Airport Security Theater Takes Turn to the Absurd

For all the talk of improving security and eliminating all manner of holes in security around airplanes and airports, it seems that there was one huge gaping hole at one of the airports from which one of the 9/11 aircraft took off.

A security supervisor at Newark Liberty Airport was using the identification of a dead man for more than 17 years.

Bimbo Olumuyia Oyelwole, a 54-year-old Nigerian national who was in the country illegally, was arrested at his home in Elizabeth this morning and charged with identity theft, said Port Authority spokesman Steve Coleman. He was an employee of FJC Security Services, a company hired by the Port Authority to provide security at some areas of the airport.

The arrest is likely to raise questions about the thoroughness of the background checks airport security personnel are required to undergo.

Oyelwole had passed multiple background checks required by both the Port Authority and federal aviation officials, but it was unclear early Wednesday afternoon how his true identity was not detected. Oyelwole supervised 30 guards and had "air side access," meaning he was able to walk in and out of secure areas. Authorities have no indication that he took on the false identity for any other reason than to remain in the country.

Oyelwole, who entered the country illegally in 1989, had a birth certificate, social security card, and other documents indicating he was Jerry Thomas, a man murdered in Queens in 1992, Coleman said. The investigation was initiated after the Port Authority's Inspector General received an anonymous tip, Coleman said.

"The IG's office is looking into how he obtained the documents to maintain another person's identity," he said, adding that additional charges are pending. Oyelwole is expected to be arraigned in Superior Court in Essex County this afternoon.

Oyelwole worked for four different security companies during his time at Newark, including Lance Security, Gateway Security, and Haynes Security.

The failures here will surely come to light over the next few days and weeks, but suffice to say this mess will not end well for those involved at the Port Authority, TSA, and others responsible for security at the airport.

After all, if the agencies responsible for airport security couldn't vet their own personnel, how exactly can we expect them to do the job of securing the airports from other threats.

And on that point, it seems that the TSA hasn't exactly got a good record either. The TSA is not tracking patterns in security breaches and isn't keeping tabs on security breaches in a way that can reduce their prevalence over time.

Hyperbole Rules the Day on TSA Searches

The TSA is frequently castigated for its heavy handed policies and often contradictory policies. The agency came into existence in the wake of the 9/11 attacks as part of the reorganization of the domestic security apparatus and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security.

From that point forward civil libertarians have consistently been critical of the TSA's screening policies and often intrusive nature of screenings. They have also been on the vanguard of those critical of the new full body scanners (FBS) that use minute amounts of radiation to scan for objects hidden under clothes without the need for a patdown.

The TSA has recently been fielding these scanners around the country and has allowed airline passengers to choose between the FBS or pat-downs that can include checking the genital region. Lest we forget, the reason for that particular search was because a terrorist attempted to blow up an airliner using explosives sewn into his underwear. That came following another terrorist who attempted to blow up a plane with explosives built into his shoes.

These are ongoing and persistent threats and the TSA has enacted these scans and searches to keep the flying public safe.

Now, right wingers are jumping on the civil libertarian bandwagon claiming that these searches are unconstitutional or otherwise violate their civil rights. These groups are pretty much complaining about policies that they were supporting just a few years ago not out of principle but because the President is someone they do not like.

They've even proffered websites and campaigns to opt-out on the busiest flying day of the year November 24 - of both the pat-down and body scan (even if the FBS aren't available at all airports).

Some argue that the scanners inflict more radiation on individuals than should be allowed - and the pilots union has called for their elimination, even though pilots are subjected to more several times more radiation while on board a transcontinental flight than they are in dozens of scans combined. And the radiation isn't the kind that can increase risks of cancer:

There are two types of machines -- millimeter wavelength imaging and backscatter X-ray scanners. Both are used to see under clothes and identify unusual objects.

Only one -- backscatter X-ray machines -- expose individuals to ionizing radiation such as that used in common medical X-rays.

But the radiation levels are well below the threshold that could be considered a risk to an individual's health, said Dr. James Thrall of the American College of Radiology and chief of radiology at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.

"All of the concerns that we have about the medical use of X-rays really don't apply to these devices," Thrall said in a telephone interview.

"The exposure is extremely low and the energy of the X-rays is also very, very low," he said.

"When X-rays are used for medical imaging purposes, they have to be energetic enough to get through the human body. The X-rays used in the backscatter machines in airports have such low energy that they literally bounce off the skin. That is what backscatter implies," Thrall said.

WAVE SCANNERS AROUND THE U.S.

