Government Response To 9/11

September 11, 2001 showed that there were weaknesses in communication and emergency response. It also significantly changed the role police have with the prevention of terrorist acts. As Oliver stated, “... policing in the post-September 11 environment is not only a response to the specific events...but also an amalgam of change brought about by various political, economic, and social factors in the United States...” (Homeland Security for Policing, 2007, p. 43).

The horrific events of September 11, 2001, profoundly altered the way law enforcement agencies conducted business. The creation of new agencies arose, strategies, procedures, and training for law enforcement was necessary to prepare and combat terrorism. In this paper, I will analyze the before and after effects, the events of 9/11 caused in law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and what improvements I feel are needed to keep our nation safe from terrorism.

Hello Ladies and Gentlemen, my name is Ann-Marie Cameron I am a Doctoral Learner in the Public Safety and Criminal Justice Leadership Program at Capella University. This presentation will analyze the World Trade Center (WTC) bombing, and what was in place post 9/11. Let us begin

No matter what the crisis is that will call for the response of individuals within the Public safety’s organization, someone will always find some m form of problem with how they responded to that crisis. One crisis that still bring up questions or debates as how the communication and the response affected our nation on 9/11. One would think that we could move away from that awful day, but it is still being judged, because of the loss of lives, the response time, property damage, and how the community was affected as well as the communities’ adjustment to life after that day. We can remove one of those question, because the communities will never be that same and they continuously fear another attack of their city. Life will never be the same after that day, and it “revealed that we lacked interoperable communication which severely hindered our response time and there was little cross discipline coordination, no framework in place to foster or create the ad hoc organization needed to respond to such a massive crisis” (Renaud, 2012, p. 2).

September 11th terrorist attack the U.S., and we were forced to watch as they used airplanes to crash into the World Trade Centers in New York City. First responders and other rescue organizations were thrust into immediate action, and were very confused because they did not know how bad the situation was with the communications and disorganization of some of our government agencies. The horror of watching the WTC crashing down was shocking. We suffered a massive loss of life, so within this paper we will try to understand all the things that interfered with public safety’s responding to the crisis that day. This report will examine the types of programs that were carried out to help these organizations with communication and cooperation issues that could create a problem within these agencies across the board internally and externally, and discuss the different types of programs that were carried out after 9/11 to help LEOs and other organizations. These issues need to be discussed because without cooperation the leaders of these organizations are thrust into the limelight and deem as self-serving. Therefore, it is beneficial for everyone to find ways to deter terrorism, but that cannot happen if they do not cooperate. The FBI and the CIA are the main agencies that need to fix this issue, and make organizational changes, and it would behoove us to move past 9/11, and examine all the things that went wrong and fix them for the greater good of society.

The attacks of 9/11 in 2001 shed a light on many different weaknesses relevant to the security of the United States regarding communication, and disaster response. On every level of government— federal, state, and local— substandard communication methods contributed to the deaths of nearly 3000 people, as well as the growing number of people dying from illnesses that resulted from participating in the cleanup at Ground Zero. There were many communication challenges faced by agencies tasked with responding to the incident, and particularly in the case of law enforcement, these problems likely resulted in more fatalities than would have occurred had better systems been in place. This paper will discuss the communication problems that

The police role in recovery from terrororism and disasters is secondary. Primary responsibilitiy for the community and economic recovery falls on FEMA, Red Cross, other chariatable organizations, insurance companies, private businesses, state and local governments as well as individuals (Cordner, 2016.) In this stage, recovery is to help the country get back to their daily lives and recover from any terroristic threat or natural disaster that has effected our country. The law enforcment agencies set certain rules and regulations in regards to the citizens safety by setting curfews, help regulate traffic as well as help families for days or even months until the country is fully recovered. A very important aspect of recovery for police departments and a specific responsibility of law enforcement is continuity of operations (Cordner, 2016.) The community depends on the law enforcement agencies to help protect and provide in the days and/or months after the disaster or terroistic attacks. Law enforcement agecnies must constrict a plan to make sure they are able to help everyone recover in a timely manner but at the same time keeping the citizens safe and

