DHS' "BioWatch" detectors can't be counted on to detect a real attack.
Denver, CO - As Chris Lindley drove to work that morning in August 2008, a call set his heart pounding.
The Democratic National Convention was being held in Denver, and Barack Obama was to accept his party's presidential nomination before a crowd of 80,000 people that night.
The phone call was from one of Lindley's colleagues at Colorado's emergency preparedness agency. The deadly bacterium that causes tularemia — long feared as a possible biological weapon — had been detected at the convention site.
Should they order an evacuation, the state officials wondered? Send inspectors in moon suits? Distribute antibiotics? Delay or move Obama's speech?
Another question loomed: Could they trust the source of the alert, a billion-dollar government system for detecting biological attacks known as BioWatch?
Six tense hours later, Lindley and his colleagues had reached a verdict: false alarm.
BioWatch had failed — again.
President George W. Bush announced the system's deployment in his 2003 State of the Union address, saying it would "protect our people and our homeland." Since then, BioWatch air samplers have been installed inconspicuously at street level and atop buildings in cities across the country — ready, in theory, to detect pathogens that cause anthrax, tularemia, smallpox, plague and other deadly diseases.
But the system has not lived up to its billing. It has repeatedly cried wolf, producing dozens of false alarms in Los Angeles, Detroit, St. Louis, Phoenix, San Diego, the San Francisco Bay Area and elsewhere, a Los Angeles Times investigation found.
Worse, BioWatch cannot be counted on to detect a real attack, according to confidential government test results and computer modeling.
The false alarms have threatened to disrupt not only the 2008 Democratic convention, but also the 2004 and 2008 Super Bowls and the 2006 National League baseball playoffs. In 2005, a false alarm in Washington prompted officials to consider closing the National Mall.
Federal agencies documented 56 BioWatch false alarms — most of them never disclosed to the public — through 2008. More followed.
The ultimate verdict on BioWatch is that state and local health officials have shown no confidence in it. Not once have they ordered evacuations or distributed emergency medicines in response to a positive reading.
Federal officials have not established the cause of the false alarms, but scientists familiar with BioWatch say they appear to stem from its inability to distinguish between dangerous pathogens and closely related but nonlethal germs.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-biowatch-20120708,0,1751272,full.story
Boston subway authority and DHS plan bio-terror tests using dead bacteria.
Planned tests of biological detection gear this summer at several stations on the city of Boston’s “T” subway system will use a harmless dead bacteria to test how quickly pathogens can be found in the system.
The test is slated for the Cambridge and Somerville stations sometime this summer, said a statement from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA). The statement didn’t provide specific dates for the tests.
On May 16, the transit agency held a public meeting seeking interested parties to voice their concerns and comments. It said DHS will take into consideration all comments received by the close of business of June 15, 2012.
MBTA said DHS had conducted an environmental assessment and found no significant impact in using an innocuous, food-safe test bacterium to evaluate the ability of the system to rapidly detect hazardous biological materials in the subway.
DHS said sensors developed by QinetiQ and others were designed to detect hazardous biological materials and enable rapid responses within 20 minutes to reduce the impact of a biological attack. The sensors were installed in December.
http://www.gsnmagazine.com/node/26394
TSA wasted millions of dollars of taxpayers dollars purchasing flawed Explosive Track Detectors.
The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform says the Transportation Security Administration is wasting taxpayers' money again, this time by holding more than 5,000 pieces of security equipment, valued at upwards of $180 million in a Texas warehouse.
"Little has changed in the past three years and the systemic flaws continue to plague the TSA," committee chairman California Republican Darrell Issa said in a statement. "These flaws are exacerbated by a management structure that seems content to throw millions of dollars at untested solutions that are bought in excess and poorly deployed and managed. That is not a security operation, but rather a recipe for disaster."
The committee's report shows that 85 percent of the equipment in the TSA warehouse as of February had been stored for more than six months and 35 percent of it had been there longer than a year. The same report shows TSA has nearly 1,500 Explosive Track Detectors, bag screening devices, in its storage facility in Texas. In order to get a discount on the machines, TSA admits they bought more machines then they needed with the expectation that eventually its supply would meet demand. But storing the equipment in the warehouse isn't cheap.
The Transportation Logistics Center where the equipment is held costs $3.5 million a year to maintain.
The Committee's report comes at a time when airport security is once again on the minds of Americans, just days after the Central Intelligence Agency stopped al Qaeda from detonating a state-of-the-art underwear bomb aboard a U.S.-bound aircraft.
Since its inception, TSA has faced heightened criticism for buying equipment before it is properly vetted for use.
Between 2004 and 2006, TSA dished out $30 million for Explosive Trace Detection Portals, or "puffers," but installed less than half of them in airports after discovering serious design flaws. The TSA then paid to keep some of the devices in storage until 2010.
After the so-called "Christmas Day Bomber" was thwarted—and before the device was adequately tested—the TSA spent $122 million on controversial Advanced Imaging Technology Devices or full body scanning machines.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/05/09/tsa-puts-millions-of-dollars-of-equipment-in-storage
Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn's 50 failures of the TSA:
Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn released her report, "Not on my Watch": 50 Failures of TSA’s Transportation Security Officers, detailing incidents that demonstrate the urgent need to improve our nation’s airport screening operations.
“TSA needs to immediately remove themselves from the human resource business. This report details highly disturbing cases where pedophiles and child pornographers wearing federal law enforcement uniforms are not only patting down unsuspecting travelers, but in many cases stealing valuables from their bags. Enough is enough. It’s time for Congress to step in and demand accountability from Administrator Pistole.
“This report serves as a prime example as to why serious changes need to be made in the way TSA operates, specifically in their hiring practices of Transportation Security Officers. I believe that many of these problems stem from the fact that TSA does not consistently conduct criminal and credit background checks on new and existing employees. TSOs take the same oath as Members of Congress and the President of the United States and as such they should be held to the highest of standards."
Congressman Blackburn discussed the TSA and her report in an interview on the Fox Business Network's new program MONEY with Melissa Francis: WATCH HERE.
Congressman Blackburn discussed the TSA and her report in an interview on the Alex Jones Show:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DkYAoDD_NiU
http://blackburn.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=298208
TSA claims we can detain but...
By Jonathan Corbett:
I just filed my opposition to the TSA’s motion to dismiss my lawsuit for illegally detaining me in FLL airport. The TSA’s motion, as to be expected, was full of contradictions, failures at logic, and other absurdities. For example, in order to avoid liability under a statute that creates a cause of action against “any officer of the United States who is empowered by law to execute searches,” they argued that TSA screeners are not empowered to execute searches. (My response was substantially: “Great! Then I can ignore them when I see them in the airport, right?”)
But perhaps what stood out the most was their assertion that they constitutionally detained me. They freely admit that screeners are not law enforcement and have no power of arrest, but at the same time argue it was totally cool for them to hold me — because it was brief.
Either one has powers of arrest or one does not. It doesn’t become “ok” simply because you do it briefly. Once again, the TSA has asked the court to carve out a new exception to the law to allow for its thuggery. Here’s to hoping that U.S. District Judge Joan A. Lenard gives them the bench-slap that they deserve.
http://tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.com/2012/07/09/tsa-we-can-detain-you-and-other-false-statements/
Corbett v. TSA – USA & TSA’s Motion to Dismiss (.pdf)
Corbett v. TSA – Opposition to USA & TSA’s Motion to Dismiss (.pdf)