The United States has 40 millimeter wave scanners now in use in 19 U.S. airports. Six machines are used for primary screening at six airports, and 34 machines are used for secondary, or random screening, as an alternative to a pat down at 13 airports.

The real problem pilots have with the scans is that they're being searched in the first place. They'd much rather be able to avoid the scanners and screening. So, they're glomming on to whatever other criticisms are available.

Moreover, the FBS and pat-downs aren't exactly a new policy enacted by the Obama Administration. They began under the Bush Administration and the FBS are now being fielded in large numbers after tests done over the past several years.

Still, FBS is not without some criticism. Is there a reason to post body imagery on the screens that essentially shows the scanned passenger naked? No. The software could be rewritten so as to project the offending items on a generic body outline or skeleton akin to the scene from Total Recall where passengers walked in front of a scanning device that highlighted explosives or weapons with flashing lights. That makes more sense than the current system. It would further speed the scanning and reduce error.

Of course, the FBS, like the patdowns and metal detectors aren't foolproof and require screeners to be consistently competent at their work. Repeated tests have shown that screeners often miss hidden weapons and banned objects. That's why a layered screening system is necessary.

At the same time, the focus on air safety ignores the fact that terrorists can just as easily bypass the screening by attacking other transportation targets like bus depots and railways - as they have done repeatedly around the world for decades.

Video Released Showing Newark Liberty Security Breach

The guard leaves his post about 5 minutes into the 6 minute video and about 30 seconds later a man and his significant other walk through in the opposite direction.

The video was released at the insistence of New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg. It was on a video system used by Continental Airlines, not the TSA system. The TSA system was inoperative.

UPDATE:
The key moments:
1:01: TSA officer asks unidentified man to move away from secure area
4:54: TSA officer leaves his post
5:31: unidentified man enters secure area with the woman who had just emerged from secured area.

A commenter wonders if any corrective actions were taken against the guard who left his post. He was placed on administrative leave according to the NY Times.

The Wrong Lesson Learned

The security breach at Newark Liberty Airport two days ago was not the result of a lack of full-body scanners, but rather the incompetence of staff to secure an exit to prevent an individual from entering the secured terminal.

Yet, we now have calls to install full body scanners at the airport because the breach shows what exactly?

A security breach at Newark Liberty International Airport that exposed screening gaps — at a time of heightened alert — has led to calls for quick installation of electronic body scanners at one of the busiest jet ports in the nation.

Transportation and federal officials said the Transportation Security Administration must go beyond investigating the breach and quickly install additional body scanners or station bomb-sniffing patrol dogs near security gates.
Terminal C at Newark Liberty International Airport Monday morning following a security breach the night before stopping air travel.

U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg criticized the TSA for failing to prevent someone from walking into a secure area of Newark airport Sunday night — just one week after an attempted bombing of a Detroit-bound plane.

Meanwhile, the TSA said passenger screenings were halted about 7 p.m. and Terminal C was shut down more than two hours after an unidentified man entered the terminal through an exit door at 5:30 p.m. He was later seen on tape leaving the terminal about 20 minutes later.

A bystander waiting for relatives to arrive told a security officer assigned to the area about the man, but officials needed to analyze the surveillance tapes to confirm a security breach had occurred before making any decisions about stopping the screenings because the bystander was uncertain of what he saw, said TSA spokeswoman Ann Davis.

The breach also grounded planes for six hours, creating a backlog that delayed some international flights for as long as five hours Monday, said Julie King, a spokeswoman for Continental Airlines.

The scanners might have been useful in detecting a terrorist carrying explosives on his person, like Abdul Mutallab, who tried to blow up the plane he was on with explosives sewn into his underwear and that would have been detonated with a liquid concealed in a syringe, but they would have been of no use for preventing the security breach at the airport.

In fact, this wasn't a screening gap, but a security cordon gap, where the perimeter of the controlled airport spaces were accessed by someone who didn't follow procedure. The TSA worker manning that control point has been reassigned, but we also have a blame game over why it took so long for security to be alerted and for various law enforcement agencies to be involved. It took two hours for federal authorities to lock down Terminal C after the security breach.

McCaffery told them the TSA officer at the gate had been momentarily distracted by a departing passenger’s question, as a rush of people came out the door from a flight that had just landed. While that was happening, an individual walked behind him, against the flow of people, apparently to talk to his girlfriend who had just cleared security and was already on the other side. TSA officials said the incident began some time around 5:20 p.m. but the lockdown was not ordered until 7:45 pm,

Lautenberg said the security breach and the TSA’s response were completely unacceptable.

