The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security have been teaming up with a group of private sector security firms and individuals to protect our nation’s infrastructure. Twenty-three thousand people now have specialized status as it pertains to the FBI, as well as American law. The group, InfraGard, basically serves the function of a surrogate homeland security operation. Their aim is to increase counter-terrorism information sharing between the government and their group, as well as the sharing of information relating to major crimes, with an emphasis on terrorism.

“This doesn’t surprise me at all,” said senior David Logwood, a political science major. “Cheney and Bush have been on this privatization kick from the start, so it totally makes sense that they would go after homeland security.”

Members of the group have direct phone numbers to the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and other government offices that aren’t released to the general public. Members also receive terrorism briefings that aren’t made available to the public.

In one case, InfraGard members were told of an alleged terrorist plot before elected officials. In November 2001, the FBI caught wind of a plot to bomb bridges in California. They alerted InfraGard members, but not then-governor Gray Davis.

“You’d think an elected official would be the first to know, not the last,” Steve Maviglio, the press secretary of the former governor, said to The Progressive.

InfraGard has become, in essence, a deputized member of our national security operation. This allows the group to move outside the legal boundaries set in place to prevent illegal activity by law enforcement. For example, InfraGard’s records can be kept secret, as they are not included in the Freedom of Information Act. Also, they are not forced to accept oversight by Congress or the Justice Department.

Also, in addition to the terrorism briefings, InfraGard members have been granted certain rights by the FBI for use in emergencies. The most frightening of those is the alleged “license to kill” clause, which gives InfraGard members the right to use deadly force to protect the infrastructure during periods of martial law.

Although the FBI denies that this clause exists, one member claims its alleged validity. According to this member, during a meeting, the FBI and Homeland Security gave presentations during which the topic of a terrorist attack and subsequent martial law came up.

“Then they said when – not if – martial law is declared, it was our responsibility to protect our portion of the infrastructure, and if we had to use deadly force to protect it, we couldn’t be prosecuted,” said the member, who wished to remain anonymous, to The Progressive.

While some might argue that our national security needs as many helping hands as it can get, for others there are serious problems with the deputizing of a privately owned company. Many wonder how far this outsourcing will go.

“It’s a terrible idea for private companies to be involved in something as important as homeland security,” Logwood said. “I mean, just look at the disaster Blackwater has caused.