Is the 1911 Still Viable for Law Officers? - Weapons - POLICE Magazine

Good look at the M1911...and if I could carry it, I would (or at least another .45 cal...unfortunately our department went to standard .40 cal pistols...waaa). It may not have the best range and kick but hell, most of the time a shooting will be within 10 feet.

Is the 1911 Still Viable for Law Officers? - Weapons - POLICE Magazine
The grip angle of the M1911 pistol takes advantage of the hand's natural geometry to promote accuracy, and makes the gun a pleasure to shoot.
John Browning's M1911 semi-automatic pistol may be the most popular handgun platform in history, but is it a viable primary duty or backup pistol for law enforcement professionals, tactical operators and lawfully permitted civilians?


The answer is a resounding yes. However, this affirmative is conditional and must be further explained in detail to provide the best resource tools to those interested in taking the M1911 to its full potential.


The main reason the M1911 is so successful is its grip angle. It's a natural pointer. The pistol takes advantage of the hand's natural geometry to promote accuracy, and the angle also makes the gun a pleasure to shoot. Having said that, certain steps must be taken to make the M1911 ready for carry.


The M1911 has multiple external tactile safety features. The first is an external frame with thumb safety. Generic GI-type M1911 basic platforms have thumb safety levers that are rough and sharp. This roughness can be an impediment in a holster environment or underneath clothing. It is important that an external thumb safety be well-rounded and low profile. This will minimize snagging in a potential quick draw situation.


When officers carry the pistol in a "cocked and locked" position, in which there is a round in the chamber, the hammer is back and the manual thumb safety in the "engaged" position.


In many respects, this makes officers who are used to a Glock or similar platform very nervous and apprehensive. In a quick draw scenario, officers must disengage the thumb safety while drawing the M1911. This takes constant practice and consistent application.


Another obstacle is the grip safety, which is located at the rear of the grip and must be fully depressed with applied pressure in order for the trigger to move rearward. Officers must practice this hundreds of times to consistently apply a good purchase in a tactical situation.


It is also important to keep a good polish on the M1911's feed ramp — an incline attached to either the barrel or the frame. It's an area between the magazine follower and the chamber responsible for guiding the ammunition into the chamber. A feed ramp that isn't polished will encounter resistance with hollow-point ammunition and may result in feeding problems.


These challenges can be countered several ways. In the past, users had to take the M1911 to a competent gunsmith to overcome such obstacles. Gun makers such as Kimber, Springfield Armory and Para-Ordinance saw this as an opportunity and created "carry" guns that were available straight from the factory.


Many M1911s are available with the "custom" features mentioned, such as low-profile snag free safeties, high capacity double-stacked magazine options, high polished feed ramps, accessory rails and caliber options other than .45 ACP. Many M1911s are now also available in high capacity .40 S&W and 9mm.


Weight reduction for easier carrying has also been accomplished by replacing bulky steel frames with high-strength lighter aluminum ones, thus reducing weight considerably. Tritium night sights are also available.


Although the M1911 takedown assembly/disassembly process is a bit more time consuming than that of its Glock-like counterparts, it is well worth mastering. The law enforcement and civilian competition circuit is dominated by the M1911. A casual glance at any issue of the International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA) journal clearly demonstrates that at least three quarters of the competitors still use a M1911 or a similar platform.


The reason is simple. It's still the most accurate pistol platform in history, and the future remains very bright. The additional work needed to get your M1911 ready for carry is worth it. For those who don't have the time for such an endeavor, a "custom" M1911 with all the bells and whistles can be had straight out of the box.

Again, as a short range pistol nothing beats it (IMHO).  The reason the US went to the 9MM in the mid 80s was an agreement with NATO to standardize the small arms rounds.  NATO countries would go from 762 to 223 in rifle, we would go to 9MM  in pistol. 

To be expected from the idiots at DOD, we got the worst of both worlds.

Good news from Charlotte on a cop killer

Wish it would be a capital sentence but at least he will (probably) never leave a jail cell...

Verdict: Demeatrius Montgomery guilty, gets 2 life terms - CharlotteObserver.com

DeMeatrius Montgomery will spend two life terms in prison after a jury this afternoon found him guilty of first-degree murder in the 2007 killings of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Officers Sean Clark and Jeff Shelton.


...“God may forgive him, but I never will,” said Shelton’s father, John Shelton. “His family will get to see him in prison. If I want to see my son, I have to go to Sharon Memorial Garden and look at a grave.


“I pray to God that you give him everything he has coming to him.”


...The judge sentenced the 28-year-old Montgomery to two life sentences without parole, to be served consecutively. Early in the proceedings, Bridges had set aside consideration of the death penalty because a former Charlotte-Mecklenburg police detective...threw away notes from the investigation.
...During the three-week trial, prosecution witnesses had testified Montgomery’s DNA was on the revolver found in the woods near the shooting scene at the Timber Ridge apartments in east Charlotte in March 2007. Experts said gunshot residue was found on Montgomery’s palms and that the handgun found in the woods fired the bullets removed from Clark’s head. Two prosecution witnesses also said they saw Montgomery running with a gun after they heard shots fired.


...Prosecutors say the officers were shot during a scuffle March 31, 2007 with Montgomery at the Timber Ridge Apartments in east Charlotte. Defense attorneys suggested someone else shot the officers in a sneak attack.

Rest in Peace Gentlemen...

Security Weekly-Terror Threats and Alerts in France

By Scott Stewart
September 30, 2010



The Eiffel Tower was evacuated Sept. 28 after an anonymous bomb threat against the symbolic Parisian tourist attraction was phoned in; no explosive device was found. The day before the Eiffel Tower threat, French authorities closed the Gare Saint-Lazare in central Paris after an abandoned package, later determined innocuous, was spotted in the train station.


These two incidents serve as the latest reminders of the current apprehension in France that a terrorist attack is imminent. This concern was expressed in a very public way Sept. 11, when Bernard Squarcini, the head of France’s Central Directorate of Interior Intelligence (known by its French acronym, DCRI), told French newspaper Le Journal du Dimanche that the risk of an attack in France has never been higher. Never is a long time, and France has long faced terrorist threats, making this statement quite remarkable.


Squarcini has noted in recent interviews that the combination of France’s history as a colonial power, its military involvement in Afghanistan and the impending French ban on veils that cover the full face and body (niqabs and burqas) combined to influence this threat environment.


A Month of Threats


After the French Senate approved the burqa ban Sept. 14 — which will go into effect next March — a bomb threat against the Eiffel Tower was called in that evening, causing French authorities to evacuate the site and sweep it for explosive devices.


On Sept. 16, five French citizens were abducted from the Nigerien uranium-mining town of Arlit in an operation later claimed by al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), a claim French Defense Minister Herve Morin later assessed as valid. In July, French Prime Minister Francois Fillon declared that France was at war with the North African al Qaeda franchise after the group killed a French hostage it had kidnapped in April. Fillon’s announcement came three days after the end of a four-day French-Mauritanian offensive against AQIM militants that resulted in the deaths of several militants. After the offensive, AQIM branded French President Nicolas Sarkozy an enemy of Allah and warned France that it would not rest until it had avenged the deaths of its fighters.


French officials have also received unsubstantiated reports from foreign liaison services of plans for suicide bombings in Paris. National Police Chief Frederic Pechenard told Europe 1 radio Sept. 22 that in addition to the threatening statements from AQIM, the French have received specific information that the group is working to target France.


On Sept. 6, Der Spiegel reported that authorities were investigating reports provided by the United States that a German-born Islamist extremist arrested in Afghanistan has warned of possible terrorist attacks in Germany and elsewhere in Europe — including France — planned by jihadists based in Pakistan. This story hit the English-language media Sept. 28, and included reports that the threat may have involved plans to launch Mumbai-like armed assaults in multiple targets in Europe.


In the words of Squarcini to the press, these combined incidents mean “all the blinkers are on red.” This statement is strikingly similar to one in the 9/11 Commission Report attributed to then-CIA Director George Tenet, who said that in July 2001 “the system was blinking red.”


While an examination of the current threat situation in France is interesting, it is equally interesting to observe the way that the French are handling their threat warnings in the media.


