September 28, 2006
At Least Pervez Musharraf Was Safe
Anyone living within two miles of Dupont Circle couldn't have missed the police lockdown last night.
Starting shortly after 9 p.m., D.C. police cruisers took positions along Connecticut Avenue up to the intersection with Florida Avenue, eventually shutting down all traffic — pedestrian and vehicular — without giving an explanation as to why. Two helicopters loudly hovered overhead, while overly anxious police officers screamed loudly at anyone who dared cross the street (a man walking a Golden Retriever and a man riding a folding bike were particularly threatening). Around 10 p.m. a motorcade approached, fronted by police on motorcycles and complemented by the full array of security vehicles — SUVs with armed guards hanging out of open windows, an ambulance, and two matching limos bearing the flags of the United States and Pakistan. President Pervez Musharraf, fresh from a meal with President George W. Bush and Afghani President Hamid Karzai (they apparently enjoyed spicy sea bass and pumpkin cake), was on his way back to the Four Seasons, no doubt to catch the newest installment of Project Runway.
We've waxed annoyed all too often on these motorcades. Beyond shutting down traffic in every which direction and making District residents feel like they are potential threats to visiting heads of state, WTOP discovered earlier this year that presidential motorcades, much like that which Musharraf enjoyed, take 40 D.C. police cruisers and two emergency response vehicles out of regular rotation to provide for security along the route. Beyond having the District foot the bill for these motorcades — to the tune of $1.5 million a year — it's the imagery of that many D.C. police vehicles and officers taken off regular duty during a crime emergency that reminds us how little the safety of the city's residents might mean to the feds. This isn't to say that Musharraf and other heads of state don't deserve motorcades, but that they can stand to do without the show of force that the District pulled out yesterday to ferry him from the White House to the Four Seasons.
Then again, that guy on the folding bike totally looked like he was hiding an anti-limo cannon in his backpack, just like that Golden Retriever made for a great cover for a tactical nuclear warhead.
|
First time in DC? This isn't any different than how they move motorcades for any visiting head of state, no less Dick Cheney.
The USSS and MPD do a great job at protection. Sorry to inconvenience you....
Go back to Omaha.
This really should be a Fed responsibility. Period.
Last night around 9pm, a square of the street was blocked off by police tape at the corner of New Hampshire Ave & 18th St NW. Inside the little square was a black rolls royce with (I think) Virginia vanity plates that read "MY ROLLS." The doors of the car were open and there were about 5 policemen milling about. A Fox5 camera man was filming and I asked him if he had any idea what was going on. Hesitantly he said, "Well, I don't know but I heard that a woman claimed to be raped inside that black car."
I haven't seen anything on any of the local news sites about this. Heard anything or have any clue what went on? I highly doubt it is related to President Musharraf's motorcade.
Yeah, they do a great job alright. Like any platoon of bullnecks with a shitload of money, authority and automatic weapons could do. What skill! Bravo!
i was wonderin' why there were so many cops around the dupont area last night. gotta agree with post #1, you don't like it, you might as well get the hell outta DC.
Haywood and Vic,
First off, I've been in D.C. long enough to get used to this. Then again, simply leaving because I express annoyance isn't a rational response. The VP's motorcade is smaller than the one they used for Musharraf, and, all told, much less intrusive. Yes, they shut down intersections, but they do so on a rolling basis, not like what they had out yesterday. There is an obvious balance between city life and the security of a head of state, and yesterday proved that the feds just don't know that.
I think it is of utmost importance to protect visiting heads of state however possible while in DC and no the President of Pakistan should not have to stop at red lights on Connecticut Avenue and no a bike messenger should not be allowed to swoop in front of the vehicle. Would you prefer the military do it? Cause army fatigues and automatic guns would surely be a bit more off putting for DC residents.
This really should be a Fed responsibility. Period.
Agreed. There are something like 30+ seperate police forces in DC, most of which are Federal, and the MPD has to supplement SS security details? Total nonsense.
They make these things called 'helicopters' that allow you to fly through the air, some of them even have weapons mounted on them for protection. Maybe they could buy one and use it.
I almost got the answer to one of my long-time lingering questions yesterday, as yet another motorcade screamed down Connecticut Avenue towards the White House. Who would get the right of way at the intersection: a motorcade going south toward the White House, or an ambulance going west on its way to GW Hospital? Unfortunately, the ambulance passed through after the motorcade had passed by a block or two.
Well he's had something like 5 attacks on his life in the last 10 years so I can sort of understand his concern for security. Plus he's helping keep Bin Laden safe from us.......
I wonder if Fenty's gonna be riding in style like that around DC or is he gonna go the Jerry Springer route and walk to work....
There aren't any motorcades in the ghetto.
Forget Omaha, (which if you have not been is actually a lovely place) if you don't like motorcades move to NE!
