Current security levels

Origin unknown, but there's enough here to offend everyone:

The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent terrorist threats and have raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." The English have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies all but ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorised from "Tiresome" to a "Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was during the great fire of 1666.

The Scots raised their threat level from "Pissed Off" to "Let's get the Bastards" They don't have any other levels. This is the reason they have been used on the front line in the British army for the last 300 years.

The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide". The only two higher levels in France are "Collaborate" and "Surrender." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France 's white flag factory, effectively paralysing the country's military capability. It's not only the French who are on a heightened level of alert.

Italy has increased the alert level from "Shout loudly and excitedly" to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain: "Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides."

The Germans also increased their alert state from "Disdainful Arrogance" to "Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs." They also have two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbour" and "Lose".

Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual, and the only threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels .

The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.

Americans meanwhile are carrying out pre-emptive strikes on all of their allies, just in case.

New Zealand has also raised its security levels - from "baaa" to "BAAAA!". Due to continuing defence cutbacks (the air force being a squadron of spotty teenagers flying paper aeroplanes and the navy some toy boats in the Prime Minister's bath), New Zealand only has one more level of escalation, which is "Shit, I hope Australia will come and rescue us".

Australia , meanwhile, has raised its security level from "No worries" to "She'll be alright, mate". Three more escalation levels remain, "Crikey!', "I think we'll need to cancel the barbie this weekend" and "The barbie is cancelled". So far no situation has ever warranted use of the final escalation level.

Counter Terror Gazette

The magazine Aviation Security International is getting ready to launch a sister publication called Counter Terror Gazette. Here's a preview of the Gazette:

Child's Play: Throughout history, armies have used children to fight their battles and this continues in some countries to this day. In 2007, Human Rights Watch (HRW) reported that an estimated 200,000-300,000 children were serving as soldiers for both governments and militant groups around the world.

Israeli Bus Bomb Attacks: Throughout the 1990s, suicide bomb attacks on Israel's public bus network and at bus stations were a common phenomenon. Following the end of the First Intifada in 1993, until the outbreak of the Second Intifada in September 2000, there were 10 suicide attacks against buses. With the outbreak of the Second Intifada, these attacks increased dramatically, and remained highuntil the end of 2005. In the five years since then, Palestinian militant attacks in general within Israel, not only those targeting buses, have decreased significantly.

Case Study - Times Square Car Bomb: On 1 May, smoke was seen coming from a Nissan Pathfinder SUV, with its engine and hazard lights on,parked on Times Square at approximately 6.30pm localtime. A police officer saw canisters inside the car and the smell of gunpowder. The bomb had ignited but had failed to detonate.

Group Profile: FARC: In early July 2010, the Colombian military killed 13 FARC rebels in an operation on the country's Caribbean coast. In mid-July, the Colombian government said it had clear evidence that Venezuela - long suspected of harbouring FARC and ELN militants a charge denied by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez - was giving shelter to leaders of both groups.

Terror Watch: A roundup of significant attacks from around the globe in the past two months.

Registered subscribers of Aviation Security International will receive a copy of Counter Terror Gazette in the Aug/Sep 2010 issue of ASI.

High tech airport security

An interesting piece in InformationWeek:

IBM Patenting Airport Security Profiling Technology

IBM, it seems, is very interested in computer-based airport security and has applied for a number of patents to claim invention of the methods:

A dozen "secret" patent applications define a sophisticated scheme for airport terminal and perimeter protection, incorporating potential support for computer implementation of passenger behavioral profiling to detect security threats.

What we have is a grid of networked computers that receive data from a collection of sensors: “video, motion, chemical, and biometric.” The data is analyzed real-time and presented to security personnel. According to Robert Angell, one of the inventors, "If it's done right, we could do passive profiling [and] passive detection and do it without a whole lot of fanfare."

This technology is pretty interesting:

Attributes may include an individual's age, make and/or model of a vehicle, color of a hat, breed of a dog, sound of an engine, a medical diagnosis, a date of birth, a color, item of clothing, walking, talking, running, a type of food eaten, an identification of an item purchased.

An attribute that is an event may include eating, smoking, walking, jogging, walking a dog, carrying bags, carrying a baby, riding a bicycle, an engine running, a baby crying, or any other event.

The individual patents are fascinating, and the article describes a few:

Detecting Behavioral Deviations By Measuring Eye Movements

Unique Cohort Discovery From Multimodal Sensory Devices

Detecting Behavioral Deviations by Measuring Respiratory Patterns in Cohort Groups

We have found Big Brother and he is Big Blue! Somehow digitally automated profiling leaves more of a bad taste in my mouth than profiling by trained humans. I know that’s not entirely logical. Will we acquiesce to this as the price we pay for security? I don’t know. Maybe it’s too late anyway.

