That's not C-4.....It's my denture cream!!

So, you going see your grandfather at the retirement village he now calls home.  During that visit, he tells you about his planned trip to Detroit.  As a security expert, you warn him about crime and other security-related issues there.  He politely nods and then reaches for his ankle and says, "Stop worrying......I got this covered", as he pulls up his trousers to reveal a fully-loaded semi-automatic pistol on his ankle.

The good folks at TSA stumbled upon one such "packing grandpa" at Detroit Metro Airport.  During a routine scan using "imaging technology", a .38 handgun was found on the unidentified 76 year old's ankle.

INVESTIGATIVE REPORT: Homegrown Terror Threat to Military Communities

Maj. Nidal Hasan, the Army psychiatrist who is charged with
murder in the Fort Hood shootings 

Love him or hate him - Congressman Peter King can get press coverage on homeland security better than anyone.  On December 7, 2011, he did not fail.  The committee he chairs, the House Committee on Homeland Security published a 14 page "investigative report" on the
"Homegrown Terror Threat to Military Communities".  So what did he say to land himself in the news again?  Oh, I don't know....Perhaps it was this little "gem" found in the report:

"The Committee’s Majority Staff has reason to believe that the actual number of radicalized troops is far more than publicly realized or acknowledged."

That's ironic because the FBI and the ADL have been practically shouting this for quite some time.  It appears to me either the Committee is a little behind on the counter-terrorism information or being a tad bit subjective.  Imagine - subjectivity in politics.

QUOTE OF THE DAY

I love it when lawmakers make sense.....

"Focusing on the followers of one religion as the only credible threat to the nation's security is inaccurate, narrow and blocks consideration of emerging threats," said Mississippi Democratic Congressman Ben Thompson, describing how America owes its military personnel a clear understanding of "their mission and a clear definition of their enemy."

"That enemy is not a religion and their mission is not to defeat an ideology. And while some of my colleagues appear to have difficulty grasping this, I am glad that our military people understand it."

Pretty cool app from the folks at Homeland Security

Found a pretty nifty tool from the folks at the Department of Homeland Security.  It's a service called SelfCheck.  It's similar to the E-Verify service US employers use to verify your employment eligibility.  It pulls data from US credit agencies and your Passport file to ask identity related questions.  From there, it verifies your eligibility against what I presume other databases (aka "watchlists") and makes it determination.  According to it, I'm "good-to-go".  Note to any companies or agencies I've applied to: That means you CAN hire me.

Self Check is a voluntary, fast, free and simple service that allows you to check your employment eligibility in the United States. If any mismatches are found between the information you provide and your Department of Homeland Security or Social Security Administration records, Self Check will inform you of how to correct those mismatches.

As a side note, you need to be in a location that participates in the service.  Here's some more info on that:

USCIS is releasing the Self Check service in phases. At this point the service is offered only to users that maintain an address in Arizona, California, Colorado, the District of Colombia, Idaho, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, or Washington. The availability of Self Check will be limited for the initial launch as the service is tested and improved upon based on the outcomes of the initial implementation. 

Commentary: Internment Camps: A 20th Century Solution for a 21st Century Problem?

U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class William Weinert
[Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

In my military professional endeavors, I have come across a variety of counter-terrorism theories and practices.  One which I always find myself "sitting on the fence" on is warrantless detentions or internment camps.  While I can appreciate the operational necessity to capture, detain, and thus incapacitate certain rogue individuals who are involved in ongoing terrorist operations, I grow concerned due to the lack of accountability and need for legal justification when making such detentions.

We've been down this road before in World War II and the results weren't so great.  One only has to look at The Ringle Report to find evidence of this.

Here's a film about what those camps were like:

Are we entering a world where our fear is governing our national security strategy and allowing for certain or "inalienable" rights to be stripped away?  Don't get me wrong.  I like the fact my government has assets whose sole job is to seek and take whatever legal actions are necessary to prevent the loss of life.  I am one of those sentimental people who says they sleep easier at night knowing this.  However, I cannot but wrestle with the notion we are regressing whether than growing in our current security paradigm.

I recently came across an interesting editorial on the Mercury News' site.  According to the author, S. Floyd Mori,

"A bill on the Senate floor raises the question of whether the Senate has forgotten our history. S. 1253, the National Defense Authorization Act, has a provision in it, unfortunately drafted by Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and John McCain, R-Ariz., that would let any U.S. president use the military to arrest and imprison without charge or trial anyone suspected of having any relationship with a terrorist organization. Although Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and more than a dozen of her colleagues are bravely calling for a halt to a damaging bill, they face significant opposition.

