Behavior Detection Officers Lead to Arrest in Orlando
(UPDATE 04/02/2008: Read the updated story. )You might have seen on the news or the web today that Behavior Detection Officers at Orlando International Airport spotted a passenger in the airport lobby, well before the screening checkpoint, who was behaving suspiciously. Because of the passenger's highly irregular behavior, the officers ensured he was under surveillance as he moved through the airport, and requested that his checked bags immediately be searched.
As a result of the bag search, a variety of suspicious items were found. (Since the FBI is leading the investigation, we're not saying exactly what these items are although there is speculation in the press and on the web). The individual was taken into custody by Orlando Police and the FBI is now questioning him. If you’ve been watching the news, you’ve probably seen the bomb squad removing the passenger's clothing curbside to ensure he did not pose a threat.
Since the passenger was stopped before he could get to the checkpoint, checkpoint operations were not affected and flights continued to take off and land. A perimeter was established in Terminal A while the bomb squad did their work.
This is an excellent example of the layers of security in action throughout the airport. This is also a good example of using specially trained Behavior Detection Officers to look for people with hostile intent as well as the items they intend to use. It's a further testament that the behavior detection program works (yes, I'm partial...).
For the official TSA statement, click here.
Thanks,
Bob
TSA EoS Blog Team
Labels: mission
posted by Bob at
9:51 PM
148 Comments:
The guy was bouncing up and down. He was also tilting to the left and right. They found a threaded pipe with end caps. They also found a bunch of ball bearings. It was pretty noticible since other passengers saw the guy and said that the guys actions creeped them out.
I will give this one to the BDO for doing their job and heading off a possible bombing attempt. Now if the guy just had the components and no explosives then they most likely will take his goodies away before sending him on his way. Google this for more information.
April 1, 2008 9:59 PM
Quotes from the CNN story:
"'He looked rather crazy,' a passenger told CNN affiliate WKMG. "He was rocking left and right and up and down."
Behavior identification officers like the one who noticed the suspect are plain-clothes officers trained to spot suspicious behavior at airports, Kair said.
'When people are doing things that are deceptive, they exhibit behaviors that are involuntary," he said. "Our officers are very well trained to identify these behaviors.'"
Bob, I wouldn't give the BDO's much credit on this one as he was doing "crazy" things, which almost anyone is able to recognize.
I would like to see what the "suspicious" items are before I would trumpet such a story. If history is any prior indication, this will prove to be much ado about nothing.
April 1, 2008 10:02 PM
You deserve to take pride in this one. TSA did their job in a way that is hard to find fault with. Keep it up, infuse this good stuff back into the TSA culture. Whatever this guy's problem was, you defused it.
Hopefully this will put a smile on your faces for a few days.
April 1, 2008 10:28 PM
Passengers waiting to board flights at Orlando International Airport Tuesday said they noticed Brown acting suspiciously before agents moved in.
"He looked rather crazy," a passenger said. "He was rocking left and right and up and down. He looked a little wacko."
The above was reported in the press. So your highly trained BDO's noticed these subtle behaviors?
Sounds like the most casual observer would have noticed that something was not right.
Never a good idea to pat your own back!
April 1, 2008 10:39 PM
weather or not the BDO's deserve the credit. it is obvious there was a threat at this airport. a serious one.
the ''security theatre'' as many like to call it, might actuall be for a reason.
passengers think this is all a joke, and they become complacent. good thing the TSA doesnt
April 1, 2008 10:59 PM
Thanks to ALL who were involved in stopping whatever this turns out to be. There was vigilance and a threat was stopped, no matter how major or minor.
God forbid anyone would say something good about the TSA BDO's. But I will, THANKS again.
D. Price
Nebraska
April 1, 2008 11:27 PM
So where is the blog posting about the evacuation in BDL over tin foil?
http://www.wfsb.com/news/15759899/detail.html
April 1, 2008 11:47 PM
passengers think this is all a joke, and they become complacent. good thing the TSA doesnt
Absolutely no one things that all airport security is a joke. Note that no one objects to walking through a metal detector, or having one's carry-on bags X-rayed. What we object to are pointless procedures based on impossible-to-carry-out threats, like the stupid liquids ban designed to thwart imaginary liquid explosives that do not exist, or mandatory shoe screening the costs of which far outstrip the benefits, or interminable ID checks that will not stop anyone at all from getting through security.
April 2, 2008 12:41 AM
Did he have nipple rings?
April 2, 2008 1:05 AM
Anonymous said...
Bob, I wouldn't give the BDO's much credit on this one as he was doing "crazy" things, which almost anyone is able to recognize.
You haven't visited Orlando before have you? A week at Disney is enough to make anyone bounce around.
April 2, 2008 1:23 AM
Yes, he was doing crazy things but how many times do you walk past someone and say I am not getting involved. According to some bloggers everyone is innocent, we should of just asked him if he meant harm and took his word on it. Sorry you can't have it both ways, some may think oh this is as just a little thing but it is one of those little things that is going to harm us. Good job in Orlando and I hope that all TSO's remain vigilant through criticism and scrutinity.
April 2, 2008 5:13 AM
Quote "Bob, I wouldn't give the BDO's much credit on this one as he was doing "crazy" things, which almost anyone is able to recognize."
Fact is, ALMOST ANYONE didn't report this guy, the BDOs did. As someone else said, How many times have you walked past a crazy person and said "I'm not going to get involved." They did.
Would you rather they weren't there yesterday?
April 2, 2008 8:05 AM
"According to some bloggers everyone is innocent, we should of just asked him if he meant harm and took his word on it."
Please provide a link to back this statement up, or retract it and apologize for lying.
