Terrorism Disadvantage DKC-NAUDL 2015-16
Terrorism Disadvantage
Glossary
1NC Terrorism Disadvantage-7
Uniqueness
Uniqueness – Surveillance Increasing
Links
Link – Surveillance solves terrorist plots-10
Link – Surveillance is necessary for timely response
Link – Surveillance solves meta-data intelligence
Link – Surveillance solves bulk intelligence
Link – Surveillance solves SIGNIT intelligence-5
Link – Surveillance solves terrorist financing
Link – Surveillance solves counter-terror efforts
Link – Surveillance solves Al Qaeda sleeper cells
Link – Surveillance solves cyber attack
Answer to: Surveillance fails at solving a terrorist attack-4
Specific Case Links
Link – Immigration Surveillance-7
Link – NSA Reform – Generic-9
Link – PATRIOT Act
Impacts
Impact – Terrorism is the most important security threat
Impact – Terrorism causes death
Impact – Terrorism threatens freedom
Impact – Terrorism hurts psychological well-being
Answer to: Terrorist attack is unlikely
Answer to: Terrorists aren’t a threat
Impact – Terrorist attack causes human rights violation
Impact- ISIS is a Threat
Impact – AQAP is a threat
Impact – Al Qaeda is a threat
Impact – Cyber Attacks threaten national security-3
Affirmative Answers
Surveillance does not solve terror plots
Surveillance does not solve terror plots - extensions
Surveillance does not solve terror plots - extensions
Surveillance does not solve terrorist attack
Intelligence gathering does not matter
Financial data tracking does not matter
Terrorist attack isn’t a national security threat
Terrorist attack is unlikely
Glossary
NSA – The National Security Agency – this is a government agency that is responsible for monitoring, collection, and processing of information for foreign intelligence. The NSA was one of the agencies exposed by Edward Snowden in 2013 as an agency conducting surveillance on domestic (and foreign) populations for counter-terror efforts
SIGINT – Signal intelligence – this is a type of intelligence that is largely collected by the NSA. SIGINT is the process of collecting telecommunication data for counter-intelligence purposes
Bulk Surveillance – this is the collection of massive amounts of telecommunication information that isn’t all individual monitored, but bits and pieces are collected and pieced together by computer systems to monitor certain activity
AUMF – The Authorization for Use of Military Force – this is a piece of legislation signed by congress after the attacks of 9/11 and authorizes the use ofUnited States Armed Forcesagainst those responsible for theattacks on September 11, 2001. The authorization granted thePresidentthe authority to use all "necessary and appropriate force" against those whom he determined "planned, authorized, committed or aided" the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups.
Al Qaeda – Al Qaeda is one of the largest terrorist networks in the world that is a radical fundamentalist group often held responsible for the 9/11 attacks. They have networks operating all across the globe in various countries in Africa, Europe and Central Asia.
AQAP – Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula – it is considered one of Al Qaeda’s most active branches and operates primarily in Yemen and Saudi Arabia
ISIS – The Islamic State of Iraq – this is an extremist terrorist organization that occupies territory in Syria and Iraq. While many folks that subscribe to Islam denounce the activities of ISIS, they are held responsible for war crimes, genocide, and massive ethnic cleansing in the region and are one of the most active terrorist groups attempting to retaliate against the United States
1
Terrorism Disadvantage DKC-NAUDL 2015-16
NAUDL 2015-16
1NC Terrorism Disadvantage
A. Uniqueness – Domestic surveillance activities are expanding with no expectation to decline
Dahl, Assistant Professor at Nataval Postgraduate School, 2011
Erik. “Domestic Intelligence Today: More Security but Less Liberty?.” Homeland Security Affairs 7, 10 Years After: The 9/11 Essays (September 2011).
Unless the threat situation changes dramatically, we are not likely to see a new American domestic intelligence agency anytime soon. In the place of an “American MI-5,” however, a huge and expensive domestic intelligence system has been constructed.This system has thus far succeeded in keeping America safer than most experts would have predicted ten years ago, but it has also reduced civil liberties in ways that many Americans fail to understand. Precisely because it was unplanned and is decentralized, this domestic intelligence system has not received the oversight it deserves. In the long run, American liberty as well as security will gain from a fuller discussion of the benefits and risks of homeland security intelligence.
