Military/Law Enforcement Partnerships: A Growing Ball of Con-'Fusion'

On Thursday, the New York Times editorialized about a new kind of national security resource: so-called “fusion centers,” or joint anti-terrorism efforts between federal, state, regional, and local law enforcement agencies in which the military may also be playing a role. The Times worries that, with last week's disclosure that President Bush considered sending troops to Buffalo in 2002 to arrest members of a suspected terrorism cell, the wall that is supposed to separate the military from domestic law enforcement in this country is starting to crack.

As the Times points out, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 "generally prohibits the military from law enforcement activities within the United States." Yet earlier this year, the Army dispatched soldiers to patrol the streets of a small Alabama town after a man went on a shooting spree, seemingly crossing the line into domestic law enforcement.

For several years, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has been warning that military personnel are taking part in fusion centers. The ACLU is also concerned about the involvement of private data-mining companies. Allowing private contractors to gather and disseminate sensitive intelligence and law enforcement information poses significant privacy risks, to say nothing of the possibility that such contractors may be performing inherently government functions. Another troubling aspect is the cloak of secrecy under which fusion centers typically operate.

Wikileaks, the online whistleblower resource, recently posted a batch of documents suggesting that fusion centers may also be rife with conflicts of interest. POGO is unable to download this massive PDF file, but Wikileaks' summary says that the documents--part of a 1525-page confidential file--detail efforts by the Washington State police to privatize criminal intelligence through a fusion center called the Washington Joint Analytical Center (WAJAC), which is housed at the FBI's Seattle field office. The file appears to include pricing, proposals, contracts, and background check information on specific individuals seeking jobs at the center.

According to Wikileaks, resumes show that some applicants have traveled back and forth through the revolving door between the military and private industry, sometimes remaining in the same building while doing so. It seems that one applicant left the Army to work for the research and engineering firm SAIC at the same base. She then went on to work for another contractor before re-entering the Army.

POGO would sure love to take a look at these documents. If anyone has better luck downloading the file, we urge you to post your findings in the comments.

-- Neil Gordon

Comments

[Kenji Y.]

Way to go Mr. Gordon and POGO!

I don't know what Jeff Hamilton's problem is. This is a blog post, for god sake, not a doctoral dissertation. Citizen journalism - that's what blogs are for.

We have every reason to be afraid of these police/military fusion centers. Civil authority over law enforcement goes all the way back to this country's founding. Add in the private contractor element - companies like SAIC, Booz Allen, CACI - and you've got big problems. I haven't been able to look at the documents either, but if what wikileaks says is true, there's plenty to be concerned about. Remember, this is just one of many fusion centers around the country. This revolving door kind of stuff must go on all the time.

Keep up the great work!

[Jessica]

I haven't finished looking at the 1500+pg document, but I have some background context about the fusion cell concept that may interest some.

I read the intelligence manual regarding fusion cells and police intelligence operations when WL posted it in May. Since it's used in the US Army's Military Police School training, there is basic background information about the concepts discussed and it's fairly accessible. I have little doubt that these "fusion" operations are intently legal, but the whole concept seems an illiberal work-around. That is what I concluded when I read it, perhaps other's will not view it the same.

The manual can be downloaded from wikileaks site, but it appears I cannot paste a link in my comments (i assume?). The entry was on May 5, 2009: Spying on anti-war protesters: US Army Concept of Operations for Police Intelligence Operations, 4 Mar 2009. Hopefully you can find it by searching!

Hope it is helpful/of interest! :)

(The info James Lee's posted in his comment above is from this manual and the WL entry)

[msfreeh]

to view a partial list of crimes committed by FBI agents over 1500 pages long see
http://www.forums.signonsandiego.com/showthread.php?t=59139

to view a partial list of FBI agents arrested for pedophilia see
http://www.dallasnews.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3574

[James Lee]

From one of the linked docs (current policy):

A CONUS [Continental United States] based PIO [military Police Intelligence Operations] network that is integrated with local, county, regional, state and federal, law enforcement entities will ensure a federated approach to enable a unified effort for defense support to civil authorities...[including] data exchange...[and the] production of [travel] blacklists...
An [intelligence] fusion cell located within the garrison staff provides a unique service that can address the complexities of the threat to a military community and installation and be an asset to the garrison and local civilian community. It has the ability to work closely with multiple local, federal, and DoD agencies. It does not have constraints that are emplaced on MI [Military Intelligence] activities within the US, because it operates under the auspice and oversight of the police discipline and standards. At the garrison level, the fusion cell is static (non‐deploying) which provides a level of continuity that allows for in‐depth institutional knowledge of threat, physical and social environs, as well as long‐term relationships with local and federal law enforcement agencies. A garrison fusion cell can also be a flexible analytical cell that can grow to form focused, ad hoc, threat‐specific cells to address, prevent or react to a specific hazard.
Vignette: A Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) was preparing to move equipment to a port of embarkation (POE) for deployment. The shipment required the movement of 300 vehicles across eight law enforcement jurisdictions. Based on previous threat fusion expertise, the garrison’s force protection (FP) fusion cell was uniquely qualified to be the lead intelligence producer to support the movement. The fusion cell coordinated police information, intelligence and civilian security with over 22 local, federal, and DoD agencies. The fusion cell produced in‐depth analysis of the threat to the SBCT equipment and advised the SBCT and garrison commanders on protection. The coordinated effort gave law enforcement agencies the knowledge to identify and prevent disruptive actions by violent protesters. The operation was considered by Corps leadership to be a watershed event for in‐depth involvement of a garrison‐based FP fusion cell in support of unit deployments. Moreover, the Corps headquarters integrated the fusion cell into other operations where the G2 [military intelligence] is constrained by intelligence oversight rules, or there is a need for police information / intelligence assessments and analysis. A fusion cell is valuable when separate data streams, information sources, or other disparate information from multiple organizations must be combined and analyzed in a coherent process to present a common operational picture for a decision maker.

[Jeff Hamilton]

Wait, you actually wrote a blog and end it with "POGO would sure love to take a look at these documents. If anyone has better luck downloading the file, we urge you to post your findings in the comments." I agree with a lot of what POGO and Danielle Brian try to accomplish, but this really doesn't sit well. Let's chalk this up to a summer Friday and hope this is not a trend for the organization.

[Hasty]

While I think the issues of intelligence fusion cells, the outsourcing of intelligence and the encroaching military role in the realm of law enforcement are important ones, I skimmed several hundred pages of the roughly 58 megabyte pdf that Wikileaks posted and there's not much of note there. (By the way, Wikileaks has several download servers, I had trouble with the US server, but the Swedish-based one worked fine.)

Wikileaks' press release earlier this week pumped it up a lot, but the documents don't buttress the scope of their assertions. The company submitting information to the Washington state police sent the resumes and biographical/professional data about six people to the police department. The people are low and mid-level folks. There wasn't a whole lot damning in there on its own. Based on my admittedly quick skim of 1500+ pages, the rest of the document is data to satisfy the RFP from the police dept.