| Cops-Pols-Media- Terrorists |
September 11, 2001 should have outraged Americans like no other event in history, because the attacks on the
World Trade Center Towers, and the Pentagon, were only a prelude of things to come. Unfortunately, only
those people who were eyewitnesses to the absolute horror of that day will know the full extent of the carnage.
…psychological well being
The American media almost immediately began to sanitize the events of that day by first removing the video
taped images of very normal people leaping to their deaths to avoid being incinerated. Our media nannies
decided that such graphic reality would not be good for our psychological well being. Besides, there would be
more important images to show us such as rows of blooded and battered Iraqi corpses; terrorist made video
tapes of tearful hostages pleading for their lives, and pictures of terror suspects wearing panties on their heads.
…more bureaucracy
The politicians reacted in standard fashion by declaring that things were broken, and they proceeded to fix the
problems as they usually do. They created committees to get to the bottom of things. After going through the
committee exercise and racking up as much television exposure as possible, they carried the tablets down from
the mountain. The solutions were clear; more bureaucracy, and more money to support the expanded
bureaucracy.
…latest high tech gadgets
Police departments across the nation eventually received millions of dollars to upgrade and meet the demands
created by the war on terror. Most departments used the money to upgrade technologically and purchase the
latest high tech gadgets. The biggest problem is most departments' inability to fully utilize new technology at
even a fraction of its potential. After the dog and pony shows for the local media, most of the new purchases
would experience little use.
…need to know
The biggest fiction foisted on everybody is the notion that all the new money and bureaucracies will make
information sharing a reality among intelligence and law enforcement agencies. It's a nice idea, and it certainly
is not a new idea. The level and extent of information sharing is always in the details, and the details always
dictate a need to know. You, as a police officer, will always be the last person with the need to know. When
you're brought into the circle, you'll know that all other means of resolving a situation have failed.
…exact and verified
There are times when an incident can best be resolved when relevant information is confined to a small
number of people within a single agency. When information is exact and verified, dissemination of the
information could jeopardize the prevention of an incident or the apprehension of a suspect(s). The problem is,
and always has been, for what reasons should information be withheld, and who should make the decision to
withhold information?
…minor to spectacular
While there are instances when information will be legitimately withheld from you, you'll experience many
instances when you'll be deprived of information you should have. In the latter instance, the reason will be
simple…who gets the credit? A lot of people will do just about anything to receive the credit for something
minor to spectacular, and police are more insatiable in this regard than most. Once you experience the
information sharing deficit of your own department, you'll wonder how much benefit would be gained through
improved interagency information sharing.
…just being polite
When politicians include local police departments in their discourse regarding information sharing, for the
most part, they're just being polite. When it comes to international terrorism, federal agencies will always
jealously guard their turf. When a federal agency shares critical information with your department, it will do so
only when it's in need of your resources, and only when a threat is imminent. Even at this juncture, the
information will still be limited based on that agency's assessment of just how much you need to know.
…constantly evolving commodity
There are usually two sides to a story, but in the case of information sharing, there are too many sides to
count. Developing information is a constantly evolving commodity which can change in the blink of an eye.
Developing information is also voluminous. Let's assume that some perfect system were in place to
disseminate all developing, and unabridged, terrorist related information through a pipeline ending with you.
Can you even begin to imagine how inundated you'd be with mostly useless information. Intelligence analysts
exist to determine the importance, accuracy, and relevancy of information. It's not a perfect system, but there
is no perfect system.
…near and dear
When you see politicians and police chiefs publicly posturing on the lack of information sharing between
federal agencies and local police departments, they're simply posturing. Most politicians and people in top
police leadership positions are pretty ignorant when it comes to information processing, and the sharing of that
information. It may be hard to believe, but many think it's as simple as pushing a button on a computer.
Everyone should worry about terrorists' attacks, but politicians and police chiefs also have to worry about one
particular result from a terrorist attack that is near and dear to their hearts… blame. They're usually pretty
good at assigning blame for most things as low down the chain as possible, but terrorism is unique. If you're
immediately present at a terror attack, you'll probably be a victim, and you won't be around to blame.