1NC Terrorism Disadvantage
B. Link – curtailing domestic surveillance prevents intelligence agencies from stopping a terrorist attack – this is empirically true
Inserra, Research Associate from the Heritage Foundation, 2015
("68th Terrorist Plot Calls for Major Counterterrorism Reforms,"
This 68th Islamist terrorist plot or attack is the 57th homegrown terrorist attack or plot and the 10th targeting a mass gathering, the third most common target. The attack also comes as part of a recent wave of attacks and plots, as this is the sixth Islamist terrorist plot or attack in 2015. All of the plots and attacks this year have been perpetrated by individuals who claim to support the Islamic State to varying degrees. The FBI has stated that Simpson wanted to commit jihad with ISIS, and press reports indicate that he may have been in secret communications with ISIS members.[6]
Regardless, with these attacks and the increasing numbers of individuals in the U.S. seeking to support or join ISIS and al-Qaeda affiliates, the U.S. is currently facing what is arguably the most concentrated period of terrorist activity in the homeland since 9/11. Director James Comey of the FBI has recent warned that “hundreds, maybe thousands” of individuals across the U.S. are being directly solicited by ISIS and urged to attack. Other senior officials, including Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson, the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and the director of the National Counterterrorism Center Nicholas Rasmussen have also noted the increasing threat of terrorism here at home.[7]
Strengthening the Counterterrorism Enterprise
In light of these warnings, the U.S. cannot be passive. Heritage has recommended numerous counterterrorism policies for Congress to address, including:
Streamlining U.S. fusion centers. Congress should limit fusion centers to the approximately 30 areas with the greatest level of risk as identified by the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI). Some exceptions might exist, such as certain fusion centers that are leading cybersecurity or other important topical efforts. The remaining centers should then be fully funded and resourced by UASI.
Pushing the FBI toward being more effectively driven by intelligence. While the FBI has made high-level changes to its mission and organizational structure, the bureau is still working to integrate intelligence and law enforcement activities. This will require overcoming cultural barriers and providing FBI intelligence personnel with resources, opportunities, and the stature they need to become a more effective and integral part of the FBI.
Ensuring that the FBI shares information more readily and regularly with state and local law enforcement and treats state and local partners as critical actors in the fight against terrorism. State,
1NC Terrorism Disadvantage
[The Evidence Continues]
local, and private-sector partners must send and receive timely information from the FBI. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should play a role in supporting these partners’ efforts by acting as a source or conduit for information to partners and coordinating information sharing between the FBI and its partners.
Designating an office in DHS to coordinate countering violent extremism (CVE) efforts. CVE efforts are spread across all levels of government and society. DHS is uniquely situated to lead the federal government’s efforts to empower local partners. Currently, DHS’s CVE working group coordinates efforts across DHS components, but a more substantial office will be necessary to manage this broader task.
Supporting state, local, and civil society partners. Congress and the Administration should not lose sight of the fact that all of the federal government’s efforts must be focused on empowering local partners. The federal government is not the tip of the spear for CVE efforts; it exists to support local partners who are in the best position to recognize and counter radicalization in their own communities.
Maintaining essential counterterrorism tools.Support for important investigative tools is essential to maintaining the security of the U.S. and combating terrorist threats. Legitimate government surveillance programs are also a vital component of U.S. national security and should be allowed to continue. The need for effective counterterrorism operations, however, does not relieve the government of its obligation to follow the law and respect individual privacy and liberty. In the American system, the government must do both equally well.
