FromWikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A fusion center is an information sharing center, many of which were jointly created between 2003 and 2007 under the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security and the Office of J ustice Programs in the U.S. Department of J ustice.
They are designed to promote information sharing at the federal level between agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), U.S. Department of J ustice, U.S. military, and state- and local-level government. As of J uly 2009, the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security recognized at least 72 fusion centers. Fusion centers may also be affiliated with an Emergency Operations Center that responds in the event of a
disaster.
The fusion process is an overarching method of managing the flow of information and intelligence across levels and sectors of government to integrate
information for analysis.
[1]
That is, the process relies on the active involvement of state, local, tribal, and federal law enforcement agenciesand
sometimes on non-law enforcement agencies (e.g., private sector)to provide the input of raw information for intelligence analysis. As the array of
diverse information sources increases, there will be more accurate and robust analysis that can be disseminated as intelligence.
A two-year senate investigation found that "the fusion centers often produced irrelevant, useless or inappropriate intelligence reporting to DHS, and many
produced no intelligence reporting whatsoever."
[2][3]
The report also said that in some cases the fusion centers violated civil liberties or privacy.
[4]
Contents
1 Common misconceptions
2 Fusion process
3 Criticism
3.1 MIAC report
3.2 Senate report
3.3 2009 Virginia terrorism threat assessment
3.4 2011 Illinois fusion center finds water pump was "hacked"; the FBI disagrees
3.5 Washington State Fusion Center
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
Common misconceptions
Although the phrase has been used widely, there are often misconceptions about the function of fusion centers. Perhaps the most common is that the center
is a large room full of work stations where the staff are constantly responding to inquiries from officers, investigators, and agents. This vision is more
accurately a watch center or an investigative support centernot an intelligence fusion center.
Another common misconception is that the fusion center is minimally staffed until there is some type of crisis whereupon representatives from different
public safety agencies converge to staff workstations to manage the crisis. That staffing model more accurately describes an emergency operations center,
not an intelligence fusion center. The fusion center is not an operational center but a support center driven by analysis.
[1]
Fusion process
The fusion process proactively seeks to identify perceived threats and stop thembefore they occur. A fusion center is typically organized by amalgamating
representatives from different federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies into one physical location. However, some fusion centers gather
information not only from government sources, but also from their partners in the private sector.
[5][6]
Each representative is intended to be a conduit of raw
information fromhis or her agency, a representative who can infuse that agency-specific information into the collective body of information for analysis.
Conversely, when the fusion center needs intelligence requirements the representative is the conduit back to the agency to communicate, monitor, and
process the new information needs.
[1]
Similarly, the agency representative ensures that analytic products and threat information are directed back to ones
home agency for proper dissemination. According to the fusion center guidelines, a fusion center is defined as a collaborative effort of two or more
agencies that provide resources, expertise, and/or information to the center with the goal of maximizing the ability to detect, prevent, apprehend, and
respond to criminal and terrorist activity. The intelligence component of a fusion center focuses on the intelligence process, where information is collected,
integrated, evaluated, analyzed, and disseminated. Nontraditional collectors of intelligence, such as public safety entities and private sector organizations,
possess important information that can be fused' with law enforcement data to provide meaningful information and intelligence about threats and criminal
activity.
[7]
State and local police departments provide both space and resources for the majority of fusion centers. The analysts working there can be drawn from
DHS, local police, or the private sector. A number of fusion centers operate tip hotlines and also invite relevant information from public employees, such
as sanitation workers or firefighters.
[8]
Criticism
There are a number of documented criticisms of fusion centers, including relative ineffectiveness at counterterrorismactivities, the potential to be used for
secondary purposes unrelated to counterterrorism, and their links to violations of civil liberties of American citizens and others.
[8]
One such fusion center
Fusion center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_center
1 of 4 25/05/2014 1:19 AM
has been involved with spying on anti-war and peace activists as well as anarchists in Washington State.
[9]
David Rittgers of the Cato Institute has noted
a long line of fusion center and DHS reports labeling broad swaths of the public as a threat to national security. The North Texas Fusion
System labeled Muslim lobbyists as a potential threat; a DHS analyst in Wisconsin thought both pro- and anti-abortion activists were
worrisome; a Pennsylvania homeland security contractor watched environmental activists, Tea Party groups, and a Second Amendment rally;
the Maryland State Police put anti-death penalty and anti-war activists in a federal terrorism database; a fusion center in Missouri thought that
all third-party voters and Ron Paul supporters were a threat; and the Department of Homeland Security described half of the American
political spectrum as "right wing extremists."
[10]
A 2007 ACLU report raised concerns with four areas of fusion center aspects, the first of which was that they suffered from "ambiguous lines of
authority", meaning that the fusion process "allows the authorities to manipulate differences in federal, state and local laws to maximize information
collection while evading accountability and oversight through the practice of 'policy shopping'." The ACLU was also concerned with the private sector and
military participation in the surveillance of US citizens through these fusion centers. Finally, the ACLU report argued that fusion centers were likely to
