Not wearing the uniform to prevent terrorist attack

[RiverAux]

Okay, over in another thread one of our contributors, evidently a group commander, said that they ordered their group not to wear their uniforms for almost all events for a time after 9/11.  Evidently because he was afraid that it would make his members vulnerable to terrorist attack.  Two questions:

1.  Was this reasonable at the time?

2.  If it was reasonable to order it at the time, what really has changed since then?  Are terrorists any less likely now to go after CAP members in uniform than they were then?

As you can probably tell, I think the whole idea is ludicrous.

[ZigZag911]

That was me; I was a group commander at the time, I position I no longer hold (unrelated to the subject at hand, I continued in command for some years after 9/11).

It seemed prudent to me, my deputy, and several of my other senior officers at the time, as it did to my Wing Commander, at least until we got a sense of whether more attacks were expected imminently.

Were we being over-cautious?  Perhaps, hard to say six years later....the point is a CAP commander's first responsibility is the safety of the members, especially the cadets.
So, I'm sorry you think it was ludicrous; had you been standing outside on a beautiful September morning watching smoke and debris clouds rise over Manhattan 15 or 20 miles away, you might have felt differently.

[Major Carrales]

I think I would wear my unifrom despite terrorism.  If you allow the Teorrirsts to alter the flow of your existance...then they win.

[MIKE]

IIRC there were similar policies within the military around that same time frame.

[RiverAux]

I just don't get it.  The terrorists had just killed almost three thousand civilians.  Why would a CAP member be at any increased danger by wearing their uniform to a meeting? 

[DNall]

IIRC there were similar policies within the military around that same time frame.

I don't remember that. They weer on Delta & you wanted to be in uniform with six forms of ID handy & don't mind the automatic weapon pointed at you, that went for both mil & CAP. Might have been a don't travel unneccesarily & alone in uniform, but I don't remember that. Generally you're less of a target in uniform. There's just no military gain from killing you & no shock value in killing a troop verus putting a shooter in an elem school.

[wingnut]

Well If I had been in that Group when the Commander said "please don't wear the uniform, we might get attacked by a terrorist? I would have refused!!!  why.
1.I been in the middle east, never did I see the Israeli government tell soldiers not to wear the uniform, a uniform deters terrorists and many criminals.

2.Where in the regulations does it say a Group commander can do that without permission or authorization from the wing or National HQ.

3.Why in the world would you order the removal of the symbols that make us who we are, soldiers died wearing the CAP uniform,911 was like Pearl Harbor for America, CAP responded to Pearl Harbor in just the opposite manner of being afraid, It is who we are!!! I think that there would have been a coup d'état in that group if I had been a member!
 

[A.Member]

1.  Was this reasonable at the time?

No. 

2.  If it was reasonable to order it at the time, what really has changed since then?  Are terrorists any less likely now to go after CAP members in uniform than they were then?

As you can probably tell, I think the whole idea is ludicrous.

Such an idea is ludicrous.

[Major Carrales]

By the way, were any CAP members killed on 9-11?  I mean, that were actually in the World Trade centers?

But, really, as I said before...when you alter your normal lives and choose to live in fear...the terrorists win.

I would have also challenged the order...at least with a call to the Group CC to ask why and defend my point. 

The CAP uniform is a visible sign of Civil Defense.  In WWII, when the nation was similarly challenged...there were more people in uniform on trains and in public than any time in History.

This brand of logic...extended out of CAP...might demand that Law Enforcement not wear their uniform for fear of criminals.

[Major_Chuck]

This thread can go bad real fast depending upon your point of view.

The important thing to remember here is that a decision was made based upon the attacks and uncertaintly at that time in our history.  We can arm chair quarterback  the decision to death which I don't want to do.

A command decision was made.  We all agree to abide by those decisions.  In this world too often we encounter leaders who fail to make decisions.  In this case he consulted with his senior staff and they were of the same mindset at that particular time and place.

[A.Member]

The important thing to remember here is that a decision was made based upon the attacks and uncertaintly at that time in our history.  We can arm chair quarterback  the decision to death which I don't want to do.

To this I agree.  The Sept. 11 attacks happened over 5 years ago, why is this a topic now?  While I definitely disagree with the decision, I'm certainly not interested in rehashing it.

[RiverAux]

Why a topic now?  First, this board wasn't here then...Second, I never heard of it until today and I am extremely troubled by the decision on a number of different levels. 

[Chris Jacobs]

If you don't remember the time every thing was crazy.  I was only 12 years old and i remember all the crazy things people and the government were doing.  i don't think this action is any thing that is that far in left field that requires discussion.  i especially don't think that this comand decision needs to be put into a category titled "ludicrous".  Remember hindsight is always 20/20.

[RiverAux]

If there had been an attack, or a specific threat of attack on CAP members in particular, this might make some sense (even though I think that is a fairly remote possibility).  However, even then this decision has some logical flaws. 

If some group said they're going to attack and kill CAP members, not wearing a uniform won't make a bit of difference when you're still all going to be gathered together in a group in an unsecure building for your regular squadron meetings anyway.   

