Earlier this month, Sami Osmakac, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in the former Yugoslavia, was arrested near Tampa, Florida, after federal officials uncovered his plan to unleash terrorism upon the United States. After receiving an anonymous tip, undercover FBI agents met with Osmakac and learned the details of his terror plot.

Osmakac described his intentions of setting off car bombs in crowded areas throughout Tampa, following such explosions with high-powered assault weapons attacks against the public. “I want to do something terrifying, like one day, one night, something’s going to happen, then six hours later something else,” Osmakac told FBI agents.

Osmakac apparently relished the thought of utilizing a suicide vest to add the finishing touches to his day of terror. Expecting to die rather than be taken alive, he stated, “We all have to die. So why not die the Islamic way?”

The arrest of Sami Osmakac is but the latest in an increasing string of Islamist-inspired terrorism plots against the American homeland. Whether the origins of such an attack are at home or abroad, the potential for such an event culminating in a devastating loss of life remains.

Uncovering the seedlings of such a plot requires the vigilance of the American public. It also requires a robust and empowered state and local law enforcement apparatus capable of uncovering and exploiting nascent terrorist operations prior to their becoming operational.

While the intelligence-gathering mandate nominally resides within the purview of the federal government, state and local law enforcement must take a greater role in this endeavor throughout the nation. An over-reliance on intelligence-gathering capacities at the federal level will only tax those resources and under-utilize the tremendous capabilities of our nation’s 18,000 domestic law enforcement agencies.

In a recent report released by The Heritage Foundation, the need for state and local law enforcement to expedite their adoption of a comprehensive and integrated suspicious activity reporting (SAR) system is addressed. Having such processes in place will act as a force multiplier in the nation’s collective responsibility to inhibit and mitigate the terrorist threat.

In a similar vein, earlier this week a group of homeland security specialists issued a thought-provoking report calling for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to refine its intelligence-gathering and analysis mandate.

Bipartisan members of the Aspen Homeland Security Group, a coalition of experts in the nation’s homeland security and counterterrorism community, called on DHS to rethink its intelligence-gathering mechanisms to include stronger, more collaborative relationships with state and local counterparts.

“The DHS enterprise is more complex than other agencies responsible for America’s security, and its intelligence mission is correspondingly multifaceted,” noted the report. Members of the Aspen group acknowledged the unique legislative mandate that allows DHS to effectively perform core functions of the national security enterprise at the federal level, such as securing borders and analyzing travel, preventing cyber intrusions, and protecting the nation’s critical infrastructure.

The effectiveness of DHS to perform these core functions, however, can actually be enhanced if its approach to state and local intelligence gathering focused more on collaboration and reducing redundancies.

State and local law enforcement agencies routinely acquire intelligence at their respective levels, much of which proves to be instrumental in the development of broader investigations linked to larger plots against the homeland. Reinforcing and strengthening the working relationships between these agencies and DHS can enhance the quality of information gathered and analyzed at all levels of government, producing higher-quality intelligence.

“This new approach to intelligence—serving local partners’ requirements, providing intelligence in areas (such as infrastructure) not previously served by intelligence agencies, and disseminating information by new means—reflects a transition in how Americans perceive national security,” the report assessed.

The terrorist threats facing the nation continue to evolve. So should the manner in which DHS and its counterparts at the state and local level view their respective roles in the process of mitigating those threats.

The Aspen group summarized: “As threats grow more localized, the prospect that a state/local partner will generate the first lead to help understand a new threat, or even an emerging cell, will grow. And the federal government’s need to train, and even staff, local agencies, such as major city police departments, will grow.”

A true recognition of the need to incorporate and support information gathering and analysis at the state and local level is long overdue. The Aspen report articulates the need for such a shift in thinking—one that ensures that any plot to attack the homeland can be effectively investigated and addressed at any and all levels of government.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

A recent analysis of data accumulated by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) at the University of Maryland reveals a disturbing depth to the level of extremism and violence perpetrated within the United States over the past decade.

In sum, START’s Global Terrorism Database, an open-source database comprising “information on over 87,000 domestic and international terrorist events around the world since 1970,” identified over 200 acts of terrorism having occurred in the United States since 2000. Of those acts, 17 resulted in fatalities.