The Threat Environment in France


While its neighbors such as Spain and the United Kingdom have suffered bloody attacks since 9/11, the French so far apparently have been spared — although there are some who suspect the yet-unsolved June 2009 crash of Air France Flight 447 may have resulted from foul play, along with the explosion at the AZF fertilizer plant in September 2001.


France has long been squarely in the crosshairs of jihadist groups such as AQIM. This is due not only to its former colonial involvement in North Africa but also to its continued support of governments in countries like Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia deemed un-Islamic by jihadists. It is also due to France’s military commitment in Afghanistan. Moreover, on the domestic side, France has a significant Muslim minority largely segregated in slums known in French as “banlieues” outside France’s major cities. A significant proportion of the young Muslim men who live in these areas are unemployed and disaffected. This disaffection has been displayed periodically in the form of large-scale riots such as those in October 2005 and November 2007, both of which resulted in massive property destruction and produced the worst civil unrest in France since the late 1960s. While not all those involved in the riots were Muslims, Muslims did play a significant and visible role in them.


Moves by the French government such as the burqa ban have stoked these tensions and feelings of anger and alienation. The ban, like the 2004 ban against headscarves in French schools, angered not only jihadists but also some mainstream Muslims in France and beyond.


Still, other than a minor bombing outside the the Indonesian Embassy in Paris in October 2004, France has seemingly been spared the type of attacks seen in Madrid in March 2004 and London in July 2005. And this is in spite of the fact that France has had to deal with Islamist militants for far longer than its neighbors. Algerian Islamist militants staged a series of attacks involving gas canisters filled with nails and bolts on the Paris subway system in 1995 and 1996, and during the 1980s France experienced a rash of terrorist attacks. In 1981 and 1982, a group known as the Lebanese Armed Revolutionary Faction attacked a series of diplomatic and military targets in several French cities. Algerian militants also hijacked an Air France flight in December 1994, a situation resolved when personnel from the French Groupe d’Intervention de la Gendarmerie Nationale (GIGN) stormed the aircraft in Marseilles and killed all four hijackers.


“Shoe Bomber” Richard Reid, who is serving a life sentence in the United States for trying to blow up a Paris-to-Miami flight with an explosives-stuffed shoe in December 2001, staged his attack out of France.


In 2001, French authorities broke up a French-Algerian terrorist cell planning to attack the U.S. Embassy in Paris. The six militants, some of whom French authorities had linked to terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, were convicted and sentenced to lengthy prison terms.


Also in 2001, Algerian extremists were convicted in connection with an aborted plot to attack a Christmas market at Strasbourg Cathedral on New Year’s Eve 2000.


In January 2005, French police arrested a cell of alleged Chechen and Algerian militants, charging members with plotting terrorist attacks in Western Europe. According to French authorities, the group planned attacks against government and Jewish targets in the United Kingdom as well as against Russian diplomatic and business targets in Western and Central Europe. Other targets included tourist attractions and crowds in the United Kingdom and France and French train stations.


More recently, in October 2009, French particle physicist Adlene Hicheur and his brother, Halim, who holds a Ph.D. in physiology and biomechanics, were arrested and charged with helping AQIM plan terrorist attacks in France.


In the final analysis, France is clearly overdue for a successful jihadist attack, and has been overdue for several years now. Perhaps the only thing that has spared the country has been a combination of proactive, skillful police and intelligence work — the kind that resulted in the thwarted attempts discussed above — and a little bit of luck.


Alerts


France has a national security alert system called the Vigipirate, which has four levels:


• Yellow, which means there is an uncertain threat.


• Orange, which signifies there is a plausible threat.


• Red, which signals a highly probable threat.


• Scarlet, which indicates a certain or known threat.


The Vigipirate level has been set at red since the aftermath of the July 2005 London bombings. This level is probably justified given that France is overdue for an attack, and French authorities undoubtedly have been busy investigating a large number of potential threats since the decision was made to raise the level to red. Still, as we have long discussed, this type of warning system has a tendency to get some attention when the levels are initially raised, but after five years of living at level red, French citizens are undoubtedly experiencing some degree of alert fatigue — and this is why Squarcini’s recent statements are so interesting. Apparently, he does not have the type of hard intelligence required to raise the threat level to scarlet — or perhaps the French government does not want to run the political risk of the backlash to the restrictive security measures they would have to institute if they raised the level. Such measures could include dramatically increasing security personnel and checkpoints and closing certain metro stops, train stations and airports, all things that could be incredibly disruptive.


Generally speaking, a figure like Squarcini would not provide the type of warnings he has recently shared in the press if his service had a firm grasp on the suspects behind the plot(s) about which he is concerned. For example, the FBI felt it had good coverage of groups plotting attacks in some of the recent thwarted plots in the United States, including the group arrested in May 2009 and charged with plotting to bomb two Jewish targets in the Bronx and shoot down a military aircraft at an Air National Guard base. In such a case, the director of the FBI did not feel the need to alert the public to the threat; he believed his agents had everything under control. Therefore, that Squarcini is providing this warning indicates his service does not have a handle on the threat or threats.


Information about a pending threat is not released to the public lightly, because such information could well compromise the source of the intelligence and endanger the investigation into the people behind the plot. This would only be done in situations where one has little or no control over the potential threat. There are numerous factors that would influence the decision to release such information.


Perhaps one of the first is that in a democracy, where public officials and their parties can be held responsible for failure to prevent an attack — as the Aznar government in Spain was following the Madrid train bombings — information pertaining to pending threats may also be released to protect governments from future liability. Following every major attack in a democratic nation, there is always an investigation that seeks to determine who knew what about the threat and when. Making threat information public can spare politicians from falling victim to a witch hunt.


Alternatively, some suggest that French authorities are being pressured to make such warnings to distract the public from domestic problems and Sarkozy’s low popularity. Many also believe the French government has been using its campaign against the Roma as such a distraction. Sarkozy, widely perceived as law-and-order oriented and tough on crime and terrorism, is indeed struggling politically. While the current warnings may provide such a beneficial distraction for Sarkozy, it is our assessment that the terrorist threat to France is very real, and is not being fabricated for political purposes.


Warnings also can be issued in an effort to pre-empt an attack. In cases in which authorities have intelligence that a plot is in the works, but insufficient information to identify the plotters or make arrests, announcing that a plot has been uncovered and security has been increased is seen as a way to discourage a planned attack. With the devolution of the jihadist threat from one based upon a central al Qaeda group to one based upon regional franchises, small cells and lone wolves, it is more difficult to gather intelligence that indicates the existence of these diverse actors, much less information pertaining to their intent and capabilities. In such a murky environment, threat information is often incomplete at best.


Whatever Squarcini’s motive, his warning should serve to shake the French public out of the alert fatigue associated with spending five years at the red level. This should cause the public (and cops on the beat) to increase their situational awareness and report suspicious behavior. The suspicious package seen at the Gare Saint-Lazare on Monday may well have been reported as a result of this increased awareness.


As the jihadist threat becomes almost as diffuse as the criminal threat, ordinary citizens who practice good situational awareness are an increasingly important national security resource — a complex network of eyeballs and brains that Squarcini may have been attempting to activate with his warning. With the burqa ban scheduled to begin next spring, French troops in Afghanistan and the ongoing conflict with AQIM, the threats are likely to continue for the near term — meaning France will remain on alert.

This report is republished with permission of STRATFOR

Gotta love the Jarheads!

 I don't know if this is true or just a internet tale but it's still makes you smile.  Thanks to Mark C, old friend for the message.

...conversation overheard on the VHF Guard (emergency) frequency 121.5 MHz while flying from Europe to Dubai


Iranian Air Defense Site: 'Unknown aircraft you are in Iranian airspace. Identify yourself.'


Aircraft: 'This is a United States aircraft. I am in Iraqi airspace.'


Air Defense Site: 'You are in Iranian airspace. If you do not depart our airspace we will launch interceptor aircraft!'


Aircraft: 'This is a United States Marine Corps FA-18 fighter. Send 'em up, I'll wait!'


Air Defense Site: ( .... total silence)


God bless our troops.


There is something about a Marine that makes other countries listen to reason.

