Military Mobilization into Washington DC?
cheers
Really? There was some pushing and shoving in Trafalgar Square, but that was about it. You're right about Paris though, but then again its kind of thing they do this time every year, regardless.
It would be interesting to know how many different law enforcement agencies are currently deployed in DC. I saw the Parks Police were out and about, a pretty tooled up bunch. Do they get a lot of trouble in the capitol's parks e.g. people walking on newly sown grass or not scooping their mutt's poop, that sort of thing?
I imagine the ones with the military police tags are military police as stated by the update on deployments posted in this thread.
The rest are all probably under the direction of the military police or are also military police.
There were some more interesting folk who, when asked, told this person that they were only permitted to say they were with the Department of Justice. The suspicion is that they could be PMC (twitter.com/dfriedman33/status/1267936203522932738).
Last edited by unmanned_droid; 3rd Jun 2020 at 16:05.
I would think that those that know are a bit busy to be posting on here.
I imagine the ones with the military police tags are military police as stated by the update on deployments posted in this thread.
The rest are all probably under the direction of the military police or are also military police.
There were some more interesting folk who, when asked, told this person that they were only permitted to say they were with the Department of Justice. The suspicion is that they could be PMC (twitter.com/dfriedman33/status/1267936203522932738).
I imagine the ones with the military police tags are military police as stated by the update on deployments posted in this thread.
The rest are all probably under the direction of the military police or are also military police.
There were some more interesting folk who, when asked, told this person that they were only permitted to say they were with the Department of Justice. The suspicion is that they could be PMC (twitter.com/dfriedman33/status/1267936203522932738).
apparently footwear (grungy trainers) gave them away
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I saw white unmarked C-32A appear at the ‘Hall size years ago, think later this airframe had stars and bar painted on and that’s it. I am led to believe this carries contingency response folks in case all hell breaks loose like with their embassies under siege etc.
cheers
cheers
But these spooks are happy to be confused with the VIP planes when something goes wrong.
They had a nosewheel collapse doing a landing at an outlying military field near Charleston, South Carolina, possibly lights out with night vision goggles:
Military plane of the type that carries VP, others under tight security at base in North after 'landing incident'
Two of 10 persons aboard were shaken up but suffered no serious injuries, according to a U.S. Air Force spokeswoman dispatched from Charleston to North as part of a team investigating what observers in North say appears to have been some kind of emergency landing.
"It's obvious the nose was down and it probably crash landed,” T&D North Correspondent Billy Robinson said. The plane, which is off the runway, is visible from outside the base.
"It's definitely an unusual sight — the sight of a solid white plane,” Robinson said of the craft that bears U.S. Air Force markings rather than the "United States of America" logo that would grace the same model used to fly government leaders.
Speaking by telephone from the North base, Sgt. Melanie Streeter, spokeswoman for 437th Airlift Wing, said the C-32A [sic
] was flown by the 486th Flight Test Squadron from Eglin Air Force Base in Florida.
The C-32A is the military version of Boeing's 757-200. It is the aircraft that makes up the fleet that carries the vice president, the first lady, cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking U.S. officials. The two-engine jet measures just over 155 feet in length with a 124-foot wingspan. It can carry 45 passengers and a crew of 16.
The plane that came down in North had a 10-member crew, Streeter said. After the 3 a.m. "landing incident,” two people were examined for injuries. Neither was seriously hurt.
Streeter would not say whether the plane was scheduled to land at North or what caused the incident. She declined even to call it an emergency landing.
"Command policy is that no information be released until a full investigation is complete,” she said.
Speaking later from Charleston, Maj. Linda Pepin said the plane was on a "test mission.” The C-32A from Elgin is "used for systems flight testing,” she said.
Along with the inquiry by an interim safety board is extra security at the North field, Streeter said.
That security was visible to Robinson and others in North on Thursday. Armed guards are manning the base's main gate off Slab Landing Road. A big truck blocks the Highway 178 entrance to the facility, which is used by the Charleston Air Force Base as a testing and training site.
