Home | Columns | Media Watch | Reports | Links | About Us | Contact

MEXIDATA . INFO
Column 020507 Brewer

Monday, February 5, 2007

Domestic Intelligence: Part of a Greater Strategy?

By Jerry Brewer

The paradoxical nature of “risk assessment,” as an

abstract truth, renders the decision-making process
difficult for a national leader. Further complicating
those efforts is the desire to politicize the intelligence
collection process.

The tendency to consciously or unconsciously ignore

intelligence demands or product contradictory to their
personal or political interests is critically detrimental to
national security interests and perfunctory in nature.

An exceptionally vigilant security and intelligence

system that is free of biases or misperceptions will most
generally result in accurate assessments. This
facilitation allows an unabated process and product to
expediently reach operational entities on a “need to
know basis” for appropriate action. In risk analysis any
impediment in this meticulous information flow has
possible disastrous consequences. We know that to be
fact from September 11, 2001, when 19 Middle Eastern
terrorists reigned death and destruction on us from our
skies.

The enemy had been preparing and operating with

absolute impunity from our own homeland. We had
been in the proverbial dark and shocked with the
realization that we could be destroyed from within. Our
amnesia is showing.

This nation must propagate an unbounded message of

solidarity and zero tolerance for threats against our
homeland. We must be united in our assumptions and
convictions. Our position must be to meet struggles
head on and prepare for challenges ahead that will
affect generations to follow. Determined enemies with
intense hatred for democracy require strategic decisions
and strong courage. Some of this comes with sacrifice.
We must not allow our enemies new safe-havens, or to
continue to spew their malignant ideologies.

To many, what has been referred to as “domestic

intelligence gathering” has resulted in a prolific — yet
uncertain — perception management. Perception
management is essentially to guard against propaganda
through which one will question the intelligence or
veracity of that product.

The self-negating prophecy of this form of psychological

dominance, and its exploitation and deception by
unconventional means, poses a clear danger to the
defense of a free nation.

Once again many civil liberty advocates, as well as

partisan politicians, are reportedly “troubled” by claims
that the Central Intelligence Agency and the Pentagon
are taking on domestic intelligence activities. Too, they
refer to this as “an overly expansive view of its
domestic role” limitations. They cite this as a
movement into “territory where historically they have
not been authorized or presumed to be operating.”

The facts are, according to U.S. government attorneys,

that for nearly 30 years there has been legal authority
for the CIA and Pentagon to gather “domestic records”
through “security letters.” Further, the provision is
strengthened by anti-terrorism law in response to 9/11,
known as the U.S. Patriot Act.

The records sought are of those suspected of terrorism

or espionage inside the United States, and of having
contact internationally with suspected terrorism
operatives or nations that pose a threat to our
homeland. These are not unjustified intrusions into
private lives, but rather a strategic and proactive tool
against radical extremists seeking sanctuary, free
movement and financing.

This form of contact domestically ranges from private

contractors profiting from sales of product and
technology to terrorists, to military and others selling
secrets that endanger the nation as a whole, our lives
and property. Many arrests and plots have been
thwarted by diligent intelligence efforts within their
collection capabilities and mandates. Threats against
the military and its installations have been major
concerns, and “force protection” is a critical concern,
both domestically and internationally.

Since 9/11 the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as the

lead agency on domestic counterterrorism, has issued
“thousands” of national security letters.

Domestic intelligence gathering should and must be

contained within the strict guidelines and interpretation
of legislative charters. What is proper and improper
must clearly be laid out, and violations swiftly
interdicted. With this strict interpretation and
adherence, perhaps the general existing mindset on the
domestic intelligence apparatus could be overhauled.
The blind hatred and desire to kill infidels by terrorists
would be hindered further by this united front at home.

Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recently

completed a visit with President Hugo Chavez in
Venezuela, his second visit there in five months. Too,
he visited left-leaning presidents Rafael Correa in
Ecuador, and Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, both of whom
were inaugurated in January. Ahmadinejad reported to
be there to “enhance Iran’s stature with governments
that distrust the United States.”

We have to just look to the south to see a number of

real threats.

——————————
Jerry Brewer, the Vice President of Criminal Justice
International Associates, a global risk mitigation firm
headquartered in Miami, Florida, is a guest columnist with
MexiData.info. He can be reached via e-mail at
Cjiaincusa@aol.com. jbrewer@cjiausa.org