DOCSLIB.ORG

The Challenge of Domestic Intelligence in a Free Society a Multidisciplinary Look at the Creation of a U.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Challenge of Domestic Intelligence in a Free Society a Multidisciplinary Look at the Creation of a U.S THE ARTS This PDF document was made available CHILD POLICY from www.rand.org as a public service of CIVIL JUSTICE the RAND Corporation. EDUCATION ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT Jump down to document6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit NATIONAL SECURITY research organization providing POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY objective analysis and effective SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY solutions that address the challenges SUBSTANCE ABUSE facing the public and private sectors TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY around the world. TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE Support RAND WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Purchase this document Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore the RAND Homeland Security Program and the Intelligence Policy Center View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. The Challenge of Domestic Intelligence in a Free Society A Multidisciplinary Look at the Creation of a U.S. Domestic Counterterrorism Intelligence Agency BRIAN A. JACKSON, EDITOR Contributors: Agnes Gereben Schaefer, Darcy Noricks, Benjamin W. Goldsmith, Genevieve Lester, Jeremiah Goulka, Michael A. Wermuth, Martin C. Libicki, David R. Howell Prepared for the Department of Homeland Security HOMELAND SECURITY PROGRAM and the INTELLIGENCE POLICY CENTER This research was sponsored by the United States Department of Homeland Security and was conducted jointly under the auspices of the Homeland Security Program within RAND Infrastructure, Safety, and Environment and the Intelligence Policy Center of the National Security Research Division. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Jackson, Brian A. The challenge of domestic intelligence in a free society : a multidisciplinary look at the creation of a U.S. domestic counterterrorism intelligence agency / Brian A. Jackson. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-8330-4616-1 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Intelligence service—United States. 2. Terrorism—United States—Prevention. 3. Terrorism—Government policy—United States. I. Title. JK468.I6J33 2009 363.325'1630973—dc22 2008046369 The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. R® is a registered trademark. Cover photo courtesy of AP Photo/Mary Altaffer. © Copyright 2009 RAND Corporation All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from RAND. Published 2009 by the RAND Corporation 1776 Main Street, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138 1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA 22202-5050 4570 Fifth Avenue, Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-2665 RAND URL: http://www.rand.org To order RAND documents or to obtain additional information, contact Distribution Services: Telephone: (310) 451-7002; Fax: (310) 451-6915; Email: [email protected] Preface With terrorism still prominent on the U.S. national agenda, whether the country’s prevention efforts match the threat it faces continues to be central in policy debate. One element of this debate is questioning whether the United States, like some other countries, needs a dedi- cated domestic intelligence agency. To examine this question, Con- gress directed that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis perform “an independent study on the fea- sibility of creating a counter terrorism intelligence agency” (U.S. Con- gress, 2006, p. 122). The results of this study are presented in three volumes: t This volume contains a series of papers examining the U.S. context for domestic intelligence, current activities, and varied approaches for assessing options. t An additional volume, published separately, Considering the Creation of a Domestic Intelligence Agency in the United States: Lessons from the Experiences of Australia, Canada, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom (Jackson, 2009), presents case studies of other nations’ domestic intelligence organizations and activities. t The overarching policy results of the assessment, including a dis- cussion of the pros and cons of creating a new intelligence organi- zation, are included in a companion volume to this work: Reorga- nizing U.S. Domestic Intelligence: Assessing the Options (Treverton, 2008). iii iv The Challenge of Domestic Intelligence in a Free Society This volume should be of interest to homeland security policy- makers, state and local governments, law enforcement organizations, civil rights and civil liberties organizations, and private-sector organi- zations with interests in homeland security. This study is part of a larger body of RAND research related to homeland security, intelligence, and terrorism. Related RAND publications include the following: t Peter Chalk and William Rosenau, Confronting the “Enemy Within”: Security Intelligence, the Police, and Counterterrorism in Four Democracies, MG-100-RC, 2004 t K. Jack Riley, Gregory F. Treverton, Jeremy M. Wilson, and Lois M. Davis, State and Local Intelligence in the War on Terror- ism, MG-394-RC, 2005 t Brian A. Jackson, Peter Chalk, Kim Cragin, Bruce Newsome, John V. Parachini, William Rosenau, Erin M. Simpson, Melanie Sisson, and Donald Temple, Breaching the Fortress Wall: Under- standing Terrorist Efforts to Overcome Defensive Technologies, MG- 481-DHS, 2007. The RAND Homeland Security Program This research was conducted jointly under the auspices of the Home- land Security Program within RAND Infrastructure, Safety, and Envi- ronment and the Intelligence Policy Center of the National Security Research Division. The mission of RAND Infrastructure, Safety, and Environment is to improve the development, operation, use, and pro- tection of society’s essential physical assets and natural resources and to enhance the related social assets of safety and security of individuals in transit and in their workplaces and communities. Homeland Secu- rity Program research supports the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies charged with preventing and mitigating the effects of terrorist activity within U.S. borders. Projects address critical infra- structure protection, emergency management, terrorism