"There's definitely something going on,” Robinson said. "The guards at the gate and the truck in obvious position to stop something from crossing and getting inside” are not customary.
"You've really got to look to see the plane out there,” Robinson said. But from the highway, armed personnel riding around the base are visible.
"The people in North get so used to hearing the planes at night, we don't think anything about it. And then you hear unusual noises up to explosions and machine gun fire, you don't think much about it because it's fairly common to have something going on. In the back of your mind, you think, 'Is there something going on out there?”'
This time there is.
- By LEE HARTER, T&D Editor
- May 2, 2003
Two of 10 persons aboard were shaken up but suffered no serious injuries, according to a U.S. Air Force spokeswoman dispatched from Charleston to North as part of a team investigating what observers in North say appears to have been some kind of emergency landing.
"It's obvious the nose was down and it probably crash landed,” T&D North Correspondent Billy Robinson said. The plane, which is off the runway, is visible from outside the base.
"It's definitely an unusual sight — the sight of a solid white plane,” Robinson said of the craft that bears U.S. Air Force markings rather than the "United States of America" logo that would grace the same model used to fly government leaders.
Speaking by telephone from the North base, Sgt. Melanie Streeter, spokeswoman for 437th Airlift Wing, said the C-32A [sic
] was flown by the 486th Flight Test Squadron from Eglin Air Force Base in Florida.The C-32A is the military version of Boeing's 757-200. It is the aircraft that makes up the fleet that carries the vice president, the first lady, cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking U.S. officials. The two-engine jet measures just over 155 feet in length with a 124-foot wingspan. It can carry 45 passengers and a crew of 16.
The plane that came down in North had a 10-member crew, Streeter said. After the 3 a.m. "landing incident,” two people were examined for injuries. Neither was seriously hurt.
Streeter would not say whether the plane was scheduled to land at North or what caused the incident. She declined even to call it an emergency landing.
"Command policy is that no information be released until a full investigation is complete,” she said.
Speaking later from Charleston, Maj. Linda Pepin said the plane was on a "test mission.” The C-32A from Elgin is "used for systems flight testing,” she said.
Along with the inquiry by an interim safety board is extra security at the North field, Streeter said.
That security was visible to Robinson and others in North on Thursday. Armed guards are manning the base's main gate off Slab Landing Road. A big truck blocks the Highway 178 entrance to the facility, which is used by the Charleston Air Force Base as a testing and training site.
"There's definitely something going on,” Robinson said. "The guards at the gate and the truck in obvious position to stop something from crossing and getting inside” are not customary.
"You've really got to look to see the plane out there,” Robinson said. But from the highway, armed personnel riding around the base are visible.
"The people in North get so used to hearing the planes at night, we don't think anything about it. And then you hear unusual noises up to explosions and machine gun fire, you don't think much about it because it's fairly common to have something going on. In the back of your mind, you think, 'Is there something going on out there?”'
This time there is.
havoc: what's your source for that?
Sounds like someone is doing their due diligence.
Secretary of Defense spoke up today against using the military contrary to the Presidents vision
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
here is a link in re Sec Def Esper's comments.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...rotests-298314
Nice Job Sec Def.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...rotests-298314
Nice Job Sec Def.
That's a C-32B, not a C-32A. The A's have Pratt motors, the B's have Rolls is one clue.
But these spooks are happy to be confused with the VIP planes when something goes wrong.
They had a nosewheel collapse doing a landing at an outlying military field near Charleston, South Carolina, possibly lights out with night vision goggles:
And, these folks are not the same as the two former 'Comco' 'Torture Taxi' civilian 757s that are operated out of Mobile Downtown airport by L3. They visit garden spots like Rabat and U-Tapao after making stops at places like Oakland to pick up operators.
But these spooks are happy to be confused with the VIP planes when something goes wrong.
