I'm pointing out the misleading way that the article is written. There is a link to "DHS internal documents" in the OP's article that were not from DHS, but from the state. They could have said state restricted reports or LE sensitive or something more accurate. To me, that draws me to conclude the article pushes the boundaries of legitimate reporting for a scare story. That same strategy for which they accuse DHS.

I think DHS has become a whiping boy for misdirected anger. ::cough::state and justice depts::cough::

I would also expect you got similar LE reports before DHS was founded?