engage in poorly contained data mining because the "Federal fusion center guidelines encourage wholesale data collection and manipulation processes that
threaten privacy" and that the centers were "hobbled by excessive secrecy".
[11]
An updated ACLU report in 2008 argued that the fusion centers were
creating a "total surveillance society" in the US.
[12]
An ACLU spokesperson compared the fusion centers initiative with Operation TIPS because of the
involvement of private Terrorism Liaison Officers.
[13]
MIAC report
Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) made news in 2009 for targeting supporters of third party candidates, Ron Paul supporters, pro-life
activists, and conspiracy theorists as potential militia members.
[14]
Anti-war activists and Islamic lobby groups were targeted in Texas, drawing criticism
from the ACLU.
[15]
According to the Department of Homeland Security:
[16]
[T]he Privacy Office has identified a number of risks to privacy presented by the fusion center program:
J ustification for fusion centers 1.
Ambiguous Lines of Authority, Rules, and Oversight 2.
Participation of the Military and the Private Sector 3.
Data Mining 4.
Excessive Secrecy 5.
Inaccurate or Incomplete Information 6.
Mission Creep 7.
Senate report
The United States Senate Homeland Security Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations report said:
[4]
Despite reviewing 13 months' worth of reporting originating from fusion centers from April 1, 2009 to April 30, 2010, the Subcommittee
investigation could identify no reporting which uncovered a terrorist threat, nor could it identify a contribution such fusion center reporting
made to disrupt an active terrorist plot.
An example of useless intelligence highlighted by the committee was a report on a foreigner with an expired visa who had been caught speeding and
shoplifting; his name was promptly added to the list of known or appropriately suspected terrorists. A reviewer of that report intimated: I am actually
stunned this report got as far as it did, because the entire total knowledge about the subject was that he tried to steal a pair of shoes fromNeiman
Marcus with everything else in the report being commentary. The reviewer concluded: I have no idea what value this would be adding to the IC
[Intelligence Community].
[17]
Another example highlighted in the Senate report was entitled Possible Drug Smuggling Activity. It detailed how two state wildlife officials saw two
fishermen in a bass boat operating suspiciously in waters off the USMexico border. The fusion center report listed as suspicions activities the fact that
the two suspects avoided eye contact and that their boat was low in the water, as if it were laden with cargo. The DHS reviewer wrote that: The fact
that some guys were hanging out in a boat where people normally do not fish MIGHT be an indicator of something abnormal, but does not reach the
threshold of something we should be reporting, and that this should never have been nominated for production, nor passed through three reviews.
[18]
fgh
Yet another example was a California fusion center report on the Mongols Motorcycle Club's distribution of leaflets to its members instructing them how
to behave when stopped by police. According to the Senate report, the leaflet suggested to the Club members that they should be courteous, control their
emotions and, if drinking, have a designated driver. One supervisor eventually killed the fusion center report, noting that There is nothing illegal or even
remotely objectionable [described] in this report, and that The advice given to the groups members is protected by the First Amendment.
[19]
Part of the problems identified by the Senate report is that the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis imposed a quota of reports to be filed by the fusion
centers, leading to diminished quality.
[19]
The Senate committee estimated that about $1.4 billion had been spent on the fusion centers.
[17]
It also estimated
that:
[17]
Of the 386 unclassified HIRs that DHS eventually published over the 13-month period reviewed by the Subcommittee investigation, a review
found close to 300 of them had no discernable connection to terrorists, terrorist plots or threats.
Fusion center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_center
2 of 4 25/05/2014 1:19 AM
Matthew Chandler, a spokesperson for the DHS, immediately denounced the Senate report in an interview with Fox News, in which he said that "In
preparing the report, the committee refused to review relevant data, including important intelligence information pertinent to their findings," and that the
"report fundamentally misunderstands the role of the federal government in supporting fusion centers and overlooks the significant benefits of this
relationship to both state and local law enforcement and the federal government."
[17]
Interviewed about the Senate report, Michael Leiter, former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, stated that: "Since 9/11, the growth of state
and local fusion centers has been exponential and regrettably in many instances it has produced an ill-planned mishmash rather than a true national system
that is well-integrated with existing organizations like the FBI-led J oint Terrorism Task Forces."
[18]
2009 Virginia terrorism threat assessment
In early April 2009, the Virginia Fusion Center came under criticism for publishing a terrorism threat assessment which stated that certain universities are
potential hubs for terror related activity.
[20]
The report targeted historically black colleges and identified hacktivism as a form of terrorism.
[21]
2011 Illinois fusion center finds water pump was "hacked"; the FBI disagrees
A November 2011 report by the Illinois fusion center was criticized for alleging that Russia hacked and deliberately disabled a water pump of the
municipal water system in Illinois. The Senate report writes: "Apparently aware of how important such an event could have been had it been real, DHS
intelligence officials included the false allegationsstated as factin a daily intelligence briefing that went to Congress and the intelligence community."
A subsequent FBI investigation found however that: "The only fact that they got right was that a water pump in a small Illinois water district had burned
out."
[4][22]
Washington State Fusion Center
A lawsuit alleges that a WSFC employee added members of the Port Militarization Resistance to the domestic terrorists list on unsubstantiated grounds.
[23][24]
See also
ADVISE
COINTELPRO
Council of Governors
Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007
Investigative Data Warehouse
Laird v. Tatum
Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative
Open-source intelligence
PRISM (surveillance program)
Surveillance
TALON (database)
Total Information Awareness
USA PATRIOT Act
References
^
a

