~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Los Angeles Times

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Assassination backlash

It's been a banner year for targeted killings, but are they an effective way to fight terrorism?

by Andrew Cockburn

November 3, 2011

There is no denying that 2011 has been a banner year for taxpayer-funded assassinations — Osama bin Laden, Anwar Awlaki, five senior Pakistani Taliban commanders in October and many more. Given the crucial U.S. backup role in Libya, and the ringing exhortation for the Libyan leader's death issued by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton just before the event itself, we can probably take a lot of credit for Moammar Kadafi's messy end too.

Once upon a time, U.S. officials used to claim that we were merely targeting "command and control centers," rather than specific individuals, as in the hunt for Saddam Hussein during the 1991 Persian Gulf War or the raid on Kadafi in 1986. Nowadays no one bothers to pretend. Successful assassination missions, whether by elite special forces or remote-controlled drones, are openly celebrated.

Clearly, the sentiment prevalent among our leaders is that eliminating particular enemy leaders is bound to have a beneficial effect. Thus in our recent wars, the U.S. has made the pursuit of "high-value targets," the principal objective of so-called human network attacks, a priority. "The platoon's mission is to kill or capture HVTs," recalled Matt Cook, a sergeant in the 101st Airborne based in northern Iraq in 2005. "That is all we do."

By 2008, according to a U.S. Strategic Command study, our military was simultaneously engaged in no fewer than 285 human network attack programs.

So, now that assassination is an official tool of U.S. foreign policy, along with trade embargoes and overseas aid, it is surely time for an open debate on whether it is indeed effective. Surprisingly for some, evidence based on hard numbers demonstrates unequivocally that the answer is no.

The numbers are derived from a study conducted in Iraq during the "surge" campaign of 2007-08 that enabled the U.S. to declare victory and wind down the war. Key to the surge was an intensive and ruthless hunt for key individuals in the "IED networks" that were organizing homemade bomb attacks against U.S. troops. Cause and effect — more dead network leaders leading to fewer bombs — seemed so self-evidently obvious that nobody bothered to check.

Early in 2008, however, Rex Rivolo, an analyst at the Counter-IED Operations/Intelligence Center attached to U.S. headquarters in Baghdad, briefed his superiors on some hard realities of the campaign. With access to any and all information relating to U.S. military operations in Iraq, he had identified about 200 successful missions in which key IED network individuals had been eliminated. Then he looked at the reports of subsequent bomb attacks in the late insurgent leader's area of operation. The results were clear: IED attacks went up, immediately and sharply. One week after the hit, on average, incidents within about three miles of the dead leader's home base had risen 20%.

Why, with the commander dead, did the enemy fight with such reinforced vigor? Eliminated enemy commanders, intelligence revealed, were almost always replaced at once, usually within 24 hours. "The new guy is going to work harder," Rivolo told me. "He has to prove himself, assert his authority. Maybe the old guy had been getting lazy, not working so hard to plant those IEDs. Fresh blood makes a difference."

Once posited, this consequence may appear obvious, but Rivolo's study, so far as I am aware, was the only time that anyone with access to relevant data had looked at the consequences of our principal national security strategy in a systematic way. However, even as he submitted his conclusions, the same strategy was being exported to Afghanistan on a major scale. Ever-increasing special forces "night raids" have indeed subsequently succeeded in killing large numbers of insurgent commanders (along with many civilians), but the consequences have been depressingly predictable.

"I used to be able to go talk to local Taliban commanders," a journalist long resident in Afghanistan told me, "but they are all dead. The ones who replaced them are much more dangerous. They don't want to talk to anyone at all."

Nongovernmental groups similarly report that the new breed of Taliban leadership is unwilling to allow the free passage of aid workers permitted by their assassinated predecessors. Neither in Afghanistan nor Pakistan, where high-value targets are the responsibility of the CIA's burgeoning killer-drone bureaucracy, is there any indication that the enemy's military capability has been diminished.

As Matthew Hoh, the foreign service officer who quit in protest at the futility of the Afghan war, told me recently, "War is a breeding ground for unintended consequences."

President Obama should think about that.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-cockburn-assassination-20111103,0,6016732.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

LAPD renews call for help in Grim Sleeper case

During a sparsely attended community meeting at a Bethel A.M.E. Church in South Los Angeles, officials also provided information on six additional women whom they say were slain by by Franklin.

Los Angeles Police Department detectives said they have now linked Franklin, 59, to the six additional murders, bringing the total number of women he is believed to have killed to 16.

Franklin, suspected of being the so-called Grim Sleeper, is already charged with murder in the slayings of 10 women whose bodies were found on the streets of South Los Angeles over two decades.

“We may never know how many young women Lonnie Franklin killed," Beck told the crowd, "but we are going to do all we can to find out."