More threats, more security

Amid reports of new threats from al-Qaeda in Yemen, security requirements are increasing. From CBN News:

A U.S. counterterrorism official said American intelligence agencies are intensely examining all information about the threats, including potential plots and specific individuals.

Air travelers can look for increased screening at the airport, including random checks, and more armed air marshals on flights. No doubt, the size of the watch and no fly lists have been growing, so increased numbers of "false positives" are likely. What are the odds that you have the same name as someone else?

Chris Elliott on Airplane Geeks Podcast

Christopher Elliott, one of the journalists served a subpoena by the TSA, appeared as our guest on Episode 80 of the Airplane Geeks podcast. We only had Chris for a short time, but his comments were interesting and insightful.

You don't need an iPod to listen in, just visit the Airplane Geeks website and look for Episode 80.

TSA subpoenas bloggers

On Tuesday, December 29, 2009, Federal agents from the TSA visited the homes of two people who had blogged copies of TSA Security Directive 1544-09-06 dated December 25, 2009. Armed with subpoenas, the agents wanted to know the source of the document.

The Directive, issued after the failed Christmas 2009 terrorist bombing attempt on a Northwest/Delta flight, was sent to airlines and airports world-wide and specifies new security measures: pat-downs, seated for the last hour of flight, no in-flight indications of aircraft location, and many others. It's not a secret or classified document, and it was not distributed publicly. But of course, air travelers quickly learn what the new measures are - because they experience them directly.

The reports by blogger Steven Frischling and travel writer Christopher Elliott (the Washington Post, MSNBC, others) indicate that the TSA was somewhat aggressive in demanding their source, and Frischling's computer was taken for a period of time.

Rob Mark, over at JetWhine.com, posted an audio interview with Mary Kirby from FlightGlobal on this. Listen to that at TSA and Bloggers Tied 1-1.

The TSA has a bit of a problem here. Actually a couple of problems.

First, going after journalists/bloggers/writers like this accomplishes nothing good and only damages the public image of the TSA. There isn't any real harm reading in advance that you won't be able to get up to go to the bathroom in the last hour of your flight, so what's the big deal?

Second, maybe the TSA has an internal leak that they need to address. Frischling says he doesn't know for sure the identity of the person who emailed him the document, but in the past this person has said he was a TSA employee.

It was bad enough that the security measures initially enacted by the TSA were bordering on nonsensical, but now we see them making a huge fuss about nothing. I think we have a leadership issue here.

Sources:

New York Times, TSA Subpoenas Bloggers, Demands Names of Sources

Wired, TSA Threatens Blogger Who Posted New Screening Directive

Elliott.org, Full text of SD 1544-09-06 authorizing pat-downs, physical inspections

Elliott.org, Full text of my subpoena from the Department of Homeland Security

Flying With Fish, The Fallout From SD-1544-09-06 : The Feds At My Door

Should we fire the TSA?

Reader Larry from Texas sent in a note expressing his frustration with the "rules" the TSA implemented immediately after the Christmas bombing attempt on Northwest Flight 253. Recall that these rules included restrictions on what passengers were allowed to do in the final hour of a flight. Since these were reportedly the same actions taken by the terrorist (a visit to the bathroom, covering up with a blanket, etc.), we assume the subsequent restrictions were enacted to prevent another bombing attempt.

Here's Larry:

"This most recent attack attempt is an Islamic issue, is it not? Even our President Obama will not call it what it is. Will you?"

Well, I think it is an extremist Islamic issue. We shouldn't conclude that all of Islam is a problem, but we should understand mainstream Islam in order to help understand the extremist minority.

"Only in the United States of America can restricting your urinary needs fight terrorism!"

I agree that it is a comical reaction. On the face of it, getting up from your seat in the final hour of flight is not a terrorist act, nor is it required to perform a terrorist act. Saying you can't pee then doesn't seem to make sense.

Now, I did hear something from Dr. Todd Curtis at AirSafe.com that started to make a little sense. He said a temporary restriction like this might deter copycat terrorists - people who just try to recreate the same bomb attempt without really thinking it through. I guess, but it's a little hard to imagine someone out there doing that.

"Here is the deal as I see it. An educated fool from a piss pot place like Nigeria is allowed to board an airliner with so many red flags flown for so many of the so called overseers of aviation security. Nigeria is a given that security is nil. How the idiot passed through the Dutch system even as an international passenger is a shocker. The Dutch don’t play games with security. How the idiot did not end up on the “No Fly” list after his own father denounced him to the Americans is a disgrace! The failure was an American failure in the final result. The idiot was allowed on an American carrier! Only his stupidity and the quick action of passengers and crew prevented a disaster on Christmas."

