Advice on the Ethical Dilemma Faced by the Analyst

The main ethical dilemma faced by the analyst pertains to the legal duty of expressing ultimate responsibility per the law. The analyst experiences the ultimate dilemma in determining the legal positions for refusal by the US army in propelling the attack. The underlying ethical dilemma is predetermined based on the need to harness a legal positioning while harnessing the legal parameters. The analyst is afraid of the video's chance to be made public, resulting in blame and punishment for contravening the legal determinations. The underlying framework determining the analyst's perspective is the need to report the incidence as observed. For instance, the video showed Reuters journalist Namir Noor-Eldeen, the driver Saeed Chmagh and others following the Apache shootout, killing them in the public square. The underlying advice that the analyst should obtain includes determining a suitable reporting mechanism that will maintain ultimate confidentiality while determining the facts of the underlying crisis.

The underlying ethical dilemma experienced by the analyst should be discussed with the joint terrorism task forces (JTTF). The main parameter underlined through the defined discussion forum should be steered towards obtaining ultimate secrecy with the joint forces' members. The reporting should be embedded in steering a significant correlation with the individual JFFT officials whose main objective is to steer a coherent guideline per the underlying ethical principles. The enforcement of a robust defense mechanism should be reported as a means to propel the underlying parameters fostering suitable protection of the legal positioning (Abubakar, 2019). The enforcement of the legal mechanisms guiding the underlying framework should be highlighted in the report. The analyst should administer a cooperative relationship with the JTTF to foster a coherent legal positioning determining the underlying measures to counter the disaster. The determination of the legal positioning should be reported to determine the underlying inferential mechanisms against the shooting.

Failure to foster an appropriate reporting mechanism can result in a significant penalty imposition which may foster an adverse legal positioning for the journalist. For instance, the analyst had a crucial part in the evaluation process of the attack but has not reported the incidence. This process may impose a legal repercussion following the failure to make a coherent report regarding the underlying crisis (Massoumi et al., 2019). The underlying procedural framework to determine per the legal guidelines includes fostering a penalty in facing the legal consequences for failing to abide by the defined ruling. The failure to confront the legal dilemma can result in a failed procedural framework which may propagate adverse penalties for the analyst.

Responsibility to Report the Video as a TLO

As the Terrorism Liaison Officer (TLO), a legal responsibility exists, fostering the defined ability to report the video to the supervisor. The main duty of the TLO per the US legal provisions includes the ability to steer inferential dissemination of terrorism-based information and intelligence to the necessary personnel. This mechanism fosters a legal positioning that complies with the agency provisions in developing an inferential information-sharing mechanism (McAleenan, 2019). TLOs are also responsible for steering a suitable verification mechanism with the person receiving the terrorism-based information. The verification process has a defined capacity to steer meaningful guidelines supporting the underlying ethical dilemma. Based on the underlying guidelines supporting the legal mandates of the TLO, the video should be reported to the right individuals who will harness a suitable intervention mechanism against the terrorist mechanism.

3)

The main item needed to ascertain proper verification and authenticity of the video includes proof of performance as a TLO. The underlying proof will be harnessed per the underlying parameters supporting a coherent legal guideline in propagating the rightful duties. The main ethical guideline to support the need for reporting the video includes the determination of truth (Massoumi et al., 2019). The main mechanism supporting the need to report the video include seeking the truth and obtaining an inferential mechanism to steer rightful information. A practical guideline supporting the truth aspect as a public office includes determining the underlying parameters embedded in conversing, obtaining, analyzing, and providing intelligence objectivity.

Reporting of the video

The other ethical code supporting the need to report the video includes the incorporation of lawfulness. Lawfulness is an essential part of the legal guidelines, supporting the need to foster an inferential defense mechanism for the constitution. Enforcing the legal parameters supporting the lawfulness concept is steered to fostering coherent compliance with the law (Abubakar, 2019). Also, the reporting mechanism is harnessed to guarantee a significant procedural guideline to conduct the underlying mission in a manner that highlights privacy, human rights, and civil liberty. The consolidation of the underlying ethical code fosters a suitable means to report the underlying video.

The other code of ethics supporting the need to report the video includes fostering inferential integrity embedded in public performance. Determining a procedural guideline supporting the underlying legal practices includes harnessing subjective conformance to the region's legal parameters (Abubakar, 2019). This mechanism is embedded in being mindful of the underlying practices and triggering absolute conformance to the underlying intelligence community guidelines. This code thus propagates an inferential mechanism supporting the need to steer ultimate regard for community wellbeing by reporting the video.

Discussion Question

Code of Ethics for the Intelligence Community

The intelligence community (IC) has a code of ethics that guarantees ultimate regard for the communal welfare parameters. Determining the underlying code of ethics fosters a coherent mechanism to facilitate sustainability measures while serving the community. For instance, the IC's code of ethics promotes ultimate integrity while determining the subjective role-play mechanisms in society. The enforcement of a subjective tool supporting the underlying code of ethics fosters the intensity of developing meaningful communal welfare mechanisms. The determination of a subjective ethical guideline steers a coherent means to harness the defined variables among the community members. The development of a subjective community wellbeing system is harnessed based on the determination of the underlying ethical code.

Enforceability of the Code of Ethics

An enforceable code of ethics would assist analysts in determining suitable performance parameters. The underlying code of ethics propagates an appropriate procedural guideline facilitating the performance parameters in the corporate setting. The code of ethics would help analysts perform their duties by enforcing legal parameters to support the jurisdictional mechanisms (Mohamed & Yaacob, 2019). The analysts would identify their legal boundaries and determine suitable measures supporting the underlying limits. The ethical code would be structured to meet the legal standards and determine an inferential guideline to support the analysts' inferential policies.

Fear and Uncertainty

The underlying code of ethics would foster fear and uncertainty following the failure to understand the defined variables supporting the professional guidelines. Analysts who fail to underline an appropriate code of ethics have a limited capacity to steer meaningful performance in society (Mohamed & Yaacob, 2019). Enrolling an inferential guideline to support the underlying legal framework articulates a suitable system to counter the underlying fear and uncertainty. Poor understanding of the inferential mechanisms supporting the code of ethics would thus impose fear and uncertainty among the analysts.