risk man- agement, border control, first responders and preparedness, domestic threat assessments, domestic intelligence, and workforce and training. Preface v Information about the Homeland Security Program is available online (http://www.rand.org/ise/security/). Inquiries about homeland security research projects should be addressed to Andrew Morral, Director Homeland Security Program, ISE RAND Corporation 1200 South Hayes Street Arlington, VA 22202-5050 703-413-1100, x5119 [email protected] The RAND Intelligence Policy Center The Intelligence Policy Center is part of the RAND National Secu- rity Research Division (NSRD). NSRD conducts research and analysis for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the Unified Combatant Commands, the defense agencies, the Department of the Navy, the Marine Corps, the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. Intelligence Community, allied foreign governments, and foundations. For more information on RAND’s Intelligence Policy Center, address queries to John Parachini, Director Intelligence Policy Center RAND Corporation 1200 South Hayes Street Arlington, VA 22202-5050 703-413-1100, x5579 [email protected] More information about RAND is available at www.rand.org Contents Preface ............................................................................. iii Figures ............................................................................. xi Tables .............................................................................xiii Acknowledgments ...............................................................xv Abbreviations ................................................................... xvii CHAPTER ONE Introduction ....................................................................... 1 Defining Domestic Intelligence .................................................. 3 Arguments for Change in Current Domestic Intelligence Policies ........... 6 About This Study ................................................................... 8 PART I The U.S. Context for Domestic Counterterrorism Intelligence .........11 CHAPTER TWO The History of Domestic Intelligence in the United States: Lessons for Assessing the Creation of a New Counterterrorism Intelligence Agency .................................13
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Table of Contents Acknowledgements
    The Data Privacy/National Security Balancing Paradigm as Applied In The U.S.A. and Europe: Achieving an Acceptable Balance Paul Raphael Murray, B.A. H.Dip in Ed. LL.B. LL.M Ph.D. (NUI) Submitted for the Degree of Doctor in Philosophy at Trinity College, Dublin School of Law August 2017 Declaration and Online Access I declare that this thesis has not been submitted as an exercise for a degree at this or any other university and it is entirely my own work. I agree to deposit this thesis in the University’s open access institutional repository or allow the library to do so on my behalf, subject to Irish Copyright Legislation and Trinity College Library conditions of use and acknowledgement. Paul Raphael Murray Acknowledgements I would like to record my thanks to my Supervisor, Professor Neville Cox, School of Law, and Dean of Graduate Studies, Trinity College, Dublin, for his help and guidance. i ii Abstract The Data Privacy/National Security Balancing Paradigm as Applied In The U.S.A. and Europe: Achieving an Acceptable Balance Paul Raphael Murray The overall research question addressed in this thesis is the data privacy/national security balancing paradigm, and the contrasting ways in which this operates in Europe and the U.S. Within this framework, the influences causing the balance to shift in one direction or another are examined: for example, the terrorist attacks on two U.S. cities in 2001 and in various countries in Europe in the opening decade of the new millennium, and the revelations by Edward Snowden in 2013 of the details of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Directors of Central Intelligence As Leaders of the U.S
    All statements of fact, opinion, or analysis expressed in this book are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect official positions of the Central Intel- ligence Agency or any other US government entity, past or present. Nothing in the contents should be construed as asserting or implying US government endorsement of the authors’ factual statements and interpretations. The Center for the Study of Intelligence The Center for the Study of Intelligence (CSI) was founded in 1974 in response to Director of Central Intelligence James Schlesinger’s desire to create within CIA an organization that could “think through the functions of intelligence and bring the best intellects available to bear on intelli- gence problems.” The Center, comprising professional historians and experienced practitioners, attempts to document lessons learned from past operations, explore the needs and expectations of intelligence consumers, and stimulate serious debate on current and future intelligence challenges. To support these activities, CSI publishes Studies in Intelligence and books and monographs addressing historical, operational, doctrinal, and theoretical aspects of the intelligence profession. It also administers the CIA Museum and maintains the Agency’s Historical Intelligence Collection. Comments and questions may be addressed to: Center for the Study of Intelligence Central Intelligence Agency Washington, DC 20505 Printed copies of this book are available to requesters outside the US government from: Government Printing Office (GPO) Superintendent of Documents P.O. Box 391954 Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954 Phone: (202) 512-1800 E-mail: [email protected] ISBN: 1-929667-14-0 The covers: The portraits on the front and back covers are of the 19 directors of central intelligence, beginning with the first, RAdm.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Order 12036 1-11. The