To shoot when you mean it

Learning to shoot for your life

Cops must assess danger and act quickly


AUGUSTA, Ga. — Imagine you're a deputy sent to investigate a shouting match between a husband and wife. When you walk into the couple's living room, the husband is standing three feet from his wife holding a steak knife.


Do you shoot him?


Now imagine you're startled awake in the dead of night by the sound of breaking glass and you see a stranger in your hallway. Or what if that stranger walks through an unlocked door in the middle of the day?


Do you shoot him?


In either instance, Georgia and South Carolina law would probably support your decision to shoot. But that split-second decision - shoot or don't shoot - will either alter your life forever or possibly become the last decision you ever make.


In the past few weeks, Augusta has seen two instances of what appear to be lethal self -defense. On Aug. 20, Superior Court Judge Carlisle Overstreet shot and killed a man investigators say was breaking into Overstreet's house. On Sept. 6, a deputy shot and killed a man who pointed a gun at him outside a Washington Road restaurant, investigators say.


Georgia law gives law enforcement and civilians equal rights to protect themselves with deadly force. The difference can be in the amount of training behind that decision.


A parking lot mugging or a late-night burglar is a lethal situation that a citizen might find himself in someday. A deputy, though, starts every shift with the real possibility he will make a life-or-death decision.


It's impossible to fully prepare for that fateful moment, but firearms instructors such as Lt. Mike Riley with the Columbia County Sheriff's Office, have several training tools to save deputies' lives.


"We don't go 50/50 in a gunfight," Riley said.


A deputy has to be able to instantly judge a situation and decide when to shoot in a split-second. Deputies train to make fast decisions at the gun range by firing at steel pop-up targets. The targets are either circle- or octagon-shaped and the deputies have to decide which one to shoot based on prior instruction.


The true test, though, comes when you're staring down the barrel of a gun and the adrenaline starts pumping.


Marc "Animal" MacYoung is a self-described street fighter who grew up on the streets of Los Angeles. He uses his life experiences to teach others how to avoid dangerous situations and methods of self-defense if they are attacked.


He also speaks from personal experience about the physical and emotional responses that follow killing someone.


"Quite frankly, people will be terrified of you," he said.


MacYoung said in a life-or-death situation, time and space are distorted. There's a "hyper-focus" on the threat and someone who is 10 feet away might seem within inches of you. Time slows down and the brain fails to pick up on almost anything but the threat.

We used to call this "tunnel vision", it is involved in other things besides shootings and can get you killed...keep looking.

That can lead to inconsistencies in your story when you're questioned immediately after the death and give the appearance of lying, MacYoung said. Immediately after killing someone, there are shakes, sometimes vomiting and even feelings of euphoria that you survived the situation.


Weeks, months, or even years later, people will flash back to that moment and often wrestle with guilt and doubt. It's also a moment that others will define you by, said MacYoung, who points to Wyatt Earp as an example. The famed lawman died an old man but his entire life is remembered for 30 seconds at the OK Corral.


MacYoung would rather live with his demons, though, than not live at all.


Teaching people to pull the trigger is Aaron Rote's job as a National Rifle Association firearms instructor. Many people'sreactions at the prospect of killing someone are self-doubt and revulsion, he said.


But place someone in a situation where they have to protect the family, and the feelings change,


The "mama bear" mentality comes out with women, he said.

Someone recently asked me about purchasing a gun for self defense.  I made some suggestions on a type of weapon and I also told this person to get to a range for training, etc.  But one thing I emphasied was there was no "shot them in the leg" or "shoot to wound".  Use of deadly force is exactly that, deadly.  Get over the fact you may kill someone if you shoot them. 

But there were some great quotes from this article:

Guns don't kill people, proper sight alignment, grip, trigger squeeze, breathing, and practice kill people. If your not training with your weapon more then the department or state mandate then you might as well throw rocks when the moment counts. All ways train like it's real and train like your life depends on it... because one day it will!

Well said.

I shoot to go home at night, and stop the threat. Two in the chest and one in the head.

when in doubt empty the mag!

As the old saying goes, "Better judged by 12 than carried  by 6"

What's going on in the World Today 100928

HYPERLINKS MAY REQUIRE AN EMAIL:

USA

Israel: U.S. Disappointed By Israeli Settlement Building September 27, 2010


The U.S. State Department issued a statement expressing disappointment regarding Israel’s decision to let a moratorium on settlement building in the West Bank expire, Reuters reported Sept. 27. A spokesman for the department said the United States is focused on its long-term objective and hopes the Arab League meeting will affirm its support for the peace process. U.S. Middle East envoy George Mitchell will leave for the region Sept. 27 for talks with Israeli and Palestinian officials.


U.S.: Duties Placed On Chinese, Mexican Copper Pipe September 27, 2010


The United States placed final duties as high as 61 percent on Chinese copper pipe and from 24.89 percent to 31.43 percent on Mexican copper pipe and tube, according to a Commerce Department announcement Sept. 27, Reuters reported. The United States imported $233 million worth of copper pipe and tube from China and $130 million from Mexico in 2009. The Commerce Department places final anti-dumping duties from 11.25 percent to 60.85 percent on Chinese producers and exporters. Preliminary duties on both countries have been effective since May. The U.S. International Trade Commission will vote Nov. 8 on whether American producers have been materially harmed or threatened with harm by the imports. 

EUROPE


NOTHING SIGNIFICANT TO REPORT



ASIA


China: Opposition To Iranian Sanctions Reaffirmed - Official September 28, 2010


China opposes sanctions against Iran and believes the nuclear issue should be addressed through negotiations, Li Changchun, a senior Communist Party of China official, said Sept. 28, MNA reported. Beijing has always had a policy of cooperation with Tehran, Li said. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad proposed that bilateral trade be expanded to reach $100 billion within five years.


China: Anti-Dumping Duties Put On U.S. Chicken Imports September 26, 2010


China will enact anti-dumping duties on U.S. chicken product imports beginning Sept. 27, AFP reported Sept. 26, citing a statement from the Chinese Commerce Ministry. The statement said the U.S. market has dumped broiler products into the Chinese market and damaged China’s domestic chicken producers. Duties of more than 50 percent will be put on up to 35 U.S. chicken broiler exporters, including Tyson Foods Inc., Keystone Foods LLC, Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation and Sanderson Farms Inc., and duties of more than 105 percent will be put on all other U.S. producers. The duties will apply for five years.



RUSSIA


Kyrgyzstan, Russia: U.S. Reportedly Welcomes Fuel-supply Venture  September 27, 2010


The United States has welcomed a proposal for establishing a joint Kyrgyz-Russian venture to supply aviation fuel to the Pentagons transit center in Bishkek, Kyrgyz Deputy Prime Minsiter Zhantoro Satybaldiyev said Sept. 27, RIA Novosti reported. The drafting of an agreement that would create the venture is in its final stages, an Kyrgyz official said.


Russia, Iran: No Nuclear Plant Negotiations Underway September 27, 2010


Russia does not negotiate with Iran on the construction of new nuclear power plants, except for the Bushehr nuclear power plant, Rosatom chief Sergei Kiriyenko stated, Itar-Tass reported Sept. 27. Bushehr is being finalized but the next power units are not on the agenda, he said without providing details.



IRAN


Above the Tearline: Cyberattacks and Investigation Disturbance STRATFOR


Iran: Unnecessary Foreign Goods Banned September 28, 2010


The Iranian government plans to support domestic producers and permanent jobs on its priority list and will ban the import of unnecessary foreign merchandise, Irans Labor and Social Affairs Minister Ali Reza Sheykholeslami said Sept. 28, IRNA reported. The industrial and agricultural ministries will identify the unnecessary goods, he said, adding that the ban will be transparent so that agricultural and industrial importers can continue their activities.


Iran: Court Bans 2 Reformist Parties September 27, 2010


The Islamic Iran Participation Front and the Islamic Revolution Mujahideen Organization, two political parties that backed presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi in the 2009 election, were banned by a court Sept. 27 from holding any further activities, AFP reported, citing a report by the Iranian Labor News Agency.