April 2, 2008 8:06 AM
What a shock that the usual cadre of blind "I hate TSA for (insert daily gripe here)" posters fail to recognize success when they see it. Just as the more enlightened posters have noted, no one...no one but the BDO(s) reported this guy's behavior that led to the detention and ultimate discovery of bomb making materials. You can complain about rude TSOs, liquid restrictions that you can't seem to understand, jump up and down about your perception of eroded civil liberties based in fact less lp.org talking points until you're blue in the face for all I care. I see results and applaud TSA for doing what it does every day.
April 2, 2008 8:55 AM
Since when is acting or looking weird a crime in this country? Or probably cause to being to searched? I'm not convinced that acting shifty is enough. How about X-Rays and detection equipment that works? How about screeners that are professional and do their jobs? How about a consideration of our rights and privacy? If the TSA did all of these things, Osama Bin Laden should be able to fly anywhere in the country, it wouldn't matter because it would be safe. We should be able to travel anonymously without worrying that our personality quirks are going to get us strip searched on the curb.
And to those of you who would say that the world is different and the founding fathers would be ok with all of this, don't forget they had FOREIGN TROOPS quartered in their cities, sometimes taking over their homes!
April 2, 2008 9:21 AM
"According to some bloggers everyone is innocent, we should of just asked him if he meant harm and took his word on it."
"Please provide a link to back this statement up, or retract it and apologize for lying."
Oh come on....now someone is getting all indignant...which is ridiculous when we have read a gazillion times on this blog that TSA is nothing but "security theater"; that liquids, gels and shoe bombs are not a threat; and that TSA should be abolished.
You can't have it both ways. If you take reasoning like "security theater" and "TSA is a farce and should be abolished" to its logical conclusion then there is no threat, i.e. no one is trying or capable of doing us harm, i.e. everyone is innocent.
If everyone is not innocent, please enlighten us all and tell us what the real threats are and how we should protect against them?
April 2, 2008 9:22 AM
Good job guys. People can say whatever negative judgements they want, but in my opinion you did your job correctly. Hats off to everyone involved.
April 2, 2008 9:51 AM
Anonymous @ April 2, 2008 8:55 AM said:
"What a shock that the usual cadre of blind "I hate TSA for (insert daily gripe here)" posters fail to recognize success when they see it. Just as the more enlightened posters have noted, no one...no one but the BDO(s) reported this guy's behavior that led to the detention and ultimate discovery of bomb making materials. You can complain about rude TSOs, liquid restrictions that you can't seem to understand, jump up and down about your perception of eroded civil liberties based in fact less lp.org talking points until you're blue in the face for all I care. I see results and applaud TSA for doing what it does every day."
OK, I will...
I equate this "big catch" as cops stopping a guy for speeding who drives 60 in a school zone right past a cop along the side of the road using his radar gun.
Ya' know? I have at least one of every one of his "bomb-making" items right now in my garage/workshop. (I'll bet you probably have them as well.) I guess we should turn ourselves in right away...
Don't flatter yourselves, TSA.
April 2, 2008 10:20 AM
Tentatively I'll say "Good job" guys. It's a shame that what people get arrested for isn't a matter of public record, but hopefully the facts will come to light. I'd say "good catch" but it doesn't sound like the BDOs really had a difficult job there.
I still disagree with the use of BDOs on general principal. It's way too 1984. There is far too much potential for abuse and as we've seen, TSA isn't really strong on common sense and appropriate responses to situations. (Though it does sound like the BDO(s) in question had good working eyes and brains)
At least no one was tasered to death.
April 2, 2008 10:32 AM
Several of the articles on the incident imply that the pipes, end-caps, BBs, and "unknown liquid" were in the guy's *CHECKED* luggage.
None of these items are prohibited in checked luggage. (or really in carry-on either, except liquids due to the silly war-on-water, which is based on an underlying threat that has been debunked as a hoax.) And if they were in his CHECKED luggage, which he had already checked in, it's clear he wasn't planning to assemble them into a bomb for his flight.
Did he have any explosives? If so, you know TSA would come out at tout this. And "bomb-making" "reading materials" is pretty vague; suspicious but not illegal.
Look, the guy was acting crazy. It's probably a good idea he was stopped. But while there's a lot of mentally disturbed people out there I'd just as soon avoid interaction with, in a supposedly-free country you for the most part have to let them be.
April 2, 2008 10:47 AM
Even I one of the many loud voices on this blog who is generally among the first to point out nearly everything that TSA does wrong has to say that in this one instance the TSA got it right. So in the spirit of fairness, let's see what the TSA did right for once:
1. The BDOs observed this person's behavior that seemed odd. They simply kept him under surveillance. I did not read anywhere, however, that they hassled him in any way. They permitted him to go about his business.
2. After the person checked baggage the TSA searched the bags and found items that gave them pause. The TSA informed the appropriate authorities who then approached the person and using what appears to be proper police procedure found reason to detain the person further.
This is an example of how the system is supposed to work. Well done.
It is toward this type of effort that the TSA ought to be directing its efforts rather than focusing its efforts on regulating whether a jar of face cream is 3 or 3.5 oz or forcing the disabled out of their wheelchairs to walk through the checkpoints and other such nonsense as we continually read about on this forum. With more of this kind of non-invasive and actually constitutional behavioral observation (if you're in a public place police action based on your public behavior is constitutional -- long standing precedent); coupled with some of the smart ideas that others have brought up (i.e. the secure ties and time check ids for the TSA baggage checkers that others have suggested when they look at bags) the TSA actually does stand a chance at improvement.