1NC Terrorism Disadvantage
C. Impact – an attack on US soil is imminent and this inflicts suffering and death against innocent people
Kephart, Researcher at Center for Immigration Studies, 2005 [Janice Kephart, Moving Beyond the 9/11 Staff Report on Terrorist Travel,
Al Qaeda operatives discussed here were strategically positioned throughout the United States -- often in places not previously associated with terrorist activity, such as Peoria and Chicago, Illinois; Columbus, Ohio; Baltimore, Maryland, and its suburbs; Seattle, Washington; Portland, Oregon; Minneapolis, Minnesota; and upstate New York. A couple of al Qaeda operatives covered in this report are still at large and currently unindicted, including Adnan Shukrijumah and Aafia Siddiqui, yet are included here because they are high on the FBI's list for questioning and spent long periods of time in the United States. The lists found throughout this report (under immigration benefit subject headings at the end of each section) begin with Mir AimalKansi, who in January 1993 opened fire outside CIA headquarters in McLean, Virginia; the most recent cases, from 2004, involve the surveillance cases in New York City; in Charlotte, North Carolina; Nashville, Tennessee; Las Vegas, Nevada; and southern California. All told, 21 of these terrorists committed five attacks against U.S. interests causing a total of 3,341 deaths and 8,463 injuries; 29 were involved in 12 unexecuted plots. Five hijackers from 9/11 had clear immigration violations, while one (Marwan Al-Shehhi), had a possible violation; thus, 13 hijackers are not included in the chart below. I do not discuss the 9/11 plotters in this report or other earlier terrorists in detail, as each is covered in 9/11 and Terrorist Travel. In 47 instances, immigration benefits sought or acquired prior to 9/11 enabled the terrorists to stay in the United States after 9/11 and continue their terrorist activities. This includes three terrorists whose visas or entries into the United States were on 9/2/01, 9/6/01 and 9/10/01. In three instances, terrorists sought immigration benefits after 9/11. One political asylee associated with the 9/11 hijackers was denied and deported after having previous immigration violations. The second managed to maintain his student status in the United States through mid-2002. A third gained legal permanent residency status in 2002. Although each of these 94 terrorists had committed an immigration violation of some kind, criminal charges alone were brought in at least 37 instances and immigration charges in 18. Indictments in 50 cases included both immigration and criminal charges. There have been a total of 15 deportations and 23 criminal convictions. In 16 instances, individuals were not convicted (e.g., the six 9/11 hijackers), are being held as an enemy combatant (e.g., Khalid Sheikh Mohammed), or have fled the United States (e.g., Anwar Al-Aulaqi, an imam associated with the 9/11 hijackers and believed to be now in Yemen.)
1
Terrorism Disadvantage DKC-NAUDL 2015-16
NAUDL 2015-16
Uniqueness – Surveillance Increasing
(__)
(__) FBI terrorism surveillance activities are increasing now and effective in the status quo
Dahl, Assistant Professor at Nataval Postgraduate School, 2011
Erik. “Domestic Intelligence Today: More Security but Less Liberty?.” Homeland Security Affairs 7, 10 Years After: The 9/11 Essays (September 2011).
The FBI is expanding its domestic intelligence and surveillance operations in other ways, as well.It is changing its own internal rules to give its agents more leeway to conduct investigations and surveillance, such as by searching databases or sorting through a person’s trash.35 And it appears to be making greater use of undercover informants in intelligence investigations, leading in some cases to successful arrests and prosecutions, but in others to controversy.36
(__) Newest government reports show surveillance is increasing by the government and is effective
Gilens, ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, 2012
(Naomi, ACLU, "New Justice Department Documents Show Huge Increase in Warrantless Electronic Surveillance,"
Justice Department documents released today by the ACLU reveal that federal law enforcement agencies are increasingly monitoring Americans’ electronic communications, and doing so without warrants, sufficient oversight, or meaningful accountability. The documents, handed over by the government only after months of litigation, are the attorney general’s 2010 and 2011 reports on the use of “pen register” and “trap and trace” surveillance powers. The reports show a dramatic increase in the use of these surveillance tools, which are used to gather information about telephone, email, and other Internet communications.The revelations underscore the importance of regulating and overseeing the government’s surveillance power. (Our original Freedom of Information Act request and our legal complaint are online.)
(__) Data shows electronic surveillance is on the rise
Gilens, ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, 2012
(Naomi, ACLU, "New Justice Department Documents Show Huge Increase in Warrantless Electronic Surveillance,"
Electronic Surveillance Is Sharply on the Rise The reports that we received document an enormous increase in the Justice Department’s use of pen register and trap and trace surveillance. As the chart below shows, between 2009 and 2011 the combined number of original orders for pen registers and trap and trace devices used to spy on phones increased by 60%, from 23,535 in 2009 to 37,616 in 2011.