Iran: Stuxnet Computer Virus Is Mutating, Spreading September 27, 2010


The Stuxnet computer virus has mutated and is spreading, the deputy chief of Iran’s Information Technology Company said, IRNA reported Sept. 27. Hamid Alipur said the exact level of contamination is unclear. He said the Information Technology Company had expected to be able to root out the virus in one to two months, but three new versions of it have been spreading. Alipur said the virus’s writer has been able to access industrial information not available to information technology experts. He said Stuxnet was not written by ordinary hackers and a country or organization was involved in Stuxnet’s creation.


Iran: President Says Soviet Union, U.S. Supported Iraq In War September 27, 2010


Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the United States and the former Soviet Union supported Iraq in the 1980-88 war against Iran and that Iran’s enemies are now defending their “white and black palaces,” Vision of the Islamic Republic of Iran Khuzestan Provincial TV, Ahvaz, reported Sept. 27. He reiterated his urging for an investigation into 9/11, saying it was used as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. He added that sanctions against Iran would not be effective.


Iran: May Sue Russia Over S-300 Delivery September 26, 2010


Iran may sue Russia if Moscow does not deliver the S-300 air defense system to Iran, according to Iranian lawmaker Alaeddin Boroujerdi, Iran’s semi-official ISNA reported Sept. 26. Boroujerdi, head of the Iranian parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, said Iran would sue for compensation if Russia does not deliver the system.



IRAQ


Dispatch: Factionalization and the Iraqi Security Forces STRATFOR


Iraq: Kurdish Rebels Deny Iranian Attack September 27, 2010


Iranian forces did not conduct a raid at the Iraqi border, Sherzad Kamanger, a spokesman for Kurdish rebels based in Iraq’s Qandil Mountains, said on Sept. 27, AP reported. Iranian state television reported on Sept. 26 that Iranian forces moved into Iraq and killed 30 militants involved in a bomb attack that occurred in northwestern Iran. Kamanger said there have been no recent battles with Iranian troops, but there was Iranian shelling late Sept. 26 at four border towns that left a civilian injured.



ISRAEL


NOTHING SIGNIFICANT TO REPORT



AFGHANISTAN


Afghanistan: Spokesman Confirms Contact With Taliban September 28, 2010


The spokesman for Afghan President Hamid Karzai confirmed that contact has been made between the government and Taliban leaders, Tolo TV reported Sept. 28. The spokesman said both indirect and direct contact has been made at various levels but said he did not consider it the beginning of peace talks.


Afghanistan: Security Transition Target May Be Delayed - NATO Gen. September 28, 2010


NATO will not meet its target for transferring security responsibility to Afghan forces in 2011 unless allies provide hundreds more specialty instructors, NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan head U.S. Lt. Gen. William Caldwell said Sept. 28, Reuters reported. According to Caldwell, desertion and casualties have caused attrition in the Afghan army, which has in turn led to 133,000 fewer Afghan police and army troops than is needed to increase the total number of personnel by 50,000 and, thus, reach the target of 305,000. If NATO’s requirements are not met on time, the transition will be delayed, Caldwell said.


U.K., Afghanistan: Taliban Demand Prisoner Swap September 27, 2010


A local Afghan Taliban commander said he kidnapped a British aid worker and her Afghan colleagues in Kunar province Sept. 26 and told an Afghan press agency with close ties to the Taliban that he was demanding an exchange for Aafia Siddiqui, The Telegraph reported.


Afghanistan: Conflict Moving North - Defense Ministry September 26, 2010


Afghanistan’s northern provinces have become less secure as International Security Assistance Force and Afghan troops have increased their presence in the country’s south and east, according to a spokesman for the Afghan Defense Ministry, Tolo TV reported Sept. 26. The spokesman said while security has improved in the south and east due to the increased operations in the area, the Taliban has shown some success in moving the conflict to the north and west.



SOUTH OF THE BORDER


Venezuela: Nuclear Program Considered September 28, 2010


Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said his government is considering a nuclear energy program for peaceful purposes, AP reported Sept. 28. Venezuela needs an atomic energy program and will not be stopped as it conducts initial studies, Chavez stated during a news conference.


Colombia: FARC Nominate New Chief September 27, 2010


The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) designated Felix Antonio Munoz Lascarro, aka Pastor Alape, as the successor to deceased chief Victor Julio Suarez Rojas, El Espectador reported Sept. 27. Lascarro is the head of the Central Magdalena bloc and is allegedly responsible for managing FARC drug production and distribution policy and controlling the supply of cocaine in Central Magdalena province.


Mexico: Tancitaro Interim Mayor Killed September 27, 2010

Mexican police discovered the bodies of Tancitaro interim Mayor Gustavo Sanchez Cervantes and his secretary, Rafael Equihua Cervantes, near the town of Angahuan in Michoacan state, El Universal reported Sept. 27. Both men had been killed with stones and were bound and blindfolded.


Colombia: GPS Not Used To Target FARC Commander September 27, 2010


Colombian armed forces commander Adm. Edgar Cely denied that a GPS chip was used to locate and target Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) chief Victor Julio Suarez Rojas, Caracol Radio reported Sept. 27. Cely said the Sept. 22 raid that killed Suarez Rojas in La Macarena, Meta department, was the result of armed forces intelligence and that only the military high command was aware of his presence at the targeted camp.


Venezuela: Chavez Allies Win Congressional Majority September 27, 2010


Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s socialist party won at least 90 of the 165 seats in the National Assembly, while the opposition coalition won at least 59 seats, National Electoral Council chief Tibisay Lucena said Sept. 27, AP reported. Ramon Guillermo Aveledo, leader of the opposition coalition, called the delayed results “inadmissible,” claiming that according to the opposition’s tally, anti-Chavez candidates garnered more than half the popular vote. Areas where the electoral council didn’t release results were dominated by the opposition, Aveledo said, demanding electoral authorities give details on those results.


Mexico: Soldiers Capture Suspected Drug Chief September 27, 2010


Mexican soldiers arrested suspected Zetas drug gang leader Jose Angel Fernandez in Cancun and blamed him for a deadly Aug. 31 bar attack that killed eight people who declined to pay protection money, Reuters reported Sept. 27. The army said Fernandez was in charge of trafficking and enforcement operations in Cancun and the surrounding state of Quintana Roo. Fernandez was caught with three other people, weapons, cash in dollars and pesos, cell phones, vehicles and a list of names of people on the Zeta payroll in Quintana Roo, according to army statements.


A FARC Leader's Death and Colombia's Upper Hand STRATFOR


Mexico Security Memo: Sept. 27, 2010 STRATFOR

MISC


Cuba: Labor Reforms To Increase Production Laborers September 28, 2010


Cuban labor reforms, which will eliminate 500,000 jobs in the next six months, could cause up to 80 percent of all public workers to be directly linked to production, EFE reported Sept. 28. The reshuffling of laborers to other sectors will be based on each person’s “demonstrated ability,” and will be carried out with the aid of advisory committees and the state labor union.


Greece: Ship Searched For Weapons September 28, 2010


Greek authorities were searching on Sept. 28 a cargo ship believed to be hauling weapons from North Korea to Syria, Reuters reported, citing officials. The ship is French-owned and German-flagged; after opening four containers, neither missiles nor weapons have been found, an unnamed official close to the operation said. “Non-military material that could have a dual use,” was found, according to an official, who added that the search was ongoing.

Dispatch: Challenges in Developing the Arctic STRATFORExcept where noted courtesy www.stratfor.com

Geopolitical Weekly : Pakistan and the U.S. Exit From Afghanistan

By George Friedman


Bob Woodward has released another book, this one on the debate over Afghanistan strategy in the Obama administration. As all his books do, the book has riveted Washington. It reveals that intense debate occurred over what course to take, that the president sought alternative strategies and that compromises were reached. But while knowing the details of these things is interesting, what would have been shocking is if they hadn’t taken place.


It is interesting to reflect on the institutional inevitability of these disagreements. The military is involved in a war. It is institutionally and emotionally committed to victory in the theater of combat. It will demand all available resources for executing the war under way. For a soldier who has bled in that war, questioning the importance of the war is obscene. A war must be fought relentlessly and with all available means.