April 2, 2008 10:47 AM
A. How about X-Rays and detection equipment that works?
B. How about screeners that are professional and do their jobs?
C. How about a consideration of our rights and privacy?
D. If the TSA did all of these things, Osama Bin Laden should be able to fly anywhere in the country, it wouldn't matter because it would be safe."
I had to label these to address each point. I will say up front that we absolutely need A, B & C.
On A., well, let me just go pull some new technology out of my…ear! Seriously, does it even exist?
On B, it seems TSA screeners need a better understanding that they work for the taxpayer. They have an important job to do-- it's a thankless job, dealing with stressed out travelers/the public every day; it probably doesn’t pay well enough; and they take it very seriously and are under a lot of pressure to perform. That’s a bad combination that seems to result in too many TSOs that are on some kind of power trip. They need a good lesson in humility and customer service. “If you want to fly today” should not be part of their vocabulary. How about forbidding them from saying that and replacing it with: “We need to clear every alarm; so we can ensure everyone’s safety.”
On C., of course, this is America, we have rights and need privacy. But, from what I can tell – if TSA has moves too much in the direction of protecting personal space, bad stuff could get through the checkpoint. Or, in the case of the nipple piercing, they are forced into an untenable situation -- having the woman take them out so they wouldn’t have to look at her breasts. It’s a hard line to walk.
In my view, C has absolutely NOTHING to do with D.
April 2, 2008 10:47 AM
Can you say if the items were an actual weapon, explosive device, prohibited item, something non-threatening but potentially illegal like drug paraphenalia, or something merely "suspicious"?
My company makes 25mm and 40mm bullets (not live cartridges) for tanks and helicopters, and I've had to fly with them for sales and engineering meetings. Are these suspicious weapon components?
April 2, 2008 10:48 AM
To Anonymous who said, "Since when is acting or looking weird a crime in this country?"
First of all the behavior detection program isn't based off how someone "looks" as you stated above, it is based around the behaviors that a person exhibits. Second "acting weird" isn't a crime. This person in Orlando was not arrested just because of the behaviors that he was exhibiting. BDO's identify POTENTIALLY dangerous passengers that might be a risk to aviation and notifies the appropriate law enforcement officials.
"Or probably cause to being to searched? I'm not convinced that acting shifty is enough."
When a passenger submits to screening be either placing bags on the conveyor belt at a checkpoint, walking through a metal detector at a checkpoint, or handing your checked bags to either a ticket agent or TSA officer, your person or property can now be searched for any reason, there is no probable cause needed, just so you are aware!
“We should be able to travel anonymously without worrying that our personality quirks are going to get us strip searched on the curb."
Thanks for the laugh this early in the morning, I needed it. Travel anonymously, why? What is it that you have to hide? And Please do not believe that someone’s “personality quirks” would get them or you strip searched on the curb.
Go back to the blog about BDO officers or visit the TSA website to read about the program and how it works because you are seriously misinformed. The BDO program gets a lot of criticism, but one thing that nobody can argue is that IT WORKS!
To the TSA/BDO crew down in Orlando, good job!! I love seeing the program I believe in so much be implemented exactly the way it’s supposed to, and in doing so providing that addition layer of protection to the public, and critics alike! GREAT GREAT JOB!!!
April 2, 2008 11:30 AM
Below is what they found according to this USA Today article.
"FBI officials tell the Associated Press that a search of Brown's luggage turned up "two galvanized pipes, end caps, two small containers containing BB's, batteries, two containers with an unknown liquid, laptop, and bomb-making literature."
April 2, 2008 11:38 AM
Behavior Detection Officers... Thought Police... tomato, tomahto...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime
And LOL @gunner...
April 2, 2008 12:25 PM
Someone anonymously wrote:
"the ''security theatre'' as many like to call it, might actuall be for a reason."
This person seems to misunderstand the term security theater. It is commonly used to describe security countermeasures that make people feel secure but provide little or no improvement to security.
April 2, 2008 1:08 PM
Anonymous said Bob, I wouldn't give the BDO's much credit on this one as he was doing "crazy" things, which almost anyone is able to recognize.
You have got to be kidding me?
This was crunch time and security paid off when it mattered most. Fact is "almost anyone" didn't notify the police...the TSA Officer did, and they performed superbly.
I recently saw a heart wrenching testimonial from the news posted on YouTube about a former airline worker, who while working on September 11, 2001 recognized suspicious behavior from two of the hijackers who boarded his flight. He didn't question them, their behavior, or notify a supervisor or police, even though the little voice inside told him something just wasn't right about them. He said when he saw the plane hit the tower it was at that precise moment it all fell into place.
Too late.
I really feel for that guy because that is a horrible burden to have to deal with.
Should have.
Would have.
Could have.
Not today.
Jay
April 2, 2008 1:31 PM
Hats off to the BDOs at Orlando Int'l. They did their job, and handled the situation accordingly.
This is indication that the system TSA is utilizing DOES work, no matter how small or large the situation may be. As for old and outdated equipment, that situation should be improving in the near future.
April 2, 2008 1:50 PM
The liquid is now no longer "unknown." The Orlando NBC affiliate reports it was nitromethane. You can read about that substance on wikipedia if you're unfamiliar with it. It's racing fuel, which it burns, rather than exploding. One has to tinker with it quite a bit (extreme adiabatic compression; addition of ammonium nitrate) to turn it into an explosive.
So this seems to be an example of the TSA:
(a) detecting someone that even Helen Keller could figure out was acting goofy,
(b) had no intention of taking out the airplane,
(c) had no capability to take out the airplane, given what he had, and
(d) might have been planning something naughty at some later time in Jamaica by assembling what he had (he'd need one additional element, not found in his suitcase to bring it off).