As the Disaster Coordinator for the city I am responsible for ensuring the public safety and welfare of the citizens within the city's jurisdiction. This requires me to have a full understanding on my role and responsibilities for managing disaster response and employing resources in order to save lives, protect property, the environment. Additionally I’m tasked to preserve the less tangible but equally important social, economic and political structures. My first reaction was to alert the regional Joint Terrorism Task Force to prepare them for possible activation. Next it is vital to gain situational awareness and develop a Common Operating Picture (COP). This COP is the who, what, where, when and how as it relates to the incident. Situational awareness starts at the incident site and includes continuous monitoring of reporting channels to gain

Since the tragic event of September 11, 2001 there have been plenty of changes to the way Americans and people around the world approach their lives and the general concern in regard to safety. The best example of an significant change that has been made in the United States and around the world to keep event attendees safer is the amount of communication that occurs between the various agencies responsible for protecting the public. "Agencies large and small, national and local, are talking and sharing information and procedures in a way some say might never have happened without the coordinated terror attacks" (Stolpe, 2011, para.2). Therefore, the increased communication has led to a decreased amount agency infighting that caused vital

Emergency management faces many challenges in today’s modern society. In the years prior to 9/11 emergency management was primarily focused on natural disasters. That has since changed; we now face a diverse variety of risks and hazards on a constant basis. As we continue to grow in population current and newer have compounded into more problems that emergency planner must face and find solutions for.

Approximately six year later, the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center turned the United States upside down. The incident killed over 2,500 people, while damaging a substantial amount of the surrounding structures in downtown Manhattan making the accessibility of the surrounding areas nearly impossible. Courts in the affected area were closed for several days and even weeks as the event made communication, personnel, and public access highly difficult to obtain (Birkland & Schneider, 2007). Security and emergency planning was no longer a question of whether or not to consider, but instead they became the highest priority of all federal and state agencies at future risk following the attack.

September 11, 2001 marked the most horrific day in history for United States of America. The events of this day changed the lives of those residing in America forever. United States was considered somewhat safe, in regards to terrorists’ attacks. However, this all came to a screeching halt when 19 militants known to be a part of the Al-Qaeda terrorist group hijacked four planes for the purpose of destroying targeted areas in the United States. As a result of the deadly attack on the United States, security measures drastically changed. Although, security measures throughout the United States have been in place, extreme caution came into effect. All departments looked at different measures to improve preventing terrorists’ attacks.

Prior to the devastating September 11, 2001 terrorist attack, the level of preparedness of local and federal first response agencies including Fire Department of New York (FDNY), the New York Police Department (NYPD), the Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM), and the Port Authority Police Department (PAPD) was not well organized (Kean & Hamilton, 2004). According to the Kean and Hamilton (2004) on 9/11 commission report, the following explain their prior preparedness. First, the PAPD did not have a standard operating procedure concerning how different commands should communicate over radio in case of a terrorist attack. This meant confusion in communication over radio in during the terrorist attack. Second, the FDNY’s radios performed

Even before 9/11, the scope of who was in charge when there was an emergency was confusing. The confusion was multifaceted: who was in charge, who would pay for the costs, who would do the labor and who was ultimately responsible for

In the past authorities have acted immediately after a widely publicized disaster showing that there has been complacency in the disaster planning and preparedness. During the Hurricane Katrina, the U.S government was blamed for poor crisis management and slow response, particularly the authority’s failure to provide adequate personnel during the rescue missions. After the Katrina disaster, the U.S government learned a lot after the analysis of the whole event was conducted. First, the U.S government agreed that it was not prepared for a disaster of that magnitude. The government also learned that there were complacency and inefficiency in leadership that resulted in delays and logistic problems. The U.S government failed to share information with the public during the evacuation (Gutmann, 2011).