Panel propose commission on homegrown terror

[flashl]

Panel would target homegrown terror

A commission proposed by key senators would study the emergence of homegrown terrorists and how U.S. citizens become radicalized through ideologies to commit acts of violence.

The National Commission on the Prevention of Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism is the brainchild of Sen. Joe Lieberman, Connecticut independent and chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, the ranking Republican member.

"The homeland security committee's extensive and ongoing investigation into homegrown terrorism has confirmed to our committee that this is a real and growing threat to our nation's security," Miss Collins said.

"The attacks in London and Madrid, as well as the recent thwarted attacks in the U.S., were the work of homegrown terrorists inspired by, but not directly linked, to al Qaeda," Miss Collins said. "But we do not yet fully understand what inspires someone to become a violent terrorist.

"If we have a better understanding of the origins of violent extremist behavior, we can disrupt terrorist plans."

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and others in the intelligence community have warned the committee that homegrown terrorism is a significant threat.

A bipartisan commission would provide "a better understanding of the radicalization process that leads to terrorist attacks, and ways that we can work to help prevent terror attacks before they occur," Miss Collins said.

The commission would examine how ideology can cause radicalization leading to violence and then report its findings and recommendations to the president and Congress.

William R. Knocke, Homeland Security spokesman, said the department is devoting a significant amount of focus to the phenomenon of radicalization of homegrown terrorists.

"We're encouraging academic work in the area, engaging with American Arab and Muslim communities and learning from international colleagues," Mr. Knocke said. "Homegrown threats tend to be low-signature, often difficult to detect and will likely be uncovered by local law enforcement. That only reinforces the value of fusion centers. We're supporting their development with funding and we're deploying analysts to dozens of centers around the country."

The lawmakers hope to create the bipartisan commission through legislation next year. The House version was authored by Rep. Jane Harman, California Democrat and chairman of the House Homeland Security subcommittee on intelligence, information sharing and terrorism risk assessment. The bill passed Oct. 23 by a 404-6 vote.

Read FUll Text

Let's see ... homegrown as in the Liberty 7 or the new homeless after foreclosure?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. "The brainchild of Joe Lieberman."

That tells me pretty much what I need to know.

[K Gardner]

2. This has been discussed here several times, but here is my question: Is some columnist

just scratching around for something to print on Christmas Day.. or has this thing actually been through whatever it needs to go through to be one step closer to going up for a vote? If someone can figure out if this is old news rehashed or something new, I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

[flashl]

3. The bill passed Oct. 23 by a 404-6 vote

[K Gardner]

4. Right, I knew that. And it's been published and discussed here since

numerous times. Just trying to figure out why it's a news item again on Dec 25. Nevermind, I'm probably confused again :-)

[warren pease]

5. "That only reinforces the value of fusion centers." What the hell??

Fusion centers are a new one on me, although research reveals they've been around since 2001 and have been popping up like mushrooms since 2003. Here's a conventional happy talk description from a 2006 article in the Washington Post:

The emerging "network of networks" marks a new era of opportunity for law enforcement, according to U.S. officials and homeland security experts. Police are hungry for federal intelligence in an age of homegrown terrorism and more sophisticated crime. For their part, federal law enforcement officials could benefit from a potential army of tipsters -- the 700,000 local and state police officers across the country, as well as private security guards and others being courted by the centers.

A "new era of opportunity" in the fight against homegrown terrorism (which, loosely translated means, um, this post). Heartwarming, eh? Fifty-eight of these domestic spying havens are supposed to be operational by the end of next year, at least one in every state.


A more jaundiced view of these Stasi-like operations comes from a June 2007 report from Spotlight on Surveillance.

Such a domestic surveillance system invites comparison to the FBI’s Counter Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO), in which the agency abused its investigatory powers to harass and disrupt political opponents. The FBI’s own documents show that the agency engaged in extensive surveillance and infiltration of political groups in the 1950s and 60s in order to disrupt a broad range of legitimate First Amendment activity. FBI agents probed groups that were suspected of having a Communist ideology. Individuals who had engaged in no criminal wrongdoing were investigated and arrested. The FBI built dossiers on the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., the National Organization for Women (NOW), environmental advocates, the American Indian Movement.

Here's what the ACLU has to say about them, excerpted from a blog post announcing a report they've compiled on these latest assaults on privacy.

Our report details what we do know about Fusion Centers so far: they often collect more information than they legitimately need for law enforcement, they exist in a legal and regulatory “wild west,” and they are engaging in dubious and invasive practices like data mining, which has been shown to be of limited application to counterterrorism.

Moreover, the Fusion Centers represent one piece of a larger drift toward a surveillance society, where all levels of government and private industry collude to watch our every move, record our every communication, and monitor our every transaction. The barriers to this new reality are no longer technological — whether we maintain a free society is now a question of our values, and how hard we’re willing to fight for them.

From an article written in support of these abominations comes this marvelous revelation:

“The private sector’s role is to act as the source of vulnerability information,” Rattner said.

The private sector is asked to communicate anything that may be deemed as unnatural behavior. The next terrorist can walk through your company’s doors and give clear clues to their intentions, but remain largely unrecognized.

And when even End Times Prophesy News is concerned, you know you're in deep shit.

But some fear that fusion centers such as MNJAC could end up sharing the wrong kind of information for the wrong reasons. According to a recent Congressional Research Service report, "The concern is to what extent, if at all, First Amendment protected activities may be jeopardized by fusion center activities." With the Republican National Convention coming to Minnesota next year, some legislators say they don't know enough about MNJAC and want to ensure that it won't be used to spy on protest groups without just cause.

Spying on protest groups without just cause? C'mon, Rapture Loons. This is America, not some Iron Curtain surveillance state you're talking about.

There's lots more info on fusion centers out there, but the above kind of captures the essence.


wp