…tolerance for violence
Can you imagine how frustrated terrorists must be with the United States of America? They've blown up our
embassies, taken Americans hostage, and murdered our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines. Even when they
attacked the Towers with a truck bomb in the heart of New York City, they still couldn't rise to the level of a
speed bump to slow the rolling behemoth called America. In a country where one city can have a higher
murder rate than most countries, acts of terror can only be successful if they can rise above our already high
tolerance for violence and destruction.
…wildest expectations
On 9ll the terrorists finally got it right. The scale and breadth of the attacks definitely got our attention. The
success of the attacks was probably beyond the terrorists' wildest expectations. Besides killing thousands, they
sucked a trillion dollars out of America's economy in one day. As horrible as that day was, it was probably
necessary to get Americans to take the scourge of terrorism seriously.
…blame and shame
Acts of terror are nothing new. politicians, and those among us who know they're smarter than the rest of us,
bemoaned the horror of the attacks, before they returned to their normal politics of blame and shame.
America is no different than any other country when it comes to the politics of power. Power is the ultimate
goal, and terror is just another issue to be discussed and debated. Our self proclaimed intellectual superiors
would have us believe the evil of terror would not exist were it not for our constitutional right of the pursuit of
happiness at the expense of others.
…three hundred years
While acts of terror have occurred in every civilization since the beginning, the 21st Century poses terror
threats never experienced or conceived by past civilizations. Weapons of mass destruction are currently a big
item in the discuss and debate arena. Weapons of mass destruction are nothing new. In the 15th Century the
Matchlock rifle was the weapon of mass destruction. The Matchlock was a heavy, cumbersome rifle requiring
support to hold the weapon level. The shooter would light a wick attached to a gunpowder charge which would
ignite gunpowder in the barrel to send the projectile on its way. The Matchlock remained the state of the art
weapon of mass destruction for three hundred years before the appearance of the Flintlock rifle.
…the rest of the story
The Flintlock rifle had a much shorter life span, but it killed plenty of people from its creation through the
American Civil War. Most of us know the rest of the story. Today, weapons of mass destruction have advanced
so rapidly that the most response the development of a new one receives is a yawn. The so called smart
weapons of this century have taken the edge off the mass part of mass destruction. Fortunately, mass still has
some significance when it comes to nuclear weapons.
…real meaning of mass
Terrorists have always had, and continue to have, access to weapons of mass destruction with the exception of
nuclear weapons. There is no reason to believe that terrorists will not, at some point, obtain and detonate a
nuclear device. God help us, politicians are all we have to prevent terrorists from obtaining nuclear weapons, so
it will be up to law enforcement agencies and police officers, like you, to prevent the detonation of a weapon
that puts the real meaning of mass back into mass destruction.
…observing people and circumstances
There's nothing better than an offense, or, in police jargon, pro-active enforcement. Police officers have always
been pro-active. The word patrol says it all. As a patrol officer, you'll be observing people and circumstances on
a continuous basis. No one can ever know how many crimes, or terrorist acts for that matter, have been
prevented solely through the action of a police officer based on that police officer's observations.
…suspicious signals
Any country's best defense against terrorism is its police officers. A terrorist is nothing more than a dangerous
criminal. Just like any other criminal, the terrorist will exude suspicious signals readily noticed by an
observant police officer. While you'll quickly learn that anything can happen at anytime and anywhere, the
possibility of that anything being a terrorist attack is a greater possibility than ever before.
…best defense
Think about this for a moment. Except for lands and structures owned by the Federal government, the safety
and security for every square mile of this nation is the responsibility of state and local police officers. You
might be a state patrol officer in the southwest with a patrol area of 250 square miles, or you might be
patrolling in a large city where your area of responsibility is only two by four blocks. Either way, if you're
familiar with your area of patrol, you'll be the best defense against terrorism.
…high quality of intelligence
You'll hear a lot of commentary on the importance of infiltrating terrorist organizations with informants to
gain high value human intelligence. While this is a valid observation, I doubt that many of the same
commentators realize the high quality of intelligence that can be gained from a patrol officer who continuously
patrols a designated area. If every police department in the nation required their patrol officers to remain in an
unchanged patrol area for a minimum of five years, the availability of high quality intelligence for terror
related investigations would be immeasurable.
