Trump was almost destroyed by the unprofessionalism of the secret services, by Evgeniy Krutikov, military expert, for VZGLYAD. 07.17.2024.
In Russia, it is simply impossible to imagine an uncovered roof as an ideal sniper position at events with the participation of top officials. On all such roofs, even the pigeons have at least the rank of captain. And here we have complete irresponsibility, multiplied by an all too broadly understood political and propaganda component.
The assassination attempt on Donald Trump at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania caused not only obvious political consequences, but also a storm of emotions and clarifications about the behavior and professionalism/unprofessionalism of his state security. The showdown under the slogan "it's not my fault, it's not my fault" even happened within the Secret Service special forces. At the same time, Trump himself praised the Secret Service the next day for its "high professionalism", since they destroyed the terrorist with the "first shot". How many shots there actually were and who shot whom - this will be determined by an internal investigation. But putting aside the frankly conspiracy theories, we can try to figure out how this happened from a technical point of view.
It all looks like yesterday's average provincial student took his father's rifle, took a good position and tried to shoot a US presidential candidate. And no one stopped him. They say he was not accepted into the school shooting club because of his very poor results (the bespectacled guy was just a bad shot, but in Pennsylvania everyone shoots, so he tried too). And if he had shot better, he had no chance of missing from 150 meters with a heavy rifle from a hill in a straight line without interference.
It must be said that all attempts to justify themselves by security and law enforcement agencies are cleverly reduced to shifting responsibility to the neighbor. The Secret Service hints that the local police should have checked the area and monitored it. The Sheriff's Department says that it checked everything and even notified some Secret Service officer about a "suspicious character." The officer says that he tried to approach the man on the roof, but the man pointed a rifle at him, and the officer retreated because he did not have a weapon with him. This is their protocol for behavior. The anti-sniper says that he held the terrorist at gunpoint for more than 40 seconds, but did not receive permission to shoot from the commanding officer. At the top of this pyramid are anonymous reports that Trump's security reported in advance to the Secret Service about incoming threats, but the Treasury Department (the SS is administratively and historically part of the financial department) refused to strengthen security, since hundreds of such threats are received, and the budget is not elastic.
All of this is material for an internal investigation, and in the end, this is an American internal affair. But from the outside, several fundamental, not situational, mistakes are visible, which were made by everyone responsible for Trump’s protection: the Secret Service, the local police, and his private security service.
Let's start with the choice of location. It is possible that there are not many areas in this locality where such an event can be held outdoors. Outdoors, because there are definitely no buildings of the required capacity there. Well, then hold it in an open field, but why build a podium in a vacant lot surrounded on three sides by uncontrolled buildings? The Secret Service, which Trump has for life as a former president, and Trump's personal security, which, in theory, should be integrated into his campaign headquarters, should have been jointly responsible for this. These functions may have different views on the choice of location, but they were simply obliged by their position to inspect the territory in advance and say a categorical "no."
But perhaps someone dug in their heels (at Trump's headquarters or at the local mayor's office) and insisted on this location. But then there was an option: it was possible to place security posts (not just anti-snipers) at all the points that a potential terrorist could choose. Put yourself in the shoes of a future sniper and pump up the location, which was something that Secret Service professionals, who themselves are sniper-killers by their first profession and know how to do. The young shooter did not show any miracles of tactical training: he chose the only roof of a barn available to him, right opposite the podium. If a Secret Service employee (or anyone else) had been sitting there on that roof, he would not have been able to climb up there, and the performance would not have taken place.
Trump's personal security was not visible at all. You could say that this is a good thing, since uniform large men in dark suits and glasses should not be conspicuous, distract the attention of the press and generally build up tension. The excessive presence of this kind of security makes the average person nervous, who is also a voter. And he absolutely must not be nervous.
But the security function should not be lost due to such political circumstances. And in any security group there are specially trained people with keen eyesight who scan the crowd and the surrounding area with their eyes. In fact, they wear glasses with tinted lenses not for show, but so that their pupils cannot be tracked - where they are looking at the moment. They should be located on the same line with the person being protected or slightly behind him, but they must look in the same direction as him. Only in this position can they notice in advance the preparation for something unpleasant - be it a sniper on the roof or a lady in the front row with a can of paint. In addition to them, there should have been people in civilian clothes in the crowd itself, who would also have a chance to notice at an early stage a strange long-haired guy with a rifle.
Third. The sheriff's department wasn't exactly sabotaging, but it was strangely calm about everything. If they noticed someone with a rifle, they should have immediately "turned on the alarm" to the point of canceling or postponing the event, since it was hard to imagine that the guy had come to hunt deer. But most likely, the Secret Service immediately announced that they were in charge, and the local police were rednecks and hillbillies. As a result, the sheriff's people shifted all responsibility to the Secret Service just when the countdown was already going on, if not by seconds, then definitely by minutes. And the Secret Service, in turn, thought for a long time whether to shoot or not, since, again, you never know. What if a local kid really is waiting for deer. Or he has a paintball rifle. And now we "neutralize" him, and that's a big scandal. Maybe they thought the decision was up to Trump's personal security detail, which is essentially part of his campaign staff?
That is, candidate Donald Trump can praise the Secret Service and other special agencies as much as he wants after the fact - this is correct in any case, since these people did their job, and we will continue to cooperate with them. But fundamentally, several mistakes were made at the stage of planning the event and organizing its security. Ideally, a joint headquarters is formed a day or two before the event, which will be engaged in building a security scheme. This is not improvisation, but headquarters work with maps on the ground. And during this, all vulnerable positions should have been identified - both for shooting and for a possible breakthrough of outsiders to the stage and even throwing an improvised explosive device.
And here at least one, but ideal, sniper position was not identified, as well as no preventive measures were taken to cover this position. In general, it is very difficult to talk about the professionalism of the special services employees who left the roof of the building opposite open. Partial responsibility should lie with the commanding officer, since he is responsible for the territory being cleared in advance, even if this is formally the responsibility of the sheriff. In the end, they will still ask the one who is declared the commanding officer. And if you saw a person with a weapon, then the decision must be made instantly.
There was no operational monitoring of the situation. It can be assumed that the security was not properly deployed because in that case they would be caught on TV cameras and would attract too much attention to themselves, which is unacceptable for political and propaganda reasons. And standing below at the level of the first line of spectators, they were physically unable to notice what was happening on the roof opposite.
There was no management system built in advance and no distribution of powers between different groups and departments. And if such a distribution of powers was carried out, then somehow in such a way that in order to make a decision to fire, it was necessary to go through three instances, one of which was political.
All of this is a gross mistake by all security services and each one separately. And it is so gross that it is unclear how they pass the re-certification. In Russia, it is simply impossible to imagine an uncovered roof as an ideal sniper position at events with the participation of top officials. On all such roofs, even pigeons have at least the rank of captain. And here we have complete irresponsibility, multiplied by an overly broadly understood political and propaganda component. And all this is at the level of planning and preparation, that is, the problem is systemic, not situational.
https://vz.ru/opinions/2024/7/17/1277793.html
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
kvs