While the motivating factors underlying these acts varied considerably, ranging from Islamist-inspired “lone wolves” to actors within the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front, the implications of such violence on America’s strategic effort to protect the homeland is profound.

Looking at the numbers more closely, START noted that since 9/11, 32 people have lost their lives due to terrorist acts committed in the United States. The single most lethal incident was the 2009 Fort Hood shooting by Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, in which 13 people were killed.

Recently, much of the focus within America’s broader national security apparatus has rightly been given to the emergent threat of homegrown Islamist radicalization. A look at START’s data substantiates that focus.

START identified 211 individuals who were radicalized in North America “to the point of supporting violence” between 1989 and 2011. Of the individuals identified, each was either indicted for violent crimes, was killed while supporting Islamist activities, or had publicly aligned themselves with known Islamist organizations.

While much attention has been given to more recent examples of domestic radicalization, such as the 2010 arrest of Faisal Shahzad or the 2009 arrest of Najibullah Zazi, the START study on Islamist radicalization in North America shows it to be a protracted phenomenon having long affected our nation’s homeland security.

The START data underscores the need for the United States to maintain vigilance in what amounts to a multifaceted effort to inhibit and contain the ill effects of Islamist radicalization and any outgrowth of violence that may result.

Our collective national security infrastructure should emphasize both counter-radicalization efforts and robust and integrated counter-terrorism programs emphasizing the active participation and cooperation among federal, state, and local law enforcement. The START analysis is a stark reminder that the threat of violent extremism is neither new nor diminishing.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

On November 8, officials in Springfield, Illinois, discovered that cyber hackers had gained remote access to the city’s water utility.

As The Washington Post reports, the hackers first stole the password and access codes from a local company that develops Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems. SCADA systems are operating systems that run many manufacturing plants around the globe. The hackers then used the stolen codes to manipulate the utility’s operational system. As a result, at least one water pump was damaged and burned out.

According to a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report on the incident, “It is unknown, at this time, the number of SCADA usernames and passwords acquired from the software company’s database and if any additional SCADA systems have been attacked as a result of this theft.” Early forensic analysis seems to have traced the attack to an Internet address in Russia. This attack is the first ever cyber attack on an American SCADA system that is known to have had practical, real-world effects.

The vulnerability of SCADA systems has been known for some time. In 2007, a DHS experiment known as the Aurora test confirmed that intrusions into SCADA systems were capable of having real-world effects—in that case, a diesel generator was burned out and destroyed. More recently, the Stuxnet virus in Iran is widely reported to have destroyed centrifuges used by the Iranian nuclear program to process uranium.

The prospects of further SCADA attacks should heighten everyone’s concern. SCADA systems run virtually every utility and manufacturing plant in America (indeed, around the globe). We can imagine any number of “worst case” scenarios, ranging from blackouts to floods, at the hands of cyber hackers.

It is high time that Americans stop being “cyber suckers” and begin the hard task of building a better cyber policy. This will require leadership from the top and a willingness to confront international bad actors (such as China and Russia) who harbor cyber criminals.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

On Tuesday November 22, The Heritage Foundation will co-host a GOP primary debate on foreign policy and national security along with the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and CNN. There are several ways you can interact with Heritage on the night of the debate. In preparation for the debate, we will be having our “Lunch with Heritage” chat on Friday, November 18 from 12-1 ET. We will be joined by Heritage’s National Security expert James Carafano. He will be taking your questions about what defense and homeland security threats we should take more seriously, and how we should engage in foreign policy.

If you would like to be reminded about the event leave your email address in the form below. If you cannot make it to the chat, leave your questions in the comments and we’ll answer it for you.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

Recently released information from the 9/11 Commission reveals that its original recommendation to condense and consolidate congressional oversight for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has yet to be implemented. This leaves homeland security at risk and bound by its own committees.

In 2003, DHS was subject to oversight by 86 congressional committees and subcommittees. Today there are more than 108. Compare that to the 36 committees and subcommittees with oversight for the Department of Defense, which has a budget 10 times greater than DHS and millions more employees.