"This security breakdown was inexcusable, especially when our aviation system was supposedly on high alert," said Lautenberg, calling for a full investigation to determine what went wrong and make sure it never happens again.

Menendez said he plans to specifically discuss with the Port Authority and TSA an expansion of the terminal’s video surveillance system, which is not operated by the TSA.

The video system was controlled by Continental Airlines, and it took time to locate the particular video showing the breach.

Meanwhile, security hasn't exactly been improved at all overseas airports that feed flights to the US, including those in countries that were put on a list for stricter scrutiny.

All the technology in the world can't secure the air traffic infrastructure and passengers if individuals can simply pass through the security perimeter unimpeded, or if the additional scrutiny on certain passengers is not initiated and carried out across the board. The gaps in security will persist.

UPDATE:
This doesn't inspire much confidence either. Gothamist reports that metal detectors at JFK airport didn't sound when a woman with a titanium hip implant passed through on several occasions. She alerted TSA and they didn't respond by changing security procedures either.

UPDATE:
I can't wait to hear the TSA excuse for this. Michael Yon facebooked that he got handcuffed at SeaTac (call it arrested or merely detained), but not for any national security issues, but rather refusing to answer questions unrelated to transportation security.

Got arrested at the Seattle airport for refusing to say how much money I make. (The uniformed ones say I was not "arrested", but they definitely handcuffed me.) Their videos and audios should show that I was polite, but simply refused questions that had nothing to do with national security. Port authority police eventually came -- they were professionals -- and rescued me from the border bullies.

UPDATE:
Back to the tragedy of errors at Newark Liberty: The TSA video system was inoperable at the time of the incident, and the TSA didn't have the phone number to contact Continental Airlines to get their video feed.

That's because CBS 2 has learned that when an unidentified man breached a secure area at Newark on Sunday night, delaying thousands of passengers for hours, the TSA cameras weren't working.

That's right – they weren't even recording, sources said, and needed a reboot, which the agency apparently didn't ask for. That set off a chain reaction of even more missteps that caused needless chaos and inconvenience for several thousand hapless passengers.

With the cameras inoperable, the TSA tried to get a second set of surveillance video from Continental Airlines. But the TSA apparently didn't know the correct telephone number and the specific procedures to get the footage. That caused a two hour delay in identifying the intruder and closing the airport to look for him.

When they finally got the footage, they couldn't find the intruder, discovering later that he had slipped out another entrance 20 minutes after he arrived.

Broken Promises

The TSA and the federal government promised to improve air security and to expand the air marshal program, which was designed to thwart terrorists from hijacking planes. Well, only about 1% of all daily flights in the US have an air marshal on board.

That means that a terrorist or other criminal bent on taking over an aircraft would be confronted by a trained air marshal on as few as 280 daily flights, according to more than a dozen federal air marshals and pilots interviewed by CNN.

The investigation found those low numbers even as the Transportation Security Administration in recent months has conducted tests in which it has been able to smuggle guns and bomb-making materials past airport security screeners.

The air marshal program began in 1970, after a rash of airline hijackings, and it was expanded significantly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Specially trained to safeguard passengers and crew aboard crowded aircraft, air marshals were seen as a critical component in the overall effort to secure America's commercial aviation system.

One pilot who crisscrosses the country and flies internationally told CNN he hasn't seen an air marshal on board one of his flights in six months. A federal law enforcement officer, who is not affiliated with the air marshal service and who travels in and out of Washington every week, said he has gone for months without seeing a marshal on board.

Neither individual wanted to be identified because neither is authorized by his employer to speak out.

And it's especially troubling that so few flights in and out of New York City and Washington, DC have marshals on board.

The TSA tells its own agents that 5% of flights have marshals on board, though the precise number is secret because of security concerns. I completely understand the need to keep the number secret because we'd be giving away way too much information to terrorists who seek to do the nation harm, but the impression of the marshals, pilots, and security experts is that there are far too few flights with marshals on board. What numbers have been obtained aren't pretty:

CNN was told that staffing in Dallas, Texas, for instance, is down 44 percent from its high, while Seattle, Washington, has 40 percent fewer agents. Las Vegas, Nevada, which had as many as 245 air marshals, this past February had only 47.

The Transportation Security Administration is advertising for applicants to fill 50 air marshal positions.

This all suggests that the government agencies and those responsible for air security are going back to a pre-9/11 mentality and accept the lower numbers, even as repeated TSA tests show that airport screeners do a poor job of uncovering hidden weapons in carry-on baggage.

Watch for more on this from Annie Jacobsen, who has been at the forefront of critiquing the TSA and air security efforts.

