HM502 Unit 5 DQ Topic 1: Infrastructure Protection A detailed discussion of threats to and the process of protecting critical infrastructure and key resources (CI/KR) sectors from man-made and natural disasters are essential for understanding one of the main missions of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). In detailed analysis of threats and protection challenges, several CI/KR sectors have emerged that require the attention of DHS professionals. These sectors include: · Agriculture and Food · Banking and Finance · Communications · Defense Industrial Base · Energy · Information Technology · National Monuments and Icons · Transportation Systems · Water What are some of the major threats to the CI/KR sectors identified above? Discuss some of the critical vulnerabilities of these CI/KR sectors. What are some of the prime consequences if these CI/KR sectors are damaged or destroyed? Describe DHS plans to deter threats, mitigate vulnerabilities, and minimize consequences. Topic 1 Student Response #1 (Respond to Jeffery) Jeffery Bailey Hello classmates/Professor The Homeland Security Act of 2002 provides the basis for Department of Homeland Security (DHS) responsibilities in the protection of the Nation’s CIKR. The act assigns DHS the responsibility for developing a comprehensive national plan for securing CIKR and for recommending the “measures necessary to protect the key resources and critical infrastructure of the United States coordination with other agencies of the Federal Government and in cooperation with State and local government agencies and authorities, the private sector, and other entities. (Chertoff, 2009) The NIPP defines the organizational structures that provide the framework for coordination of CIKR protection efforts at all levels of government, their framework includes the action of setting goals and objectives, Identify Assets, Systems and Networks, Assess Risk, consequences, vulnerabilities, and threats. Prioritize, Implement Programs and Measure effectiveness. The NIPP Conducts research and development and using technology to improve CIKR protection-related capabilities to ensure refined risk assessments for many years into the future. The NIPP assistance programs offers Federal grant assistance to State, local, tribal, and territorial entities; and complement relevant private sector activities. Part of their mission is to make America safer and more secure from cyber attacks and also both man made and natural disasters. Together, the NIPP and SSPs provide the mechanisms for identifying critical assets, systems, and networks, and their associated sectors. In dealing with risk and emergencies the NIPP has Sector Specific Agencies that are assigned certain areas of responsibilities such as Agriculture, Food, Energy and Water. Banking and Finance Communications, in dealing with the potential risk that may befall any of these entities the NIPP takes critical steps to assess, mitigate, protect, and plan for futur ...

1. HM502
Unit 5 DQ
Topic 1: Infrastructure Protection
A detailed discussion of threats to and the process of protecting
critical infrastructure and key resources (CI/KR) sectors from
man-made and natural disasters are essential for understanding
one of the main missions of the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security (DHS). In detailed analysis of threats and protection
challenges, several CI/KR sectors have emerged that require the
attention of DHS professionals. These sectors include:
· Agriculture and Food
· Banking and Finance
· Communications
· Defense Industrial Base
· Energy
· Information Technology
· National Monuments and Icons
· Transportation Systems
· Water
What are some of the major threats to the CI/KR sectors
identified above? Discuss some of the critical vulnerabilities of
these CI/KR sectors. What are some of the prime consequences
if these CI/KR sectors are damaged or destroyed? Describe DHS
plans to deter threats, mitigate vulnerabilities, and minimize
consequences.
Topic 1 Student Response #1 (Respond to Jeffery)
Jeffery Bailey
Hello classmates/Professor
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 provides the basis for
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) responsibilities in the

2. protection of the Nation’s CIKR. The act assigns DHS the
responsibility for developing a comprehensive national plan for
securing CIKR and for recommending the “measures necessary
to protect the key resources and critical infrastructure of the
United States coordination with other agencies of the Federal
Government and in cooperation with State and
local government agencies and authorities, the private sector,
and other entities. (Chertoff, 2009) The NIPP defines the
organizational structures that provide
the framework for coordination of CIKR protection efforts at all
levels of government, their framework includes the action of
setting goals and objectives, Identify Assets, Systems and
Networks, Assess Risk, consequences, vulnerabilities, and
threats. Prioritize, Implement Programs and Measure
effectiveness.
The NIPP Conducts research and development and using
technology to improve CIKR protection-related capabilities to
ensure refined risk assessments for many years into the future.
The NIPP assistance programs offers Federal grant assistance to
State, local, tribal, and territorial entities; and complement
relevant private sector activities. Part of their mission is to
make America safer and more secure from cyber attacks and
also both man made and natural disasters. Together, the NIPP
and SSPs provide the mechanisms for identifying critical assets,
systems, and networks, and their associated sectors. In dealing
with risk and emergencies the NIPP has Sector Specific
Agencies that are assigned certain areas of responsibilities such
as Agriculture, Food, Energy and Water. Banking and
Finance Communications, in dealing with the potential risk that
may befall any of these entities the NIPP takes critical steps to
assess, mitigate, protect, and plan for future emergencies. One
main threat to the entities that are named of course is terrorism,
terrorist will use any of these agencies to obtain or control or
impose a certain agenda. These are all areas that can have
devastating consequences to a city or state if under the control