The troubling provision, Section 1031, would let the military lock up both Americans and noncitizens in the 50 states. There would be no charges, no trial, no proof beyond a reasonable doubt. All that would be required would be suspicion."

I went online to further research the bill and I've attached the section of concern:

a) In General- The Armed Forces of the United States are authorized to detain covered persons captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) as unprivileged enemy belligerents pending disposition under the law of war.

(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person, including but not limited to persons for whom detention is required under section 1032, as follows:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

(c) Disposition Under Law of War- The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:

(1) Long-term detention under the law of war without trial until the end of hostilities against the nations, organizations, and persons subject to the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111-84)).

(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.

(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person's country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity

(d) Constitutional Limitation on Applicability to United States Persons- The authority to detain a person under this section does not extend to the detention of citizens or lawful resident aliens of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

Here's the lowdown on three subsections:

1. Subsection (b) makes it a point to leave out the specifics of what particular operations would be eligible.  In other words, anyone who is not a citizen or legal resident alien suspected of participating in a terrorist action could be detained without so much as a warrant.
2. Subsection (4) says a person could then be transferred to another foreign country or foreign entity to be detained as well.  Why would someone want to "transfer custody" of these individuals to a foreign country or entity?  In other places, they may not have the legal restraints against certain kinds of detention activities which could be useful in obtaining critical intelligence or they may have a more compelling reason for having them.
3. The only bit I like about this bill is contained in subsection (d) which says that it does not pertain to citizens and legal alien resident who are conducting suspected activities within our borders.  However, those protections do not extend outside of them.  The only negative side effect I see here is the application of indefinite detention within the US or outside of it for activities our government could see as being terrorist related.  Given the often "shaky" nature of the definition of terrorism and who you're asking, those activities could range from financing to operating a website which post terrorist related materials.

The bill's supporters will claim Guantanamo as a success.  They will allude to the lack of attacks on US soil since its inception ten years ago.  While its detractors will allude to its failures in gathering reliable information and only detaining very few real operators and masterminds.  They will point Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, the 9/11 plotter who while at Guantanamo Bay reportedly told lie after lie in an effort to mislead his interrogators.  

Like these Senators, I want to give our government more powers to act on against ongoing operations.  I sincerely believe some extreme measures would be necessary in certain circumstances such as operations which could result in a large loss of life or cause massive chaos and public unrest.  However, I'm troubled by the bill's lack of specific language or limitations.  Troops and operators on the ground hate such restraints and I can understand why.  The persistent question I ask is, "Where and when does it end?"

Captain, we are being hailed....

It isn't every day you get to look at the future.  One day in October, I did just that.  It all started with a Tweet during ASIS 2011 regarding behavioral analytics.  I was somewhat curious as to what it was and so I chimed in asking questions.  Normally, when you start asking questions about a product, you don't expect the company to "follow" you on Twitter.  Well, BRS Labs did just that.

Curious as to what behavioral analytics was and why BRS Labs thought it would revolutionize the security industry, I requested an interview.  Boy, am I glad I did because they didn't put me in contact with a PR minion.  Nope.  I spoke with the CEO and founder, Ray Davis, a pioneer in the tech sector.  According to the company's website, "In 2000, when the Dot.coms of the era struggled to deliver a cost-effective operating system for the Internet, Mr. Davis invented the only viable method to deliver computer applications online. With the technology built and patented, Simdesk Technologies delivered Office applications over the Internet at a staggering 20 million users per server, a benchmark that has never been matched."

Good afternoon, Mr. Davis.  It is an honor to speak with you.  I have some very general questions to ask about BRS and behavioral analytics.  Would you please tell us what behavioral analytics is?


Thanks, Scriven.  Let's first start off by explaining how this all came about.  Over the years, the security industry has developed and marketed what we term as "rules-based analytics".  What that entails is programming a CCTV system to alert an operator of a violation of a prescribed set of "rules" in its view.  It operates like a traditional "trip wire".  If the camera detects a pattern inconsistent with the users prescribed set of allowed patterns, it alerts the operator.  The industry went to this model because it realized the unrealistic expectation that an operator could stare at numerous screens for hours on end and reliably analyze various data streams.