But while the military’s top generals and senior civilian leadership are responsible for providing the president with sound, clearheaded advice on all military matters including the highest levels of grand strategy, they are ultimately responsible for the pursuit of military objectives to which the commander-in-chief directs them. Generals must think about how to win the war they are fighting. Presidents must think about whether the war is worth fighting. The president is responsible for America’s global posture. He must consider what an unlimited commitment to a particular conflict might mean in other regions of the world where forces would be unavailable.


A president must take a more dispassionate view than his generals. He must calculate not only whether victory is possible but also the value of the victory relative to the cost. Given the nature of the war in Afghanistan, U.S. President Barack Obama and Gen. David Petraeus — first the U.S. Central Command chief and now the top commander in Afghanistan — had to view it differently. This is unavoidable. This is natural. And only one of the two is ultimately in charge.


The Nature of Guerrilla Warfare


In thinking about Afghanistan, it is essential that we begin by thinking about the nature of guerrilla warfare against an occupying force. The guerrilla lives in the country. He isn’t going anywhere else, as he has nowhere to go. By contrast, the foreigner has a place to which he can return. This is the core weakness of the occupier and the strength of the guerrilla. The former can leave and in all likelihood, his nation will survive. The guerrilla can’t. And having alternatives undermines the foreigner’s will to fight regardless of the importance of the war to him.


The strategy of the guerrilla is to make the option to withdraw more attractive. In order to do this, his strategic goal is simply to survive and fight on whatever level he can. His patience is built into who he is and what he is fighting for. The occupier’s patience is calculated against the cost of the occupation and its opportunity costs, thus, while troops are committed in this country, what is happening elsewhere?


Tactically, the guerrilla survives by being elusive. He disperses in small groups. He operates in hostile terrain. He denies the enemy intelligence on his location and capabilities. He forms political alliances with civilians who provide him supplies and intelligence on the occupation forces and misleads the occupiers about his own location. The guerrilla uses this intelligence network to decline combat on the enemy’s terms and to strike the enemy when he is least prepared. The guerrilla’s goal is not to seize and hold ground but to survive, evade and strike, imposing casualties on the occupier. Above all, the guerrilla must never form a center of gravity that, if struck, would lead to his defeat. He thus actively avoids anything that could be construed as a decisive contact.


The occupation force is normally a more conventional army. Its strength is superior firepower, resources and organization. If it knows where the guerrilla is and can strike before the guerrilla can disperse, the occupying force will defeat the guerrilla. The occupier’s problems are that his intelligence is normally inferior to that of the guerrillas; the guerrillas rarely mass in ways that permit decisive combat and normally can disperse faster than the occupier can pinpoint and deploy forces against them; and the guerrillas’ superior tactical capabilities allow them to impose a constant low rate of casualties on the occupier. Indeed, the massive amount of resources the occupier requires and the inflexibility of a military institution not solely committed to the particular theater of operations can actually work against the occupier by creating logistical vulnerabilities susceptible to guerrilla attacks and difficulty adapting at a rate sufficient to keep pace with the guerrilla. The occupation force will always win engagements, but that is never the measure of victory. If the guerrillas operate by doctrine, defeats in unplanned engagements will not undermine their basic goal of survival. While the occupier is not winning decisively, even while suffering only some casualties, he is losing. While the guerrilla is not losing decisively, even if suffering significant casualties, he is winning. Since the guerrilla is not going anywhere, he can afford far higher casualties than the occupier, who ultimately has the alternative of withdrawal.


The asymmetry of this warfare favors the guerrilla. This is particularly true when the strategic value of the war to the occupier is ambiguous, where the occupier does not possess sufficient force and patience to systematically overwhelm the guerrillas, and where either political or military constraints prevent operations against sanctuaries. This is a truth as relevant to David’s insurgency against the Philistines as it is to the U.S. experience in Vietnam or the Russian occupation of Afghanistan.


There has long been a myth about the unwillingness of Americans to absorb casualties for very long in guerrilla wars. In reality, the United States fought in Vietnam for at least seven years (depending on when you count the start and stop) and has now fought in Afghanistan for nine years. The idea that Americans can’t endure the long war has no empirical basis. What the United States has difficulty with — along with imperial and colonial powers before it — is a war in which the ability to impose one’s will on the enemy through force of arms is lacking and when it is not clear that the failure of previous years to win the war will be solved in the years ahead.


Far more relevant than casualties to whether Americans continue a war is the question of the conflict’s strategic importance, for which the president is ultimately responsible. This divides into several parts. This first is whether the United States has the ability with available force to achieve its political goals through prosecuting the war (since all war is fought for some political goal, from regime change to policy shift) and whether the force the United States is willing to dedicate suffices to achieve these goals. To address this question in Afghanistan, we have to focus on the political goal.


The Evolution of the U.S. Political Goal in Afghanistan


Washington’s primary goal at the initiation of the conflict was to destroy or disrupt al Qaeda in Afghanistan to protect the U.S. homeland from follow-on attacks to 9/11. But if Afghanistan were completely pacified, the threat of Islamist-fueled transnational terrorism would remain at issue because it is no longer just an issue of a single organization — al Qaeda — but a series of fragmented groups conducting operations in Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen, North Africa, Somalia and elsewhere.


Today, al Qaeda is simply one manifestation of the threat of this transnational jihadist phenomenon. It is important to stop and consider al Qaeda — and the transnational jihadist phenomenon in general — in terms of guerrillas, and to think of the phenomenon as a guerrilla force in its own right operating by the very same rules on a global basis. Thus, where the Taliban apply guerrilla principles to Afghanistan, today’s transnational jihadist applies them to the Islamic world and beyond. The transnational jihadists are not leaving and are not giving up. Like the Taliban in Afghanistan, they will decline combat against larger American forces and strike vulnerable targets when they can.


There are certainly more players and more complexity to the global phenomenon than in a localized insurgency. Many governments across North Africa, the Middle East and South Asia have no interest in seeing these movements set up shop and stir up unrest in their territory. And al Qaeda’s devolution has seen frustrations as well as successes as it spreads. But the underlying principles of guerrilla warfare remain at issue. Whenever the Americans concentrate force in one area, al Qaeda disengages, disperses and regroups elsewhere and, perhaps more important, the ideology that underpins the phenomenon continues to exist. The threat will undoubtedly continue to evolve and face challenges, but in the end, it will continue to exist along the lines of the guerrilla acting against the United States.


There is another important way in which the global guerrilla analogy is apt. STRATFOR has long held that Islamist-fueled transnational terrorism does not represent a strategic, existential threat to the United States. While acts of transnational terrorism target civilians, they are not attacks — have not been and are not evolving into attacks — that endanger the territorial integrity of the United States or the way of life of the American people. They are dangerous and must be defended against, but transnational terrorism is and remains a tactical problem that for nearly a decade has been treated as if it were the pre-eminent strategic threat to the United States.


Nietzsche wrote that, “The most fundamental form of human stupidity is forgetting what we were trying to do in the first place.” The stated U.S. goal in Afghanistan was the destruction of al Qaeda. While al Qaeda as it existed in 2001 has certainly been disrupted and degraded, al Qaeda’s evolution and migration means that disrupting and degrading it — to say nothing of destroying it — can no longer be achieved by waging a war in Afghanistan. The guerrilla does not rely on a single piece of real estate (in this case Afghanistan) but rather on his ability to move seamlessly across terrain to evade decisive combat in any specific location. Islamist-fueled transnational terrorism is not centered on Afghanistan and does not need Afghanistan, so no matter how successful that war might be, it would make little difference in the larger fight against transnational jihadism.


Thus far, the United States has chosen to carry on fighting the war in Afghanistan. As al Qaeda has fled Afghanistan, the overall political goal for the United States in the country has evolved to include the creation of a democratic and uncorrupt Afghanistan. It is not clear that anyone knows how to do this, particularly given that most Afghans consider the ruling government of President Hamid Karzai — with which the United States is allied — as the heart of the corruption problem, and beyond Kabul most Afghans do not regard their way of making political and social arrangements to be corrupt.