b

c
Carter, D. L.; Carter, J . G. (2009). "The Intelligence Fusion Process for State, Local and Tribal Law Enforcement". Criminal Justice and Behavior 36 (12):
13231339. doi:10.1177/0093854809345674 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1177%2F0093854809345674).
1.
^ O'Harrow, R. (October 2, 2012). "DHS fusion centers portrayed as pools of ineptitude, civil liberties intrusions" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations
/dhs-fusion-centers-portrayed-as-pools-of-ineptitude-and-civil-liberties-intrusions/2012/10/02/10014440-0cb1-11e2-bd1a-b868e65d57eb_story.html). Washington
Post. Retrieved 2012-10-03.
2.
^ US Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (October 3, 2012). "Investigative Report Criticizes CounterterrorismReporting, Waste at State & Local
Intelligence Fusion Centers" (http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/media/investigative-report-criticizes-counterterrorism-reporting-waste-
at-state-and-local-intelligence-fusion-centers).
3.
^
a

b

c
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/03/senate_report_says_national_intelligence_fusion_centers_have_been_useless 4.
^ Monahan, T. (2009). "The Murky World of 'Fusion Centres' " (http://torinmonahan.com/papers/FC-CJ M.pdf) (pdf). Criminal Justice Matters 75 (1): 2021.
doi:10.1080/09627250802699715 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080%2F09627250802699715).
5.
^ Harwood, M. "Smashing Intelligence Stovepipes" (http://www.securitymanagement.com/article/smashing-intelligence-stovepipes?page=0%2C1). Security
Management. Retrieved 2012-07-13.
6.
^ "Global Intelligence Working Group, 2005a, p. 8" (http://it.ojp.gov/documents/fusion_center_guidelines_law_enforcement.pdf) (pdf). Retrieved 2012-07-13. 7.
^
a