There are problems with this, though.  Installation costs in regards to "man hours" are high.  It can take hours or days to setup each camera with each set of "rules".  Additionally, they are also high maintenance costs as well.  If the camera moves, then you have to change the rules all over again.  Perhaps the biggest drawback is in "real world" situations it can cause missed or false alarms.  In other words, you can have a false alarm generated by a normal nonthreatening event.  This is an issue because as the event occurs over and over again the amount of false alarms increase and eventually the operator could begin to ignore any alarm from that camera thinking any alarm could be a false one.

Obviously, the industry needed a better solution.  So at BRS Labs, we began to look for ways to make the system smarter and more adaptable to change.  The only way to make the system smarter was artificial intelligence.  (ATTENTION READERS:  This is where it gets COOL!!)  We created what is called an "artificial neural network" which could understand the "behavior" of an object and create the video into a computer language.  It generates "memories" over a period of time.  Rules-based systems are never as good as the first day.  With behavioral analytics, it is dramatically different because the system is always learning and adapting.

Me (a HUGE Star Trek fan attempting to control my drool):  Did you just say "artificial neural network"?  You just made this Trekkie's day.


As we developed this product, I often teased my children I was working to help create the "Big Brother" computer in the movies.

What are some of the pros and cons of doing this sort of tech in the security industry?


For starters, video analytics takes any where from 5 hours to 40 days to install per camera.  It takes behavioral analytics two weeks to learn.  After that, it never has to learn a new set of "rules" or patterns.  It literally studies the behavior of the objects in view and determines what is abnormal and what is not.  Traditional analytics generates approximately 1,500 false alarms whereas our system generates 1 alert on average per day.  After 30 to 60 days, it gets to less than one per day.  You can move a camera and not have to change to a different set of rules.  It will actively learn and adapt to its new "environment" or view.

What are some of the challenges you faced when developing this system?


First, you have to understand nothing like this had ever been attempted.  The challenges were massive.  Since no one had ever undertaken something like this, we had to start from "scratch".    Once we converted video into a programming language, the biggest challenge was developing a quality control for the product.  It had to be tested and the "kinks" worked out before its launch.  Because we are a software driven organization we took this approach.

Who have been some of its earliest adopters and what is the future of this technology?


One of our earliest customers was a major hotel in Bali who needed a system that could detect abnormal behavior.  This is significant because we were approached after the terrorist attacks there.  The customer was expecting to detect terrorists.  They got more than that.  Our system because it's constantly learning what is normal and what is not can detect any abnormal behavior.  In Bali, it was looking at an entrance and detected a security deficiency.  It saw several people bypassing a security checkpoint without being challenged or detected by the security personnel.

Given its ability to detect such abnormalities, we have been approached by Defense agencies to develop a way for our product to exist within unmanned aerial vehicles.

Me (having more difficulty controlling drool):  Did you just say "unmanned aerial vehicles"?


The system can look at video of regardless where its taken and "learn" if anything in it view has changed and alert operators on the ground.  The applications are boundless.

Me:  Mr. Davis, thanks so much for taking the time to talk with me.  This is perhaps the coolest thing I've heard affecting our industry possibly in the last 10 years.


Here's a video of the system in action:


http://www.brslabs.com/includes/examples/PublicAccessPTZPosition4.html

If their pirates didn't scare you, wait until you read this!

My favorite magazine in the whole-wide world, Security Management, has just posted a new article on some scary testimony given to Congress. As al-Qaeda becomes more decentralized, splinter groups, inspired by the success of squad-level attacks such as Mumbai, are seeking new members to bring into their organizations to increase their operational reach and membership size. According to the article,

"Experts and Somali community leaders yesterday told Congress that a suicide attack carried out by a Somali-American youth in Somalia could mean that a terror group based there is recruiting in the United States, raising the specter of homegrown terrorism.

Last October, Minneapolis resident Shirwa Ahmed carried out a suicide bomb attack in Somalia. He is believed to be the first American suicide bomber ever.

“We are concerned that if Somali-American youth can be motivated to engage in such activities overseas, Ahmed’s fellow travelers could return to the U.S. and engage in terrorist activities here,” Andrew Liepman, deputy director of intelligence for the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), told the Senate Homeland Security Committee yesterday.

In recent years a number of Somali-American youths and American converts to Islam have traveled to Somalia to fight with the al Shabaab militia. The Islamist insurgent group has used terror and guerilla tactics to fight the the country's weak Transitional Federal Government (TFG) and Ethiopian forces, according to intelligence officials.

Even scarier is finding out there are 150,000 to 200,000 Somalis that currently reside in the United States.