This unnecessary oversight causes conflicting answers to the same question and drains resources. DHS has repeatedly sought to remedy the excessive oversight. However, the problem lies with Congress and its power and influence struggles. This incessant fighting resembles schoolyard taunts and the race to be king of the hill.

Rather than continuing to waste DHS time and resources, Congress needs to condense its labyrinth of committees into an organized and effective machine for DHS—sooner rather than later. Consolidating the department’s oversight into six full committees (three in the House of Representatives and three in the Senate) would create uniformity. This would allow for succinct and direct oversight and guidance to the department, increasing the safety and security of the United States.

The acknowledgment of this unmanageable mess is a step in the right direction. However, Congress has a long way to go to prioritize and reconstruct its committees. In the wake of the 10th anniversary of 9/11 and the recent commission status report, it is evident that there are still far too many cooks in Homeland Security’s kitchen, and Congress is in no hurry to shuffle them out.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

The White House has recently announced more details about the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA), a ballistic missile defense plan for the protection of allies and friends in Europe and the U.S. homeland in its later stages.

While the EPAA has certain good aspects, including advancing the Aegis sea-based missile defense capability, it would not provide the kind of robust missile defenses needed by the United States and its friends and allies.

For example, it is not until the Phase Four (2020) timeframe that the plan would provide additional defensive capabilities to improve the ability of the U.S. to defend its people and territory against a long-range missile attack. Iran, however, might have a capability to target the U.S. homeland as early as 2015. The Phase Four also assumes that the development of the SM-3 interceptor will proceed on schedule. Given the current fiscal environment, this will be increasingly difficult for the Department of Defense.

The Aegis system is said to provide coverage against medium- and intermediate-range missiles. It is not until Phase Four that it is slated to be capable countering long-range missiles. As experts at The Heritage Foundation point out, however, Aegis can be given the capability of countering long-range missiles at a much earlier date than the 2020 so long as proper command-and-control arrangements are put in place and the interceptor in the Aegis weapon system is tied to a properly positioned surface radar. This would further increase its effectiveness and reliability of the system. This raises a question: Why wait until 2020 and not give Aegis the desired capability at a much earlier date?

So far, the Administration seems to be on track regarding Phases One and Two of the EPAA. This is essential, as it is wise to involve European allies. Agreements with Poland, Romania, and Turkey should translate into Europe taking defense more seriously and investing in its own security. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization 2010 Strategic Concept declared missile defense the core element of the collective defense, further raising stakes in the ballistic missile protection of Europe.

On the other hand, the EPAA fails to advance a program for deploying space-based interceptors. Worse, the Obama Administration has demonstrated the willingness to subordinate the missile defense program to advance its arms control and nuclear disarmament agendas. This means that there is a high likelihood that the U.S. will withdraw certain elements of its own EPAA proposal in the future. This would be an unfortunate signal for U.S. allies relying on the United States for their security in Europe and around the world.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

While opinions about America’s post–9/11 policies come and go, facts remain: The U.S. has thwarted 40 terrorist plots through an aggressive and prioritized plan of offense to protect America. That is not a plan to abandon now, in an age of increasingly high-tech terrorism.

As John Yoo, a former official in the U.S. Department of Justice between 2001–2003, said yesterday at The Heritage Foundation, “The most important thing to happen in the U.S. in the last 10 years was nothing… the most important question to ask is why and whether it was worth it.”

Now a legal scholar, Yoo bared his thoughts in a new, multi-authored book of essays on the 9/11 tragedy and its aftermath, Confronting Terror. The book includes reflections from a variety of notable figures on issues like presidential authority during a time of war, enforced interrogation, and other controversial issues.

In the 10 years since al-Qaeda terrorists killed nearly 3,000 American citizens, there has been much anger and some justice—but often, profound disagreement on the best way to combat a new kind of war with a stateless enemy.

Yoo, a co-editor of the book with Dean Reuter, appeared on a panel with contributors former ACLU President Nadine Strossen and Heritage’s Ed Meese.

On 9/11, the future of America’s national security situation was immediately turned upside down. While the nation is unquestionably safer today than it was before 9/11, security questions remain delicate as intelligence experts and military leaders attempt to navigate a safe but effective pathway.