Police have made the strategic decision not to seek additional criminal charges from prosecutors in the new cases. That move was criticized by Franklin's attorney, Louisa Pensanti, who said it does not allow her client to defend himself against the allegations.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/11/grim-sleeper-community-meeting.html#more

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Massachusetts

OUR VIEW: Cops and community unite to fight crime

The weather may not have been ideal this past weekend, but an effort to put a damper on crime in Fall River neighborhoods helped send a message that many eyes were watching to fight against crime this Halloween weekend. The Community On Patrol public safety initiative was championed by Fall River Mayor Will Flanagan and supported by the city's police unions and neighborhood associations.

Under the program, which took place Saturday, several police officers — on their own time — volunteered to team up with neighborhood watch members to patrol streets in the Flint, St. Anne's, the Highlands and Maplewood neighborhoods during the day. For the police, the volunteer effort was a way to give back to the community and show that their dedication to the city is about more than getting a paycheck. After all, community policing is about being visible and building relationships within the community.

In addition to the walking beats, which targeted some of Fall River's less crime-ridden neighborhoods, an evening component involved “Crime Caravans” to patrol high-crime neighborhoods on Saturday night. Flanagan, who sees the initiative as a pilot program, got the idea from another mayor, Cory Booker of crime-plagued Newark, N.J. Booker had instituted that program in 2009.

Here in Fall River, about 20 city residents joined the volunteer police effort, consisting of seven civilian vehicles and three police cruisers. Flanagan explained that the president of the police union had approached him about getting another volunteer effort going, as had been done with “Operation Blue Thunder,” the March 2010 weekend initiative, in which 43 officers volunteered to serve warrants and walk a beat.

Operation Blue Thunder targeted the highest crime areas in Fall River by sending officers out to make sweeping arrests of those wanted on outstanding warrants. While Operation Blue Thunder made for splashier headlines and arguably put a larger dent in the city's crime rate, that type of operation was too dangerous to include civilians.

Saturday's COP initiative, however, took a more proactive role in fighting crime, increasing police visibility and building community relationships, rather than taking a reactive role in making warrant arrests and seizing contraband. Saturday's program helped boost police morale and involvement in the community. It helped the officers get to know the neighborhoods better and helped the neighborhoods get to know their local beat cops.

While Operation Blue Thunder represented a strong, sudden blast of police force, COP represented a show of community force. Operation Blue Thunder had immediate tangible results in the form of arrests and seized weapons and drugs taken off the street. With community policing — which is the aim of COP — results take time to build.

One of the main organizers of the COP initiative was Patrolman Nelson Sousa, secretary of Massachusetts Coalition of Police Local 1854. Souza explained that city police use the volunteer effort as a way to give back to the community. “We want to thank the neighborhood associations for all they've done.” As Sousa — who helped recruit the police volunteers — said, officers “have a stake in the community as well. This is supporting all of us.” Mass. COP was joined in the effort by the Superior Officers Union.

There is no question that Fall River has a high crime rate, but efforts like this go a long way in making people feel safer and empowered. While no criminal activity was spotted on Saturday (likely due to the nasty weather), the visibility effort was accomplished. It makes the city's residents feel safer and fights citizen apathy. Saturday's Community On Patrol initiative sent

a powerful message that “the good guys” in this scrappy city are ready to fight back against crime.

http://www.wickedlocal.com/somerset/news/opinions/x213520886/OUR-VIEW-Cops-and-community-unite-to-fight-crime#axzz1ce52dhI4

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Department of Justice

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Justice Department, Six Cities Work to Prevent Youth Violence President Obama's National Forum Develops Strategies to Help Youth Succeed

WASHINGTON—Teams of youth violence experts from Boston; Chicago; Detroit; Memphis, Tenn.; Salinas, Calif.; and San Jose, Calif., have concluded a two-day meeting of the National Forum on Youth Violence Prevention. The group, comprised of law enforcement officers, policy and public-health experts, educators, researchers, city officials, social services providers, community and faith leaders, and concerned parents, met this week to share experiences and to continue working to address and to prevent youth and gang violence.

“The work we are doing is sending an unmistakable message: that, in this country, we will not give up on our children when it comes to combating youth violence,” Attorney General Eric Holder said. “The priorities that we set now are what will allow America's next generation of leaders to rise above the current threats and obstacles, break destructive cycles and seize tomorrow's opportunities.”

The six participating cities developed comprehensive plans to prevent youth and gang violence in their city, using multi-disciplinary partnerships, balanced approaches and data-driven strategies. They first presented these plans at the Summit on Preventing Youth Violence on April 4-5, 2011, in Washington, D.C. These plans focus on strategies to reduce violence, improve opportunities for youth, and encourage innovation at the local and federal levels. The strategy is already at work in each city, enabling these teams to establish diverse partnerships, leverage limited resources, and raise awareness of the problem and solutions as well as support for young people.