3. of a terrorist organization. For instance a tainted water system
at its base could affect an cities health and resources, for this
reason California created a comprehensive review plan along
with DHS to address possible water system attacks also cyber -
attack as we have seen in our elections process can bring down
an informational structure or render it ineffective, some of the
vulnerabilities to these types of entities is the ever-changing
face of technology. In America we are relying more and more
on technology which in itself makes us vulnerable to the wrong
element. DHS works with CIKR partners to develop or improve
consequence assessment methodologies that can be applied to a
variety of asset such as the stated ones in this discussion. The
DHS provides scenarios for possible vulnerabilities in these
areas, they asses possible damages, possible fatalities, and
assess the economic loss to the economy. These are all ways
that risk mitigation and assessment help to protect certain
vulnerable assets.
Chertoff, M. (2009).
https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/NIPP_Plan.pdf. National
Infrastructure Protection Plan, pg1-188.
Topic 1: Student Response #2 (Respond to Skyler)
Skyler Fry
According to the National Infrastructure Protection Plan
(NIPP), the greatest risks to national security are severe
weather, catastrophic natural disasters, pandemic illnesses,
technical failures or accidents, chemical spills, acts of
terrorism, cyber-attacks, and other crimes with the intent to
disrupt essential services (U.S. Department of Homeland
Security., 2009). The energy sector is one of the most
vulnerable sectors as much of the energy infrastructure is
severely dated due to being privatized and the private
organizations only updating on a as needed basis in order to
expand their profit margin (American Society of Civil
Engineers., 2021). The risk of cyber attacks is also greater in

4. this sector than most of the other sectors due to the
exploitability available with holding power hostage. Many of
the sectors are interdependent upon another, for example if their
is a severe fuel shortage in the energy sector that would impact
the transportation sector which would in turn impact the food
and agriculture sector. The consequences involved if a sector is
damaged or destroyed include but are not limited to; major
economic and financial impact, security vulnerability, and lack
of basic necessities if not repaired or replaced in a sufficient
timeframe (Weiss & Weiss, 2019). According to the National
Strategy for Homeland Security, DHS acts as a liaison for
interagency and inter-sector cooperation to ensure that each
sector is strengthening their security in order to mitigate against
potential threats and ensuring that vulnerabilities are addressed
through various risk assessment strategies (U.S. Department of
Homeland Security., 2003).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2009). National
infrastructure physical protection plan. pp. 1-105. Retrieved
from http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/NIPP_Plan.pdf
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2003, February) The
national strategy for the physical protection of critical
infrastructures and key assets. Retrieved
from http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/Physical_Strategy.pdf.
pp 35-82.
American Society of Civil Engineers. (2021). Energy. ASCE's
2021 Infrastructure Report Card
. https://infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/energy/.
Weiss, M., & Weiss, M. (2019). An assessment of threats to the
American Power Grid. Energy, Sustainability and
Society. https://energsustainsoc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1
186/s13705-019-0199-y.