UPDATE:
Debbie Schlussel wonders where is DHS Secretary Chertoff with a rebuttal or excuse, or something. She notes that the federal air marshal program spent $720 million - and wants to know where all the money went. Good question.

Newsflash: Airport Screening Still Ineffective

Billions of dollars later and despite warnings that terrorists may use various seemingly innocent items to construct bombs, air screeners are still incapable of stopping those items from being carried onto airplanes at 19 different airports.

Government investigators smuggled liquid explosives and detonators past airport security, exposing a dangerous hole in the ability of the United States to keep these forbidden items off airplanes, according to a government report.

Investigators learned about the components to make an improvised explosive device on the Internet and purchased the parts at local stores, according to the report released Wednesday by the Government Accountability Office. These covert tests were conducted at Transportation Security Administration checkpoints at 19 airports in March, May and June of this year.

In August 2006, the TSA changed its screening policies after officials foiled a plot to use liquid explosives to blow up commercial airlines headed toward the U.S.

The TSA is quick to claim that there are multiple layers of security that would prevent such items from being carried on board or built into usable weapons, but I find that questionable.

Consider that the screeners at the checkpoints are checking the passengers before they board. After that, they're still in control of their items, which means they'd be able to get them on board and assemble the devices. What other layer of security are they talking about unless they consider passengers who might be sitting next to some terrorist taking matters into their own hands is one of those layers?

Air security checkpoints are more about providing the veneer of security rather than actually providing security. Terrorists determined to penetrate such security may be able to do so as these tests show. That they haven't to this point is more luck than skill on our part.

The report doesn't point out which 19 airports were penetrated by the GAO testers.

Suspicious Dry Runs Have Airports Worried

A news report came out overnight how airports have been alerted to a series of suspicious incidents at airports around the country that may have been dry runs to see how security handles such situations.

Airport security officers around the nation have been alerted by federal officials to look out for terrorists practicing to carry explosive components onto aircraft, based on four curious seizures at airports since last September.

The unclassified alert was distributed on July 20 by the Transportation Security Administration to federal air marshals, its own transportation security officers and other law enforcement agencies.

The seizures at airports in San Diego, Milwaukee, Houston and Baltimore included "wires, switches, pipes or tubes, cell phone components and dense clay-like substances," including block cheese, the bulletin said. "The unusual nature and increase in number of these improvised items raise concern."

Security officers were urged to keep an eye out for "ordinary items that look like improvised explosive device components."

The 13-paragraph bulletin was posted on the Internet by NBC Nightly News, which first reported the story.

A federal official familiar with the document confirmed the authenticity of the NBC posting but declined to be identified by name because it has not been officially released.

"There is no credible, specific threat here," TSA spokeswoman Ellen Howe said Tuesday. "Don't panic. We do these things all the time."

So, what are you supposed to do if you see something suspicious? If you see something, say something, says law enforcement officials around the country. However, Democrats are trying to prevent legislation that would provide immunity for those who would report suspicious behavior and incidents in case their suspicions turn out to be wrong. This became an issue after the flying imams incident and CAIR sought to sue those who reported the incident to the authorities.

I'll tell you what I would do. If I saw something suspicious, I would speak up. I'd take my chances with the legal system, knowing that an honest mistake is far better than being silent and it turns out to be a terrorist incident.

The Weakest Link

Air security is only as good as its weakest link. And watching how Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport handles its air security and screening during the overnight hours, one can only say that security is asleep at the switch.

Security checkpoints are just part of travel these days. They're supposed to keep us safe, so we use them - but not all of us and not all the time.

We've discovered a 4.5 hour time frame each night when virtually anything can be brought into the secure side of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport. There's no metal detector, no X-ray machine, and it's apparently not a problem.

Afraid to show her face, one long time Sky Harbor employee talks about the security most people don't see.

Lisa Fletcher: "You're telling me Sky Harbor's not safe?"

Employee: "I'm telling you Sky Harbor's not safe and hasn't been for a long time."

It's what we discovered in the middle of the night - TSA agents going away, and security guards taking over. It's 4.5 hours - every night - when an employee badge becomes an all-access pass.

Night after night, our hidden cameras captured what security experts tell us is a disaster waiting to happen.

The X-ray machines were off, the metal detectors were closed, and bags with unknown contents were carried to the secure side of the airport where the planes are.

We watched as a security guard let people with purses, coolers and suitcases
walk right through - bags unchecked.

When you have passengers and other individuals who are able to gain access to the secured areas beyond the inactive x-ray scanners and screening section without inspection of baggage, one wonders how exactly can this be called security?