This is a problem. The U.S. Government is not as connected across all it's agencies as it could be. Little bits of intelligence can exist here and there, but there is not always a process that connects all the related bits. We need to change that, but carefully so as not to create a "central repository" of all your personal information that can be abused. I don't necessarily mean "abused" in an evil way. It wouldn't be too hard to abuse the information in well intended ways.

"Someone in the American government quickly dictated that there would be no toilet use in the last hour of flight to fight terrorism! A NO PEE rule will prevent terrorist attacks! We have not been told who is the originator of that ruling but we should know. We should also know that that person has been fired from government service. Rather than find out how this string of human and system failures happened this government employee focused on the NO PEE regulation!

"How many passengers have medical conditions that cause sudden and frequent need for urination? If you notice the radio and television commercials most must have something going on in the PEE-PEE department. How many would chance arrest by defying the NO PEE rule over wetting his/her pants in flight? I would! What in the name of enlarged prostates is this government doing? I will not wet my pants on any flight!"

As a member of the enlarged prostate club, I can easily identify with Larry on this. There are times when I just gotta go! I could probably write a book on "interesting places I have pee'd" and there are plenty of people out there who have other issues that cause them to need a bathroom on very short notice. I know some of them who don't fly for just this reason. Those of us in the commercial aviation industry want to see more flyers, not fewer!

Now, on the issue of how these rules came into effect, I'd be very interested to know the process the TSA goes through to arrive at actions immediately following a terrorist act. Sure, we want them to react quickly, but not without thought and some process of vetting the proposed rules.

"A stupid religious nut from the third world has outfoxed the American Government again. How bloody sad! Only Americans can allow this kind of politically correct bowing to the Muslim community to continue or to be abruptly halted and reversed. If you knew you were in the sights of the next Islamic attack would you be politically correct or in prevent it? Profile and neutralize the enemy!

"I do not care if Muslims are offended. I AM OFFENDED that Muslims think I should walk on eggs for fear that they might be insulted if I protect my safety in the air! I am offended when my government, media, and even our universities are bowing to the Muslim community not wanting to offend them.

"This most recent attack attempt is an Islamic issue, is it not? Even our President Obama will not call it what it is. Will you?"

Here I differ a little from Larry, although I do respect his viewpoint. Again, I think it is an Islamic extremist issue - one that we need to understand and effectively deal with. I'd like to hope that we could do so without "collateral" damage to non-extremist Muslims who are innocents, but I recognize this might be hard. Especially if the frequency or scope of terrorist acts increases.

My views probably won't satisfy reader Larry, but I'd be interested in your thoughts. Write a comment to this post and tell us what you think. The comments are moderated so please don't be offensive or hateful and keep it PG-rated. Thanks.

Obama on Airline Security

At a press conference December 29, 2009, President Barack Obama made some statements about airline security in the wake of the attempted bombing of Northwest Flight 253 on Christmas 2009.

"...I announced two reviews, a review of our terrorist watch list system and a review of our air travel screening so we can find out what went wrong, fix it, and prevent future attacks. Those reviews began on Sunday and are now underway."

Obama means to move quickly and he "directed the preliminary findings be provided to the White House by this Thursday." He admitted to several deficiencies in the system:

"It's been widely reported that the father of the suspect in the Christmas incident warned U.S. officials in Africa about his son's extremist views. It now appears that weeks ago this information was passed to a component of our intelligence community but was not effectively distributed so as to get the suspect's name on a no-fly list."

You take this fact, and combine it with other "clues" (a ticket to the U.S. purchased with cash, no luggage) and it makes you wonder how the security establishment failed to flag the accused terrorist. No doubt a conclusion from the reviews ordered by Obama will be the need for greater communication between government agencies around the world. That, of course, means connecting databases and there are a whole series of issues there - including privacy concerns.

"Had this critical information been shared, it could have been compiled with other intelligence, and a fuller, clearer picture of the suspect would have emerged. The warning signs would have triggered red flags, and the suspect would have never been allowed to board that plane for America."

In his remarks, Obama hinted at something we all wonder about - other terrorist attempts that have been thwarted but not made public:

"Now, the professionalism of the men and women in our intelligence, counterterrorism, and law enforcement, and homeland security communities is extraordinary... They have targeted and taken out violent extremists. They have disrupted plots and saved countless American lives."

It would be interesting to learn the "inside story" about that some day.

For all of President Obama's comments, see The Washington Post Transcript of Obama remarks on Detroit case and airline security.