There is a time and a place for being discrete about association with the US military.  Military members traveling via commercial means through the middle east probably aren't going to be wearing their uniforms.  Similar situations exist out there.  But not wearing your CAP uniform in the US when otherwise you would doesn't fit in that category in my book. 

And, this isn't just a matter of armchair quarterbacking.  Sooner or later terrorists will strike America again.  Do you want CAP leadership making a similar decision absent a specific threat to CAP? 

[wingnut]

I think it is a very appropriate subject. We need to discuss the potential threat to a CAP member or sabotage of CAP equipment and Aircraft by persons who are against our activities on the Border or in the anti drug flights, the Homeland Security Flights. Are our planes behind a locked fence (Almost all police cars are)?  Are we as participants prepared for retaliation?  Should we even discuss this possibility and how to protect ourselves?? Opsec Security!!!

I see a new thread here

[lordmonar]

Okay, over in another thread one of our contributors, evidently a group commander, said that they ordered their group not to wear their uniforms for almost all events for a time after 9/11.  Evidently because he was afraid that it would make his members vulnerable to terrorist attack.  Two questions:

1.  Was this reasonable at the time?

No.  Terrorists are not just trolling for random GI's to kill.  They know who you are, where you are and when you are going to be there.  If you have been targeted suddenly taking off your uniform is not going to help that much.

2.  If it was reasonable to order it at the time, what really has changed since then?  Are terrorists any less likely now to go after CAP members in uniform than they were then?

As you can probably tell, I think the whole idea is ludicrous.

Concur.....lots of people lost their minds after 9/11 and amped up anti terrorism levels way up for no good reason.  Mostly it was just eye wash "see we are doing something to protect you".  We never secured our overseas bases.  They still are not secure.

In addition CAP is way...way....way....way down on the list of terrorists targets.

[Chris Jacobs]

I agree that this is a topic that may need to be discussed.  discussing an order that was given directly after the worst attack on American soil since Pearl harbor is what i feel is "ludicrous".

To say that there was no specific threat on CAP might be true, but at the time no one knew.  and just like other safety related things taking some small steps decreases risks.  Buckling your seat belt is just one small thing you do every time you get in your car, to be really safe there are many more things you must do.  So i don't think the order at the time was basically wrong.

In the future maybe a different approach should be taken, but at the time that is what the commander felt needed to be done to keep his people safe.  If he would have had a long time to think about the decision maybe it would be different.

I don't really have an opinion one way or the other, and i would love to hear what people have to say about how we should deal with it in the future.  I am disgusted that any one would criticize a leader after 9-11 for doing something out of fear.  The whole country was scared to death and as i said there were a lot of crazy decisions made.

[flyerthom]

I neither disagree or agree with the decision but I would urge anyone involved in any emergency service to remember these little treasures:
http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/emergencypreparedness/guides/secondary.html
[http://cryptome.org/ieds.pdf

The bottom line is: emergency responders are a target. The uniform is a target. NV health professionals are required to take at least 4 hours of CBNRE training post license. That is an integral part of the training. We assume that risk willingly. A commander must make decisions in the heat of the moment to protect his people. Some in hind sight may seem over the top. But then again, how often have we paid for the lack of vigilance with tragedy?

The decision may have been overly cautious, but the intent to protect our volunteers is beyond reproach. We can not care for others if we do not care for ourselves.

[lordmonar]

I am disgusted that any one would criticize a leader after 9-11 for doing something out of fear.  The whole country was scared to death and as i said there were a lot of crazy decisions made.

Sorry you feel that way.  When my comm site was bombed in '88 no one lost their minds and over reacted.  Between 89-95 when I was in Japan my base was rocketed three times.  We never even changed our threatcon.

I most certainly can criticize our leaders for operating on fear instead of good intelligence.  Yes we missed the 9-11 hijackers...but standard operating procedure says that after a few day, if there are no more attacks then the cell has spent their wad.  Also we reacted globally.  My base in Japan was at FPCON Charlie.  There was no threat there.  There was no need for us to go the level of security we did.  Except that our leaders were operating on fear.....and not using their brains.

[ZigZag911]

Well If I had been in that Group when the Commander said "please don't wear the uniform, we might get attacked by a terrorist? I would have refused!!!  why.
1.I been in the middle east, never did I see the Israeli government tell soldiers not to wear the uniform, a uniform deters terrorists and many criminals.

2.Where in the regulations does it say a Group commander can do that without permission or authorization from the wing or National HQ.

3.Why in the world would you order the removal of the symbols that make us who we are, soldiers died wearing the CAP uniform,911 was like Pearl Harbor for America, CAP responded to Pearl Harbor in just the opposite manner of being afraid, It is who we are!!! I think that there would have been a coup d'état in that group if I had been a member!
 

And if you had been in my Group (the one in questions), at the very least we would have had a long, frank conversation about cooperation and carrying out orders.

FYI, I did have the concurrence of the Wing CC.

Coup d'etat, by the way, is a French word, a nation that hasn't been a whole lot of help in this entire situation.