What makes it all the more galling is that the TSA supposedly has signed off on this arrangement despite TSA regulations that require baggage checks at airports 24/7/365.

How many other airports around the country have substandard baggage checks during the overnight hours and does anyone at the TSA actually care? If someone is able to get into the system, they're able to fly around the country and the world and no one would be any the wiser that someone was able to bring contraband or worse aboard.

UPDATE:
It's those kinds of things that keeps VP Cheney up all night, and Newsweek points to a new biography of the Vice President and spins some of this worry as a negative - the gloomy demeanor of the man. The VP has long worried about additional terrorist attacks and continuity of government should an attack decapitate the chain of command, and it is actually good to see that someone was taking an interest in such a dire and unspoken concern.

Yet, the Newsweek piece is also informative in that the intel that was coming into the WH was so much garbage. There was no way to process and weed out reports:

Most Americans have not quite grasped how imminent and overwhelming the danger seemed to be, at least to those reading the incoming intelligence. Under pressure to produce something—anything—about terrorist planning, the CIA and FBI flooded the White House with raw intelligence, much of it dubious or just wrong, but terrifying in its totality. At one point, security officials believed that the home belonging to Elizabeth Cheney, the veep's daughter, had been hit by an anthrax attack. Elizabeth had to call her nanny to get her to take the kids to "the mall," as she put it—so they could be tested for exposure.

In a revealing interview, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (at the time Bush's national-security adviser), told Hayes, "[Cheney] read every intelligence report. I mean every intelligence report no matter how minor. And I was feeling kind of driven crazy by not knowing how to—at that time we didn't really have a good system for sorting what was reliable and what wasn't. I mean, we were just getting raw reporting of everything that was coming in, you know. So I remember thinking that he had an extraordinary memory ... for all of these things."

How exactly could anyone make a rational decision when the intel on which they had to act was faulty, inaccurate, and contradictory. Hindsight may prove the intel to be faulty, but when one looks at the volumn of reports, one had to err on the side of caution and do what was best for the nation's national security. It's an ongoing problem, and building in new layers of bureaucracy do little to improve intel gathering and analysis.

UPDATE:
The TSA has taken action as a result of being embarrassed by the major failings to screen passengers and personnel 24/7 at Sky Harbor.

As a result of an ABC15 Investigation, Transportation Security Administration administrator Kip Hawley has determined Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport is violating TSA policy which requires all workers to be screened at security checkpoints.

The TSA has reportedly placed the Federal Security Director at Sky Harbor on administrative leave.

The TSA also says it will resume 24-hour screening tonight at all airport security checkpoints.

A follow up question should be whether other airports engaged in similar behavior. I suspect it was not alone.

Air Safety Dog and Pony Show Continues

The so-called airline safety experts at the TSA have decided that the risk posed by lighters and matches has passed, so that they will no longer be confiscating those items at security checkpoints at airports around the country.

Screeners at U.S. airports will stop confiscating common cigarette lighters because authorities now consider them a distraction from efforts to find bombs and other threats, officials said on Friday.

The 2005 prohibition was a response to the attempt four years earlier by Briton Richard Reid to bring down an American Airlines jet with a shoe bomb.

Lighters are the most confiscated item at airport security checkpoints -- about 22,000 per day, the Homeland Security Department's Transportation Security Administration said. The number has gone as high as 35,000.

But authorities say security resources need to be focused even more closely in specific areas, most notably bomb detection. The security agency previously has taken steps to reorder screener priorities -- like lifting the ban on small scissors -- to emphasize bomb detection.

"Explosives remain the most significant threat to aviation," Kip Hawley, the TSA administrator, said in a statement.

Congress has permitted the change after initially ordering the lighter ban. It is set to be lifted on August 4.

Torch lighters, which burn hotter and tend to be used for pipes and cigars, will still not be allowed in the passenger cabin.

Explosives remain the most serious threat, but it is far from the only one. An inventive terrorist could take advantage of this change just as surely as they could do before Richard Reid highlighted the need to look closely at the kinds of items brought on board airlines.

What's next? Some time in the future will the TSA determine that liquid explosives are no longer the threat they once were and drop the existing requirements? The threat is still there and the terrorists are nothing if not inventive. After all, they didn't use anything more sophisticated than box cutters to hijack the four planes on 9/11.

Smoking is not permitted on all flights, and the need for a lighter on board is nonexistent. Changing this rule makes little sense as it could be used as a trigger for a weapon.

Oh, and matches are still permitted on airlines, despite the fact that Reid himself tried to light his shoe bomb with a match.