Threat warning creates confusion over homeland security roles

The Justice Department's warning this week of threats of upcoming terrorist attacks has ignited a controversy over which federal agencies are responsible for homeland security efforts and whether congressional hearings are needed to snuff out turf battles.

People inside and outside government said Friday that the way Attorney General John Ashcroft announced the warning was "scary," "unbelievable" and "confusing." In a press conference Wednesday with FBI Director Robert Mueller, Ashcroft said "credible intelligence from multiple sources indicates that al Qaeda plans to attempt an attack on the United States in the next few months." Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge was notably absent from the event, and his department has not issued any public advisories in response to the warning.

"I'm shocked in how it was done, but I'm not surprised," said retired Air Force Col. Randall Larsen, who founded the Institute for Homeland Security and is the chief executive officer of Homeland Security Associates, LLC. "There's clearly a disconnect. I'm not going to soft-soap it at all. Who's in charge? We don't know right now."

Justice and DHS refuted criticism that they are not working together.

"This effort was coordinated at the highest levels in this administration," said Justice spokesman Blane Rethmeier. "Ashcroft, Ridge and Mueller discussed this issue and agreed on a strategy for how to move forward to address the threat."

DHS spokeswoman Katy Mynster said Ridge knew the press conference was going to be held and that threat information would be discussed, even though he was not in attendance. Ridge told ABC-TV Wednesday that the intelligence was not sufficiently alarming to raise the nation's color-coded alert level or convene the White House Homeland Security Council.

"This is coordinated. We are on the same page," Mynster said. "We continue to work with our federal partners to monitor and assess all intelligence information related to any potential terrorist threat to the Untied States."

The leadership of the House Homeland Security Committee, however, questioned the apparent lack of coordination across federal agencies.

"Dissemination by our government of public threat advisories must be closely coordinated across our intelligence and law enforcement communities," said committee Chairman Christopher Cox, R-Fla., Thursday. "It is regrettable that Secretary Ridge was not with the Attorney General and FBI director at yesterday's news conference because their separate public appearances conveyed the impression that the broad and close interagency consultation we expect -- and which the law requires -- may not have taken place in this case."

Cox noted that issuing public threat advisories is the statuatory mandate of the department. Committee ranking member Jim Turner, D-Texas, along with other congressional Democrats, might seek oversight hearings to examine how the government issues threat warnings and what different agencies are responsible for, said Moira Whelan, minority communications director. She said Justice appeared to overstep its authority by talking about threat warnings.

"It just screams of turf battle," she said. "To be a relevant federal agency in this game of Washington, you have to have something that you control that nobody else controls. In this case, DHS' control is how information like this is communicated to the public."