Great, cole. Now the evil-doing terrorists know that all they need to do to kill visiting or U.S. leaders/dignitaries is to load up an ambulance with explosives. ;-)
Motorcades for heads of state should be done by the feds. If the feds don't have the manpower, they should reimburse the DC government for using our resources.
First off, the federal police agencies simply don't have the manpower to dedicate to assisting with motorcades. The two largest are the Park Police which is stretched far too thin already and the Capitol Police which, for obvious reasons of federalism, should not be in the Presidential protection business.
Second, while DC is not directly reimbursed for motorcade costs, it does receive a Federal payment each year for "security costs related to the presence of the Federal government in the District of Columbia." For FY2006, this payment was $13.5 million.
How does it work when the president, vice president, etc. visit places outside of DC? Does the government front the money then? Basically, does DC have this special reimbursement arrangement just because our agencies are capable of being dispatched at a moment's notice, whereas Omaha's aren't? (Never been to Omaha, and don't mean to pick on it--just keeping the example alive.)
SWester - I guess the federal government doesn't have the money or capacity to hire more police officers? The larger issue is that the gov't is taking police officers and ambulances out of circulation in DC for the protection and convenience of heads of state. Would you care about the federal payment to the District if you couldn't get an ambulance because of a motorcade?
I heard that Musharraf was going to speak at GW when he was here, but did not see anything on the news. Did he? Hunter H. Cashdollar
I TOTALY AGREE...TOO MUCH FORCE, time to tone down the protection for our heads of state.
Sincerely,
John Hinckley, Jr.
Leland W. Modjeski
Francisco Martin Duran
Frank Eugene Corder
Squeaky Fromme
Sara Jane Moore
Samuel S. Byck
Lee Harvey Oswald (and Crew)
Richard Paul Pavlick
Oscar Collazo
Griselio Torresola
Giuseppe Zangara
John Schrank
Leon Czolgosz
Charles J. Guiteau
John Wilkes Booth
Richard Lawrence
I saw the ordeal at 18th and New Hampshire Aves around 9pm last night as well... there were at least 15 cop cars, which may have added to the mess with Musharraf's motorcade. The driver of the Rolls got pulled out the car, cuffed, and taken away with the cops. Meanwhile, the paramedics pulled a woman out of the back seat after much debate, and put her on a stretcher and into an ambulance. Seems like an awful lot of police involvement for something like this. Anyone know what happened?
I agree-- the federal gov't should be responsible for the cost/officers for this. Being "spread too thin" isn't an excuse-- they can hire more officers.
As for the amount of force, I think its appopriate in relation to the risk. After all, this is a head of state that has had several assassination attempts.
Oh...and in every developing country I've visited the U.S. AMBASSADOR usually gets the type of motorcade Musharraf did -- with costs incurred by the host country. The reason -- the security you provide is commensurate to the risk. High risk = high security. In Dhaka, they shut down the entire city for 1/2 a day when Bill Gates went there. If ambassadors and businessmen get that, you can only imagine the type of security US Presidents get abroad.
Yes, what SWester said. This is not a tax burden for the citizens of DC anymore than it is a tax burden for Alaskans. The DC receives a federal pay out for the presence of the federal government and the security costs incurred. It would be all in good to say that this should be solely the responsibility of the federal gov’t to handle, but remember, the streets of DC are policed by the DC police. They are the ones in charge of securing and protecting those areas that are not under the direct control of the federal government - like the Four Seasons, and it isn’t costing the people of DC a dime more than it is costing people in Omaha. You’re receiving a federal pay out. And need I remind you that the presence of the federal government is what fuels the DC economy. Such inconveniences, thus, should be kept in their proper context.
Also, how many times has Musharraf’s motorcades been targeted by suicide bombers in the past 5 years? Musharrif’s motorcades are a significant security concern, which obviously is why his motorcade had 10 times as much security as your typical Head of State. It is in the United States’ best interests to go ape crazy with Mucharrif’s security.
And just to amend to be fair, could this have been an example of overkill? Perhaps, but remember that Musharrif and Karzai are the world’s two highest motorcade suicide bomber targets.
The real question is whether $13.5 million is enough.
We've been providing "security related to the presence of the Federal government in the District of Columbia" for a while now, and I don't know my way around the police budget process, but if all these inaugurals and motorcades and such add up to more than 13.5 million, well then we've got a claim. I'm hopeful that someone must be doing the math.
As for the inconvenience factor to residents, well, I think its probably more than made up for by all the free embassy events, museums, and bric-a-brac associated with living with the feds. And oh yeah, like pgbaffled said, that economy bit too.
It'd still be nice to have voting rights, though.
It seems to me that these motorcades are such an ordeal that they're just inviting unwanted attention. 400 police cars and 50 black SUVS and 12 limos, all with sirens blaring, blocking off 5 blocks of the city at a time seems like quite an easy target.
