NYPD and the CIA

[BOfH]

Interesting and somewhat troubling read:

(Too long to post the text)

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/w...n4tG1oIsqGWoUJ

Thoughts?

[1stindoor]

Interesting read...troubling (to me) only that it's effectiveness has been ruined by a sensational piece in the NY Post. Some of the better quotes in the story,

The NYPD denied that it trolls ethnic neighborhoods and said it only follows leads. In a city that has repeatedly been targeted by terrorists, police make no apologies for pushing the envelope. NYPD intelligence operations have disrupted terrorist plots and put several would-be killers in prison.
"The New York Police Department is doing everything it can to make sure there's not another 9/11 here and that more innocent New Yorkers are not killed by terrorists," NYPD spokesman Paul Browne said. "And we have nothing to apologize for in that regard."

Amen to that, glad to see he didn't try to sugar coat things or come up with some political double-speak.

To settle a lawsuit, the department agreed to follow guidelines that required "specific information" of criminal activity before police could monitor political activity.
In September 2002, Cohen told a federal judge that those guidelines made it "virtually impossible" to detect terrorist plots. The FBI was changing its rules to respond to 9/11, and Cohen argued that the NYPD must do so, too.
"In the case of terrorism, to wait for an indication of crime before investigating is to wait far too long," Cohen wrote.

At least some of the people in the GWOT are awake and taking notes.

"It's not a question of profiling. It's a question of going where the problem could arise," said Mordecai Dzikansky, a retired NYPD intelligence officer who said he was aware of the Demographic Unit. "And thank God we have the capability. We have the language capability and the ethnic officers. That's our hidden weapon."

Now who else has the capability to go where the problems could be...aaaand...has the language capability?

[Intel Cop]

Unfortunately, the NYPD does not enjoy a good working relationship with the FBI due mostly to egos. Because of this, the Department has take a sharp turn towards cooperation with the CIA in recent years. There have been quite a few pick-ups of former CIA staff/leadership into civilian postions within the NYPD.

Due to our size, level of funding, and of course the high-profile nature of NYC, the NYPD does not operate in the same manner as most local law enforcement agencies. I could go on and on about the differences, but the easiest way to express the difference is that if you remove the college and private police forces from the equation, the NYPD makes up almost 10% of the police officers in the whole country. Another aspect of the NYPD's operating MO to consider is Ray Kelly himself. Ray Kelly has previously held goverment positions (he was the head of the Customs Service), and has been considered for the FBI more than once in the past. His connections run deep, and he is fond of running the NYPD as if it was a Federal-level agency.

More troubling, is that the NYPD uses some of the tactics mentioned in that article here on a local scale, in non-terrorist related investigations. Every year, during "fireworks season", the NYPD sends unmarked police vehicles to sit in the parking lots of legal fireworks stores in PA to follow any vehicles with NY plates back to the City. As soon as they cross the state line, they are pulled over and arrested. Granted, the act of bringing fireworks into NYC is illegal, but the tactics are highly questionable in legality.

BOfH, what is your beef with what the article says? Me personally, I do not like that the NYPD is being used to get around laws which preclude the Federal Government from spying within our borders. Local policing becomes the secondary mission because Counter-Terror Ops are much more high profile, high speed, and funding-attracting. I feel our mission should be to serve the people of the City of NY first and foremost, within our city's boundaries.

[Intel Cop]

1stindoor, Paul Browne is one of the most experienced spin doctors in the business. His well-known nickname (locally) is Baghdad Bob. Some of the ridiculousness that has come out of his mouth would top anything you've ever heard Hollywood airheads bloviating about.

[BOfH]

Originally Posted by Intel Cop

BOfH, what is your beef with what the article says? Me personally, I do not like that the NYPD is being used to get around laws which preclude the Federal Government from spying within our borders. Local policing becomes the secondary mission because Counter-Terror Ops are much more high profile, high speed, and funding-attracting. I feel our mission should be to serve the people of the City of NY first and foremost, within our city's boundaries.

I tend to agree with you on that(though you know quite a bit more about this than I do considering your line of work ), then again, QP 1stindoor raises a very valid point: If we sensationalize every damn thing that LEO does to protect us, then we might as well just forget the protection and shoot ourselves in the foot, some things just need to remain secret. Your point regarding these techniques bleeding over into non-CT areas is well taken, where will it end? Considering that NY state, with NYC as it's flagship, was rated the "least free" A.K.A "most restrictive" by a George Mason University study: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/s...iTExNWFBYd3oeL, encroaching on our rights, not just civil liberties, is not a far stretch at all. The problem comes once we try to rein in things like this in a responsible manner, the civil liberties crowd comes stampeding with their inane policies which will probably get us all killed eventually, and the politicos usually bow to their demands, which would ultimately kill an invaluable program which has and will continue to save lives.

On that note:
I'm sure you can speak to this more than I can: IMHO, policing in general is more reactive by nature, whereas the general public expectation of the NYPD, is that it can be an omnipresent, proactive force capable of stopping crime before it happens; and they have been quite successful, but at what cost? Balancing that is like walking a crooked tight-rope blindfolded.

[Intel Cop]

Unfortunately, the cost is all too frequently lawsuits and a few expendable police officers' careers. As soon as Lady Gaga or Kim Kardashian do something that distracts the media, the bosses go right back to business as usual with new cops.

As I mentioned earlier, Paul Browne is a masterful spokesman. The officer of Deputy Commisioner of Public Information uses its control over the issuance of press passes to leverage quite a bit of influence over what gets printed about the PD and its actions. Believe me, I love my job and my department, but I am quick to cry foul over blatant civil liberty infractions. Sometimes more on principle, and others just because I see how the department is willing to weild me in a way that risks my livelihood. Take the Stop, Question and Frisk program as an example. The Courts have limited it, the City Council has attacked and further limited it, and the media has skewered it (along with the ACLU), but the department has refused to change anything other than our computer database because the higher-ups are adamant that it is a necessary tool of policing. I agree that it is, but not in the way the department executes it. Apparently, if the budget can handle civil liberty lawsuit payouts, then the department policy is to continue to violate them.

I don't want to stray too far off topic, but this article highlights many of the questionable tactics that the NYPD justifies under the umbrella necessity due to of homeland security. And as you said, those tactics then bleed out into local crime fighting, which is an after-thought nowadays anyway.

[Intel Cop]

Originally Posted by BOfH

On that note:
I'm sure you can speak to this more than I can: IMHO, policing in general is more reactive by nature, whereas the general public expectation of the NYPD, is that it can be an omnipresent, proactive force capable of stopping crime before it happens; and they have been quite successful, but at what cost? Balancing that is like walking a crooked tight-rope blindfolded.

Most of police work is reactive. The so-called "routine" aspect of police work, day to day ops, are overwhelmingly reactive. But the "good" police work, that which actually drives down crime and changes a neighborhood for the better, comes from proactive, innovative tecniques. Unmarked cars, plainclothes and undercover officers, investigators, etc.: that is where the real work gets done. I hope to return to that sometime in the future (working on passing the promotion test and getting back to patrol as a SGT first).

[BOfH]

Originally Posted by Intel Cop

those tactics then bleed out into local crime fighting, which is an after-thought nowadays anyway.

Is it a nefarious lib-socialist-Soros plot for a welfare/police state(and country), or just random pieces falling together? Either way, it can(and will) ultimately hurt the law abiding citizen; like many (investigative/crime fighting) tools, judicious precision is key... My .02