Now stopping (d) is, by any measure, a good thing. The thing is, is law enforcement really a duty we want the TSA to have? I mean if you're happy about them using their BDOs to detect a guy who might have been thinking about doing something bad at some later time, that had nothing to do with transportation (the T in TSA), then why not extend that logic?
Why not just have police set up random checkpoints for cars and pedestrians? Make each person show their ID, check them for outstanding warrants or BOLOs, and have a look through their possessions.
If you're uncomfortable with that scenario (and you should be), then what the TSA did shouldn't necessarily be considered an "accomplishment." It didn't advance the security of any mode of transportation, for sure.
April 2, 2008 1:51 PM
People, please stop posting anonymously so I can point to your post!
Someone wrote:
Absolutely no one thin[k]s that all airport security is a joke. Note that no one objects to walking through a metal detector, or having one's carry-on bags X-rayed. What we object to are pointless procedures based on impossible-to-carry-out threats, like the stupid liquids ban designed to thwart imaginary liquid explosives that do not exist, or mandatory shoe screening the costs of which far outstrip the benefits, or interminable ID checks that will not stop anyone at all from getting through security.
Exactly! I think your BDO's are a good idea, and I don't mind them at all. You have every right to observe me. I think your liquid ban, checking ID, and taking off shoes policies are stupid.
Also, I can't begin to tell you how violated I feel already by the back-scatter scanners. They are far different than walking through a metal detector. In the video you have about it, the guide says there is no one to save, print, or capture the image on the screen (that shows people's genitals). Except maybe a camera! Like the one in my phone, or the one recording him say those words with the screen image in the background!
April 2, 2008 2:31 PM
I write grants for a living. If I write a grant for $100,000 for our organization and that grant is awarded, I don't get my efforts praised and splashed all over our organization's website.
Neither should the TSA's BDOs - they did the job they were hired to do. End of story, in fact no story.
April 2, 2008 3:55 PM
First, congratulations! If this deranged man with a dodgy assemblage in his checked bag was indeed a threat to aviation, the TSA has scored a genuine success that's well worth crowing about. Even if it turns out he wasn't a threat, the BDO performed well, and entirely within the TSA's mission to protect aviation. Either way, it qualifies as a bona fide success for a BDO, far more than the false positive catches of drugs, fake IDs, and fraudulent military jackets you've previously touted as "successes."
Now that you've had your parade, it's time to rain on it. It's worth noting that the stupid rules about shoes, liquids, and piercings capriciously "interpreted" at checkpoints contributed nothing to this success. Nor were any passengers yelled at, bullied, or humiliated. Rather, the BDO spotted some very suspicious behavior and took appropriate action. But given that the behavior was apparently egregiously suspicious, did the special training of BDOs really make a difference? Would it have been as much of a success if it had been a bored passenger who called police and contained the threat rather than a BDO?
The other relevant question is how many false positives have BDOs "detected" for each "success" like this one? I define a "false positive" as someone who is either innocent, or else who possesses some kind of contraband that does not actually threaten aviation. If the number of false positives is low, I will begin to be convinced that BDOs provide useful and effective protection for aviation. Conversely, if the number of false positives is high, I can only conclude that any protection BDOs provide is a matter of dumb luck. If you flag enough "suspicious" people for additional screening, you're bound to stumble on something, eventually. Since the TSA will never answer this important question (other than "it's SSI, so you'll have to trust us"), we Taxpaying Passengers have no way of determining whether this "success" mean anything, or whether it's worth the price we're paying for it.
Both the TSA and the administration it's part of have a shameful lengthy history of well-timed announcements of "successes" in the War on Terror that ultimately fizzled. So I'm inclined to view this "success" skeptically. But for the sake of the country, I'd really like to be convinced that it means something.
April 2, 2008 4:26 PM
So this seems to be an example of the TSA:
(a) detecting someone that even Helen Keller could figure out was acting goofy,
I think that's been addressed above.
(b) had no intention of taking out the airplane,
Are you certain of this? You may very well be right, but at this stage it is too early to know for sure. Maybe it really was just to blow up tree stumps, but let's wait for all the facts before we say for sure one way or the other.
(c) had no capability to take out the airplane, given what he had, and
Perhaps he didn't, but if you recall, it is believed that China Northern Airlines Flight 6136 was brought down by a passenger who set a fire with gasoline, killing all aboard. On a personal note, when I was stationed in Korea a man used a couple of milk cartons full of flamable liquid to set a fire in the subway station not far from me that killed almost 200 people. I wouldn't discount the possibility just yet that he had the capability, even if the intent wasn't there.
(d) might have been planning something naughty at some later time in Jamaica by assembling what he had (he'd need one additional element, not found in his suitcase to bring it off)....had nothing to do with transportation (the T in TSA),
I think your analogy is somewhat flawed. TSA didn't go out onto the street and stop this guy in the road or force him to use the airport. If he is in fact guilty of nothing more than poor judgement, well, that's why we have a justice system independant of the executive to decide these things.
Chance
April 2, 2008 4:55 PM
Perhaps he didn't, but if you recall, it is believed that China Northern Airlines Flight 6136 was brought down by a passenger who set a fire with gasoline, killing all aboard. On a personal note, when I was stationed in Korea a man used a couple of milk cartons full of flamable liquid to set a fire in the subway station not far from me that killed almost 200 people. I wouldn't discount the possibility just yet that he had the capability, even if the intent wasn't there.
I think your analogy is somewhat flawed. TSA didn't go out onto the street and stop this guy in the road or force him to use the airport.