They had a nosewheel collapse doing a landing at an outlying military field near Charleston, South Carolina, possibly lights out with night vision goggles:
And, these folks are not the same as the two former 'Comco' 'Torture Taxi' civilian 757s that are operated out of Mobile Downtown airport by L3. They visit garden spots like Rabat and U-Tapao after making stops at places like Oakland to pick up operators.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...-amid-protests
2 decades ago they flew BO105 primarily based out of DoE little ops at Nellis and laughingly all the 105 belonged to EG & G according to 2003 Rotor Roster.
cheers
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I have a close relative who worked for a famous three-letter DOJ law enforcement agency. He wasn't a Special Agent but due to his professional standing was given a very impressive looking 'cred' (credential) with a picture, a seal and a lot of fancy writing, just like in the movies.
I asked if that was what he used to get access to secure spaces like SCIF's. He said no, the chip in his ID card knows all that stuff. He said the only time he was supposed to use the fancy cred was to get a discount at a hotel when travelling on government business. If you've ever worked for the government, you'll know he wasn't joking.
I asked if that was what he used to get access to secure spaces like SCIF's. He said no, the chip in his ID card knows all that stuff. He said the only time he was supposed to use the fancy cred was to get a discount at a hotel when travelling on government business. If you've ever worked for the government, you'll know he wasn't joking.
I have a close relative who worked for a famous three-letter DOJ law enforcement agency. He wasn't a Special Agent but due to his professional standing was given a very impressive looking 'cred' (credential) with a picture, a seal and a lot of fancy writing, just like in the movies.
I asked if that was what he used to get access to secure spaces like SCIF's. He said no, the chip in his ID card knows all that stuff. He said the only time he was supposed to use the fancy cred was to get a discount at a hotel when travelling on government business. If you've ever worked for the government, you'll know he wasn't joking.
I asked if that was what he used to get access to secure spaces like SCIF's. He said no, the chip in his ID card knows all that stuff. He said the only time he was supposed to use the fancy cred was to get a discount at a hotel when travelling on government business. If you've ever worked for the government, you'll know he wasn't joking.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
DC National Guard asks for investigation into use of helicopter to target protesters
By Zack Budryk - 06/02/20 11:02 PM EDT The District of Columbia National Guard has asked for an investigation into the use of a helicopter in the city to disperse crowds protesting the killing of George Floyd, officials told The Hill."Maj. Gen. William J. Walker, District of Columbia National Guard Commanding General, has directed an investigation into a June 1 low-flying maneuver conducted by one of our rotary aviation assets," Air Force Lt. Col. Brooke Davis, spokeswoman for the D.C. National Guard, told The Hill in a statement.
"Our highest priority is the safety of our Citizen Soldiers and Airmen who support civil authorities as they perform their duties,” the spokeswoman continued. “This is our home, and we are dedicated to the safety and security of our fellow citizens of the District and their right to safely and peacefully protest."
As police enforced a 7 p.m. curfew on Monday night, multiple helicopters were deployed to disperse protesters. Footage on social media showed an unarmed Lakota medevac craft with Red Cross markings using its rotor wash — or the downward rush of air from rotors — to disperse crowds.“This was a foolish move,” Geoffrey Corn, a former Army lawyer and professor at the South Texas College of Law in Houston, told The Washington Post. “The symbolic significance of the Red Cross is pervasive: It denotes a ‘noncombatant’ function of the armed forces.”
Kyleanne Hunter, a former Marine Corps pilot, agreed that the use of the helicopter was an escalation and that it flew far too low to serve any useful surveillance purpose.
“You add more military equipment, you get more military tactics,” she told the Post. “It’s to provoke and incite rather to protect and serve.”
They started rioting outside No10 today and assaulted the police. Break out the rubber bullets I say.
The BBC 10 o'clock news had an excellent item (for a change) on the US situation, pointing out the history of racial tensions in the US - totally different from any other country - but also the issue of 18,000 separate police departments where some police have as little as 12 weeks training. Many are so small that oversight must be imperfect. Now we have so many different police departments and agencies and military units trying to sort out an issue caused by this cacophany. The US is my second home but sadly nothing changes.......
The BBC 10 o'clock news had an excellent item (for a change) on the US situation, pointing out the history of racial tensions in the US - totally different from any other country - but also the issue of 18,000 separate police departments where some police have as little as 12 weeks training. Many are so small that oversight must be imperfect.