1
Terrorism Disadvantage DKC-NAUDL 2015-16
NAUDL 2015-16
Link – Surveillance solves terrorist plots
(__) Domestic surveillance solves terrorist plots – since 9/11, the NSA program has prevent 50 homeland threats
New York Times, 2013
(Charlie Savage, "N.S.A. Chief Says Surveillance Has Stopped Dozens of Plots,"
WASHINGTON — Top national security officials on Tuesday promoted two newly declassified examples of what they portrayed as “potential terrorist events” disrupted by government surveillance. The cases were made public as Congress and the Obama administration stepped up a campaign to explain and defend programs unveiled by recent leaks from a former intelligence contractor.
One case involved a group of men in San Diego convicted of sending money to an extremist group in Somalia. The other was presented as a nascent plan to bomb the New York Stock Exchange, although its participants were not charged with any such plot. Both were described by Sean Joyce, deputy director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, at a rare public oversight hearing by the House Intelligence Committee.
At the same hearing, Gen. Keith B. Alexander, the head of the National Security Agency, said that American surveillance had helped prevent “potential terrorist events over 50 times since 9/11,” including at least 10 “homeland-based threats.” But he said that a vast majority of the others must remain secret.
(__) The plan prevents the government from accessing critical information to prevent a terrorist attack on US soil
Sterman, masters from Georgetown University, 2014 "DO NSA'S BULK SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS STOP TERRORISTS?,"
June 5, 2013, the Guardian broke the first story in what would become a flood of revelations regarding the extent and nature of the NSA’s surveillance programs. Facing an uproar over the threat such programs posed to privacy, the Obama administration scrambled to defend them as legal and essential to U.S. national security and counterterrorism. Two weeks after the first leaks by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden were published, President Obama defended the NSA surveillance programs during a visit to Berlin, saying: “We know of at least 50 threats that have been averted because of this information not just in the United States, but, in some cases, threats here in Germany. So lives have been saved.”Gen. Keith Alexander, the director of the NSA, testified before Congress that: “the information gathered from these programs provided the U.S. government with critical leads to help prevent over 50 potential terrorist events in more than 20 countries around the world.” Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said on the House floor in July that “54 times [the NSA programs] stopped and thwarted terrorist attacks both here and in Europe – saving real lives.”
Link – Surveillance solves terrorist plots
(__) Domestic surveillance data mining capabilities prevents a terrorist attack before it is too late
Yoo, 7 John, Heller Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley, and a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, "THE TERRORIST SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM AND THE CONSTITUTION," SSRN
It seems that critics are mostly interested in blindly limiting the powers of the government, even as it fights a tough war. They presume the American government to be acting in bad faith, and so all of its activities must be treated with the highest possible level of suspicion. Meanwhile, data mining technology and databases are exploding in the private sector.121 It would be ironic if al Qaeda and private individuals were permitted greater legal access to new data technology than our own government, especially in wartime. Overreaction and plain scare tactics killed TIA, a potentially valuable tool to counter al Qaeda’s offensive within the United States.122 It made little sense to cut off TIA at the research and development stage out of sheer anti-government paranoia. There was no chance to see what computer technology could even do, no discussion of whether adequate safeguards for privacy could be installed, and no opportunity to evaluate whether data mining would yield leads on terrorist activity that would be worth any costs to privacy. No analysis could be done on the legal issues. Perhaps worst of all, we could never explore the ways that computers could be used to protect privacy. Data mining scans many perfectly innocent transactions and activities, but this in itself does not make the search illegal; even searches of homes and businesses or wiretaps with warrants will encounter many items or communications that are not linked to criminal activity.123 The understandable concern is that much innocent activity will come under scrutiny by data (discussing the need for an attenuated probable cause requirement in the national security context, because “intelligence officers will often not have a good idea . . . what they are looking for”).. 21 mining, unless controlled in some way by a warrant requirement.124 But if computers are doing the primary scanning, privacy might not be implicated because no human eyes would ever have seen the data.125 Only when the computer programs highlight individuals who fit parameters that reasonably suggest further study for terrorist links—say a young man who has traveled from Ohio to Pakistan several times, has taken flight lessons in the U.S., has received large deposits of cash wired into his account from abroad, and has purchased equipment that could be used for bomb-making—would a human intelligence officer view the records