    Executive~ Order 12036 Proposed Executive Order Reason for Change 1-11. The Department of Defense. 1.11 The Department of Defense. The Secretary of The Secretary of Defense Defense shall: shall: 1-1101. Collect national (a) Collect national Technical change. foreign intelligence and be foreign intelligence and be responsive to collection tasking responsive to collection tasking by the NITC. by the Director of Central · Intelligence; I I 1-1102. Collect, produce (b) Collect, produce and Technical change. and disseminate foreign military disseminate military and and military-related intelligence military-related foreign intelli­ information, including scien- · gence and counterintelligence as tific, technical, political, required for execution of the geographic and economic. informa­ Secretary's responsibilities; tion as required for execution of the Secretary's responsibilities; 1-1103. Conduct programs (c) Conduct programs and and missions necessary to fulfill missions necessary to fulfill national and tactical foreign national, departmental and intelligence requirements; tactical foreign intelligence requirements; 43 E~ecutive Order 12036 Proposed ~x e c~ t ive Orae r Reason for Change (1.11 Continued) 1-1104. Conduct counter­ (d) Conduct counter­ Unnecessary language intelligence activities in intelligence activities in eliminated. support of Department of Defense support of Department of Defense components outside the United components outside the United States in coordination with the States in coordination with the CIA, and within the United States CIA, and within the United States in coordination with the FBI in coordination with the FBI, pursuant to procedures agreed pursuant to procedures agreed upon by the Secretary of Defense upon by the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General, and and the Attorney General; produce and disseminate counter­ intelligence studies and reports; 1-1105.
    [Show full text]
  • Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems Via Two Case Studies: the United States and China
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations Fall 2009 Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems via Two Case Studies: The United States and China Kenneth N. Farrall University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Asian Studies Commons, Communication Technology and New Media Commons, International and Intercultural Communication Commons, and the Social Influence and oliticalP Communication Commons Recommended Citation Farrall, Kenneth N., "Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems via Two Case Studies: The United States and China" (2009). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 51. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/51 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/51 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems via Two Case Studies: The United States and China Abstract This dissertation problematizes the "state dossier system" (SDS): the production and accumulation of personal information on citizen subjects exceeding the reasonable bounds of risk management. SDS - comprising interconnecting subsystems of records and identification - damage individual autonomy and self-determination, impacting not only human rights, but also the viability of the social system. The research, a hybrid of case-study and cross-national comparison, was guided in part by a theoretical model of four primary SDS driving forces: technology, political economy, law and public sentiment. Data sources included government documents, academic texts, investigative journalism, NGO reports and industry white papers. The primary analytical instrument was the juxtaposition of two individual cases: the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Bureau of Investigation Hearing
    FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION JULY 26, 2007 Serial No. 110–86 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://judiciary.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 37–010 PDF WASHINGTON : 2007 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:11 Jul 09, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 H:\WORK\FULL\072607\37010.000 HJUD1 PsN: DOUGA COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan, Chairman HOWARD L. BERMAN, California LAMAR SMITH, Texas RICK BOUCHER, Virginia F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., JERROLD NADLER, New York Wisconsin ROBERT C. ‘‘BOBBY’’ SCOTT, Virginia HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina ELTON GALLEGLY, California ZOE LOFGREN, California BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas STEVE CHABOT, Ohio MAXINE WATERS, California DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts CHRIS CANNON, Utah ROBERT WEXLER, Florida RIC KELLER, Florida LINDA T. SA´ NCHEZ, California DARRELL ISSA, California STEVE COHEN, Tennessee MIKE PENCE, Indiana HANK JOHNSON, Georgia J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia BETTY SUTTON, Ohio STEVE KING, Iowa LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois TOM FEENEY, Florida BRAD SHERMAN, California TRENT FRANKS, Arizona
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    1 Introduction Intelligence collection is one of the earliest recorded organized human activ- ities, along with war. The earliest writing about intelligence collection dates from the seventh and sixth centuries BCE: Caleb the spy in the Book of Numbers and The Art of War by Sun Tzu. It is striking that two cultures, ancient Hebrew and Chinese, geographically remote from one another and undoubtedly unknown to one another, should both discuss the importance of intelligence collection at roughly the same time in an early part of human history. But the precept is elementary at its core—information confers power. Whoever is best at gathering (and exploiting) relevant information tends to win. In the twenty-fi rst century, the U.S. Intelligencedistribute Community (IC) is premier in its capabilities for doing both. Collection in the IC generally refers to fi ve ordisciplines (or sources): Open Source Intelligence (OSINT), Human Intelligence (HUMINT), Signals Intel- ligence (SIGINT), Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT), and Measurement and Signature Intelligence (MASINT). A great deal of mystery and myth surrounds the subject of those sources and the capabilities and uses implied. And many popular perceptions are far afi eld from reality. That is why we have written this book. Our intentionpost, is to give readers an approachable but detailed picture of U.S. intelligence collection capabilities. To that end, each chapter follows a similar construct. We discuss the unique origin and history of the INT, or intelligence collection discipline, which is important to under- stand in terms of both its development and how it is used today. We discuss the types of intelligencecopy, issues that each INT is best suited for and those for which it is of little help.