…trust and respect
When an officer becomes a permanent day to day presence in the same area of patrol, residents within that
area will develop a higher comfort level with that officer. Even residents who generally view police with
suspicion will fairly evaluate an officer they observe on a frequent basis. Once an officer establishes himself or
herself as fair, knowledgeable, and competent, information becomes a natural byproduct. There are many,
many people who would never provide any kind of information to a stranger with a badge. Those same people
will, however, convey valuable information to a patrol officer who they trust and respect.
…instantly recognize
If you're employed by a department led by experienced professionals who appreciate the importance of the
patrol function, you'll find yourself assigned to a geographical area of patrol on a continuous basis. Your
supervisors and commanders will continually impress upon you the importance of your total familiarity with
your patrol area. Those same supervisors and commanders can then rightly hold you responsible for failing to
recognize situations or circumstances alien to your area of responsibility. If you're fortunate enough to
experience this kind of stability, you'll instantly recognize persons or activities not indigenous to your area as
well as constantly observing and evaluating persons and activities which are indigenous.
…fast movers
On the other hand, you could end up working in a department led by inexperienced fast movers who are so
busy thinking out of the box that they have little time, or inclination, to build a stable and well informed patrol
force. Their time will be spent networking with the fast movers from other police departments and government
agencies in pursuit of recognition for old ideas in new clothes. These leaders will be loath to rely on telephones
and email preferring face to face communication with their counterparts over good food in pleasant
surroundings. While these types of leaders would be better suited to conduct inspirational seminars on self
esteem, their presence in police departments is a reality.
…enormous control
Regardless of the experience or quality of a department's leadership, you, as a police officer, have enormous
control over your own development. As long as you recognize the real importance of your microscopic position
in the big picture, you'll realize that any terror attack, or preparation for an attack, will occur on some officer's
microscopic patch of turf. If you're thoroughly familiar with your patrol area, the odds against you detecting
and preventing an act of terror are not that great.
World Trade Center Towers, and the Pentagon, were only a prelude of things to come. Unfortunately, only
those people who were eyewitnesses to the absolute horror of that day will know the full extent of the carnage.
…psychological well being
The American media almost immediately began to sanitize the events of that day by first removing the video
taped images of very normal people leaping to their deaths to avoid being incinerated. Our media nannies
decided that such graphic reality would not be good for our psychological well being. Besides, there would be
more important images to show us such as rows of blooded and battered Iraqi corpses; terrorist made video
tapes of tearful hostages pleading for their lives, and pictures of terror suspects wearing panties on their heads.
…more bureaucracy
The politicians reacted in standard fashion by declaring that things were broken, and they proceeded to fix the
problems as they usually do. They created committees to get to the bottom of things. After going through the
committee exercise and racking up as much television exposure as possible, they carried the tablets down from
the mountain. The solutions were clear; more bureaucracy, and more money to support the expanded
bureaucracy.
…latest high tech gadgets
Police departments across the nation eventually received millions of dollars to upgrade and meet the demands
created by the war on terror. Most departments used the money to upgrade technologically and purchase the
latest high tech gadgets. The biggest problem is most departments' inability to fully utilize new technology at
even a fraction of its potential. After the dog and pony shows for the local media, most of the new purchases
would experience little use.
…need to know
The biggest fiction foisted on everybody is the notion that all the new money and bureaucracies will make
information sharing a reality among intelligence and law enforcement agencies. It's a nice idea, and it certainly
is not a new idea. The level and extent of information sharing is always in the details, and the details always
dictate a need to know. You, as a police officer, will always be the last person with the need to know. When
you're brought into the circle, you'll know that all other means of resolving a situation have failed.
…exact and verified
There are times when an incident can best be resolved when relevant information is confined to a small
number of people within a single agency. When information is exact and verified, dissemination of the
information could jeopardize the prevention of an incident or the apprehension of a suspect(s). The problem is,
and always has been, for what reasons should information be withheld, and who should make the decision to
withhold information?
…minor to spectacular
While there are instances when information will be legitimately withheld from you, you'll experience many
instances when you'll be deprived of information you should have. In the latter instance, the reason will be
simple…who gets the credit? A lot of people will do just about anything to receive the credit for something
minor to spectacular, and police are more insatiable in this regard than most. Once you experience the
information sharing deficit of your own department, you'll wonder how much benefit would be gained through
improved interagency information sharing.
