Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Fusion Centers

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    I don't know barbaro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    on pacific ocean, south america
    Posts
    21,406

    Fusion Centers

    When I first read and saw investigative journalists report on fusion centers I did not really believe it was true. I suppose I didn't want to believe these things existed. Secretive, strange,. un-American and of course inaccurate

    There is a fusion center in Seattle. It collects information and data on all kinds of citizens. Sometimes supporters of Ron Paul find out they have data collected on them.

    Not only is this Orwellian but also inefficient Big Brother.

    Homeland Security 'fusion' centers spy on citizens, produce 'shoddy' work,
    By Michael Isikoff

    NBC News
    The Department of Homeland Security has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on a network of 77 so-called “fusion” intelligence centers that have collected personal information on some U.S. citizens — including detailing the “reading habits” of American Muslims — while producing “shoddy” reports and making no contribution to thwarting any terrorist plots, a new Senate report states.

    The “ fusion centers,” created under President George W. Bush and expanded under President Barack Obama, consist of special teams of federal , state and local officials collecting and analyzing intelligence on suspicious activities throughout the country. They have been hailed by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano as “one of the centerpieces” of the nation’s counterterrorism efforts.
    Advertise | AdChoices


    But a bipartisan report by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released Tuesday concludes that the centers “often produced irrelevant” and "useless” intelligence reports. “There were times when it was, ‘What a bunch of crap is coming through,’” one senior Homeland Security official is quoted as saying .
    Entire: Homeland Security 'fusion' centers spy on citizens, produce 'shoddy' work, report says - Open Channel
    ............

  2. #2
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Online
    09-05-2021 @ 03:25 AM
    Posts
    33,644
    Quote Originally Posted by barbaro
    When I first read and saw investigative journalists report on fusion centers I did not really believe it was true. I suppose I didn't want to believe these things existed. Secretive, strange,. un-American
    Un American ?

    The Yanks were using surveillance cameras in 1962

  3. #3
    I'm in Jail

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Online
    23-04-2025 @ 02:55 PM
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    13,986