5. CJ513
Unit5 Assignment
Team Assignment Planning
Your team will be submitting a paper by the end of Unit 6
examining the nature of a specific terrorist attack. Your first
step will be, as a team, to choose one of the terrorist attacks
below and develop a plan for the successful completion of the
project. Your instructor will assign teams no later than the
beginning of Unit 5, and it will be the responsibility of your
team to complete the Assignment.
· Boston Marathon Bombing, April 15, 2013
While the team can write the project plan together, each team
member should submit a copy of the document to their Unit 5:
Assignment 2 Dropbox as an acknowledgement and acceptance
of the project plan.
Your paper should include the following sections:
● Introduction
*****● A description of the attack and the aftermath o Include
at least four characteristics specific to this attack. THIS IS MY
PART OF THE ASSIGNMENT- ONLY DO THIS PART WITH
REFERENCES.*****
● An evaluation of the motivations of the attacker(s), including
the extent to which the attack was motivated by: o Religious
beliefs o Ideological beliefs o Political beliefs
● The extent to which the attacker(s) acted as part of a terrorist
organization or group, including whether they pledged
allegiance to any group, and the associated implications
● The extent to which they may have been self-radicalized, and
the associated implications
● Lessons learned from the attack regarding the importance of
accurately understanding the nature of terrorist attacks. o
Include at least four lessons learned from the nature of the

6. attack.
● Conclusion Use at least four credible sources beyond the
assigned reading and discuss how you evaluated the credibility
of each source.
You may consult the Library, the internet, the textbook, other
course material, and any other outside resources in supporting
your task, using proper citations and references in APA style.
100 of the total points available for the team Assignment are
associated with the team submission, 30 of the total points are
associated with quality of individual contribution, and 20 points
are associated with your submission of the team evaluation form
(total Assignment points possible: 150).
CJ513
Unit 5 DQ
Topic 1: Characteristics of Right-Wing and Left-Wing
Terrorism
Discuss the various characteristics of right-wing and left-wing
terrorism within the United States. What are the similarities and
differences between the two? Do you believe that such attackers
typically belong to terrorist groups or organizations, or are they
more often self-radicalized? Provide specific examples to
support your post.
Topic 1: Student Response #1 (Respond to Joe)
Joe Cacioppo
Right-wing vs Left-wing
When examining the characteristics of right-wing terrorists,
they are composed of radicals or extremists who may fall into
either a Far Right group, or a Fringe Right group on the
classical ideological continuum. For the right-wing terrorists,
they center around the beliefs of ethnic, religious, or nationalist

7. superiority and justify violent actions as a way to reinforce their
superiority (Martin, 2018, p. 30.). Fringe right groups are
considered more extreme than far right groups and will employ
violence and feel they are being subjected to inferior groups,
religions or national interests. They tend to value power,
superiority and care about promoting their value system over
others they determine to be oppositional to theirs.
Left-wing terrorists may fall into a Left Fringe, Far Left groups
on the classical ideological continuum. In the fringe-left groups,
they use violence to justify their beliefs and feel they are at war
with an oppressive government and believe they are champions
of the poor or minority groups. In far left groups, they may be
believers in Marxist ideology and will use the democratic
process, to effect change. They may resort to demonstrations
and protests to promote reform. It is important to note, however
this style is only peaceful where civil protests are tolerated.
This style can become violent in countries that do not tolerate
protests, (Martin, 2018, table 2.3.).
In evaluating these groups on the classical ideological
continuum, the further left, or further right these groups are, the
greater the potential for violence. As the categories slide closer
to the middle, the ideologies appear to be less extreme, and both
sides tend to use the democratic process to effect change to
promote their beliefs (Martin, 2018, p. 29.) When evaluating if
such attackers belong to a certain terrorist group, organization,
or are self-radicalized, this may be answered in a variety of
ways. Each group along the classical ideological continuum
could be considered a terrorist group, an organization, or
perhaps be a lone-wolf attacker. This would require an
examination of who committed the attack, what type of attack
was used, and what their intentions were. For example, a
member of a left fringe group who became so enraged as a
result of George Floyd’s death who was protesting at a Black
Lives Matter rally and threw a Molotov cocktail at a vehicle
containing police officers could be viewed as a lone-wolf
terrorist, a criminal, or a professional agitator for Antifa who