    [Show full text]
  • The NSA Is on the Line -- All of Them
    The NSA is on the line -- all of them An intelligence expert predicts we'll soon learn that cellphone and Internet companies also cooperated with the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on us. By Kim Zetter, Salon.com May. 15, 2006 | When intelligence historian those safeguards had little effect in preventing Matthew Aid read the USA Today story last at least three telecommunications companies Thursday about how the National Security from repeating history. Agency was collecting millions of phone call records from AT&T, Bell South and Verizon for Aid, who co-edited a book in 2001 on signals a widespread domestic surveillance program intelligence during the Cold War, spent a designed to root out possible terrorist activity in decade conducting more than 300 interviews the United States, he had to wonder whether with former and current NSA employees for his the date on the newspaper wasn't 1976 instead new history of the agency, the first volume of of 2006. which will be published next year. Jeffrey Richelson, a senior fellow at the National Aid, a visiting fellow at George Washington Security Archive, calls Aid the top authority on University's National Security Archive, who has the NSA, alongside author James Bamford. just completed the first book of a three-volume history of the NSA, knew the nation's Aid spoke with Salon about how the NSA has bicentennial marked the year when secrets learned to maneuver around Congress and the surrounding another NSA domestic Department of Justice to get what it wants. He surveillance program, code-named Project compared the agency's current data mining to Shamrock, were exposed.
    [Show full text]
  • Law Enforcement Intelligence: a Guide for State, Local, and Tribal Law Enforcement Agencies
    David L. Carter, Ph.D. School of Criminal Justice Michigan State University Law Enforcement Intelligence: A Guide for State, Local, and Tribal Law Enforcement Agencies November 2004 David L. Carter, Ph.D. This project was supported by Cooperative Agreement #2003-CK-WX-0455 by the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Points of view or opinions contained in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice or Michigan State University. Preface The world of law enforcement intelligence has changed dramatically since September 11, 2001. State, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies have been tasked with a variety of new responsibilities; intelligence is just one. In addition, the intelligence discipline has evolved significantly in recent years. As these various trends have merged, increasing numbers of American law enforcement agencies have begun to explore, and sometimes embrace, the intelligence function. This guide is intended to help them in this process. The guide is directed primarily toward state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies of all sizes that need to develop or reinvigorate their intelligence function. Rather than being a manual to teach a person how to be an intelligence analyst, it is directed toward that manager, supervisor, or officer who is assigned to create an intelligence function. It is intended to provide ideas, definitions, concepts, policies, and resources. It is a primer- a place to start on a new managerial journey. Every effort was made to incorporate the state of the art in law enforcement intelligence: Intelligence-Led Policing, the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan, the FBI Intelligence Program, the array of new intelligence activities occurring in the Department of Homeland Security, community policing, and various other significant developments in the reengineered arena of intelligence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Internal Effects of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's
    REDACTED AND UNCLASSIFIED The Internal Effects of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Reprioritization U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General Audit Division Audit Report 04-39 September 2004 REDACTED AND UNCLASSIFIED REDACTED AND UNCLASSIFIED THE INTERNAL EFFECTS OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION’S REPRIORITIZATION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY * In direct response to the September 11, 2001 (9/11), terrorist attacks, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) initiated a transformation that, among other things, established a new ranking of priorities and formally shifted a significant number of agents from traditional criminal investigative work to counterterrorism and counterintelligence matters. According to the Director, each of the changes was designed to reshape the FBI into an organization better able to combat the imminent threat of terrorism and to prevent another large-scale terrorist attack against the United States. Prior to 9/11, the FBI utilized more of its field agent resources to investigate traditional criminal activity than to investigate matters related to terrorism. According to the FBI, since the reprioritization it is striving to incorporate more proactive, intelligence-based tactics and operations into its procedures, particularly in terrorism-related matters. Non-terrorism related crime, however, still occurs, and because the FBI has the broadest jurisdiction of any federal law enforcement agency, it is expected to maintain a response capability for violations of federal criminal law. However, other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies may be capable of taking on increased responsibilities for certain investigative areas in light of the FBI’s reprioritization. In order for this transition to occur effectively, the specific areas from which the FBI has reduced its involvement must be identified.