    Intelligence effort named US citizens, not terrorists

    WASHINGTON (AP) — A multibillion-dollar information-sharing program created in the aftermath of 9/11 has improperly collected information about innocent Americans and produced little valuable intelligence on terrorism, a Senate report concludes. It portrays an effort that ballooned far beyond anyone's ability to control.
    What began as an attempt to put local, state and federal officials in the same room analyzing the same intelligence has instead cost huge amounts of money for data-mining software, flat screen televisions and, in Arizona, two fully equipped Chevrolet Tahoes that are used for commuting, investigators found.
    The lengthy, bipartisan report is a scathing evaluation of what the Department of Homeland Security has held up as a crown jewel of its security efforts. The report underscores a reality of post-9/11 Washington: National security programs tend to grow, never shrink, even when their money and manpower far surpass the actual subject of terrorism. Much of this money went for ordinary local crime-fighting.
    Disagreeing with the critical conclusions of the report, Homeland Security says it is outdated, inaccurate and too focused on information produced by the program, ignoring benefits to local governments from their involvement with federal intelligence officials.
    Because of a convoluted grants process set up by Congress, Homeland Security officials don't know how much they have spent in their decade-long effort to set up so-called fusion centers in every state. Government estimates range from less than $300 million to $1.4 billion in federal money, plus much more invested by state and local governments. Federal funding is pegged at about 20 percent to 30 percent.
    Despite that, Congress is unlikely to pull the plug. That's because, whether or not it stops terrorists, the program means politically important money for state and local governments.
    A Senate Homeland Security subcommittee reviewed more than 600 unclassified reports over a one-year period and concluded that most had nothing to do with terrorism. The panel's chairman is Democrat Carl Levin of Michigan, the ranking Republican Tom Coburn of Oklahoma.
    "The subcommittee investigation could identify no reporting which uncovered a terrorist threat, nor could it identify a contribution such fusion center reporting made to disrupt an active terrorist plot," the report said.
    When fusion centers did address terrorism, they sometimes did so in ways that infringed on civil liberties. The centers have made headlines for circulating information about Ron Paul supporters, the ACLU, activists on both sides of the abortion debate, war protesters and advocates of gun rights.
    One fusion center cited in the Senate investigation wrote a report about a Muslim community group's list of book recommendations. Others discussed American citizens speaking at mosques or talking to Muslim groups about parenting.
    No evidence of criminal activity was contained in those reports. The government did not circulate them, but it kept them on government computers. The federal government is prohibited from storing information about First Amendment activities not related to crimes.
    "It was not clear why, if DHS had determined that the reports were improper to disseminate, the reports were proper to store indefinitely," the report said.
    Homeland Security Department spokesman Matthew Chandler called the report "out of date, inaccurate and misleading." He said that it focused entirely on information being produced by fusion centers and did not consider the benefit the involved officials got receiving intelligence from the federal government.
    The report is as much an indictment of Congress as it is the Homeland Security Department. In setting up the department, lawmakers wanted their states to decide what to spend the money on. Time and again, that setup has meant the federal government has no way to know how its security money is being spent.
    Inside Homeland Security, officials have long known there were problems with the reports coming out of fusion centers, the report shows.
    "You would have some guys, the information you'd see from them, you'd scratch your head and say, 'What planet are you from?'" an unidentified Homeland Security official told Congress.
    Until this year, the federal reports officers received five days of training and were never tested or graded afterward, the report said.
    States have had criminal analysis centers for years. But the story of fusion centers began in the frenzied aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
    The 9/11 Commission urged better collaboration among government agencies. As officials realized that a terrorism tip was as likely to come from a local police officer as the CIA, fusion centers became a hot topic.
    But putting people together to share intelligence proved complicated. Special phone and computer lines had to be installed. The people reading the reports needed background checks. Some information could only be read in secure areas, which meant construction projects.
    All of that cost money.
    Meanwhile, federal intelligence agencies were under orders from Congress to hire more analysts. That meant state and local agencies had to compete for smart counterterrorism thinkers. And federal training for local analysts wasn't an early priority.
    Though fusion centers receive money from the federal government, they are operated independently. Counterterrorism money started flowing to states in 2003. But it wasn't until late 2007 that the Bush administration told states how to run the centers.
    State officials soon realized there simply wasn't that much local terrorism-related intelligence. Terrorist attacks didn't happen often, but police faced drugs, guns and violent crime every day. Normal criminal information started moving through fusion centers.
    Under federal law, that was fine. When lawmakers enacted recommendations of the 9/11 Commission in 2007, they allowed fusion centers to study "criminal or terrorist activity." The law was co-sponsored by Sens. Susan Collins and Joe Lieberman, the driving forces behind the creation of Homeland Security.
    Five years later, Senate investigators found, terrorism is often a secondary focus.
    "Many fusion centers lacked either the capability or stated objective of contributing meaningfully to the federal counterterrorism mission," the Senate report said. "Many centers didn't consider counterterrorism an explicit part of their mission, and federal officials said some were simply not concerned with doing counterterrorism work."
    When Janet Napolitano became Homeland Security secretary in 2009, the former Arizona governor embraced the idea that fusion centers should look beyond terrorism. Testifying before Congress that year, she distinguished fusion centers from the FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Forces that are the leading investigative and analytical arms of the domestic counterterrorism effort.
    "A JTTF is really focused on terrorism and terrorism-related investigations," she said. "Fusion centers are almost everything else."
    Congress, including the committee that authored the report, supports that notion. And though the report recommends the Senate reconsider the amount of money it spends on fusion centers, that seems unlikely.
    "Congress and two administrations have urged DHS to continue or even expand its support of fusion centers, without providing sufficient oversight to ensure the intelligence from fusion centers is commensurate with the level of federal investment," the report said.
    And following the release of the report, Homeland Security officials indicated their continued strong support for the program.


    Intelligence effort named citizens, not terrorists - Yahoo! News

  4. #4
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Online
    14-08-2015 @ 05:39 PM
    Location
    Ex-Pat Refugee in Thailand
    Posts
    9,579
    Quote Originally Posted by Latindancer
    WASHINGTON (AP) — A multibillion-dollar information-sharing program created in the aftermath of 9/11 has improperly collected information about innocent Americans and produced little valuable intelligence on terrorism, a Senate report concludes. It portrays an effort that ballooned far beyond anyone's ability to control.
    Absofukinglutly, shocking news. Glad I didn't have to read the entire cut and paste to get the full info.

  5. #5
    Thailand Expat
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    38,456
    The $50bn or so the federal government (ie taxpayer) is throwing at the DHS and affiliated activities in other departments is a modest percentage of the ridiculous amount of $931bn that the US gov't will spend on national security this year, of which $530bn is the Pentagon base budget.