That is on purpose.
The overall intent is that we, as a matter of systems design, want to avoid too much power being in too few hands, unlike Europe and the autocratic habits they developed over about 20 centuries.
Our founders didn't arrive at their ideas by accident. They took a lot of ideas that arose from the Enlightenment and tried to put a few of them into practice. It's called the Great American Experiment in Self Government for a good reason. And yes, we are still in a petri dish. Seen from the Chinese or European perspective, a couple of centuries or so isn't a pie that is for sure fully baked. Might take a bit longer in the oven, as it were. Still baking, maybe waiting for the crust to turn that lovely golden brown.
With that design principle come a variety of inefficiencies.
That also is on purpose.
This means, as you observe form that article, it's a bit of a mess in detail but the overall framework remains intact. We survived a bloody civil war. And some progress was made. We lived through the upheaval of the 60's and 70's, learned, made a bit of progress.
Here we are again, doing something similar but different. And it may be painful, but in the longer term I am optimistic that a bit more progress can be made.
Again, that is on purpose.
Our Constitution is the political version of the model of continuous improvement that Deming claims to have uncovered in the 1950's. (I like his work, but he was a few centuries late to be original).
Being political, which means that the messy human element is involved, it's somewhat less than a perfect lab experiment.
That is by design.
The reasoning behind that design is an attempt - and for that matter an experiment - in creating a system that prevents too much power being in too few hands. The underlying reason for that viewpoint is about 2000 years of European history before our nation's founding, from which our founders learned.
The experiment remains an ongoing process. That too is by designer intent.
So far so good, but it can for sure get messy at times.
I have hopes for the experiment to proceed into the future for a while. If it ever ends, and when it ever ends, the rest of you will wish it hadn't.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Who Are They? Unmarked Security Forces in DC Spark Fear
Mistaken for mercenaries, armed personnel from federal agencies refuse to identify themselves to street protestors and media.
By Katie Bo Williams Senior National Security Correspondent
The presence of unmarked federal law enforcement officers, dressed in paramilitary uniforms and wearing no identifying insignia, quickly spread among protesters marching through Washington, D.C.’s streets on Tuesday and Wednesday, causing concerned protesters and officials to ask: Who are they?
In some locations, security personnel refused to identify themselves to journalists and protesters who asked which agency sent them, answering only that they worked for the federal government. In other places, they identified themselves as working for the Department of Justice. Some carried rifles, or were equipped with body armor, riot shields, and pepper spray canisters.
Two such clad security members in Washington on Tuesday night identified themselves to Defense One as part of a specialized emergency response force run by the Bureau of Prisons — part of the Justice Department — to help maintain security at correctional facilities. They and others are part of what’s known as the bureau’s Special Operations Response Teams, or SORTs. NPR reported on Monday that Attorney General Bill Barr had ordered BOP to send its specialized riot response teams to assist with the local D.C. law enforcement with the civil unrest that has engulfed downtown Washington this week.
On Wednesday, protesters, former national security officials, and legal analysts raised alarms about the refusal of these units to identify their specific agency, and the legal authority under which they are operating. Some critics compared the units to “little green men” — a reference to the unmarked Russian soldiers who appeared in Crimea, Ukraine, prior to its 2014 annexation by the Russian Federation and were compared to the classic plastic toy soldiers. A few of the personnel in Washington on Tuesday wore patches identifying them as BOP or SORTs, but many did not.
“There is no generic DOJ police force, obviously. No badges, no identifying info, refusal to say who they represent — it’s like Russia’s little green men have taken over the nation’s capital,” tweeted Matt Miller, a former DOJ spokesman under President Barack Obama.
Asked in a brief phone call why the units had been ordered not to identify themselves in more detail, DOJ spokesman Kerri Kupec said, “I don’t know anything about that.” In a separate conversation, another Justice Department official who spoke on the condition of anonymity dismissed the concerns as the purview of conspiracy theorists, expressing frustration that officials who were “clearly” part of the enforcement efforts would be mistaken for mercenaries. That official argued that the BOP officers were appropriately identifying themselves as being with DOJ, suggesting that no further detail was required.
