12-12-2008, 12:02 PM
<b>Lack of coordination during Mumbai attacks glaring, says top US official</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Speaking at the Johns Hopkins University, Chertoff said, "This is what was reflected in the Wall Street Journal a couple of days ago when they wrote about the lack of communication between the fire responders and the emergency responders, the police and the military dealing in the hours and then days after that initial assault in Mumbai."
Chertoff said, <b>"The failure to coordinate all of those elements led to delay and lack of coordination and resulted in criticism directed against the government by the citizens of India itself. This is not again my opinion. I'm not commenting. I wasn't there."</b>
"This is what the papers are reporting and the citizens of India have indicated," he added.
<b>"What you come to recognise is without the kind of incident management and coordination we are building at the Department of Homeland Security, joint planning, joint execution, cutting across the lines of different operators, without that kind of capability, it's easier to have a disconnected response than to have a coordinated and properly connected response."</b>
Chertoff said that shortly after the DHS was created, President George W Bush [Images] had issued a Homeland Security Directive which "put the Secretary in the position of the operational incident manager in the case of a terrorist attack or natural disaster of significant consequence."
....
Chertoff said in this regard, the DHS would ramp up its 'small boat strategy' which it had started 18 months ago. "We just didn't wake up because of what happened in Mumbai.<b> We've got a general aviation strategy we have unrolled, and these things obviously are not finished, but we've launched them off to a good start."
"Obviously, we are still fully unpacking the lessons of Mumbai," he said, but argued that 'the key is you want to minimise the risk by having good intelligence and by having effective response, because effective response in a low signature attacks, meaning one that doesn't give a lot of intelligence warning in advance, is your best bet for mitigation."</b>
Asked if his analysts have identified anything out of the Mumbai incident that he believed requires immediate attention, Chertoff said, "When I do an analysis with the bureau, we're going to disseminate what we see as the lessons of Mumbai."
<b>"We need to recognise that technology is an enabler for terrorism," Chertoff said and referred to reports "about how terrorists were able to use everything from watching TV to cell phones, to other kinds of technological tools to advance their schemes."</b> <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Chertoff said, <b>"The failure to coordinate all of those elements led to delay and lack of coordination and resulted in criticism directed against the government by the citizens of India itself. This is not again my opinion. I'm not commenting. I wasn't there."</b>
"This is what the papers are reporting and the citizens of India have indicated," he added.
<b>"What you come to recognise is without the kind of incident management and coordination we are building at the Department of Homeland Security, joint planning, joint execution, cutting across the lines of different operators, without that kind of capability, it's easier to have a disconnected response than to have a coordinated and properly connected response."</b>
Chertoff said that shortly after the DHS was created, President George W Bush [Images] had issued a Homeland Security Directive which "put the Secretary in the position of the operational incident manager in the case of a terrorist attack or natural disaster of significant consequence."
....
Chertoff said in this regard, the DHS would ramp up its 'small boat strategy' which it had started 18 months ago. "We just didn't wake up because of what happened in Mumbai.<b> We've got a general aviation strategy we have unrolled, and these things obviously are not finished, but we've launched them off to a good start."
"Obviously, we are still fully unpacking the lessons of Mumbai," he said, but argued that 'the key is you want to minimise the risk by having good intelligence and by having effective response, because effective response in a low signature attacks, meaning one that doesn't give a lot of intelligence warning in advance, is your best bet for mitigation."</b>
Asked if his analysts have identified anything out of the Mumbai incident that he believed requires immediate attention, Chertoff said, "When I do an analysis with the bureau, we're going to disseminate what we see as the lessons of Mumbai."
<b>"We need to recognise that technology is an enabler for terrorism," Chertoff said and referred to reports "about how terrorists were able to use everything from watching TV to cell phones, to other kinds of technological tools to advance their schemes."</b> <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->