism risk assessment, and information sharing between various different agencies. This

-In regard to what information the organization should focus on and sources are deemed acceptable, as long as researchers choose to observe popular site like Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, LinkedIn, etc. and avoid other sites or taking actions that are considered inappropriate by policy standards most investigators are free to collect whatever data they feel is important as there are usually little to no formal procedure to follow. The only issue that may arise is collecting data from sites that promote extremely controversial ideologies or cover taboo subjects as those sites generally attract the kind of criminals that are destined to end up in federal prison. Some department chairs will deny any investigation towards those sites as they feel it is beyond their capabilities and that would rather not gamble with the department’s reputation and bring unwanted scrutiny by the media.

Intelligence collection and apprehension of criminals have occurred for many years; however, with the exception of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, these actions were performed by different organizations. Nonetheless, roles and responsibilities have changed since the attacks on September 11, 2001. Intelligence-led policing and the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing program were incorporated, and fusion centers were established to help gather intelligence from different levels of the government. Although law enforcement at the local, state, and tribal levels aid in intelligence collection, it is important to ensure that intelligence gathered to protect national security and law enforcement

Intelligence is one of the first lines of defense used by the United States to protect the Country against both foreign and domestic threats (Johnson, 2010). There are many ways and methods of intelligence collections employed by the intelligence community such as “spies, eavesdropping, technical sources, and openly available materials” etc (Clark, 2013). Method used also depends on many factors such as available resources, time, agency involved, and intelligence collection source. U.S Intelligence agencies use different collection and analytical method that suit their collection function, structure and pro¬cess. For example, DNI/OSC relies on open source (OSINT), CIA uses human intelligence (HUMINT) tactic, DIA uses measurements and signatures intelligence (MASINT), NSA employs signals intelligence (SIGINT), and NGA utilizes imagery intelligence (IMINT) techniques for their intelligence collections (Clark, 2013).

According to Federal Bureau of Investigation (2011) after the 9/11 attacks, “significant advances have been made in clarifying and rectifying intelligence gaps and requirements through the formation of liaison and working relationships with other U.S. intelligence community agencies, foreign partners, the private sector, and academia”. For instance, since 2001, FBI CI program has resulted in total arrests of 249, of which 46 of them were linked to espionage. CI has