Legal analysts have raised questions about what statute authorizes BOP’s use in civil law enforcement efforts. Those nitty-gritty rules dictate what kind of authority the units have — like the power to arrest citizens, for example. That, in turn, dictates how civilians can seek redress for any abuses of power.
“BOP, like other federal, state, and local law enforcement officers may be deputized under the authority granted the US Marshals Service to enforce federal criminal statutes and protect federal property and personnel,” DOJ spokesman Wyn Hornbuckle said in an email.
That legal rationale — ”if this is really what happened,” cautioned national security law professor Bobby Chesney — means that the BOP officers have the same broad law enforcement authorities that any deputy U.S. marshal would, including the power to carry fire arms and make an arrest without a warrant for any offense.
But the officers’ refusal to identify themselves is still “bonkers,” Chesney said. Some security analysts and protesters argued that the BOP’s reticence was an intimidation tactic.
“The authority they [are] operating under dictates what they are allowed to lawfully do. If DOJ is being intentionally vague in order to intimidate citizens, that is abusive,” tweeted former NSA counsel Susan Hennessey.
Other analysts expressed concerns that tactical teams trained to deal with prison riots by inmates may not know how to cope with civilian unrest on city streets.
BOP officers “are trained for specific missions in specific conditions quite different from working with U.S. civilians—convicted of no crime—exercising their protected 1st A rights,” tweeted Diana Bolsinger, a senior fellow at the Strauss Center for International Security and Law.
It was far from clear that BOP personnel were the only unmarked paramilitary forces on the streets, not was it clear how many BOP officers have been dispatched to Washington. A hodgepodge of federal agencies have loaned their forces to support local law enforcement efforts as D.C.’s protests entered their sixth day on Wednesday, and the BOP units sometimes appeared to be intermingled with officers from these other agencies. Officers from the DEA, FBI, DHS and other federal agencies could be seen around the city, as well as thousands of National Guardsmen.
The BOP did not respond to requests for information on the units by the time this story was published. Democratic lawmakers and some former military and security officials also have expressed concern.
“Unacceptable for uniformed federal officers policing constitutionally-protected assemblies to refuse to identify themselves to people who pay their salaries,” tweeted Rep. Don Beyer, D, who represents northern Virginia’s 8th congressional district, directly across the Potomac River from Washington. “Denying accountability to the public they serve ensures abuses.” Arlington County, in Beyer’s district, on Tuesday pulled their police forces out of Washington, saying it did not want to participate in Trump’s escalation and commingling of security forces against the protests.
“DC police are required by law to wear badges that must be visible ‘even if wearing riot gear,’” Beyer noted. “But because Trump called in federal agencies to crack down on peaceful protests, people in the nation’s capital once again are treated as second class citizens.”
Mistaken for mercenaries, armed personnel from federal agencies refuse to identify themselves to street protestors and media.
By Katie Bo Williams Senior National Security Correspondent
The presence of unmarked federal law enforcement officers, dressed in paramilitary uniforms and wearing no identifying insignia, quickly spread among protesters marching through Washington, D.C.’s streets on Tuesday and Wednesday, causing concerned protesters and officials to ask: Who are they?
In some locations, security personnel refused to identify themselves to journalists and protesters who asked which agency sent them, answering only that they worked for the federal government. In other places, they identified themselves as working for the Department of Justice. Some carried rifles, or were equipped with body armor, riot shields, and pepper spray canisters.
Two such clad security members in Washington on Tuesday night identified themselves to Defense One as part of a specialized emergency response force run by the Bureau of Prisons — part of the Justice Department — to help maintain security at correctional facilities. They and others are part of what’s known as the bureau’s Special Operations Response Teams, or SORTs. NPR reported on Monday that Attorney General Bill Barr had ordered BOP to send its specialized riot response teams to assist with the local D.C. law enforcement with the civil unrest that has engulfed downtown Washington this week.