Simply withdrawing from Afghanistan carries its own strategic and political costs, however. The strategic problem is that simply terminating the war after nine years would destabilize the Islamic world. The United States has managed to block al Qaeda’s goal of triggering a series of uprisings against existing regimes and replacing them with jihadist regimes. It did this by displaying a willingness to intervene where necessary. Of course, the idea that U.S. intervention destabilized the region raises the question of what regional stability would look like had it not intervened. The danger of withdrawal is that the network of relationships the United States created and imposed at the regime level could unravel if it withdrew. America would be seen as having lost the war, the prestige of radical Islamists and thereby the foundation of the ideology that underpins their movement would surge, and this could destabilize regimes and undermine American interests.


The political problem is domestic. Obama’s approval rating now stands at 42 percent. This is not unprecedented, but it means he is politically weak. One of the charges against him, fair or not, is that he is inherently anti-war by background and so not fully committed to the war effort. Where a Republican would face charges of being a warmonger, which would make withdrawal easier, Obama faces charges of being too soft. Since a president must maintain political support to be effective, withdrawal becomes even harder. Therefore, strategic analysis aside, the president is not going to order a complete withdrawal of all combat forces any time soon — the national (and international) political alignment won’t support such a step. At the same time, remaining in Afghanistan is unlikely to achieve any goal and leaves potential rivals like China and Russia freer rein.


The American Solution


The American solution, one that we suspect is already under way, is the Pakistanization of the war. By this, we do not mean extending the war into Pakistan but rather extending Pakistan into Afghanistan. The Taliban phenomenon has extended into Pakistan in ways that seriously complicate Pakistani efforts to regain their bearing in Afghanistan. It has created a major security problem for Islamabad, which, coupled with the severe deterioration of the country’s economy and now the floods, has weakened the Pakistanis’ ability to manage Afghanistan. In other words, the moment that the Pakistanis have been waiting for — American agreement and support for the Pakistanization of the war — has come at a time when the Pakistanis are not in an ideal position to capitalize on it.


In the past, the United States has endeavored to keep the Taliban in Afghanistan and the regime in Pakistan separate. (The Taliban movements in Afghanistan and Pakistan are not one and the same.) Washington has not succeeded in this regard, with the Pakistanis continuing to hedge their bets and maintain a relationship across the border. Still, U.S. opposition has been the single greatest impediment to Pakistan’s consolidation of the Taliban in Afghanistan, and abandoning this opposition leaves important avenues open for Islamabad.


The Pakistani relationship to the Taliban, which was a liability for the United States in the past, now becomes an advantage for Washington because it creates a trusted channel for meaningful communication with the Taliban. Logic suggests this channel is quite active now.


The Vietnam War ended with the Paris peace talks. Those formal talks were not where the real bargaining took place but rather where the results were ultimately confirmed. If talks are under way, a similar venue for the formal manifestation of the talks is needed — and Islamabad is as good a place as any.


Pakistan is an American ally which the United States needs, both to balance growing Chinese influence in and partnership with Pakistan, and to contain India. Pakistan needs the United States for the same reason. Meanwhile, the Taliban wants to run Afghanistan. The United States has no strong national interest in how Afghanistan is run so long as it does not support and espouse transnational jihadism. But it needs its withdrawal to take place in a manner that strengthens its influence rather than weakens it, and Pakistan can provide the cover for turning a retreat into a negotiated settlement.


Pakistan has every reason to play this role. It needs the United States over the long term to balance against India. It must have a stable or relatively stable Afghanistan to secure its western frontier. It needs an end to U.S. forays into Pakistan that are destabilizing the regime. And playing this role would enhance Pakistan’s status in the Islamic world, something the United States could benefit from, too. We suspect that all sides are moving toward this end.


The United States isn’t going to defeat the Taliban. The original goal of the war is irrelevant, and the current goal is rather difficult to take seriously. Even a victory, whatever that would look like, would make little difference in the fight against transnational jihad, but a defeat could harm U.S. interests. Therefore, the United States needs a withdrawal that is not a defeat. Such a strategic shift is not without profound political complexity and difficulties. But the disparity between — and increasingly, the incompatibility of — the struggle with transnational terrorism and the war effort geographically rooted in Afghanistan is only becoming more apparent — even to the American public.

This report is republished with permission of STRATFOR

Officer Down

Police Officer James E. Fowler III

Baltimore City Police Department

End of Watch: Monday, September 27, 2010

Age: 61

Tour of Duty: 34 years

Officer James Fowler was killed in an automobile accident on U.S. 22 in Lewiston, Pennsylvania, while traveling to an accident investigation training course at Penn State University.

During the drive Officer Fowler encountered inclement weather, causing his vehicle to leave the roadway and strike the center divider.

Officer Fowler was a U.S. Navy veteran and had served with the Baltimore Police Department for 34 years. He is survived by his wife and two children.

Rest in Peace Bro…We’ll Continue The Watch

Day is done, gone the sun,

From the lake, from the hills,

From the sky.

All is well, safely rest,

God is nigh.

Adventures in a strange new world

As some of you know I recently became engaged and my financee and her two girls moved into my place. Having lived in this four bedroom house for most part alone since I bought it is a bit of a change. But I just had an adventure that reminds me of becoming one of your parents.

The youngest Adele had her birthday and got a gift card to a local video game store. Her sister Katie insisted on coming with us and upon arrival the girls descended into the place at warp speed. They did (more or less) know what they wanted and we got in line to pay. Both also needed to pay separately. I usually am stuck at the back of the line this and am ready to scream, already late for work. But I had to just grin and bear it...and the parents in line behind me understood!

I can't wait till Katie brings home her first boyfriend!

To cuff or not to cuff...that is the question

I have to say I was kinda taken back by the title. I've always told my victims, err field trainee's if you have a suspect to immediately handcuff, put them at a disadvantage. If I need to release him (he really wasn't the turd we were looking for)and he complains I'll gladly write the letter as opposed to write the letter to the next of kin...or have someone write the letter about me. That said he has some good points here....

Search first or handcuff first? Neither! - PoliceOne.com 

Training to Think with Sgt. Steve "Pappy" Papen
The 'search first' and the 'handcuff first' theories have inherent dangers — the Grip-Protective Sweep (GPS) technique is a good 'somewhere in between' strategy


A county deputy was shot in the face and killed by an auto theft suspect. A city police officer was shot in the face and killed by a subject trying to cash bad checks. A state trooper was shot in the upper body during a car stop. The trooper survived despite numerous bullet wounds. In all three events the officers were standing behind the suspects attempting to handcuff them when the offender pulled a hidden weapon and shot over their shoulders striking the officers.


Let’s list the “mistakes” some say these officers made. First, the officers did not correctly apply a control-hold while performing the handcuffing. Next, the officers did not put the suspect in a position of disadvantage. Third, the officers should have waited for a backup officer before attempting the arrest, and operating alone was the ultimate error. Fourth, the officers were all attempting to place the handcuff on the controlled wrist when they should have cuffed the uncontrolled hand first. Finally, the officers were shot because they were handcuffing before searching; and, had they searched first they would have discovered the weapon before the subject had an opportunity to access it.


To all these arguments I respond, “Maybe...maybe not.”


...we all make errors every day; and we would admit that we have often operated in a similar fashion. There but for the grace of God go anyone of us.


How can we improve our odds in similar circumstances? First, after acknowledging that we are only human, prone to errors, and not invincible, we admit that:


1. There is no “control-hold” that can absolutely control everyone.


2. There is no such thing as a “position of advantage” or a “position of disadvantage.” The suspect almost always has the advantage. He has no rules of engagement. He has no need to follow any constitutional provisions or force policies. He usually gets the first move, forcing us to respond to his actions. We can only operate in a way that provides “less-disadvantage” to us and “less-advantage” for the suspect.


3. Backup officers are not always available, or the immediacy of the action makes it imprudent to wait for backup.


4. Grasping one of the suspect’s hands and cuffing the other hand does not necessarily control either.


5. The belief that searching before handcuffing is the magic bullet is erroneous. In the case of the deputy, he did search first but missed a firearm concealed in the suspect’s rear pants pocket. Additionally, if you are conducting a full body search in close quarters with an unsecured subject, then you are exposed in both place and time. In other words, you have a divided-attention issue wherein you are trying to both control and search a subject simultaneously — and you’re doing this for a relatively extended time period. If the suspect is dedicating all his mental effort on developing a plan of attack while you are busy controlling, searching, scanning for other threats, listening to your radio, considering what you are physically detecting, determining whether you have the legal authority to continue your actions, etcetera, then you are seriously behind the reactionary curve — especially since you have virtually no reaction time due to the intimacy of the distance.


