SURVEILLANCE detection

Heno said:
Out of interest what manual were you trained on?

The manual I was trained on was, "Bodyguarding for Dummies" and various clips on Youtube:D:D:D:D

Don't think I'm the only one either.


Heno
Click to expand...

Heno,

It was a serious question and if you look at it logically one of the main problems in today’s market is terminology and lack of a common handbook. This is what makes testing impossible. It also makes compatibility; which the SIA claim they wants via set standards impossible.
Although the manual as I refer it to; was produced in about 76-77 it is a lot better than the SIA have. In fact it is more up to date than “The Modern Bodyguardâ€. More so it was written by a professional organisation.
 
NGIP said:
I was referring to official visits to countries by protected (by USSS) members of government in other words white house members. Prior to this they would provide training prior the visit.

With WWP I agree they are part of DoS they provide training for the diplomatic corps including private security companies. The DoD are, like DoS writing a specific training program for support contracts in hostile regions.

With this you say it indicates I have no first hand knowledge? This is true I was never a serving member of the USSS.
Click to expand...

Are you implying you are a graduate of the USSS 6 week support course?
If so, which country were you in, serving under which capacity?
Out with it, nothing to hide ;-)
 
NGIP said:
Heno,

It was a serious question and if you look at it logically one of the main problems in today’s market is terminology and lack of a common handbook. This is what makes testing impossible. It also makes compatibility; which the SIA claim they wants via set standards impossible.
Although the manual as I refer it to; was produced in about 76-77 it is a lot better than the SIA have. In fact it is more up to date than “The Modern Bodyguardâ€. More so it was written by a professional organisation.
Click to expand...

I disagree, standardisation and testing is indeed possible.
A manual from 1976/77? Threats, MO's and technology has changed somewhat, no?
 
mts said:
Are you implying you are a graduate of the USSS 6 week support course?
If so, which country were you in, serving under which capacity?
Out with it, nothing to hide ;-)
Click to expand...

Nothing at all to hide on this subject: the Answer is no I was not.
 
mts said:
Thanks.

So where is your information from? It seems very incorrect to me (and i may be wrong, but i don't think so.)

m
Click to expand...

MTS

My information is incorrect to you. You seem to be implying you are a graduate of the USSS 6 week support course? If so, which country were you in, serving under which capacity?

Out with it, nothing to hide
 
NGIP said:
MTS

My information is incorrect to you. You seem to be implying you are a graduate of the USSS 6 week support course? If so, which country were you in, serving under which capacity?

Out with it, nothing to hide
Click to expand...


That's new !
a sense of humour.
Touche !!!
 
Rich H said:
No it's not Odd, NGIP is a wikipedia cock.



Rich H
Click to expand...

No Rich,

This stuff although old is still not general public knowledge. This is mainly because it is 70's stuff and has not been declassified it has simple evolved. Today’s methods are far in advance.

I said this manual is better in my opinion to the SIA course because it can be cut and fitted into 150 hours. It is easy to run and forms a cornerstone to build on.

As for people shouting out what they have done; I believe in traditional values. I don't post pictures standing around with a gun and I don't list any qualifications or history to prove a point. In other words I don’t give a dam if people believe me or not.

However that does not mean I am totally without knowledge. If I quote a specific operation or area in the 60-70's until 2010 it means I was there. If I talk about anything relating to training methods it means I have insider knowledge of it.

If I cut and past direct from a training manual it means I wrote or contributed to the manual.
 
NGIP said:
No Rich,

This stuff although old is still not general public knowledge. This is mainly because it is 70's stuff and has not been declassified it has simple evolved. Today’s methods are far in advance.

I said this manual is better in my opinion to the SIA course because it can be cut and fitted into 150 hours. It is easy to run and forms a cornerstone to build on.

As for people shouting out what they have done; I believe in traditional values. I don't post pictures standing around with a gun and I don't list any qualifications or history to prove a point. In other words I don’t give a dam if people believe me or not.

However that does not mean I am totally without knowledge. If I quote a specific operation or area in the 60-70's until 2010 it means I was there. If I talk about anything relating to training methods it means I have insider knowledge of it.

