1-8-2017
APUS Intl: 500
From: Miss. Bayo Elizabeth Cary, AA, BA, MLIS
Intelligence Officer In Training
APUS: 2nd Master’s Degree
Response: Counter Terror After 9/11 Within the US
Focus Group Online Discussion
Assignment Due Week 1
Response Follows:
In
regards to counterterrorism, in the US, in response to: 9/11-one major problem,
has to do primarily, with US regulations, and permissions, about: identification,
of terrorists, who live in the US, and/or, who have been naturalized, as: US
citizens (Lowenthal and Clark 2016, 11). In the United States, we have certain
laws and prohibitions, to protect American citizens, from un-due: surveillance
and harassments-which, prohibits US intelligence agents, and severely limits
the ability of US intelligence. Terrorists, domestic or not, need to be: tracked,
followed, and their activities recorded, regardless of citizenship.
There are terrorists, which are US
citizens, and domestic to the US. Although it is obvious to many, and, from my
own intelligence information collection along the West Coast of the
US-specifically: Seattle, WA-I can honestly substantiate: “there are in fact
active terrorist cells-who, supported the 9/11: disaster and attacks, and, who
admit to guilt, with impunity. Terrorist living along the West Coast of the US,
falsely believe, that with US laws protecting American citizens, that they
cannot be: implemented, accused/prosecuted/judged, or brought to trial-anywhere
in the world.” Instead, of writing and talking about the real threat, of: “home-grown
terrorism”-which is not legally allowed, US intelligence professionals, deflect
the conversation, to a safer, and legally allowable topic, such as:
“International terrorism,” and how it affects the US-which, is only half, of
the true story:
The vast majority of
terrorism studies are predicated on, or at the very least, take for granted, the
notion that terrorism represents one of the main threats facing states today. This
is certainly the case with several of the books under review here (see
Bar,2006;Nesi,2006; Sloan,2006).Some terrorism scholars go so far as to suggest
that terrorism is the premier international security threat today
(Sageman,2004,p.vii),and that it threatens the existence of the entire
international system (Mendelsohn, 2005, p. 45). (Jackson 2009, 174)
It is too difficult, for: FBI, CIA, and
other secret service intelligence agencies, to deal with domestic terrorism,
with “counterterror” efforts-or in any other ways, while, the US government, is
actively legally prohibiting a conversation, by US intelligence professionals,
about how-US citizens, contribute to domestic terror (Lowenthal and Clark,
2016, 11). In order to resolve, a serious problem, with usable intelligence
tactics, such as: “counterterrorism,” the problem situation, needs to be
approachable, by at least a legal discussion. Because, the US prohibits
conversation, by US intelligence, about our: “domestic citizen active terror
cells”- a popular conversation, about: “religious terrorism,” has become the
foremost shared: “headlining news” and information-by US media, etc. instead:
Predicated on the
popular notion of ‘religious terrorism’ first articulated by David Rapoport
(1984) and galvanised by the identities of the 11 September 2001 attackers and
the massive media coverage given to al-Qa’eda, an extremely large literature on
‘Islamic terrorism’ has developed in the past six years (Jackson, 2007a).
(Jackson 2009, 177)
It was presumed-and by many, that the new,
post-911, anti-terrorism: rules, laws, and regulations, that the George W. Bush
Administration, signed into place, would in many ways, loosen the constraints,
restricting open discussions, regarding the: epistemology, and existence, of
domestic terror, within the US. I think, the George W. Bush Administration,
were sincere in their efforts, to begin the employment of: “counterterrorism,” in
the US-against domestic terrorists, by signing: “The Patriot Act:” http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/george-w-bush-signs-the-patriot-act
(A and E Networks, History Channel Online Oct.
26, 2001):
The
USA PATRIOT Act, as it is officially known, is an acronym for “Uniting and
Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and
Obstruct Terrorism.” Bush hoped the bipartisan legislation would empower law
enforcement and intelligence agencies to prevent future terrorist attacks on
American soil. (A and E Networks, History Channel Online Oct. 26, 2001)
However, there are no
indications, that anything George W. Bush, signed into place, after 9/11- to
prevent a second domestic terror attack, within the US, has benefited the US-in
anyways at all-including, new Gitmo “prisoner of war” legislation. In my
opinion, not being able to discuss, the serious problems related to: 911, and
domestic terror within the US-is a major part of the problem, and, most likely,
the primary reason why, effective: “counterterrorism” measures, have not been domestically
applied.
References
A and E Networks. Oct. 26, 2001. “George
W. Bush Signs The US Patriot Act.”
History Channel Online.
Accessed January 8, 2017. http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/george-w-bush-signs-the-patriot-act
Jackson, Richard. 2009. “The Study of
Terrorism after 11 September 2001: Problems,
Challenges and Future
Developments.” Political Studies Review.
vol. 7: 171-184.
Lowenthal, Mark M. and, Clark, Robert M.
2016. The 5 Disciplines of Intelligence
Collection.
CQ Press, an Imprint
of SAGE Publications, Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment