Quandary 1
Domestic terrorists are defined as terrorist who are residents of a country who carry out
terrorist plots and activities within that same country. Within the United States, majority of the
terrorist activity comes from domestic terrorism groups rather than foreign terrorist groups
(Kilroy, 2008). Focusing on domestic terrorism is just as important as foreign terrorism. At times,
I feel there is more focus on foreign terrorism than domestic terrorism. Domestic terrorism is just
as dangerous. The perception of foreign terrorism really changed after 9/11. The magnitude of
that event will forever be etched in the history. Usually with extreme cases such as 9/11, a tunnel
vision focus is created. There is more to domestic terrorism than jihadists. For example, look at
the sovereign citizen extremist or other ideological terrorist groups; ELF and ALF. “It is
important to realize sovereign citizens’ tactics to harass and intimidate law enforcement, court,
and government officials, as well as financial institution employees” (FBI, 2011). This is not to
say domestic jihadist forms of terrorism are less important, but other forms should be equally
recognized to be just as dangerous.
The attacks just within the recent years have made the current domestic terrorism threat
level concerning. Just within the past couple of years, domestic terrorist acts have become more
frequent or at least recognized more within the media creating a psychological effect amongst the
public; Las Vegas shooting, Pulse shooting, Charlottesville rally killing, even the most recent
Waffle House shooting. Just talk to anyone these days and they mention the fear of going to
concerts, out to eat, to the mall, to almost any public facility or gathering. There is a sense of
fear. Last year, a bill was passed to dedicate more focus on domestic terrorism; Domestic
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2017. I believe the passing of this bill says a lot about the status of
domestic terrorism. The United States has a very diverse population when compared to other
countries. This mean our domestic terrorism groups are diverse as well. The diversity of all the
various domestic terrorism groups is something unique to the United States. Domestic terrorism
can be a threat to a nation and what that nation stands for. It can lead to the fall of that nation. “If
a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand” (Mark 3:25, NIV).
In some respects, I do believe religious types of terrorism or more dangerous as to other
types of terrorism because they are acting in in the name of a deity and are not bound by earthly
constraints (Kilroy, 2008). To them, there is no higher moral act than acting in the name of God,
and that can be very deadly when compared to other terrorist acts.
Quandary 2
The use of meta data collection for intelligence purposes serves as a double edge sword.
In one way it is beneficial, in another way it can very easily violate civil liberties. It all depends
on the given situation. Meta data is still new in comparison to other forms of intelligence
collection. Meta data has become especially controversial since the leaks led by Edward
Snowden. The purpose of the meta data program was to collect information related to foreign
intelligence and counterterrorism efforts (Donohue, 2014). I do not agree with the collection of
meta data when it is used in violation of civil liberties, because that goes against the foundations
of this country.
Human intelligence is very important. Without human intelligence, there would be an
abundance of unanswered questions and would create a high risk for attacks. Human intelligence
provides intelligence that other forms of collection cannot. “A satellite-based camera or even a
drone cannot look into a tent to see who is inside or determine the plans or intentions of an
adversary” (Ramsay & Kiltz, 2014, p. 197). This is one of the reasons I am a proponent for
human intelligence, because provides invaluable intelligence. The gathering of human
intelligence is more hazardous than other forms of collection, yet it provides the most useful
information. However, there are times when the information gathered turned out to be false,
which can put a damper on the intelligence situation. Obtaining credible intelligence is key to
successful counterterrorism measures. At times, obtaining credible information is done through
captured sources and when conducted properly, I am a proponent of this as well. There are times
when retrieving information from captured sources is the best route to obtain credible
information. Although, it truly depends on the method of interrogation on whether credible
information is retrieved. After 9/11, enhanced interrogation techniques were used and in some
instances it caused an adversary effect and the opportunity of gaining credible information was
lost. HUMINT can provide credible information in the name of national security but it must be
done correctly to preserve that information.
References:
Donohue, L. K. (2014). Bulk meta data collection: Statutory and constitutional considerations.
Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 37(3), 757-900.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2011, September 1). Sovereign citizens: A growing domestic
threat to law enforcement. Retrieved from
https://leb.fbi.gov/articles/featured-articles/sovereign-citizens-a-growing-domestic-threat-
to-law-enforcement
Kilroy, R. J. (2008). Threats to homeland security: An all hazards perspective. Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley.
Ramsey, J. D., & Kiltz, L. (2014). Critical issues in homeland security: A casebook. Boulder,
CO: Westview.
Thank you for your post Tina. I agree with you, communicating makes the world of a
difference in the intelligence world, federal agencies, and even with local and state governments.
As you stated, it creates for a more stable government. In regards to human intelligence, you are
so right, it is only good when it is reliable and credible. In regards to interrogation methods,
specifically in gathering HUMINT, coercive interrogation methods can be counterproductive at
times. Although I do agree with you, terrorists should not be handles with kid gloves. It is
dangerous to have a soft approach when dealing with individuals who have no mercy.
Knowledge and studying on interrogation methods will only benefit the future in obtaining
reliable and credible information. Unfortunately, in the research community, analytical and
linguistic support have been largely ignored (Russano, Narchet, & Kleinman, 2014). To improve
interrogation practices, this research is necessary. Knowledge and further research in this subject
is beneficial to national security. “Let the wise hear and increase in learning, and the one who
understands obtain guidance” (Proverbs, 1:5, ESV).
Reference:
Russano, M. B., Narchetm, F. M., & Kleinman, S. M. (2014). Analysts, interpreters, and
intelligence interrogations: Perceptions and insights. Applied Cognitive Psychology,
28(6), 829-946. doi: 10.1002/acp.3070
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