b
Monahan, T.; Palmer, N. A. (2009). "The Emerging Politics of DHS Fusion Centers" (http://torinmonahan.com/papers/FC-SD.pdf) (pdf). Security Dialogue 40
(6): 617636. doi:10.1177/0967010609350314 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1177%2F0967010609350314).
8.
^ Report on Fusion Centers (http://www.democracynow.org/2009/7/28/broadcast_exclusive_declassified_docs_reveal_military) J uly 29, 2009 Democracy Now 9.
^ Rittgers, David (February 2, 2011). "Were All Terrorists Now" (http://web.archive.org/web/20110415064139/http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/we%E2%80%99re-
all-terrorists-now/). Cato Institute. Archived fromthe original (http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/we%E2%80%99re-all-terrorists-now/) on 2011-04-15.
10.
^ http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/whats-wrong-fusion-centers-executive-summary 11.
Fusion center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_center
3 of 4 25/05/2014 1:19 AM
^ ACLU Highlights Risk of Fusion Centers, The Progressive, www.progressive.org/mag/mc073008a.html 12.
^ The New Snoops: TerrorismLiaison Officers, Some fromPrivate Sector, The Progressive, www.progressive.org/mag/mc070208 13.
^ [1] (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/23/fusion-centers-expand-criteria-identify-militia-members/) 14.
^ Wagley, J ohn. "Fusion Centers Under Fire in Texas and New Mexico" (http://www.securitymanagement.com/news/fusion-centers-under-fire-texas-and-new-
mexico-005314). Security Management. Retrieved 2012-07-13.
15.
^ Privacy Impact Assessment for the Department of Homeland Security State, Local, and Regional Fusion Center Initiative December 11, 2008 [2]
(http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/privacy/privacy_pia_ia_slrfci.pdf)
16.
^
a

b

c

d
rt.com/usa/intelligence-fusion-dhs-report-598/ 17.
^
a

b
investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/02/14187433-homeland-security-fusion-centers-spy-on-citizens-produce-shoddy-work-report-says 18.
^
a

b
DHS fusion centers portrayed as pools of ineptitude, civil liberties intrusions articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-10-02/news/35500769_1_fusion-centers-
investigators-report
19.
^ "Fusion center declares nation's oldest universities possible terror threat" (http://rawstory.com/news/2008
/Virginia_terror_assessment_targets_enormous_crosssection_0406.html). The Raw Story. Retrieved 2012-07-13.
20.
^ 2009 Virginia TerrorismThreat Assessment (http://rawstory.com/images/other/vafusioncenterterrorassessment.pdf). Commonwealth of Virgina. Department of
State Police. Virginia Fusion Center. March 2009.
21.
^ Zetter, Kim(October 2, 2012). "DHS Issued False 'Water Pump Hack' Report; Called It a 'Success' " (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/10/dhs-false-water-
pump-hack/). Wired.
22.
^ Moynihan, Colin (J une 24, 2013). "Defendant Added to Protesters' Spying Suit" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/25/us/defendant-added-to-protesters-spying-
suit.html?_r=0). The New York Times.
23.
^ http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2013/06/25/3069025/ex-jblm-worker-admits-he-accessed.html 24.
External links
Fusion Center Guidelines (http://www.it.ojp.gov/topic.jsp?topic_id=209) issued by the US Department of J ustice Office of J ustice Programs
Information Fusion Centers and Privacy (http://epic.org/privacy/fusion/) Information related to Fusion Centers and privacy. Electronic Privacy
Information Center J une 2008.
Fusion Center Update (http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/privacy/fusion_update_20080729.pdf) Report from the ACLU J uly 2008.
Council on Foreign Relations: Fusion Centers (http://www.cfr.org/publication/12689/)
"Fusion Centers", J uly 15, 2010 (http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/44220&65407), Radio4All podcast about fusion centers and the Total
Information Awareness program
"Fusion Centers Map, Locations, Contact Information", February 15, 2011 (http://publicintelligence.net/fusion-centers), PublicIntelligence blog's
listing of centers
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/are-we-safer/
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fusion_center&oldid=609856910"
Categories: Counter-terrorism policy of the United States Surveillance
This page was last modified on 23 May 2014 at 20:21.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipediais a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Fusion center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_center
4 of 4 25/05/2014 1:19 AM