A sit-down talk with city's sole terrorism cop
By Eliav Appelbaum eliav@theacorn.com

For Detective Paul Coambs, work is a juggling act, a jigsaw puzzle, a labyrinth.

"When you're a one-man shop," he said, "you wear all the hats yourself."

As the only intelligence officer on the Simi Valley Police Department's staff of 125, Coambs must know the city, the state, the country and the world.

And if he doesn't know someone or something that breezes suspiciously into town, he has the contacts who do know.

Simply put, the detective gathers information, analyzes it and delivers a report to Police Chief Mike Lewis that could include "a prediction of what happens next."

Coambs, 61, worked behind the scenes on the $2-million cash raid of a Colombian cartel that was operating in Simi Valley.

He's helped with security during presidential debates and the inauguration of the Ronald Reagan Library. He predicted, with precise detail, the clash that would occur between white supremacists and counterdemonstrators around the time of the Rodney G. King trial.

Coambs works for the Special Investigative Section, which focuses primarily on narcotics. The detective has developed a network of sources and relationships through his involvement with the Law Enforcement Intelligence Unit, a private organization of state and local officials who work together to share information.

Coambs has witnessed the shift of emphasis toward international terrorism.

"Terrorism is a big factor for everybody in law enforcement now," he said, "and it will continue to be a factor. It's a big factor and it's got to get bigger."

Coambs, who worked with the Pasadena police force for eight years before joining the SVPD in 1987, has been an intelligence officer since 1989.

He recently discussed his thoughts on the future of law enforcement, the potential threat of terrorism in Simi Valley and Southern California and the importance of citizens being knowledgeable about the world around them.

Q: What has changed for local law enforcement since 9/11?

A: I think it's the emphasis toward terrorism. That changed our awareness. It didn't mean that the problem is different now than it was before. It was there and we just didn't know it as much.

Q: What kind of special training did you get for the job?

A: I started intel in 1989. I went to a two-week intelligence school that was just a primer. Since that time, I went to numerous training sessions . . . over the years.

Intelligence function covers all major topics including biker (gangs), organized crime, terrorism- you name it. It wasn't until 9/11 the whole law enforcement started ramping up the antiterrorism aspect. . . . Nationally, we became aware of it on 9/11.

If we had our heads screwed on, we would have realized (it was an issue) in 1993 when the first World Trade Center was bombed. But we were too busy with the O.J. Simpson case. The trials were going on at the same time.

Q: What do you think Americans don't know about antiterrorism efforts inside the country that they should know?

A: They don't have a basic knowledge of the threat, that's the problem. They don't understand the severity of it. They don't understand the cultural dynamics of it. This is a culture so diametrically opposite to us they can't conceive of it.

What I'm talking about now is not Islam; I'm talking about 'Islamofascism.' There's a very clear distinction between the two. . . . We don't have an understanding of what's happening. When the public doesn't have an understanding, they're not demanding of legislatures to respond appropriately.

Q: Are we safer since 9/11?

A: Are we safer from Islamofascist attacks? No, we're not. Have we disrupted events that could have been catastrophic? Absolutely. We've disrupted numerous plots and operations. The fear is, what about the ones we don't know about. And are they coming to hit us? Absolutely, there's no doubt about it. Answering that question is something I can't say. Who knows?

Q: What technological advancement has done the most to aid law enforcement in the last five years?

A: I would have to say the issue is not technological, it's human intelligence that we need more of. That's something we've lost in previous administrations. We cut human intelligence funding and went to technology, thinking we could see everything from spy satellites. Well, if you don't have bodies on the ground telling you what's really happening, your spy satellites are only so good.

If you noticed, the FBI is trying desperately to hire linguists who can speak Arabic. We need people on the ground. If you put me in Saudi Arabia, how long do you think (it would be until) I'd be figured out? I'm not a spy. But if I could speak Arabic and move through the crowd. . . . You need people in those countries getting people to cooperate with you and tell you something that no spy satellite will ever tell you.

Q: What do you think is the likelihood we'll have another attack in the United States?

A: It's extremely high. It's 100 percent we will. The only question is what will be the severity of the attack.

Q: What are the most likely targets for terrorists in Southern California?

A: You can just go with your standard pick of any sorts of things. There's talk about the library towers, the nuclear facility, the airport. One of the things intel people say, if there was a target that terrorists weren't able to hit, they'll come back to it.

Q: What about an attack on Simi Valley?

A: You could pick the Ronald Reagan Library, you could pick on Brandeis, the police department. The question is what is the probability and the likelihood of it . . . both are dependent on who is there at the time and world conditions. It's dependent on a lot of things.

Q: Was there anti-terrorist policing before 9/11 and did you know about it?

A: There was. Before 9/11, the emphasis was on domestically oriented groups. There was Oklahoma City. Before that the militia movement and the sovereign citizens movements were running strong. . . . That was a big concern.

It's changed. International terrorism was occurring "over there." A café blowing up in Israel is a sad thing, but it's not something we spend time on here. We weren't looking this way for that. We were asleep in general. Certainly the terrorism task forces weren't asleep, but the general populace was, as reflected in local police departments.

Law enforcement, in general, needs to all get on board on the same page. Some remarkable improvements are being made. . . .

While L.A. is without a doubt a premier target for a major terrorist attack, the support may live in Simi Valley or in the city of Orange or in Rancho Cucamonga. Just because we don't live in a (big city) doesn't mean we're not playing a role in this whole thing.

Q: Is there anything Simi Valley residents can do to protect themselves from possible terrorist attacks?

A: Be as knowledgeable as they can. That's the most important part, be knowledgeable on world conditions. To be illinformed or misinformed is a disaster for us. How can you properly express yourself to your legislator if you're ill-informed or misinformed? You need to be educated and you need to know what's important.