If I cut and past direct from a training manual it means I wrote or contributed to the manual.
Click to expand...

I hope you're spelling is better in your manual. ;-) (light hearted humor, take it as such)

So you were working in the 60's? So you must be at least 70 years old, correct?

m
 
NGIP said:
No Rich,

This stuff although old is still not general public knowledge. This is mainly because it is 70's stuff and has not been declassified it has simple evolved. Today’s methods are far in advance.

I said this manual is better in my opinion to the SIA course because it can be cut and fitted into 150 hours. It is easy to run and forms a cornerstone to build on.

As for people shouting out what they have done; I believe in traditional values. I don't post pictures standing around with a gun and I don't list any qualifications or history to prove a point. In other words I don’t give a dam if people believe me or not.

However that does not mean I am totally without knowledge. If I quote a specific operation or area in the 60-70's until 2010 it means I was there. If I talk about anything relating to training methods it means I have insider knowledge of it.

If I cut and past direct from a training manual it means I wrote or contributed to the manual.
Click to expand...

VERY few security methods from the 70's are "classified" afaik; very few methods today are "classified".

m
 
NGIP said:
MTS

My information is incorrect to you. You seem to be implying you are a graduate of the USSS 6 week support course? If so, which country were you in, serving under which capacity?

Out with it, nothing to hide
Click to expand...

Not USSS and not 6 weeks.

Plenty to hide.

m
 
NGIP,

We have crossed lines on several occasions on this forum. With each case I have found much wanting in what you have to say. Flying off on tangents when criticized or challenged. You have nothing new to say and what you do say has found to be wrong.

You are indeed a bluffer.


Rich H
 
NGIP said:
MTS

No I was not employed by USSS. Why all the questions. Is this one of those "I'm better than you interviews"?
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. It's one of the "you posted things you firmly believe in" and i would like to know the credibility as if credible, i may learn something.

I am a happy man, nothing to prove but always glad to learn if the source is credible.

Quite frankly, what you posted does not add up so by you posting on an open forum, you provided a platform to question your credentials, you certainly don't need to answer - i will sleep well either way. This is no way an attack, simply a statement that from what i know, which is far from everything, what you posted doesn't gel - consider this an opportunity to shine as opposed to an attack.

Thanks

m
 
Rich H said:
NGIP,

We have crossed lines on several occasions on this forum. With each case I have found much wanting in what you have to say. Flying off on tangents when criticized or challenged. You have nothing new to say and what you do say has found to be wrong.

You are indeed a bluffer.


Rich H
Click to expand...
I might be or I might not be

Rich, you believe the training you did is the best. I have made statements which at times contradict you. We then have the childish jibes or the one letter swear word. After that I simpler can’t be bothered to comment. Same run in with the police on the firearms thread.

One aspect of protective security is you have to be able to spot patterns. On this site this is very applicable. The first pattern is somebody will mention either a method or a training company and normally and associate will attempt to get the ball rolling with post two. This person will tell how good the product is?

If someone pipes up “thing have changed or that’s wrong.†The first objective is to find out his history etc. Then what is said no matter how valuable you now have to first try to discredit the messenger.

This is followed by others with the same complex that comes in with the “I’m a trained CPO and I have never heard of thatâ€.

Not the way to progress; look back to how this thread started, I read the thread and found the context compared to today’s standard fairly basic. It was also not within the correct (by todays teaching ) headings.

This could have progressed to the latest teaching but it did not; if you ask yourself why it didn't the answer is simple it cramps some people’s image. They are no longer the fountain. of knowledge.
 
mts said:
Absolutely not. It's one of the "you posted things you firmly believe in" and i would like to know the credibility as if credible, i may learn something.

I am a happy man, nothing to prove but always glad to learn if the source is credible.

Quite frankly, what you posted does not add up so by you posting on an open forum, you provided a platform to question your , you certainly don't need to answer - i will sleep well either way. This is no way an attack, simply a statement that from what i know, which is far from everything, what you posted doesn't gel - consider this an opportunity to shine as opposed to an attack.

Thanks

m
Click to expand...

Two questions you judge it in the souces credentials and not on the information

What does not add up???
 
Back
Top