Homeland Security Watch

News and analysis of critical issues in homeland security

March 11, 2009

Kansas City Coverage

Filed under: General Homeland Security — by Philip J. Palin on March 11, 2009

Kansas City newshounds got the scoop on the National Fusion Center Conference and Secretary Napolitano’s keynote.

Bill Draper, an AP reporter, filed a story on the speech with the Kansas City Star’s online edition.  As of 9:15 PM eastern DHS public affairs had not released a copy of the prepared remarks and I can’t find any other reports.

For even more local flavor – including KCs dry barbeque – check out Nadia Pflaum’s coverage of the conference in  The Pitch.

UPDATE: As of 6AM eastern Thursday still no prepared remarks that I can find.  Scott Canon with the Kansas City Star has filed a story focusing on Rod Beckstrom’s cybersecurity accusations and the concern that fusion centers will invade the privacy of citizens.  (There’s a good overview of the Beckstrom controversy in Computerworld.)  My day will have me away from the net for extended periods.  If you see the Secretary’s speech or substantive coverage of it, please use the comments function to give us all the link.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • Print
  • LinkedIn

1 Comment »

Comment by William R. Cumming

March 12, 2009 @ 8:43 am

Just noting for the record that the FUSION Centers whatever their performance were the one real reform of domestic intel system to prevent terrorism by enhanced information sharing. They are necessar and must be staffed and funded properly. But they must also have clear guidelines under which to operate. Remember that domestic intel and critical infrastructure protection (including Cyber Security) were the principal rational provided by the 9/11 Commission and others for the creation of a DHS. Border Protection and Controls and even FEMA inclusion were NOT a principal rationale. A good history of the formation of DHS is unavailable in my judgement, and what is clear is that the Hart-Rudman’s conclusions did not really include formation of a new Cabinet Department although frequently cited for that purpose. Personally I think that DHS should be largely focused on WMD incident/event protection and prevention and preparedness and response and recovery. There is still no coherent analysis of the the non-DHS players in the Homeland Security role. The result is certain critical programs, functions, and activities continue as step-children. Again in my opinion. A specific example would be the demise of the NEST teams, with the convoluted switch over from DOE to DHS in an actual event. We need this capability verified as existing now and 24/7 365 days a year. Again the proper subject of Congressional oversight.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>