8. his hell-bent on warring with a perceived oppressive police
force. By comparison, a similar violent attack by a fringe right
group could be generalized as a person armed with a rifle who
takes aim at government officials during a softball game, who
feels that destroying an existing government is necessary to
promote a change more suitable to his beliefs. In this instance,
the shooter would fall under a lone-wolf under the fringe right.
References:
Martin, G. 2018. Essentials of Terrorism, 5th Edition.
[[VitalSource Bookshelf version]]. Retrieved
from vbk://9781544342955
Topic 1: Student Response #2 (Respond to Travis)
Travis Reed
Good Evening Y’all
Right-wing terrorism refers to extremism response against an
apparent threat to a group's sense of specialness, value system,
and or its superiority assumption. This ideology is linked to
religious superiority or ethnonational beliefs (Windisch et al.,
2019). Rightists often try to preserve their superiority status
using aggressive and violent attacks to assert their status
(Windisch et al., 2019). They intend to return to the period of
lost glory because their value system has been usurped by
another culture or enemy group. Their justification for violence
is that their beliefs are opposed and attacked by unwanted
interests (Windisch et al., 2019). Right-wing terrorism is
usually based on nostalgic ideology. Most of the terrorist
attacks in the U.S. and abroad target Christians and fellow
Muslims who do not want to subscribe to extremist views. An
example is the 9/11 attack in which the Al Qaeda group sought
recognition by the U.S and the global community.
Left-wing terrorism is future-oriented whose goal is to conquer
an existing system or regime and implementing their ideology
of a new society (Windisch et al., 2019). Left-wing terrorism is
conducted because the group perceives themselves as oppressed

9. unjustly by a corrupt and biased government (Windisch et al.,
2019). This ethnonational group believes that they must achieve
the equality and justice that they deserve. Left-wing terrorism is
an extreme view of Marxist ideology which is idealistic. The
group justifies the use of violence because it considers itself at
war with an oppressive system.
These two groups have similarities in that they can belong to
terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, or be self-radicalized or
belong to an organization. For instance, Al Qaeda is being
involved in various left-wing incidences such as the 9/11 attack.
In addition, they can be self-radicalized such as the attack on
students at the University of North Carolina in 2006, which was
carried out by Mohammed Reza Taheri-Azar. In addition, the
two types of terrorism use violence to emphasize or pass their
information.
References
Windisch, S., Scott Ligon, G., & Simi, P. (2019).
Organizational [dis] trust: Comparing disengagement among
former left-wing and right-wing violent extremists. Studies
in Conflict & Terrorism, 42(6), 559-580.
v/r
Reed
Topic 1: Student Response #3 (Respond to Damon)
Damon Bradshaw
Right-Wing and Left-Wing Terrorism
Right-wing terrorism is a type of organized crime carried out by
individuals or groups with different ideological beliefs such as
white nationalism, ecofascism, neo-fascism, white separatism,
often acting in response to the perceived oppression of specific
people or groups (Ravndal, 2016). On the other hand, Malkki
(2018) cites that left-wing terrorism is a movement that aims to
overthrow the capitalist system and replace it with a socialist
one and can happen within already established socialist states.
Left-wing terrorism is also known as Marxist-Leninist
terrorism. The right and left-wing clusters are alike in that they

10. participate in terrorist and criminal activities to get funds for
their cause. The difference between the two groups is that the
right-wing is driven by anti-federal, racist, and religious issues.
In contrast, socio-economic and political issues drive the left-
wing. Right-wing terrorists believe that their actions will lead
to the establishment of authoritarian governments. At the same
time, left-wing terrorism is a movement that aims to overthrow
the capitalist system and replace it with a socialist one. “Based
on a CSIS data set of terrorist incidents, the most significant
threat likely comes from white supremacists, though anarchists
and religious extremists inspired by the Islamic State and al -
Qaeda could present a potential threat as well” (Jones, 2020).
Jones (2020) noted that since 1994 the number of attacks
carried out by the left and right-wing groups had outstripped
those carried out by groups inspired by al-Qaeda and the
Islamic State. Organized groups conduct these attacks, and
rarely are they self-radicalized. The right-wing movement in the
US is likely to be influenced by a complex contagion process,
which involves the transmission of radical ideology. The use of
social media and group membership increases the spread of
radical ideology.
Malkki, L. (2018). Left-wing terrorism. In Routledge Handbook
of Terrorism and Counterterrorism (pp. 87-97). Routledge.
Ravndal, J. A. (2016). Right-wing terrorism and violence in
Western Europe: Introducing the RTV dataset. Perspectives on
Terrorism, 10(3), 2-15.
Jones, S. (2020). The Escalating Terrorism Problem in the
United States. Retrieved 30 August 2021,
from https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-
problem-united-states
Topic #2: New Terrorism
Discuss the concept that Martin (2018) refers to as the New
Terrorism. How has modern extremist behavior contributed to
the development of this modern concept of terrorism? How can