Chance
What do those two incidents have in common that the current one doesn't? The perpetrators in the two had the flammable liquids on them when they committed their acts. Here the liquid was contained in the passenger's checked luggage -- it was already separated from him. How does he have the capability to cause an explosion in this situation? And we are all capable of illegal actions, but we don't have the intent to act on them.
Was the BDO layer really necessary here? Why wouldn't the CTX have detected a flammable liquid?
I can take your analogy further to say that an LEO can stop me as I pull out of my driveway to do a search on my person since I wasn't forced to go outside my home. Slippery slope.
April 2, 2008 5:25 PM
The stuff was in his checked luggage. No access while traveling through to his destination.
Blah Blah Blah.
Ultimately, a guy who was possibly mentally ill, had some stuff that, except for flamability, posed no danger to the airplane.
Nice stop, not a big catch. If a real cop had found the guy sitting under a bridge it would barely make a news-story. The police department certainly wouldn't trumpet the event as proof that they should exist.
April 2, 2008 5:36 PM
"TSA didn't go out onto the street and stop this guy in the road or force him to use the airport. If he is in fact guilty of nothing more than poor judgement, well, that's why we have a justice system independant of the executive to decide these things.
Chance"
The executive and judicial branches have a very cozy relationship these days. Bit of a shake up recently, but still not enough to get to the rot.
April 2, 2008 6:35 PM
Millions delayed.
Hundreds of thousands humiliated.
Thousands abused.
Thousands deliberately made to miss their flights for no good reason.
Dozens deprived of their personal arms for no good reason.
One caught.
The greatest stupidity is that if I tried to go through naked, _I_ would get in trouble.
April 2, 2008 6:37 PM
There was no plot. There was no one in danger. Why is this even a press release?
To MSP BDO, you ask what we have to hide. We don't have to _hide_ anything. That's what the 4th amendment is for - to keep the government from looking without probable cause. You're not supposed to look. Our persons, houses, papers, and effects, are sacrosanct. Period.
April 2, 2008 6:44 PM
Anonymous said...
The guy was bouncing up and down. He was also tilting to the left and right. They found a threaded pipe with end caps. They also found a bunch of ball bearings. It was pretty noticible since other passengers saw the guy and said that the guys actions creeped them out.
I will give this one to the BDO for doing their job and heading off a possible bombing attempt. Now if the guy just had the components and no explosives then they most likely will take his goodies away before sending him on his way. Google this for more information.
April 1, 2008 9:59 PM
This guy was actually ARRESTED by the FBI and questioned. He stated that he was taking the items back to his home to show friends how to build IED's like he had seen in Iraq! Nay sayers where are you now? You wanted proof that TSA could or had thwarted a possible bombing attack you got your proof. Now lay off of us please.
April 2, 2008 6:47 PM
The only credit the TSA gets is that a passenger told someone there was a guy acting weird and someone in the TSA did something. Congrats. You guys listened to someone about something. They do not get credit for IDing the guy or using their somewhat-trained BDOs. The TSA does get credit for acting more like a human and less like a wall.
April 2, 2008 6:53 PM
Re: " It didn't advance the security of any mode of transportation, for sure."
You've obviously never seen how fast a plane's pressurized oxygen rich environment. If the "unknown liquids" in the luggage was indeed nitromethane, as CNN is reporting, (it may have been worse) the last thing you want on a flight is a volatile flammable liquid in a BREAKABLE container to be released anywhere on the plane.
Mind you, nitromethane by itself is also considered an explosive but one that is oxygen-poor, yet considered more energetic than TNT. Again a plane is an oxygen rich environment.
Mixing this with other chemicals makes it an even more serious threat to commercial aviation.
Still think liquids aren't a threat?
April 2, 2008 7:27 PM
I don't believe for one minute that only 37 comments have been posted to this thread.
Come one, TSA, where are the rest of the comments that you are refusing to post - I KNOW they are out there.
April 2, 2008 7:29 PM
Re: "I can take your analogy further to say that an LEO can stop me as I pull out of my driveway to do a search on my person since I wasn't forced to go outside my home. Slippery slope."
LEOs are bound by the Fourth Amendment and require probable cause. Searches at airports are considered adminisrative searches and require only initial implied consent (i.e., submitting bags for screening, walking through the metal detector).
April 2, 2008 7:38 PM
so just to reiterate a couple points that have been brought up...
1)The guy was obviously nuts.
Yes your BDO's noticed this guy, but so did random passengers. The only difference is (as someone pointed out) that your BDO's did something about it. Well that leads me on to point 2.
2)This is your job.
You don't deserve special recognition for doing your job well. This viewpoint/methodlogy is creeping like a virus through our society and your not helping;. People deserve credit when they go above and beyond.
3)Thanks for the laugh this early in the morning, I needed it. Travel anonymously, why? What is it that you have to hide?
This statement made me want to cry. Beyond the simple answer of "Have you ever read the constitution?" I could bring up another response...what does the TSA?
April 2, 2008 7:49 PM
The fact that the TSA won't tell us everything tips me off to the fact that there is nothing more to tell. Since nothing that was supposed to go in carry-on luggage was dangerous for carry-on luggage (as described by the TSA) then I'm inclined to think this is what happened.
"Oh crap, the previous blog entry is now filled with comments about questions we're ignoring. Let's come up with a story showing how good we're doing. We don't have one but maybe we can hype this one up by saying there was actual danger but the FBI won't let us tell you what it is."
So, back to 3-1-1, please admit you know that you are wrong.
So, back to piercings, pleas admit that you know you did wrong.
April 2, 2008 8:05 PM
Bob, I wouldn't give the BDO's much credit on this one as he was doing "crazy" things, which almost anyone is able to recognize.