In the book, Yoo criticizes the Obama Administration’s opposition to holding prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, where enhanced interrogation tactics have had led to life-saving information. When American intelligence can no longer obtain that kind of valuable material from the only people who have it, how will the U.S. thwart their plans?

As Yoo writes:

Gaining the information in the heads of terrorist leaders remains the most effective means for stopping terrorist attacks on the U.S. homeland. Our enemy has no territory, population or regular armed forces. It operates covertly, concealing its movements and communications within everyday economic traffic and aims to launch a surprise attack on innocent civilian targets…only by learning al-Qaeda’s plans can we preempt its attacks on the U.S. homeland.

What is known is that the U.S. counterterrorism strategy has worked. To alter a successful tactic for political gain would be foolish. Ten years removes America from the shock of the attacks, but time has offered determined terrorists space to refine plans for another attack.

A big part of keeping attacks at bay is also a strong troop presence overseas. While the President made some good choices to keep troops in place, his strategy has been flawed from the start. Now it’s getting worse, as Congress cuts an already burdened defense budget and faces a heavy troop drawdown—an order that came before the troop buildup even began. Fulfilling political promises to withdraw troops has trumped military security and the necessary incremental assessments President Obama should make as the 2012 election nears.

As Heritage’s James Carafano wrote yesterday on Fox News.com:

The president believes America can be kept safe with a “small footprint” defense—a limited number of special-forces boots, smart missiles and attack drones that can play “whack-a-mole” with a selected number of targets. Covert operations and surgical strikes can be useful tactically, but they are no good as a world-wide strategy.

… Meanwhile, Mr. Obama will peck at them from afar–just as Presidents Clinton and Bush did before 9/11. In a few years we’ll be right back where we were on September 10, 2001.

Yoo echoed these sentiments, noting the success of U.S. intelligence operations in their many forms, including the Patriot Act and enhanced interrogation techniques. He credited the killing of Osama bin Laden as President Obama’s “greatest foreign policy and national security achievement”—recognizing that it came about only through intelligence learned from those detained under the laws of war combined with electronic surveillance to locate bin Laden’s hideout.

As Yoo reminded, most of the post–9/11 national security agenda was approved by a bipartisan majority of Congress again and again. Many who voted for the security provisions now in place have flip-flopped in order to appease a political base.

It’s too easy to revert to pre–9/11 thinking, but America will wish it hadn’t if and when terror strikes again. We are still a nation at war. It’s no accident that 9/11 was the only attack of its kind—lest President Obama and others in Congress begin to think otherwise.

Quick Hits:

• TSA will reportedly ease up on airport security screenings for children under 12, with less intrusive pat-downs and the ability to keep shoes on.
• Like others in the Obama Administration, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has denied any knowledge of the Fast & Furious gun tracker program.
• A general in charge of U.S. cyberwarfare said yesterday that computer-based attacks will  be a growing threat in the future.
• Members of the new, joint Super-committee will meet Thursday night to begin negotiations on how to save at least $1.2 Trillion over the next 10 years.
• The threat of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is serious and could result in a nightmare even worse than 9/11.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

Last week, the Bipartisan Policy Center’s National Security Preparedness Group (NSPG)—a follow on to the original 9/11 Commission—reported that, 10 years after 9/11, nine of the 41 recommendations made by the commission remain unfulfilled. With scores like that, this report card certainly isn’t going to make it on anyone’s fridge.

The NSPG’s findings point to several key recommendations of the commission that have not been met. For one, some seven years after the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created, congressional oversight remains abysmal. DHS remains subject to oversight by a total of 108 different congressional committees and subcommittees. This is in stark contrast to the Department of Defense, which, with a budget 10 times greater than DHS’s and millions more employees, is subject to oversight from only 36 committees and subcommittees.

These reports looking at the progress in meeting the 9/11 recommendations are nothing new. Roughly every year since 9/11, DHS has issued its own reports on implementing the commission’s recommendations. Each year however, these reports seem only to “epitomize everything that is wrong with the current state of homeland security: too much triumphalism and not enough recognition of the pressing challenges in building the homeland security enterprise that the nation needs…. [These reports] contain little discussion of whether these recommendations are still relevant or whether they are the right answer in the first place.”