At this working session, the cities discussed strategies, including youth and family engagement, faith and community-based outreach, and intervention and enforcement models such as the Boston Gun Project's Operation Ceasefire and the CeaseFire-Chicago programs, to support the implementation of their plans. Other topics included how to implement and fund comprehensive strategies in tough economic times, as well as how to improve data-sharing and address reentry concerns.

At the direction of President Obama, the Departments of Justice and Education, along with other participating federal agencies and localities, officially launched the Forum on Oct. 5, 2010. The administration created the forum as a context for participating localities to share challenges and promising strategies with each other and to explore how federal agencies can better support local efforts.

Participating cities were selected on the basis of need, geographic diversity, and willingness and capacity to engage. Along with the Departments of Justice and Education, participating federal agencies include the Departments of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development and Labor, as well as the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

More information on the National Forum on Youth Violence Prevention can be found at: http://findyouthinfo.gov/topic_preventingViolence.shtml .

Oral Statement of Assistant Attorney General Laurie Robinson Before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security

Washington, D.C. ~ Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Chairman Sensenbrenner, Ranking Member Scott, and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to be here today. I'm pleased to have the opportunity to discuss the priorities and work of the Office of Justice Programs.

Before I begin, Mr. Chairman, I really want to commend your leadership over the years in your efforts to protect our nation's young people – through the Adam Walsh Act, the PROTECT Act, and strengthening AMBER Alert. In my work at OJP, I see the difference this has made.

OJP's mission is to increase public safety and improve the fair administration of justice across America through innovative leadership and programs. The resources OJP provides are critically important to our state, local, and tribal partners, especially in challenging economic times when public safety professionals face shrinking budgets.

When I was confirmed as Assistant Attorney General two years ago, I announced three goals: first, to support state, local, and tribal criminal and juvenile justice practitioners through innovative partnerships; second, to expand our base of knowledge about “what works” and better communicate that knowledge to the field; and third, to fulfill our obligations as stewards of federal funds. I can report on progress in each area.

Tight budgets at every level of government have made it harder for jurisdictions to tackle their crime problems alone. Since returning to OJP, I've sought to expand partnerships with our stakeholders.

Our work has paid off. For example, yesterday we concluded the third meeting of our National Forum on Youth Violence Prevention. This is a cooperative effort across levels of government and across federal agencies to address youth and gang violence. The investment of federal funds in the Forum is modest. It isn't about new spending; it's about leveraging existing resources and making those public dollars go further.

Representative Scott, I want to thank you for having joined us for several Forum meetings in the past – this is a real reflection of your longstanding commitment to juvenile justice over the years.

I'm also proud of the progress we're making building our base of evidence and getting information about “what works” out to the field. Last November, the Attorney General appointed an 18-member Science Advisory Board to help guide these efforts. In 2009, I launched an OJP-wide Evidence Integration Initiative to improve our knowledge about effective practices and, just as important, get that information out to practitioners on the front lines.

As part of that Initiative, in June I announced a new Web site called CrimeSolutions.gov that has more than 150 programs with information from research assessing their effectiveness. And next year, we'll be opening a State and Local Help Desk and Diagnostic Center to serve as a one-stop shop to help those implementing evidence-based approaches.

Finally, we're working hard to fulfill the trust the American taxpayer has placed in us to manage public funds.

During my confirmation hearing, I said guarding against waste, fraud, and abuse would be a top priority. As an agency, we have been actively working to strengthen internal controls.

OJP currently manages almost 14,000 active grants totaling almost $10 billion, yet we consistently exceed our statutory monitoring requirements. Last year, we monitored more than twice the amount required by law. The Department ‘s Inspector General has pointed out the positive steps we've taken to improve our grant management practices – and even called our work to implement the Recovery Act “extraordinary.”

We've also found ways to minimize costs. In Fiscal Year 2011, we cut staff travel expenses by 39% from the prior year and saved $2 million through freezes on hiring, promotions, and staff training. And we reassessed our IT contracts, saving an additional $5 million.

We've specifically taken a number of steps to limit costs related to training and conferences for the field. Even before the IG issued its September report on conference costs, we had already taken measures to limit spending in this area. And we've taken additional steps since then, including a new policy I announced October 21 st prohibiting all food and beverage costs under OJP grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements, except in extraordinary circumstances.

While we've acted aggressively to reduce these costs, it's important to remember that training conferences are indispensable in meeting OJP's mission of sharing information and providing essential assistance to the criminal and juvenile justice field.

Mr. Chairman, OJP's effectiveness – and credibility – depend on our ability to account for the dollars we administer. I take that responsibility very seriously, and I look forward to working with the Subcommittee to ensure our programs meet the high standards you expect, and the American people deserve.

Thank you, and I'm happy to answer your questions.

http://www.justice.gov/ojp/opa/pr/testimony/2011/ojp-testimony-111102.html

.