SAGE Journal Articles

Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ARTICLES

The study of homeland security is a challenging field of study that requires experts, students, and members of society to understand the underlying reasons for the creation of homeland security systems, as well as the configuration of these systems.  Those who examine homeland security must necessarily study data and theories grounded from a variety of disciplines, including political science, public administration, and the administration of justice.

Federal, state, and local authorities are perennially challenged by the problem of designing homeland security systems which reflect threats emanating from the current terrorist environment.  These challenges are not new, and have historically posed very serious policy questions for all sectors of society.  Unfortunately, these are challenges that are not easily resolved, and which will continue to be at the center of domestic policy.. The possibility of political violence is an unresolved problem, and exists across the nation.  There are no ideal political, national, or social solutions that guarantee immunity from the possibility of being touched by terrorist violence. 

The purpose of this online resource is to stimulate critical discussion about the attributes of homeland security systems and terrorist environments.  This resource is organized into thematic parts which correspond to the textbook’s chapters.  Articles have been selected from reputable scholarly journals, and additional articles are recommended for further study.

TEN CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS

  • Does a central cause exist which explains the creation of homeland security environments?
     
  • Is it possible to accurately predict the likelihood of terrorist violence?
     
  • What are the policy implications of research that indicates an association between homeland security measures and civil liberty challenges?
     
  • Do homeland security measures effectively reduce the incidence of terrorism?
     
  • Are particular levels of authority within the homeland security enterprise more effective in managing terrorist environments?
     
  • Are innovations such as target hardening effective?
     
  • How popular is the current homeland security enterprise?  What explains different public opinions in different regions?
     
  • What are some of the challenges faced by reformers who sincerely seek to reduce the extent of the homeland security enterprise in order to preserve civil liberty?
     
  • How important are international legal institutions and conventions for preventing terrorist violence?
     
  • Has enough research been conducted on the sociological and psychological impact of a pervasive homeland security environment?
     

CHAPTER 10.  Always Vigilant: Intelligence and Hardening the Target

Bentz, Blumenthal, and Potter discuss the data needed to enable emergency responders to effectively respond to CBRN incidents.  Betz and Stevens “attempt to interrogate some of the predominant forms of analogical reasoning within current cyber-security discourse, with a view to clarifying their unstated premises, major strengths and, vitally, points of conceptual failure.”  Bartosz Bolechów argues that the United States has committed a number of policy mistakes that are associated with its being the target of terrorist violence.  Karen Douglas, et. al. investigated online self-enhancement strategies by White supremacist groups.  Similarly, Margaret Duffy presents an analysis of the online activities of American hate groups, as does Brian Levin in his article.  Epkins investigates the reporting on terrorism by “prestige press” reporters.  McGuffin and Mitchell explore the military domain of cyberspace and its role in warfighting and planning.  Steve VanderHeiden explores the case for classifying attacks against inanimate targets—often practiced by ecological extremists—as acts of terrorism.

Bentz, Julie A., Daniel J. Blumenthal, and Bradley A. Potter.  “It’s All About the Data: Responding to International Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Incidents.”  In Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 70:4 (2014).

Betz, David J. and Tim Stevens.  “Analogical Reasoning and Cyber Security.”  In Security Dialogue.  (April 2013).

Bolechów, Bartosz.  “The United States of America Vis-à-Vis Terrorism: The Super Power’s Weaknesses and Mistakes.”  In American Behavioral Scientist, 48:6 (February 2005).

Douglas, Karen M., Craig McGarty, Ana-Maria Bliuc, and Girish Lala.  “Understanding Cyberhate: Social Competition and Social Creativity in Online White Supremacist Groups.”  In Social Science Computer Review, 23:1 (Spring 2005).

Duffy, Margaret E.  “Web of Hate: A Fantasy Theme Analysis of the Rhetorical Vision of Hate Groups Online.”  In Journal of Communication Inquiry, 27:3 (July 2003).

Epkins, Heather Davis.  “Working the ‘Front Lines’ in Washington, DC: Digital Age Terrorism Reporting by National Security Prestige Press.”  In Media, War & Conflict, vol. 5 (April 2012).

Levin, Brian.  “Cyberhate: A Legal and Historical Analysis of Extremists’ Use of Computer Networks in America.”  In American Behavioral Scientist, 45:6 (February 2002).

United States Department of State.  “White House Counterterrorism Reports.”  .

United States National Intelligence Council.  National Intelligence Estimate: The Terrorist Threat to the US Homeland.  Washington, D.C. (July 2007).

McGuffin, Chris and Paul Mitchell.  “On Domains: Cyber and the Practice of Warfare.”  In International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis, 69:3 (2014).

VanderHeiden, Steve.  “Eco-terrorism or Justified Resistance?  Radical Environmentalism and the ‘War on Terror’.”  In Politics & Society, 33:3 (September 2005).