…just being polite
When politicians include local police departments in their discourse regarding information sharing, for the
most part, they're just being polite. When it comes to international terrorism, federal agencies will always
jealously guard their turf. When a federal agency shares critical information with your department, it will do so
only when it's in need of your resources, and only when a threat is imminent. Even at this juncture, the
information will still be limited based on that agency's assessment of just how much you need to know.
…constantly evolving commodity
There are usually two sides to a story, but in the case of information sharing, there are too many sides to
count. Developing information is a constantly evolving commodity which can change in the blink of an eye.
Developing information is also voluminous. Let's assume that some perfect system were in place to
disseminate all developing, and unabridged, terrorist related information through a pipeline ending with you.
Can you even begin to imagine how inundated you'd be with mostly useless information. Intelligence analysts
exist to determine the importance, accuracy, and relevancy of information. It's not a perfect system, but there
is no perfect system.
…near and dear
When you see politicians and police chiefs publicly posturing on the lack of information sharing between
federal agencies and local police departments, they're simply posturing. Most politicians and people in top
police leadership positions are pretty ignorant when it comes to information processing, and the sharing of that
information. It may be hard to believe, but many think it's as simple as pushing a button on a computer.
Everyone should worry about terrorists' attacks, but politicians and police chiefs also have to worry about one
particular result from a terrorist attack that is near and dear to their hearts… blame. They're usually pretty
good at assigning blame for most things as low down the chain as possible, but terrorism is unique. If you're
immediately present at a terror attack, you'll probably be a victim, and you won't be around to blame.
…tolerance for violence
Can you imagine how frustrated terrorists must be with the United States of America? They've blown up our
embassies, taken Americans hostage, and murdered our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines. Even when they
attacked the Towers with a truck bomb in the heart of New York City, they still couldn't rise to the level of a
speed bump to slow the rolling behemoth called America. In a country where one city can have a higher
murder rate than most countries, acts of terror can only be successful if they can rise above our already high
tolerance for violence and destruction.
…wildest expectations
On 9ll the terrorists finally got it right. The scale and breadth of the attacks definitely got our attention. The
success of the attacks was probably beyond the terrorists' wildest expectations. Besides killing thousands, they
sucked a trillion dollars out of America's economy in one day. As horrible as that day was, it was probably
necessary to get Americans to take the scourge of terrorism seriously.
…blame and shame
Acts of terror are nothing new. politicians, and those among us who know they're smarter than the rest of us,
bemoaned the horror of the attacks, before they returned to their normal politics of blame and shame.
America is no different than any other country when it comes to the politics of power. Power is the ultimate
goal, and terror is just another issue to be discussed and debated. Our self proclaimed intellectual superiors
would have us believe the evil of terror would not exist were it not for our constitutional right of the pursuit of
happiness at the expense of others.
…three hundred years
While acts of terror have occurred in every civilization since the beginning, the 21st Century poses terror
threats never experienced or conceived by past civilizations. Weapons of mass destruction are currently a big
item in the discuss and debate arena. Weapons of mass destruction are nothing new. In the 15th Century the
Matchlock rifle was the weapon of mass destruction. The Matchlock was a heavy, cumbersome rifle requiring
support to hold the weapon level. The shooter would light a wick attached to a gunpowder charge which would
ignite gunpowder in the barrel to send the projectile on its way. The Matchlock remained the state of the art
weapon of mass destruction for three hundred years before the appearance of the Flintlock rifle.
…the rest of the story
The Flintlock rifle had a much shorter life span, but it killed plenty of people from its creation through the
American Civil War. Most of us know the rest of the story. Today, weapons of mass destruction have advanced
so rapidly that the most response the development of a new one receives is a yawn. The so called smart
weapons of this century have taken the edge off the mass part of mass destruction. Fortunately, mass still has
some significance when it comes to nuclear weapons.