If i was an important political type person I'd feel more comfortable traveling incognito. Perhaps in an old beat up Toyota Corolla or something.
pgbaffled:
I haven't seen anything that indicates that the federal payout comes anywhere close to matching the cost of providing the security it's supposedly paying for, and that federal government presence only fuels the DC economy to the extent it can without, say, the property taxes from which federal buildings are exempt, and the income taxes which are paid to other jurisdictions when people work in DC but are legal residents of other states.
DC's ability to profit from federal government presence is often limited to restaurant bills and taxi fares. Can you prove otherwise? Can you say that any federal payout is actually equal (or even close) to the lost revenue from property taxes and income taxes, plus the police costs actually incurred in those motorcades?
I'm sure there would be a lot less complaining from DC residents about the police force being repurposed for motorcades if (1) they were actually being fully paid for, instead of just in part, and (2) there were actually enough police officers to support the motorcades and, say, the increased presence required in a crime emergency.
cole: To answer your question, federal vehicles always have the right-of-way over local vehicles. If a fire truck, an ambulance, a governor's limousine, and a mail truck all come to an intersection at the same time, the mail-carrier would technically have the right of way. But even if that was not the case, I'm absolutely certain that the motorcade would not have let the ambulance through. It's demonstrably clear that "we the people" put a significantly higher value on the life of Musharraf than on the lives of the common folk.
On the issue of who it's really costing (DC-residents or Alaskans) that really depends on the value of human life. States pay the federal government some amount of cash with which the feds reimburse the city for the use of their emergency forces. The city, in turn, trades emergency response capability for this cash. Is it a fair deal? Tell me how much money the city gets for the use of its forces, tell me how many lives could have been saved by having the police and ambulances deployed as usual, and then divide one by the other; that's how much your life is worth to your government.
Jeremy, I remember something in the newspapers 10 or 15 years ago when there was a struggle between the federal gov’t and dc over this very issue. Apparently, at the time, the feds were not paying enough to cover the costs. I cannot remember any similar complaints in recent years, though, but I haven't really been looking.
fedward:
I have not seen anything that indicated that the federal payout does NOT come anywhere close to matching the cost of providing security. What have you seen?
Also, you’re smokescreening with the economic and tax issues. You said “DC’s ability to profit...” when you should have said DC’s municipal government. Fact of the matter is, THE ENTIRE DC ECONOMY is fueled by its overwhelming encompassing largest industry, Federal government. Sodas at the corner store, advertizing dollars, media, non profits, gas stations, money to pay to go to the movies, EVERYTHING - follow the root of the penny and the source is the presence of the federal goverment. Federal Government is to DC what the car industry was to Detroit. Without it, there is no economy, there are no jobs, there is no food on anybody’s plate.
Interesting discussion. I do have some points to make about Musharraf.
He may have had attempts on this life, but how many where outside of Pakistan? More importantly, how many suicide bombings have there been against visiting heads of state in the U.S.? This isn't to say that he shouldn't get security, but that some realism is in order. Finally, if they are so concerned about his security, they picked a really crappy route to get him where he was going. If he was going to the Four Seasons from the White House, going straight down Pennsylvania Avenue is much faster and much less populated with traffic and people.
Grizzled - That's an urban legend. http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/fourway.asp
martin, these are valid questions. But the whole reason that our government had to get into bed with Musharrif in the first place is because we were lax on security. God knows that just because there has not yet been an attempt on Mucharrif’s life outside of Pakistan does not mean that his enemies will not try in the future. If the past 6 years has shown us anything it is that the bad guys are very resourceful and adapt quickly. it only takes one surface to air missile out of window in dupont circle.
What I find surprising is that Mushariff, of all Heads of State, was not staying in a more secure location. You’d think it would be smart to keep in the bedroom next to the Bushes, or some other secure government location. They should open up a Secret Service Bed and Breakfast or something. ;-)
Now, why they did not take the fastest route from point a to point b, I think is as plain as the nose on my face. That is standard security procedure in any security detail, for heads of state and for your local drug dealer. it is the same reason air force 2 sends out two choppers, one with the prez, and another as a decoy. Keep the assassins guessing.
Actually, bike messengers always have the right of way...
Sorry to be a downer, but the lives of heads of state ARE more important than yours from the perspective of global harmony. And why do we have to always rehash the debate over who should be responsible for motorcades? Have you thought about the reason WHY there are 30 different police forces? It's because each one has jurisdiction over a different aspect of DC. It probably happens that MPD most logically would be the agency to bear responsibility for traffic control and escort through the streets of DC. And they get funding to do it.
CDTrave,
I don't think any of us are arguing that our lives are more important than, let's say, Musharraf's. What we are arguing is that maybe, just maybe, the whole show for him was a little much, and a little expensive.
Let's not forget that Musharraf took power in a military coup, his ISI forces are said to be complicit in Taliban insurgent activities along the Afghan border and he conveniently raises the Pakistani Islamic militant flag whenever faced with a challenge to his power. But hey, he's our 'strategic ally.' I just hope we won't have to answer questions about funneling weapons to this guy ten years down the road.