Once we recognize the disadvantages we face, we can then begin to formulate survival strategies. But, first we need to recognize one last idiosyncrasy shared by the three described events. In each case the officers had contact with only one of the subject’s hands during the cuffing process. All subjects had one hand free, and in each case it was the right hand. The vast majority of the population is right handed. Should we cuff that hand or control that hand? If you’re following the human factors under discussion, you know there is no good answer to this question.


Most officers when conducting a pat-frisk have the subject’s hands interlaced either behind his head or at the small of his back. Where you frisk will depend upon where you reasonably believe a weapon might be secreted...


Offenders generally carry their firearms in the waistband and pockets. They do so for ease of access. Therefore, most defense-tactics search patterns start with these areas before moving to less probable and less accessible areas. If you really believe that a subject is armed wouldn’t you be safer if he was handcuffed before you frisked him? Of course you would. But, in the process of handcuffing him you have the divided-attention issue discussed earlier. You are trying to control his hands while you are accessing your handcuffs, getting the proper grip on the cuffs, and then applying them to the subject’s wrists. Meanwhile, the subject might have a weapon of which you are unaware but is immediately accessible to him.


Tactics are a tradeoff — a balancing act. Every time you create a tactic to solve a problem, you create a new problem. Both the “search first” and the “handcuff first” theories have inherent dangers. I submit that we must find the reasonable “somewhere in between” strategy. That strategy is the Grip-Protective Sweep (GPS). Simply put, grip the subject’s hands either behind his head or behind his back. Know that there are pros and cons to each of these positions (in fact, that is a topic of discussion we will have at another time in the future).


Conduct a limited frisk of the areas that subjects are known to carry weapons and that are easily accessible to them. We call this a “protective sweep” to discriminate between this action and a full search. Once you have determined to the best of your ability that the subject is not armed with an immediately accessible weapon (and if he does have one, use your trained tactics to deal with that) handcuff him. After he is handcuffed, conduct your Terry frisk or your search incident to arrest.


...at this point the strategy seems to fulfill the needs of the “balancing act” between the search first / handcuff first extremes. You satisfy the “search first” proponents by establishing whether or not there is a weapon present in the “high-risk” areas before handcuffing. You satisfy the “handcuff first” proponents by handcuffing a subject prior to conducting a full-body search. You limit your “time in the hole” (that area in close proximity to a subject) with an unsecured suspect. And, you satisfy the human factors experts who correctly insist that it is extremely difficult to pay attention to more than one thing at a time.


I am open to suggestions from others, and always willing to learn something new. If you have a tactic that works for you I certainly would like to know about it. Please contact me and tell me about your experiences.


Like most trainers, I steal from others without remorse.

I'll second that one!

I wonder where is the ACLU et all on this...

The fact Army Reserve Command approved it and then spent the money (we're talking over 100K) to buy every issue to then burn tells me someone screwed up real bad...and I want a copy to see what this LTC is really saying

Pentagon destroys thousands of copies of Army officer's memoir - CNN.com

Operation Dark Heart' describes Lt. Col Anthony Shaffer's time in Afghanistan leading a black-ops team


Washington (CNN) -- The Department of Defense recently purchased and destroyed thousands of copies of an Army Reserve officer's memoir in an effort to safeguard state secrets, a spokeswoman said Saturday.


"DoD decided to purchase copies of the first printing because they contained information which could cause damage to national security," Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. April Cunningham said.


In a statement to CNN, Cunningham said defense officials observed the September 20 destruction of about 9,500 copies of Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer's new memoir "Operation Dark Heart."

Damage to national security...probabaly Secret stuff.  But if he got it approved and they screwed up I still see a law suit coming up...and no publicity is bad publicity. 

"The whole premise smacks of retaliation," Shaffer told CNN on Saturday. "Someone buying 10,000 books to suppress a story in this digital age is ludicrous."


Shaffer's publisher, St. Martin's Press, released a second printing of the book that it said had incorporated some changes the government had sought "while redacting other text he (Shaffer) was told was classified." 

From single words and names to entire paragraphs, blacked out lines appear throughout the book's 299 pages.

...The Pentagon contacted St. Martin's Press in early August to convey its concerns over the release of the book. According to the publisher, at that time the first printings were just about to be shipped from its warehouse. Shaffer said he and the publisher worked hard "to make sure nothing in the book would be detrimental to national security."


"When you look at what they took out (in the 2nd edition), it's lunacy," Shaffer said.


The Pentagon says Shaffer should have sought wider clearance for the memoir.


"He did clear it with Army Reserve but not with the larger Army and with Department of Defense," Department of Defense spokesman Col. David Lapan said earlier this month. "So he did not meet the requirements under Department of Defense regulations for security review."


One of the book's first lines reads, "Here I was in Afghanistan (redaction) My job: to run the Defense Intelligence Agency's operations out of (redaction) the hub for U.S. operations in country."


In chapter 15, titled "Tipping Point," 21 lines within the first two pages are blacked out.

Kinda reminds me of when Climetgate broke...media sources were putting up stories on who  broke the story, not the fact the fact global warming.  a hoax.  Gee, I wonder why we haven't heard about this from CNN, et all...Again I wonder what was blacked out... but I cannot afford 2 grand the original.

The guy who did the Obama poster is loosing "Hope"...gee ain't you bright

Another thing that reminds me of the wisdom of Churchill, “If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”  Now if the idiot had used his brain before drawing and voting...

Famed Obama 'Hope' poster artist losing hope - Yahoo! News

The artist whose poster of Barack Obama became a rallying image during the hope-and-change election of 2008 says he understands why so many people have lost faith.


In an exclusive interview with National Journal on Thursday, Shepard Fairey expressed his disappointment with the president -- a malaise that seems representative of many Democrats who had great expectations for Obama.


Fairey explained that when he came up with the poster in 2008, he was trying to find a single image that embodied the issues he cared most about -- promoting health care, helping labor, and curtailing lobbyists. He likened the issues to projectiles.


"Looking at Obama's standpoint on various policies, it was like, 'Why throw all these particular projectiles over the wall... when I could put all those things in one projectile that I could hurl over the wall,'" Fairey said in a phone interview from Los Angeles, where he lives. "Obama was the delivery device in theory. Now, I realize that he maybe is not the correct delivery device, and I'll just deal with those issues separately."


... Fairey, who at 40 is no kid himself, said it's easy to see why young voters are down on Obama and the Democrats. He lamented that health care reform was watered down, Tea Party activists have been emboldened, and his man has fallen short on bold campaign promises like closing Guantanamo Bay.


"There's a lot of stuff completely out of Obama's control or any of the Democrats' control," Fairey allowed. "But I think there's something a little deeper in terms of the optimism of the younger voter that's happening. They wanted somebody who was going to fight against the status quo, and I don't think that Obama has done that."


To be sure, Fairey still supports Obama, and he says he would use his talents to as...sist the president's re-election efforts in 2012. But he said that he couldn't design the same Hope poster today, because the spirit of the Obama campaign hasn't carried over to the Obama presidency.


"To say I feel disappointment is within the context that I know he's very intelligent, very capable, very compassionate," Fairey said. "I think he has the tools, and he does not trust his instincts in how to apply them."

Welcome to life Mr Fairey...you invested in a fool and this is what you get...and I would say thanks but you've been no help...I will only say your disappointment does not come close to my despair at what he's done and I can only hope his administration gets neutered come November...we may be able to repeal some of his damage.

