CommunityEditor
06-18-2008, 02:32 PM
Security program well-intended but misguided
By Robert F. Dorr
While Americans are in battle far from home, how closely should we guard the home front?
If we have too little security, we may be attacked. If we have too much, it may change the character of America in ways we don’t want.
The Eagle Eyes program, a project of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations — together with similar programs in other service branches — has taken us across that line.
Publicized in e-mail messages to troops, promoted in base newspapers and emphasized by some commanders, Eagle Eyes is an effort to remind service members that they should be alert for suspicious behavior.
While officials did not respond to my repeated requests for comment, the overall intent of the program appears to be commendable. Dangers to our nation could arise in unexpected places, at unexpected times. We need what fighter pilots call “situational awareness.” If something bad is going to happen, we want to see it coming.
But Eagle Eyes goes too far — it warns airmen to keep watch on their fellow Americans.
One widely circulated notice tells military personnel traveling to the Pentagon to be on the lookout for anti-Iraq war harassment, and that they may be “verbally assaulted.”
Although I live in the Washington area, I was unable to find much evidence of verbal assault toward military members. Several military members did tell me the public treats the uniform with respect.
Security officials contend, however, that there have been isolated incidents of individuals yelling insults at military members, including profanity and racial epithets.
That’s wrong. Whatever one’s political opinions may be, no one should verbally abuse the troops.
But is this the business of the federal government? If somebody insults you on the subway on your way to work, can’t the police take care of it? Is this a “force protection” issue, to use a favorite term of the military bureaucracy, or is it merely an unpleasant occurrence in a free nation?
Force protection is a nice way to say “security.” It sounds better. The word “security,” left dangling by itself, sounds un-American. When our government decided to create a Cabinet-level department of security, it softened the impact by adding an adjective and calling it the Department of Homeland Security.
Throughout the military, we have security people whose titles sound less ominous when they’re called force protection officers. But is it their job to make sure no one annoys or insults a military member? What about the cops? And don’t we have bigger worries out there in the real world?
At one joint-service installation in the Washington area, a force protection officer sent out an e-mail notifying military members of the phone number they should call if anyone offends them.
Here’s a quote from the notice:
“Uniformed personnel ... are encouraged to report instances involving individuals expressing anti-war/anti-government sentiments.”
No, I’m not making this up. A military official is telling military members to turn in people exercising their right to free speech.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates needs to shut down these misguided programs.
Meanwhile, if you happen to spot me on your way to work, please look the other way. Otherwise, you might have to report that I’m expressing sentiments.
Article: http://www.militarytimes.com/community/opinion/airforce_backtalk_homefront_062308/
By Robert F. Dorr
While Americans are in battle far from home, how closely should we guard the home front?
If we have too little security, we may be attacked. If we have too much, it may change the character of America in ways we don’t want.
The Eagle Eyes program, a project of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations — together with similar programs in other service branches — has taken us across that line.
Publicized in e-mail messages to troops, promoted in base newspapers and emphasized by some commanders, Eagle Eyes is an effort to remind service members that they should be alert for suspicious behavior.
While officials did not respond to my repeated requests for comment, the overall intent of the program appears to be commendable. Dangers to our nation could arise in unexpected places, at unexpected times. We need what fighter pilots call “situational awareness.” If something bad is going to happen, we want to see it coming.
But Eagle Eyes goes too far — it warns airmen to keep watch on their fellow Americans.
One widely circulated notice tells military personnel traveling to the Pentagon to be on the lookout for anti-Iraq war harassment, and that they may be “verbally assaulted.”
Although I live in the Washington area, I was unable to find much evidence of verbal assault toward military members. Several military members did tell me the public treats the uniform with respect.
Security officials contend, however, that there have been isolated incidents of individuals yelling insults at military members, including profanity and racial epithets.
That’s wrong. Whatever one’s political opinions may be, no one should verbally abuse the troops.
But is this the business of the federal government? If somebody insults you on the subway on your way to work, can’t the police take care of it? Is this a “force protection” issue, to use a favorite term of the military bureaucracy, or is it merely an unpleasant occurrence in a free nation?
Force protection is a nice way to say “security.” It sounds better. The word “security,” left dangling by itself, sounds un-American. When our government decided to create a Cabinet-level department of security, it softened the impact by adding an adjective and calling it the Department of Homeland Security.
Throughout the military, we have security people whose titles sound less ominous when they’re called force protection officers. But is it their job to make sure no one annoys or insults a military member? What about the cops? And don’t we have bigger worries out there in the real world?
At one joint-service installation in the Washington area, a force protection officer sent out an e-mail notifying military members of the phone number they should call if anyone offends them.
Here’s a quote from the notice:
“Uniformed personnel ... are encouraged to report instances involving individuals expressing anti-war/anti-government sentiments.”
No, I’m not making this up. A military official is telling military members to turn in people exercising their right to free speech.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates needs to shut down these misguided programs.
Meanwhile, if you happen to spot me on your way to work, please look the other way. Otherwise, you might have to report that I’m expressing sentiments.
Article: http://www.militarytimes.com/community/opinion/airforce_backtalk_homefront_062308/