Edited

#2
I would see it more as evidence that the "community" - certainly in the US - is already divided. When 9/11 happened the US threw a huge, huge amount of money at the problem very quickly. Rather than a planned expansion of what was already there anyone and everyone set up their own little empire. NYC in particular got a huge amount of cash, and who living there would dare to argue they didn't need their own home grown anti-terrorist unit while the ashes still smouldered ? That said, opposition from the CIA and FBI is mentioned in the blurb.

The fact that most of this work was nugatory at best wasn't even mentioned - I mean, crticising all those hard working loyal citizens - you must be one of those un-American godless faggot liberals boy !

There have been a a number of wider critiques of US anti-terror spending post 9/11 arguing that far too much has been spent on irrelevant projects because the funding is there and organisations wish to get their slice, while the real threats aren't targeted.
 
#3
I remember reading that the US has over 50 intel gathering agencies and they all seem to be private empires, It was also rumoured that the NYPD set this unit up because the Federal agencies would not give enough intel.
 
#5
Dontdreamit said:
If the NYPD had recieved information preceding the attacks what action could they have realistically taken? Nothing other than to fire the information up to the strategic agencies.

Would they have evacuated the Twin Towers? I doubt it.
well, that would kind of depend on the nature of the information received, wouldn't it...? :roll:
 

Glad_its_all_over

ADC
Book Reviewer
#7
Dontdreamit said:
Would we evacuate Canary Wharf on Special Branch advice without SIS/SS/GCHQ corroboration?
Of course we would, Police = operational primacy.
 
#9
Dontdreamit said:
Glad_its_all_over said:
Dontdreamit said:
Would we evacuate Canary Wharf on Special Branch advice without SIS/SS/GCHQ corroboration?
Of course we would, Police = operational primacy.
Operational Primacy?

No according to the Joint Intelligence Commitee

The Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC) was created in 2003 as the UK's centre for the analysis and assessment of international terrorism. JTAC is responsible for setting international terrorism threat levels and Ministers are informed of its decision. It also issues warnings of threats and other terrorist-related subjects for customers from a wide range of government departments and agencies, as well as producing more in-depth reports on trends, terrorist networks and capabilities.

The Head of JTAC is accountable directly to the Director General of the Security Service, who in turn reports to the Joint Intelligence Committee on JTAC's performance of its functions. An Oversight Board, chaired by the Cabinet Office

The Security Service is responsible for assessing the level and nature of the threat arising from domestic terrorism, principally the Irish related terrorist threat.
I think you've just proved you don't understand what "operational primacy" actually means .... Think G3, not G2.
 
#11
Glad_its_all_over said:
Dontdreamit said:
Would we evacuate Canary Wharf on Special Branch advice without SIS/SS/GCHQ corroboration?
Of course we would, Police = operational primacy.
The converse is also true, to not evacuate in the face of NO advice. The last DG was placed on the spot over this at a security industry seminar in 1 Canada Square about 4 years ago.

One of the red tabs ran a scare story that Canary Wharf was the next target and , with management unable to produce government counter-advice, over 60% of staff threw a sicky the next day. city lost £Bn+++
 
#12
Hang on, the reason 9/11 happened was because there were too many intelligence agencies not sharing information with each other. How will making another one help?
 
#13
Dontdreamit said:
Glad_its_all_over said:
Dontdreamit said:
Would we evacuate Canary Wharf on Special Branch advice without SIS/SS/GCHQ corroboration?
Of course we would, Police = operational primacy.
Operational Primacy?

No according to the Joint Intelligence Commitee

etc
police primacy is pretty basic stuff dontdreamit. what DO they cover on the A3 nowadays :)
 
#15
Police agencies have a specific remit to protect the public - note the NYPD motto "Protect and Serve". Some other departments have a remit to protect the state.

Cops have absolute operational primacy. They can do pretty much what they want to protect the public (and carry the can for it afterwards, of course). OGDs and MoD have no executive authority at all (although MoD can be handed it under certain circumstances).
 
#16
In addition to protecting the public and the state, some government departments also have remit to cover there arrse......
for those that are:

a. Sill Lucky enough to have one left, ( see Marsh Reconnaissance Force) or
b. able to find it
 
#17
:lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol:

Arf Arf Arf !!!

All our Bus Shelters have armoured CFV (B6) and laundry facilities are no longer run by the masons !

By the way can Subby can you PM me the contact details for the S&LEA goverment new business team over at NG ? I want them to have first sight of a proposal for intelligence training support :twisted:
 
#18
In London the Police Community Service has primacy. Their chief tool of operational policy seems to be the 'Enforcement Officers' who lurch around in pairs, hung about with high-vis jackets, Special-Forces-cool baseball caps, combat boots and enough belt-kit to outfit a guerilla army.
 

Top