What's going on in the World Today 100924

HYPERLINKS MAY REQUIRE AN EMAIL:

USA

U.S.: Nicaraguan Diplomat Found Dead In New York September 23, 2010


A Nicaraguan diplomat attending the U.N. General Assembly in New York was found dead in his South Bronx apartment, a New York Police Department spokesman said Sept. 23, DPA and The New York Post reported. The diplomat, 34-year-old Cesar Mercado, who is a senior official working at the Permanent Mission of Nicaragua to the United Nations, was found with his throat slit at 10:30 a.m. local time. His body was discovered by his driver, who entered the apartment after waiting for Mercado to come down to the car. A knife was found near the scene, and the driver reported Mercado’s door as ajar when he entered.

The Latest Cooperation Between Russia and the United States STRATFOR

EUROPE

Georgia: Second Bomb Neutralized In Tbilisi September 22, 2010


Georgian police found a second improvised explosive device in a Tbilisi cemetery near the U.S. Embassy, the same cemetery where a bomb had earlier gone off Sept. 22, Trend news agency reported. Police neutralized the device where it was found, adding that it appeared to be homemade. Police said an investigation is under way.



ASIA

China: U.S. Sets Paper Product Duties September 22, 2010


The U.S. Commerce Department will impose 7.60 to 135.83 percent antidumping and 17.64 to 178.03 percent countervailing duties on certain coated paper imported from China, Xinhua reported Sept. 22. Chinese producers and exporters of the products received subsidies equivalent to the imposed duties, according to a Commerce statement. U.S. Customs and Border Protection will collect a cash deposit or bond based on the final antidumping rates, the statement said. The U.S. International Trade Commission will make a final determination in November regarding cash deposits of countervailing duties .


South Korea, U.S.: Anti-Submarine Drills Scheduled September 24, 2010


South Korea and the United States will hold five-day anti-submarine drills starting Sept. 27 in the waters west of the Korean Peninsula, according to the U.S.-led United Nations Command (UNC), Xinhua reported Sept. 24. The exercises are designed to send a clear message of deterrence to North Korea and improve anti-submarine warfare capabilities of the South Korean-U.S. alliance, the UNC stated. About 10 ships, including two U.S. guided missile destroyers and two submarines, and some 1,700 troops will be mobilized, officials from Seoul’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said.



RUSSIA

Russia: Agreements Will Settle Arctic Border Disputes - Putin September 23, 2010

Partnership agreements will settle all border disputes in the Arctic region, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said Sept. 23 amid fears of Arctic territorial clashes, RIA Novosti reported. Russia is monitoring the situation in the region closely and has concluded that most “scare stories” about the Arctic are groundless, Putin said at news conference at the International Arctic Forum in Moscow. Putin also said Russia will expand scientific research in the region.

Russia: NATO Envoy Explains Missile System Ban September 23, 2010

Russian President Dmitri Medvedev’s decision to ban the sale of S-300 missile defense systems to Iran was made in the interest of Russia’s national considerations, Russian NATO envoy Dmitri Rogozin said Sept. 23, Interfax reported. The decision logically follows U.N. Security Council discussions surrounding Iran, Rogozin added.

Russia: Decree Bans Transporting S-300s, Other Equipment To Iran September 22, 2010


Russian President Dmitri Medvedev on Sept. 22 signed a decree banning the delivery of S-300 air defense missile systems to Iran, Interfax reported. The decree, which implements a U.N. Security Council resolution, bans combat tanks, armored combat vehicles, combat aircraft including helicopters, military ships, missiles, large-caliber artillery systems, missile systems including the S-300 or any equipment related to all of the above, to include spare parts, from being transported through Russian territory to Iran, exported from Russia to Iran, or transferred to Iran using sea vessels or aircraft under the Russian flag.



IRAN

U.S., Iran: Officials Discuss Covert Diplomatic Relations September 22, 2010


U.S. and Iranian diplomats have initiated contact to examine opening covert lines of communication between the countries, unnamed sources in New York said, Haaretz reported Sept. 22. Diplomats from both sides secretly met at the U.N. headquarters in New York ahead of the Sept. 23 U.N. General Assembly, sources said. The officials discussed a U.S. plan to set up unofficial diplomatic relations.


Iran: Gasoline Shipments Drop To Below 1 Cargo A Month September 24, 2010


Iran has so far imported less than one gasoline cargo for September, making the shipments about 80 percent less than in August, Reuters reported Sept. 24. Using calculations based on trade sources, Reuters found that Iran was importing only 12,000 tonnes in September; a standard cargo is 33,000 tonnes (280,000 barrels). Before new sanctions over Tehran’s nuclear program, Iran had purchased 10-12 cargoes a month. Turkey stopped exporting gasoline to Iran in August, according to records.


The Stuxnet Computer Worm and the Iranian Nuclear Program STRATFOR


The pull quote...gotta love it.

A computer worm proliferating in Iran targets automated activity in large industrial facilities. Speculation that the worm represents an effort by a national intelligence agency to attack Iranian nuclear facilities is widespread in the media. The characteristics of the complex worm do in fact suggest a national intelligence agency was involved. If so, the full story is likely to remain shrouded in mystery.

IRAQ

Iraq: Nationwide Census To Be Held In October September 22, 2010


Iraq will hold a nationwide census for the first time in 20 years on Oct. 24, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Sept. 22, Xinhua reported. Although the security situation and a lack of funding led Iraq to delay the census, al-Maliki said he his confident it will be successful.

ISRAEL

NOTHING SIGNIFICANT TO REPORT





AFGHANISTAN

Afghanistan: Woodward Book Discloses U.S. Paramilitary Presence September 23, 2010

The CIA and U.S. Special Operations forces train and deploy a well-armed 3,000-member Afghan paramilitary force, known as Counterterrorism Pursuit Teams, for operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan, according to a forthcoming book by Bob Woodward, The Washington Post reported Sept. 23. The teams’ primary mission is to improve Afghan security, an official said, adding they do not engage in “lethal action” when crossing into Pakistan for intelligence collection. Border bases are used to build and manage networks of ethnic Pashtun informants who identify and located al Qaeda and Taliban leaders. The Pakistani government will not comment until Woodwards book is released.


Afghanistan: Petraeus Drafts Plan for Reduced NATO Forces September 22, 2010


U.S. Gen. David Petraeus has completed a draft plan to start reducing NATO forces in parts of Afghanistan next year but warned that the process of transition would be slow, Reuters reported Sept. 22. Petraeus said the preliminary analysis of the plan has looked at districts that could be candidates for beginning the transition process, but he emphasized that military headquarters would remain in Afghanistan as a crucial communications and intelligence link and base from which a quick reaction team would deploy, medevac assets would be staged and teams mentoring Afghan forces would be located.

A Week in the War: Afghanistan, Sept. 15-21, 2010 STRATFOR


Great quote from this article:


Copyright http://www.stratfor.com/

"Nothing in Afghanistan should be judged by Western standards. Issues with free and fair elections — just like enduring issues with corruption — do not necessarily equate to or signify a lack of progress (and certainly not failure). Western standards simply are not applicable to realities in Afghanistan, and any application of them only further skews perceptions of an already complex and multifaceted country. But the problem is that it is hard to see progress resolving fundamental incongruities between the realities of Afghanistan and what the U.S.-led International Security Assistance Force is attempting to achieve there

SOUTH OF THE BORDER

Colombia: Security Forces Kill FARC Leaders September 23, 2010


Colombian security forces killed Henry Castellanos Garzon, the head of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) Eastern Bloc, and Jorge Briceno Suarez, FARC military chief, during a raid in La Macarena, Meta department, El Espectador reported Sept. 23.

Paaraguay: Police Eliminate EPP Leader Caceres September 24, 2010


The special operations unit of Paraguay’s national police eliminated Nimio Cardozo Caceres, an important leader of the Paraguayan People’s Army (EPP), on Sept. 24 and invaded one of the group’s camps in Jhugua Nanda, Concepcion, Ultima Hora reported. Explosives were discovered at the camp, and police are still looking for other suspected EPP members. The confrontation and raid occurred two days after the national police increased their mobilizations and operations in response to a recent EPP attack on the police.

A FARC Leader's Death and Colombia's Upper Hand STRATFOR

MISC

Dispatch: Oil Production and Nigeria's Elections STRATFOR

Dispatch: Challenges in Developing the Arctic STRATFOR

Except where noted courtesy www.stratfor.com