    The reality is, China is not about to invade the USA, neither is Russia about to invade Europe. The strategic threats the US faces now are about as limited as they have been since 1945. The only real threats the US faces from a national security perspective are mainly asymmetric, localised, and small- and one of these is domestic terrorism, which can either be internationally or domestically sponsored.

    It is obviously political (or actual) suicide to say this in US politics, because the only one willing to talk about it is Ron Paul who, along with Bernie Sanders & Barney Frank, is a tolerated kook in Congress- he can say whatever he wants, and be compliantly downplayed by the media. I am sure there is a whole lot of inefficiency and waste in DHS spending, as there is in all national security spending except maybe Veterans Affairs.

    But, as the saying goes, security begins at home. I think that righteous criticism directed at the DHS should be about making it more efficient and less intrusive- ie 'better'- rather than slashing it's budget. The homeland security budget is certainly money better wasted than, say, this-


    US military bases in [west] Germany as of 2008.

    Anderson Barracks, Dexheim (will reopen)
    Artillery Kaserne, Garmisch-Partenkirchen
    Askren Manors Housing Area, Schweinfurt (scheduled to close 2015)
    Bamberg Local Training Area, Bamberg (scheduled to close 2015)
    Barton Barracks, Ansbach
    Benjamin Franklin Village, Mannheim (Scheduled to close December 2012)
    Bismarck Kaserne, Ansbach
    Bleidorn Housing Area, Ansbach
    Campbell Barracks, Heidelberg (Scheduled to close 2015)
    Gen. Lucius D. Clay Kaserne (formerly Wiesbaden Army Airfield, renamed June 14, 2012), Wiesbaden
    Coleman Barracks, Mannheim (Scheduled to close 2015)
    Conn Barracks, Schweinfurt (scheduled to close 2015)
    Dagger Complex, Darmstadt Training Center Griesheim
    Funari Barracks, Mannheim (Scheduled to close December 2012)
    Germersheim Army Depot, Germersheim
    Grafenwöhr Training Area, Grafenwöhr/Vilseck
    Hammonds Barracks, Mannheim
    Heidelberg Army Airfield, Heidelberg
    Hohenfels Training Area/Joint Multinational Readiness Center, Hohenfels (Upper Palatinate)
    Husterhoeh Kaserne, Pirmasens
    Kaiserslautern Military Community
    Katterbach Kaserne, Ansbach
    Kelley Barracks, Stuttgart
    Kleber Kaserne, Kaiserslautern Military Community
    Lampertheim Training Area, Lampertheim (Scheduled to close 2015)
    Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Landstuhl
    Ledward Barracks, Schweinfurt (scheduled to close 2015)
    Mark Twain Village, Heidelberg (Scheduled to close 2015)
    McCully Barracks, Wackernheim
    Miesau Army Depot, Miesau
    Nachrichten Kaserne, Heidelberg (Scheduled to close 2015)
    Oberdachstetten Storage Area, Ansbach
    Panzer Kaserne, Stuttgart
    Patch Barracks, Stuttgart
    Pulaski Barracks, Kaiserslautern
    Patrick Henry Village, Heidelberg (Scheduled to close late 2014)
    Patton Barracks, Heidelberg (Scheduled to close 2015)
    Rhein Ordnance Barracks, Kaiserslautern
    Robinson Barracks, Stuttgart
    Rose Barracks, Vilseck
    Rottershausen Storage Area, Schweinfurt
    Sembach Kaserne, Kaiserslautern
    Shipton Kaserne, Ansbach
    Smith Barracks, Baumholder
    Spinelli Barracks, Mannheim (Scheduled to close 2015)
    Storck Barracks, Illesheim
    Stuttgart Airport, Stuttgart
    Sullivan Barracks, Mannheim (Scheduled to close 2014)
    Tompkins Barracks, Schwetzingen (Scheduled to close 2015)
    Storage Station, Mainz-Kastel
    Warner Barracks, Bamberg (Scheduled to close 2015)
    USAG Wiesbaden Military Training Area, Mainz, Gonsenheim/Mombach
    USAG Wiesbaden Training Area, Mainz Finthen Airport
    USAG Wiesbaden Radar Station, Mainz Finthen Airport
    Urlas Housing and Shopping Complex, Ansbach (converted from Urlas Training Area in 2010-2011)
    Yorktown Housing Complex, Schweinfurt (scheduled to close 2015)

    The rationale behind the large number of closures is that the strategic functions of the bases, originally designed to serve as forward posts in any war against the Soviet Union, are no longer relevant since the end of the Cold War.
    List of United States Army installations in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    'Large' number of closures?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •