portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary global

imperialism & war

Bush Bodyguards OKed to Fire on anyone "threatening the life" of the Prez while in London

"We are on the highest alert that we have ever worked at," he said. "We are working two-and-a-half times harder than we did at the very height of the Irish terror campaign."

Scotland Yard has cancelled all leave for the three-day visit and mobilised 3,800 officers for the 4million security operation . . . the Met and the US Secret Service have reportedly agreed "rules of engagement" allowing Bush bodyguards to shoot anyone they believe is clearly threatening the life of the President.

Sounds a little like Bush's fund-raising appearances in the US, doesn't it? What a collossal waste of money.
Yard fury over Bush visit
By Patrick Sawer, Evening Standard
10 November 2003

White House security demands covering President George Bush's controversial state visit to Britain have provoked a serious row with Scotland Yard.

American officials want a virtual three-day shutdown of central London in a bid to foil disruption of the visit by anti-war protestors. They are demanding that police ban all marches and seal off the city centre.

But senior Yard officers say the powers requested by US security chiefs would be unprecedented on British soil. While the Met wants to prevent violence, it is sensitive to accusations of trying to curtail legitimate protest.

Met officers came in for heavy criticism when banners were torn down and demonstrators prevented from coming within sight of Chinese President Jiang Zemin during his visit in 1999.

But with tens of thousands of protestors from around the UK set to join blockades and marches during the Bush trip, US officials are reportedly insisting on an "exclusion zone".

They say terrorists could use the crowds as cover to attack the President.

Secrecy surrounds his itinerary during the trip, which starts on 19 November. He will stay at Buckingham Palace and his staff want The Mall, Whitehall and part of the City closed. Besides provoking a civil liberties backlash, the Met fears such a move would cause traffic chaos and incur huge loss of business across the capital.

White House officials have already vetoed the traditional drive in an open carriage along the Mall. They fear it would make Mr Bush too vulnerable to attack or confrontations over British support for the US in Iraq.

Anti-war groups such as the Stop The War Coalition, and the Muslim Association of Britain, have made no secret of their wish to harass Mr Bush wherever he goes. But they insist they are only planning "non-violent direct action".

Met Commissioner Sir John Stevens said his force was facing "a very tough" time over the visit, which will see the biggest security operation ever mounted in Britain.

He told the Breakfast with Frost show a balance had to be struck between the President's safety and protestors' right to make their voices heard.

"We are on the highest alert that we have ever worked at," he said. "We are working two-and-a-half times harder than we did at the very height of the Irish terror campaign."

The Yard has cancelled all leave for the three-day visit and mobilised 3,800 officers for the 4million security operation.

Civil rights campaigners say they expect draconian anti-terror rules to be deployed, although Sir John has assured them marches will be allowed and they will be able to use Trafalgar Square.

But the Met and the US Secret Service have reportedly agreed "rules of engagement" allowing Bush bodyguards to shoot anyone they believe is clearly threatening the life of the President.

 http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/7602147?version=1
No surprise here 11.Nov.2003 13:04

seatac reader

This is standard operating procedure for the US Secret Service for an international visit. Canvass the local authority and get local cooperation, cancel leaves and insure that security is tight. However, the Secret Service (nor anyone in a bodyguard position) will not instigate a confrontation with a potential threat, nor will they draw their weapons unless, and only unless, a threat is clearly perceived against the president i.e. a drawn weapon. Secret Service agents do not simply draw their weapons at the first sign of a threat. (This is not "In the Line of Fire", but real life people).

Aside from the protection of the subject, which is paramount, you don't want to start a riot by drawing your sidearm in a crowd. That could be even more dangerous. I was taught that the first week of boarding officer training. Never draw your sidearm unless the following conditions are met:

1. Clearly perceived threat to subject or your own life
2. Clear field of fire (no civilian targets)
3. Reasonable chance of hitting the target
4. As directed by higher authority if possible, time permitting

However, the Secret Service is empowered to detain or contain a potential threat with, and only with, the assistance of local jurisdiction, but they cannot and will not randomly fire on any threat to the president. 9 times out of 10 they will surround or 'swarm" the subject and take them as far away as possible. At the same time, the president is "swarmed" as well and taken out of the confrontation area by the speediest route. These routes are clearly defined and practiced many times before the president even gets close to the area (many times weeks in advance).

More info can be found at the following website. However, the so-called "rules of engagement" are not posted and never will be as they change for each scenario they encounter.

 http://www.ustreas.gov/usss/index.shtml

Hope this helps.

wot's all this then. 11.Nov.2003 13:17

this thing here

MEMO

FROM: white house communications director
TO: staff, chief of staff
SUBJECT: security in london

: closing down central london doesn't gaurantee security for our dear leader. i'm sure the evil communist homosexual protesters will find some way to get past security and, in a particularly evil act, speak freely. so, here's a better idea.

hold the entire meeting in secret.

president george w. bush II is a honorable vietnam war veteran, who won multiple medals for downing migs over north viet nam, right? he's the kind of brave man who knows how to fly planes and how to handle a parachute.

so, here's the plan: have president george w. bush II "inserted" into english territory by a special operation.

here's how it will go down. let him fly in on some plane, hugging the ground beneath the english radar, maybe in the back of some special presidential C-130 combat talon or something, and have him parachute out over london in the middle of the night, and land right in the secure, private grounds of buckingham palace! he could stay there for three days and do his offical business, all without anybody knowing, and without ever having to go through the trouble of a motorcade on london streets full of evil protesters! hell, we could also insert the first lady in the same fashion. what a way to see london with your husband, zooming up at you at 170 miles per hour. very exciting...

sounds good, right? getting him out will be equally challenging. perhaps he could be smuggled off the royal premises in the back of some lorry (truck) and driven all the way to lands end, and disguised as some fisherman, he could row out into the atlantic to get picked up by a waiting american submarine?

that would work, right?

because we can't have our president suffer the indignity of seeing the what people think of his own actions on the streets of london. :

Funny Memo 11.Nov.2003 13:24

seatac reader

Very Funny takeoff on an official memo. I'll be snickering about it for a while.

My complements on your sense of humor.

By the way, my post was not meant to show support for the president. I simply wanted to post the proper protocols that the Secret Service may or may not use. Personally, I don't care if they do protest him there. It's the Secret Service's job to protect the president, not shield him from reality.

Thanks for the funny!

Buckingham For Bonzo 11.Nov.2003 15:50

Living With Bad Choices

One almost feels sorry for Her Majesty. What a month! First she discovers via tabloids that her son may be bisexual, and now she will be forced to act the gracious hostess to the hated Chimp at Buckingham Palace. It's like accepting delivery of a jar of nitroglycerine in the middle of a tornado.

Although the article states that localities should not be expected to bear the burden of extra security and manpower, clearly London citizens will be forced to absorb the cost in some way. I see that elsewhere that US taxpayers will get to pay for 250 US security agents to work with the 3,800 Brit officers - some of whom have had their leave revoked for the Resident's visit.

Cudoes to the Brits for upholding their citizens' right to protest; I only wish it were the same in our country.

In the meantime is this visit important enough to be spending 4 million pounds ($6,662,295.83 US dollars) IN SECURITY ALONE for a single visit?

same rules 12.Nov.2003 04:53

rules same

1. Clearly perceived threat to subject or your own life
2. Clear field of fire (no civilian targets)
3. Reasonable chance of hitting the target
4. As directed by higher authority if possible, time permitting

Same rules they had in Vietnam.
Same rules they have in Iraq.

A "civilian" is any gook locked behind razor-wire,
preferably starving, bound, gagged, and blindfolded.
Everyone else is a "suspected terrorist".

london we're counting on you 12.Nov.2003 11:44

get real close, brother!

come on now, it's not that hard. You wanna be remembered as a hero don't you?