If he was acting so crazy, and anyone was able to recognize the threat, where were the hundreds of calls to police? Where were the reports to airport officials or security personnel? Why was it only this one BDO?
I hope that he wasn't acting as "crazy" as everyone said, because the only alternative is that people don't care enough to report it.
Why is the praise for finding liquid explosives (even in a check in) considered undeserved praise, but asking people to remove their shoes or bring only small bottles of water to the airport deserved criticism.
We are well past the point where the liquid ban is new. Don't bring them in your carryon and they won't take them away!
Good job TSA. I know you hear it less than you should but thank you for all you do!
April 2, 2008 8:09 PM
Come on folks, you can slam TSA and say anyone could have noticed it but the reality is maybe they did but they didn't follow up on their thoughts. That's the difference, some stay on the side lines and other act!! Good score for the BDO!
April 2, 2008 9:05 PM
Okay, I'm tired of all this bitching and moaning. You ask for results, you get results and you still bitch! STOP IT ALREADY! "The TSA BDO's did what they were hired to do, end of story. In fact, No story!"? What the heck are your talking about man? Here's a scenario for ya big guy, lets say the BDO program was not in place, and several people saw this guy "acting crazy" as its put, but no one said anything. Lets say he gets on this plane, and has an actual bomb in his CARRY ON bag as well as what he has in his checked bags, lets say, that what he has in his carry on is so minute that it can't be detected by current technology (YES THIS STUFF DOES EXIST) but combined with what he has in his checked bag, could take out an airport, bank or other structure on the opposite end of his flight. But NO ONE says anything about his strange behavior...now what? He gets to his destination, blows up an airport, Federal faciility or other structure....day care center? How about a women's health clinic if he's an anti abortion nut? Does any of that count? Here's what the BDO program and the people who peform that job did, they stopped a potential nut case from carrying out what he may have planned. Now that's the end of the story for one more nut case and a job well done for TSA and the BDO's. This blog is really getting on my nerves because some of you people just don't seem to want to give credit where its due.
April 2, 2008 10:05 PM
Previously posted...
Perhaps he didn't, but if you recall, it is believed that China Northern Airlines Flight 6136 was brought down by a passenger who set a fire with gasoline, killing all aboard. On a personal note, when I was stationed in Korea a man used a couple of milk cartons full of flamable liquid to set a fire in the subway station not far from me that killed almost 200 people. I wouldn't discount the possibility just yet that he had the capability, even if the intent wasn't there.
I think your analogy is somewhat flawed. TSA didn't go out onto the street and stop this guy in the road or force him to use the airport.
Chance
What do those two incidents have in common that the current one doesn't? The perpetrators in the two had the flammable liquids on them when they committed their acts. Here the liquid was contained in the passenger's checked luggage -- it was already separated from him. How does he have the capability to cause an explosion in this situation? And we are all capable of illegal actions, but we don't have the intent to act on them.
Was the BDO layer really necessary here? Why wouldn't the CTX have detected a flammable liquid?
Reply...
Hence the liquid ban. Imagine someone filling 4 16 oz shampoo bottles with gasoline and lighting them aboard a plane. Taking thier hairspray and using it as a blow torch.
X-ray machines can't detect flammable or dangerous liquids. Nothing goes off in a x-ray machine. Anything found was found by the TSO's good eye. On a x-ray dangerous liquids look the same as regular liquids. So they only way to tell the difference between a shampoo bottle full of gasoline and a shampoo bottle full of shampoo would be to test it. And to test every single bottle that comes through the checkpoint is insane. So to avoid the situation all together, just ban all liquids.
Futhermore, the machines in checked baggage are programmed to pick up certain depths of items that could possible contain a threat. All those liquids which alarm those machines are tested.
April 2, 2008 11:32 PM
Someone anonymously wrote:
"Travel anonymously, why? What is it that you have to hide?"
No traveling by commercial air without first identifying myself to TSA agents? What is it about my name that could help that agent determine whether or not I am attempting to carry something dangerous onto my flight?
Requiring us to present our papers to a government agent who will determine based on our identities whether or not we may travel would be equivalent to requiring us to request permission to travel. (Note: There is still no requirement that passengers on domestic flights identify themselves to TSA agents.) As long as I am not carrying anything dangerous, the United States government should get out of the way and leave whether or not I'll be flying up to me and the airline with whom I have contracted to transport me to my destination.
Paraphrasing words of The Identity Project: No matter how sophisticated the security embedded into an I.D., a well-funded criminal will be able to falsify it. Honest people, however, go to Pro-Life rallies. Honest people go to Pro-Choice rallies, too. Honest people attend gun shows. Honest people protest the actions of the President of the United States. Honest people fly to political conventions. What if those with the power to put people on a 'no fly' list decided that they didn't like the reason for which you wanted to travel? The honest people wouldn't be going anywhere.
Over 900,000 names are now on the United States' so-called "terrorist watch list". Presumably, the people named on that list have neither done wrong nor attempted to do wrong, or else they would be arrested, tried, convicted, and sentenced by a judge to punishment for their wrongdoing. If someone's name is placed on the list, there is no way for him to find out why it was placed there and there is no process for appealing the decision to place it there. Placement on the list is an administrative punishment dealt anonymously.
April 3, 2008 12:20 AM
Hey guys, can we stop being cynical for a moment and commend them for doing a good job for once. At least this was an example of good ol' fashioned logic based policing and not arbitrarily dumb rules.
TSA did a good job today. These are baby steps, but at least baby steps in the right direction. Hopefully this is not just a one time thing...
Law Enforcement needs every hand they can get, and these BDOs were able to stop a potencially dangerous individual that could have been the successful Richard Reid.