…real meaning of mass
Terrorists have always had, and continue to have, access to weapons of mass destruction with the exception of
nuclear weapons. There is no reason to believe that terrorists will not, at some point, obtain and detonate a
nuclear device. God help us, politicians are all we have to prevent terrorists from obtaining nuclear weapons, so
it will be up to law enforcement agencies and police officers, like you, to prevent the detonation of a weapon
that puts the real meaning of mass back into mass destruction.
…observing people and circumstances
There's nothing better than an offense, or, in police jargon, pro-active enforcement. Police officers have always
been pro-active. The word patrol says it all. As a patrol officer, you'll be observing people and circumstances on
a continuous basis. No one can ever know how many crimes, or terrorist acts for that matter, have been
prevented solely through the action of a police officer based on that police officer's observations.
…suspicious signals
Any country's best defense against terrorism is its police officers. A terrorist is nothing more than a dangerous
criminal. Just like any other criminal, the terrorist will exude suspicious signals readily noticed by an
observant police officer. While you'll quickly learn that anything can happen at anytime and anywhere, the
possibility of that anything being a terrorist attack is a greater possibility than ever before.
…best defense
Think about this for a moment. Except for lands and structures owned by the Federal government, the safety
and security for every square mile of this nation is the responsibility of state and local police officers. You
might be a state patrol officer in the southwest with a patrol area of 250 square miles, or you might be
patrolling in a large city where your area of responsibility is only two by four blocks. Either way, if you're
familiar with your area of patrol, you'll be the best defense against terrorism.
…high quality of intelligence
You'll hear a lot of commentary on the importance of infiltrating terrorist organizations with informants to
gain high value human intelligence. While this is a valid observation, I doubt that many of the same
commentators realize the high quality of intelligence that can be gained from a patrol officer who continuously
patrols a designated area. If every police department in the nation required their patrol officers to remain in an
unchanged patrol area for a minimum of five years, the availability of high quality intelligence for terror
related investigations would be immeasurable.
…trust and respect
When an officer becomes a permanent day to day presence in the same area of patrol, residents within that
area will develop a higher comfort level with that officer. Even residents who generally view police with
suspicion will fairly evaluate an officer they observe on a frequent basis. Once an officer establishes himself or
herself as fair, knowledgeable, and competent, information becomes a natural byproduct. There are many,
many people who would never provide any kind of information to a stranger with a badge. Those same people
will, however, convey valuable information to a patrol officer who they trust and respect.
…instantly recognize
If you're employed by a department led by experienced professionals who appreciate the importance of the
patrol function, you'll find yourself assigned to a geographical area of patrol on a continuous basis. Your
supervisors and commanders will continually impress upon you the importance of your total familiarity with
your patrol area. Those same supervisors and commanders can then rightly hold you responsible for failing to
recognize situations or circumstances alien to your area of responsibility. If you're fortunate enough to
experience this kind of stability, you'll instantly recognize persons or activities not indigenous to your area as
well as constantly observing and evaluating persons and activities which are indigenous.
…fast movers
On the other hand, you could end up working in a department led by inexperienced fast movers who are so
busy thinking out of the box that they have little time, or inclination, to build a stable and well informed patrol
force. Their time will be spent networking with the fast movers from other police departments and government
agencies in pursuit of recognition for old ideas in new clothes. These leaders will be loath to rely on telephones
and email preferring face to face communication with their counterparts over good food in pleasant
surroundings. While these types of leaders would be better suited to conduct inspirational seminars on self
esteem, their presence in police departments is a reality.
…enormous control
Regardless of the experience or quality of a department's leadership, you, as a police officer, have enormous
control over your own development. As long as you recognize the real importance of your microscopic position
in the big picture, you'll realize that any terror attack, or preparation for an attack, will occur on some officer's
microscopic patch of turf. If you're thoroughly familiar with your patrol area, the odds against you detecting
and preventing an act of terror are not that great.
| Cops - Pols - Media - Terrorists |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| Copyright © 2006 - 2009 - Barry M. Baker - CareerPoliceOfficer.com |
| Disclaimer |
| CareerPoliceOfficer.com is not responsible for the contents of any linked site or any link contained in a linked site, or any changes or updates to such sites. Links are provided only as a convenience, and the inclusion of any link does not imply endorsement by this site. |
Protect
your files
your files
Protect
your identity
your identity