    [Show full text]
  • The Perilous Dialogue
    Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2009 The Perilous Dialogue Laura K. Donohue Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] Georgetown Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 12-028 This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/787 http://ssrn.com/abstract=2020353 97 Cal. L. Rev. 357-392 (2009) This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, National Security Law Commons, and the President/Executive Department Commons DONOHUE FINAL.DOC 4/30/2009 11:11:35 PM The Perilous Dialogue Laura K. Donohue† Five months before his retirement, Justice William Brennan wrote in a dissent: “the Framers of the Bill of Rights did not purport to ‘create’ rights. Rather, they designed the Bill of Rights to prohibit our Government from infringing rights and liberties presumed to be pre-existing.”1 Professor Stephen Holmes reminds us in his lecture that such rights and liberties do not impede progress: they embody it.2 The rules preserving rights and liberties can help to focus action by bringing clarity to the present, while still preserving a long- term political perspective. Yet, time and again, both these rights and the rules designed to protect them are sacrificed in the name of national security. The master metaphor in each sacrifice is, indeed, “security or freedom,” and it is on this metaphor that I would like to focus.
    [Show full text]
  • The Original Documents Are Located in Box 4, Folder “COINTELPRO” of the Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R
    The original documents are located in Box 4, folder “COINTELPRO” of the Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Ron Nessen donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Digitized from Box 4 of the Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL WASHINGTON, D.C. 20!130 November 14, 1974 MEMORANDUM FOR: FROM: SUBJECT: COINTELPRO Attaqhed for your use at your press briefing on Monday, November 18, are the following: A. Proposed questions and answers for your own use. I suggest that you refer all specific inquiries concerning the or1g1n, scope, details etq. of COINTELPRO to the Department of Justice; B. Questions and answers which will be used by the Attorney General in his own press conference on that day; C. The COINTELPRO report to be released in conjunction with the Attorney General's press conference; and D. A memorandum from the Attorney General to the FBI Director which will also be released in conjunction with the Attorney General's press conference.
    [Show full text]
  • JP 2-02 National Intelligence Support to Joint Operations
    Joint Pub 2-02 National Intelligence Support to Joint Operations 28 September 1998 PREFACE 1. Scope from organizing the force and executing the mission in a manner the JFC deems most This joint publication describes national appropriate to ensure unity of effort in the intelligence organizations and their support accomplishment of the overall mission. to joint military operations. Also addressed is the special support and augmentation 3. Application available for joint operations by national joint elements such as the Military Intelligence a. Doctrine and guidance established in this Board, the National Military Joint Intelligence publication apply to the commanders and Center, and National Intelligence Support intelligence staff of combatant commands, Teams. This joint publication covers Service subordinate unified commands, joint task forces, intelligence organizations and centers, as combat support agencies, and subordinate well as nonmilitary agencies and components of these commands. These nongovernmental organizations. The principles and guidance also may apply when recommended target audience for this joint significant forces of one Service are attached to publication is commanders and intelligence forces of another Service or when significant staffs of combatant commands, subordinate forces of one Service support forces of another unified commands, joint task forces, combat Service. support agencies, and supporting Service components. b. The guidance in this publication is authoritative; as such, this doctrine (or JTTP) 2. Purpose will be followed except when, in the judgment of the commander, exceptional circumstances This publication has been prepared under dictate otherwise. If conflicts arise between the the direction of the Chairman of the Joint contents of this publication and the contents of Chiefs of Staff.
    [Show full text]