The fact of the matter is that the 9/11 Commission findings focused on the problems of 10 years ago as they were understood then. A look at the experience of the past 10 years suggests different answers.

Reviewing the lessons learned from the past 10 years is certainly important; however, Congress and the Administration should remember that we aren’t fighting the same war we were 10 years ago. Winning the global war against terrorists and ensuring that the nation never relives the tragedy of 9/11 requires that we look toward the next iteration of homeland security.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

Heritage’s Jim Carafano appeared on CBS’s “Early Show” to discuss the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) wanting a blank check. FEMA says it has too little money in the Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) due to its federalizing a record number of natural disasters this year. (Watch the video here.)

As Carafano notes, FEMA needs to save its resources—funding especially—for truly catastrophic events, and get out of the business of bailing out states for natural disasters that occur with fairly predictable regularity. This issue of federalization of disasters is vividly illustrated by this chart and discussed in our latest report, “Homeland Security 4.0: Overcoming Centralization, Complacency, and Politics.” As previously discussed, Representative Eric Cantor (R–VA) is spot on to demand spending cuts elsewhere before beefing up FEMA’s DRF.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

Many will quietly and somberly remember 9/11 on the tenth anniversary of the terrorist attacks that killed over 3,000 Americans. Indiana resident Karen Hall will do it a bit more loudly, leading a caravan of patriots across the country with the flags of each of America’s 50 states sailing out their windows.

It was three days after 9/11 when Hall first rallied a similar flag parade together in Key West, Florida, where she was living at the time. In an effort fueled by passion and love of country, Hall gathered a group of local Floridians to walk down the street holding high their American flags to show support and honor for the United States.

Coincidentally, a biker rally was happening in Key West that day and many in the crowd joined the parade, forming what Hall called an “honor guard” around her group of marchers. The event caught the attention of others eager to do something to stand up for their recently attacked country.

Since that day in 2001, Hall has been pondering an even bigger event to mark the tenth anniversary of the attacks. An event, she says, that will “show that every state across America has not forgotten and never will.”

Her quest to honor this day 10 years later underscores the reality that the fight is not over and the threat has not ceased. America must remain on guard.

Heritage experts write:

The nation has undergone tremendous changes in how we do business on homeland security since September 11, 2001. There have been a number of successes. However, the biggest challenges remain. Namely, we must overcome the challenges associated with centralization, complacency, and politics if we are to stay ahead in the war on terrorism and build a healthy homeland security enterprise capable of tackling the threats we face.

Hall’s event, officially called “The 9/11 10th Anniversary Flag Promenade” has gained the attention of local media and has a quickly growing Facebook page as well. It’s been featured on Oprah’s “Dream Board” Web site, and a 9/11 plaque to be hung in the Pentagon will feature the names of Hall and several others involved in the “Promenade” effort.

After the trip across the country, which Hall hopes will attract more and more people along the way, the caravan will make a pit stop in Indiana on September 8 for a festival to promote the event with food, music, speakers, and—of course—flags. Then the group will then pack up for a three-stop trip to Washington, Pennsylvania, and New York City to pay tribute at the attacked areas.

Hall emphasized that her event is not politically related and that she hopes to represent a nation standing united together saying, “We can’t let this happen again.” She was re-inspired to make the event happen with the killing of Osama bin Laden. That occurrence, too, reminds America of the work required to maintain freedom. The job is never done.

As Heritage President Ed Feulner wrote the day after bin Laden’s death:

That full range of tools must be applied to the United States’ continued efforts against terrorism in Afghanistan and around the world. Bin Laden’s death is a demoralizing blow against al-Qaeda that could be followed up by additional strikes against other al-Qaeda leaders. But though this is a significant achievement, much work remains.

Hall is still gathering the final details for her cross-country trip, but attention for the cause is growing. Indiana Senator Richard Lugar and State Senator Brent Steele have both supported it by sending official Indiana flags for the journey.

One woman’s inspiration to honor 9/11 heroes and never forget that fateful day demonstrates the kind of everlasting diligence it takes to protect and preserve freedom for generations to come.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.