You guys do a million and one things wrong, but not this, keep up the good work, and hopefully one day we won't hate your guts.
April 3, 2008 3:20 AM
Oh and let me just comment that the job the TSOs do, with the stress they have and the responsibilities they have to potentially prevent another 9/11, I think they deserve more than 12 bucks an hour, and 15 if they have been there for 6 years...
Come on, honestly, how would YOU feel?
April 3, 2008 3:29 AM
OK, I'll buy the whole "The BDO's did what they were hired to do, end of story" because it's true, that's their job. I don't think TSA is trying to say these guys went ABOVE AND BEYOND THE CALL OF DUTY or anything like that, they're just trying to say, hey, guess what, it looks like behavior detection works.
We can't rely on the passengers to report every "wacky" person at the airport. Even if this guy looked suspicious to the untrained eye, it doesn't mean it would have been reported by regular Joe. In fact, it wasn't. It was reported by the people hired to do that job. TSA is just trying to justify the BDO program.
I'll take the other bloggers at their word (I didn't research it) that the liquid he brought was "flammable" but not "explosive," but that isn't really the point right now. What SOME of you don't seem to understand is that a "guilty" person is going to act "suspicious" whether he has a pipe bomb or a bong pipe(to borrow a joke from an earlier post) if he's nervous about being caught.
BDO's don't know if he's acting guilty because of something as innocuous as trying to smuggle his $100 cologne into his carry-on (why do people do this, I DON'T KNOW, but they do) or if he's acting guilty because he has a bomb strapped to his chest. They just know he's acting guilty. So I don't care if this guy was jumping up and down and tilting left and right because he forgot to put his toothpaste in the ziplock bag. The point is, he was acting suspicious, and it didn't go unnoticed. To me, that's a success for the BDO's.
April 3, 2008 4:40 AM
First comment: please don't lead us to believe there are ONLY 38 comments on this story. Why are you holding back?
Second comment comes from
MSNBC:
"Authorities in Idaho say they aren’t sure of the true identity of a Transportation Security Administration officer charged with attempting to kidnap a 10-year-old boy because they found personal identification documents — including Social Security numbers — for five separate individuals in his possession.
KTVB-TV, NBC’s Boise affiliate, reported that the TSA officer was charged with second-degree kidnapping Tuesday under the name of Robert Joe Harrison Jr. Fifth District Magistrate Ted Israel set bail at $500,000.
The station said the man known as Harrison has worked as a TSA officer at the Friedman Memorial Airport in Hailey since November 2005. It said he has been suspended without pay pending investigation of the kidnapping charges."
April 3, 2008 7:06 AM
Chance said:
Are you certain of this? You may very well be right, but at this stage it is too early to know for sure.
Based on the reporting, he had pipes, endcaps, a container of BBs, flammable liquid, and batteries. The reports say nothing about these items having been assembled into a pipe bomb, make no mention of timed or remote detonators. And if it had been an actual device, it would be most likely that bomb squad would have detonated it rather than dragging it off.
So yes, I'm sure. I'll give you $100 if it turns out this was a device set to take out the plane.
China Northern Airlines Flight 6136 was brought down by a passenger who set a fire with gasoline, killing all aboard.
The flammable liquid was in his checked--not carryon--bag, so the situations are completely different. His flammable liquid was in no danger of igniting the passenger cabin.
TSA didn't go out onto the street and stop this guy in the road or force him to use the airport.
This is disingenuous. He was going to Jamaica. It's not like you can drive there. He could fly or take a boat. Flying is cheaper.
This was perhaps a win for law enforcement, insofar as goofy acting people don't need to be carting around pipe bomb materials with them. But I (as a taxpayer) don't pay the TSA to stop weird people from building pipebombs in their spare time. I pay them to keep my planes safe, and it still isn't clear to me that these actions kept a plane safe.
This calls back to the argument folks were having on here weeks ago about TSA trumpeting drug detection as a "win." I don't want you acting as de facto law enforcement agents. That's Big Brotherish.
April 3, 2008 8:19 AM
Some of my previous posts could be defined as, "I hate TSA for (insert daily gripe here)" but I think they got this one right. If what has been reported turns out to be true this isn't some innocent bystander off the street railroaded by our "War on Water" (I love that quote and I'll have to steal it, hehe). I see some grumbling on here about whether or not he intended to cause this flight harm. It does not matter in the slightest what his intent was. If by accident I had a firearm in my luggage my intent is not the issue. That I attempted to bring it onto an aircraft is the issue. I live in Arizona where it is perfectly legal to walk down the sidewalk with a holstered firearm if I wanted to. If I then walk into a business with fine print at the entry that firearms are not allowed it does not matter what my intent is either. In both examples I would cease to be a law abiding citizen and legal action in various forms can begin against me. Now if a store clerk sees me with a holstered firearm in their store and calls the Police they are not acting as law enforcement. The Police arriving on scene are acting as law enforcement. I understand some of the complaints here that TSA should not be acting as law enforcement. It needs to be understood that they're not acting as law enforcement though, they're letting the Police handle that. That's what a good security officer (SO in TSO) does. Unfortunately for TSA there is one bit of bad news here that is hard to ignore. This guy was so obvious that private security in place before 9/11 or airline ticket counter agents probably would have noticed him too leading to the same result.
April 3, 2008 8:30 AM
Wow -- After all the intrigue, handcuffs & shackles, endless interviews and self-congratulations, the only thing this guy might be charged with is "transporting an incendiary material" -- a SAFETY (not security) restriction that has been in place going back to practically the Wright Brothers.