On Wednesday, protesters, former national security officials, and legal analysts raised alarms about the refusal of these units to identify their specific agency, and the legal authority under which they are operating. Some critics compared the units to “little green men” — a reference to the unmarked Russian soldiers who appeared in Crimea, Ukraine, prior to its 2014 annexation by the Russian Federation and were compared to the classic plastic toy soldiers. A few of the personnel in Washington on Tuesday wore patches identifying them as BOP or SORTs, but many did not.
“There is no generic DOJ police force, obviously. No badges, no identifying info, refusal to say who they represent — it’s like Russia’s little green men have taken over the nation’s capital,” tweeted Matt Miller, a former DOJ spokesman under President Barack Obama.
Asked in a brief phone call why the units had been ordered not to identify themselves in more detail, DOJ spokesman Kerri Kupec said, “I don’t know anything about that.” In a separate conversation, another Justice Department official who spoke on the condition of anonymity dismissed the concerns as the purview of conspiracy theorists, expressing frustration that officials who were “clearly” part of the enforcement efforts would be mistaken for mercenaries. That official argued that the BOP officers were appropriately identifying themselves as being with DOJ, suggesting that no further detail was required.
Legal analysts have raised questions about what statute authorizes BOP’s use in civil law enforcement efforts. Those nitty-gritty rules dictate what kind of authority the units have — like the power to arrest citizens, for example. That, in turn, dictates how civilians can seek redress for any abuses of power.
“BOP, like other federal, state, and local law enforcement officers may be deputized under the authority granted the US Marshals Service to enforce federal criminal statutes and protect federal property and personnel,” DOJ spokesman Wyn Hornbuckle said in an email.
That legal rationale — ”if this is really what happened,” cautioned national security law professor Bobby Chesney — means that the BOP officers have the same broad law enforcement authorities that any deputy U.S. marshal would, including the power to carry fire arms and make an arrest without a warrant for any offense.
But the officers’ refusal to identify themselves is still “bonkers,” Chesney said. Some security analysts and protesters argued that the BOP’s reticence was an intimidation tactic.
“The authority they [are] operating under dictates what they are allowed to lawfully do. If DOJ is being intentionally vague in order to intimidate citizens, that is abusive,” tweeted former NSA counsel Susan Hennessey.
Other analysts expressed concerns that tactical teams trained to deal with prison riots by inmates may not know how to cope with civilian unrest on city streets.
BOP officers “are trained for specific missions in specific conditions quite different from working with U.S. civilians—convicted of no crime—exercising their protected 1st A rights,” tweeted Diana Bolsinger, a senior fellow at the Strauss Center for International Security and Law.
It was far from clear that BOP personnel were the only unmarked paramilitary forces on the streets, not was it clear how many BOP officers have been dispatched to Washington. A hodgepodge of federal agencies have loaned their forces to support local law enforcement efforts as D.C.’s protests entered their sixth day on Wednesday, and the BOP units sometimes appeared to be intermingled with officers from these other agencies. Officers from the DEA, FBI, DHS and other federal agencies could be seen around the city, as well as thousands of National Guardsmen.
The BOP did not respond to requests for information on the units by the time this story was published. Democratic lawmakers and some former military and security officials also have expressed concern.
“Unacceptable for uniformed federal officers policing constitutionally-protected assemblies to refuse to identify themselves to people who pay their salaries,” tweeted Rep. Don Beyer, D, who represents northern Virginia’s 8th congressional district, directly across the Potomac River from Washington. “Denying accountability to the public they serve ensures abuses.” Arlington County, in Beyer’s district, on Tuesday pulled their police forces out of Washington, saying it did not want to participate in Trump’s escalation and commingling of security forces against the protests.
“DC police are required by law to wear badges that must be visible ‘even if wearing riot gear,’” Beyer noted. “But because Trump called in federal agencies to crack down on peaceful protests, people in the nation’s capital once again are treated as second class citizens.”
- Katie Bo Williams is the senior national security correspondent for Defense One, where she writes about defense, counterterror, NATO, nukes, and more. She previously covered intelligence and cybersecurity for The Hill, including in-depth reporting on the Russia investigations and military ... Full bio