11. acts of terrorism be prevented and deterred when these terrorists
do not fit squarely into the classical ideological continuum
discussed previously? Provide specific examples to support your
post.
Topic#2: Student Response #1(Respond to Angie)
Angie Georgi
Good morning Professor and Fellow Classmates:
Martin (2018) has described New Terrorism has modern
terrorists that are utilizing weapons to create as much damage
as possible while also creating the highest casualties as
possible. Extremists on their own will do whatever is necessary
to support any idea or cause, and their influence is great. So
when the combination of extremist behavior and terrorism is
presented, it becomes an even more volatile situation.
Religious ideas or causes is no longer the motive behind
terrorism, economic, social, and political views and causes are
now in the mix for motives. Because of the motive and drive of
the new terrorists, it is often more difficult to prevent acts of
terrorism. As previous stated, modern terrorists will do
whatever it takes to support their cause, so prevention and
deterrence is futile. Terrorists typically do not discuss their
plans, especially with outsiders, so this makes prevention even
more difficult. There might be a small amount of chatter
regarding possible events. However, the smaller the group, the
less the talk. September 11th, the Boston Bombings, and the
USS Cole are all examples of terrorist attacks that involved
little to no chatter that likely could not have been prevented, let
alone deterred.
Angie
Martin, G. (2018). Essentials of Terrorism: Concepts and
Controversies (5th ed.). Sage Publications
Topic #2 Student Response #2 (Respond to Elizabeth Stuart)
Elizabeth Stuart
New Terrorism refers to the morality of modern terrorists, as

12. well as their desire and ability to cause the most damage
possible. As Martin (2019) stated, New Terrorism is
characterized by cell-based organizations, desired possession of
weapons of mass destruction, either politically or religiously
vague motives, inconsistent methods of attack, utilizing the
Internet, and manipulating the media. These factors make New
Terrorism different from terrorism that took place in the 1800s
until the late 1900s. Behavior by modern extremists show a
wanton disregard for life and the desire to exact as much
damage as possible. Martin (2019) pointed out that prior to the
New Terrorism age, terrorist attacks were calculated and
targeted specific people or groups of people. While modern
terrorists may still target specific groups of people, the goal of
mass casualty has become more frequent in recent years. In
order to prevent terrorism in the new age, counterterrorism
efforts must evolve and adapt to meet terrorists’ abilities. For
example, the use of the Internet could be an advantage to
counterterrorism organizations. Technology is constantly
changing and adapting to the needs of the public. Terrorist
networks that operate online can also be infiltrated through the
Internet. While this is difficult and oftentimes time-consuming,
it is nonetheless a worthwhile pursuit.
Martin, G. (2019). Essentials of Terrorism: Concepts and
Controversies (5th ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
Topic 2: Student Response #3 (Respond to David)
David Carusotto
Hello All,
Gus Martin describes new terrorism as a post-September 11,
2001 attack (Martin, 2018). He also describes new terrorism as
mass casualty and destruction from a terrorist attack (Martin,
2018). Martin explains that these new attacks are creative and
organized (Martin, 2018). September 11, 2001, was the
deadliest day of American history on American soil, with 2,977

13. people killed from the terrorist attacks from that day. Terrorists
are always trying to one-up the last attack, and unfortunately,
September 11, 2001, set the bar high in terms of casualties and
destruction (Gunn, 2003). Martin also describes new terrorism
as transnational religious solidarity (Martin, 2018). Broken
down, this means that people worldwide are committing
terrorist attacks on behalf of one group's religious views. For
example, if a person in America commits a terrorist attack on
behalf of Jihad because they agree with the mindset that is set
by Al-Qaeda who is based out of the middle east. With
technology constantly advancing, it is easier for those parties to
communicate and coordinate from the other side of the world.
Finally, Martin sums up new terrorism with redefined moral
justifications for political violence (Martin, 2018). Recently in
America, we are seeing attacks from groups such as Antifa
because they currently do not agree with the morals or system
that America was founded upon. Groups are justifying violence
to get their message heard.
Thank you,
Dave
Gunn, M. J. (2003, Summer). Has the threat of mass-casualty
terrorism been exaggerated? Defence Studies, 3(2), 114-120.
Martin, G. (2018). Essentials of Terrorism: Concepts and
Controversies (5th ed.). Sage.