He's got what looks like a very no-BS public defender who didn't talk to the press after the arraignment. Oh yeah -- the government told the judge they need "more time" to build a case against the guy. If the PD is smart, he would back the TSA into a corner and require release of their sacred SSI during discovery and the trial itself, if there ever is a trial. This is probably a "career case" for the PD and I hope he becomes Chertoff's and Kippie's worst nightmare.
Thank God the Constitution still applies everywhere else except at an airport.
April 3, 2008 9:18 AM
It just boggles my mind how all you experts can sit back and tell us that this guy was no threat because he didn't have an explosive on his person.
First, though I don't think passengers would ever let it happen again, the planes on 9/11 were taken over with box cutters and FAKE bombs.
Second, hmmm...let's think...McVeigh and Nichols; Atta and al Shehri (et al); and Amanta Nagayeva and S. Dzhebirkhanova. What do these terrorists all have in common? THEY WORKED IN PAIRS (or groups)!
Maybe he didn't in this case, but what if he had an accomplice or two somewhere trying to sneak in parts B, C & D?
Use your brains people, and give TSA some credit when credit is due.
April 3, 2008 9:25 AM
From what I can tell, the components were not assembled in the checked bag. They likely would also have been picked up by the checked bag screening machines. So it's great that the BDOs found it, but it doesn't seem like it was a threat in the first place.
April 3, 2008 9:37 AM
Anonymous at 7:27 pm said:
Still think liquids aren't a threat?
Yes. This liquid would have burned, not exploded. Airplanes aren't "oxygen rich" environments, as they just scoop in air from outside but don't adjust the components. In fact, for reasons that don't concern us here, the gas mix at altitude is such that there's a bit less oxygen than normal.
Alcohol burns too. I'm not sure if it's allowed in carryons or not, but I could probably get nearly a quart in individual 3.4-oz bottles labeled "shampoo." I'm not terribly worried about flammable liquids on a plane. Especially not when they're packed in someone's checked luggage and stuffed in the unpressurized hold.
April 3, 2008 9:53 AM
What I find funny is that people complain TSA never caught anybody with the way they do things (which isn't true even before this incident)but now that they caught someone who was seriously dangerous(it's not ok to have dangerous, flammable, bomb making materials on a plane even in checked baggage)
and people are still complaining, saying it's not a big deal.
I bet if TSA caught Osama, the public would still say "Oh, they just got lucky." Shame on you for not noticing a job well done. Just goes to show, you can't make everyone happy.
April 3, 2008 10:19 AM
"Thanks to the quick actions of the Orlando TSA behavior detection team, the Orlando Police Department, the Orange County Bomb Squad and the FBI, this situation had a happy, safe ending; all without closing a single checkpoint or delaying more than Brown's flight." -- from "the updated story"
Versus:
"The search took place during the busy spring-break vacation season, with many visitors departing town after attending WrestleMania 24 on Sunday. Orlando police sealed off a 300-foot perimeter near the check-in counters at Terminal A for more than two hours while bomb-squad technicians searched the suspect and his backpack at curbside. Several airlines, including Air Canada, WestJet, Air Jamaica and Virgin Atlantic, had flights delayed." -- Orlando Sentinel
Who are you going to believe?
April 3, 2008 10:33 AM
Slightly OT... this guy was a veteran who has been in Iraq. Seems like he was probably off his medication.
http://www.wftv.com/news/15775496/detail.html
April 3, 2008 10:37 AM
Anonymous @ 10:19 am:
I bet if TSA caught Osama, the public would still say "Oh, they just got lucky."
Strawman much?
No, everyone would count that as a win. The problem isn't that TSA hasn't caught Osama yet, but that their attitude towards their accomplishments is like the Special Olympics: we're supposed to give them awards for just trying.
The hate toward TSA comes from the fact that they're accomplishing the terrorists' goals for them. I'm afraid to fly, not because I'm worried some radical fundamentalist (whatever that's supposed to mean) is going to blow my plane up with some magical binary liquid explosive, but because I'm worried about being set on by a jackbooted thug. I'm worried about some overenthusiastic screener grabbing my junk while he's giving me a patdown; I'm scared of having my stuff pawed over and possibly broken; I'm worried I'll miss my flight while I wait in line for people to satisfy the TSA's shoe fetish; I'm mad at having to buy a drink at outlandishly inflated prices in the secure zone rather than bring my own beverage; I'm scared of some thug asking me if "I want to fly today," when I don't step to fast enough; I'm scared of warrantless, unwarranted search of my possessions and personal papers.
In short, I'm more afraid of my government--not just of an executive that believes the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to it, but to the TSA--than the "bad guys." People should not be afraid of their government; government should be afraid of its people.
April 3, 2008 10:48 AM
how do we know he wasnt testing the system? sure, the components wernt assembled. but what if he got through with them, then next time they were assembled.
remember last year when they found those blocks of cheese with components that resembled IED's? replace the cheese with an explosive which has the same consistancy. we know they were doing a dry run.
it could have been the same deal. who really knows what this guys intentions were.
April 3, 2008 11:02 AM
it's just a matter of time before the TSA bans ALL electronic devices, for fear they've been MODIFIED.
Check out this gem: Teen turns camera into Taser-like device
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080403/ap_on_re_us/camera_taser_1
April 3, 2008 11:11 AM
anonymous 11:02:
replace the cheese with an explosive which has the same consistancy. we know they were doing a dry run.
No, no they weren't. Even the TSA later admitted as much. It was a guy from Milwaukee with cheese and a phone charger in his bag. Imagine! Someone coming from Wisconsin with a bag full of cheese! (I once stuffed 30 lbs of brick cheese--Widmers brand--in a suitcase leaving Madison, and got hardly a raised eyebrow.)
April 3, 2008 11:53 AM
An