[ad_1]
The US Attorney General, in consultation with intelligence agencies, determines the Homeland Security threat level based on qualitative information about the likelihood of an attack. The threat level is indicated through a color-coded system of five levels. Critics have raised concerns about transparency and the potential harm of alerting potential attackers. Defenders argue that communicating changes to the threat level is important, even without specific details. A task force recommended changing the advisory system to only three levels.
The level of internal security threat, or threat condition, to the United States (US) is determined by the United States Attorney General in cooperation with the Department of Homeland Security. While there are some guides to how this is determined, ultimately it is information that US security and intelligence agencies have regarding the potential for an attack against the United States. The Homeland Security threat level is based on qualitative information about the likelihood of an attack against the United States and is not based on any sort of quantitative or numerical system.
Following the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, the Department of Homeland Security established the Homeland Security Advisory System. This system indicates the Homeland Security threat level through a series of color-coded indicators. The Homeland Security threat level consists of five levels of threat alerts: green for low threat level, blue for general or supervised threat risk, yellow for high threat level, orange for high threat level and red for a serious threat risk.
The threat level at any given time is set by the United States Attorney General, who consults with intelligence agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Central Intelligence Agency for security information regarding potential threats. The Attorney General then sets or adjusts the Internal Security Threat Level based on the information he has received. By showing the level of threat to the public, the hope is that people will adjust their behaviors and be more vigilant in detecting potential threats and risks.
There has been criticism, however, of the advisory system and the way Homeland Security’s threat level is established and explained. On numerous occasions, the threat level was adjusted due to a “non-specific threat” or a specific threat that could not be publicly identified due to national security concerns. For many critics, this lack of transparency has often been seen as reducing the effectiveness of the advisory system. Since people aren’t being told what the threat is, critics say, the change to the threat level to Homeland Security doesn’t actually help convey any useful information.
Other critics have even warned that use of the advisory system could ultimately serve to harm the public welfare, as it also serves to alert potential attackers to when the United States might be aware of some type of attack. Defenders of the advisory system, however, say communicating changes to Homeland Security’s threat level is important even without specific details, and that alerting potential attackers can act as a deterrent. In 2009, a bipartisan task force under President Barack Obama recommended that the advisory system be changed only to the three highest threat levels, as the threat level had never turned blue or green in the eight years since the advisory system was created. advice.
[ad_2]