Professor Ken Menkhaus of Davidson College told lawmakers that Somalia’s 9 million people, “almost all of whom are Muslims, have endured 19 years of complete state collapse, periods of civil war, chronic insecurity, lawlessness and warlordism, massive displacement, the destruction of major cities, disruption of already fragile livelihoods, and recurring humanitarian crises, including the 1991-92 famine in which 250,000 people died.”

So why are these radical groups looking at Somalis? Because since their migration, they've failed to do what most immigrants try to do - assimilate. According to the article, ".....intelligence officials worry that Somali immigrants are more prone to radicalization and recruitment."

The question you have to ask is "Is this happening now or we talking about a vulnerability?"
Osman Ahmed, a Somali community leader in Minneapolis, alleged many of the young man that fled to Somalia were indoctrinated at the city's Abu-Bakar As-Saddique mosque.

Here's where I tell you to put down your gun and step back a minute and read the rest of the article.

Liepman said he wanted “to emphasize that we do not believe we are witnessing any form of community-wide radicalization among Somali-Americans.”

How do we solve this problem before it grows bigger? What's the government doing about it? We learned after 9/11 that "actionable intelligence" was useless if you never acted on it.

Philip Mudd, associate executive assistant director of the FBI’s National Security Branch, said the agency has crafted extensive outreach programs to Muslim communities and have also initiated a pilot program in Minneapolis to help FBI field offices and the Somali community deal with young men leaving to fight in their homeland.

The DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties has also organized roundtable discussions to engage Muslim community leaders, Liepman said.

Chinese Really Dig Cyberwarfare...You Think?

My ultra-favorite security magazine Security Management has written an articlle detailing the testimony of certain government officials and contractors before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commision. They informed the panel "that the Chinese government has embraced cyberwarfare and is directing its intrusions at U.S. government and critical infrastructure networks." According to Colonel Gary D. McAlum, director of operations for the Joint Task Force for Global Network Operations,

"The People's Republic of China has concentrated primarily on cyber-reconnaissance, particularly data mining, rather than cyberattacks."

What about all of the attacks originating from China we've been reading about? Don't fret. The Chinese have set a goal of 2050 to achieve "electronic dominance" through attacks on information infrastructure.

The DoD won't come out and say the world's second largest econoomy is vying for supremacy through hacking, it did note "a 31percent increase in malicious activity on its networks from 2006 to 2007." What attraction does cyberwarfare have fo such a country as China? It provide anonymity and an "asymetrical advantage", according to Dr. James Mulvenon, director of advanced studies and analysis for Defense Group, Inc..

Commission Co-chairman Peter T.R. Brookest cited attacks last spring on Estonia recalling that it wanted to evoke the collective defense clause of the NATO Charter and said "this is a question of escalation" moving from non-conventional to conventional, i.e. military, responses.

Mulvenon said there's no reason why the United States should restrict itself to trying to deter cyberattacks electronically. His next remark should sound familiar.

"We should ... begin with the premise that we have all the tools of ... national power, and in many cases it might not be to the U.S. advantage to respond to an electronic or cyberintrusion or cyberattack simply in that realm," he said. "We may, in fact, want to take advantage of escalation dominance that we have in other elements of national power, whether it’s military or economic."

CyberCommand anyone? What about this little tidbit from the article?

Michael R. Wessel said he fears that the perimeter security methods such as routers and firewalls used to protect against network intrusion are produced overseas, increasingly in China." Can we in fact have a secure perimeter," he wondered, "if in fact the Chinese are helping to build that perimeter?"

The nasty Cisco routers are keep creeping back into the blogosphere. For more information from Security Management, click here.

SWAT vs Airline Pilots

I've taken the cartoon down out of respect for the artist's copyright (no cease and desist letter yet - just want to be sure he's getting his due). In case you forgot, it's a political cartoon with a really interesting look at where the public's perception is of our current security climate. Click here to see the link.

Border Security via RoboCop

Below is a video of Guardium, an autonomous observation and target intercept system, developed by IAI/Lahav is based on the M-Guard unmanned security vehicle (USV) which can be operated from a command center, carry out routine patrols and quickly respond to evolving emergencies. According to the Defense Update, which is an online international defense magazine,

They can suppress suspicious elements close to the perimeter, and hold them back until manned security forces arrive, or use various forceful means to eliminate the threat, if applicable.

The M-Guard autonomous vehicle uses the TomCar chassis. The vehicle is equipped with an automated tactical positioning system and can operate autonomously on and off road, at speeds up to 80 km/h. The vehicle can carry a payload of up to 300 kg, including light armor shield to protect vital systems. The USV can carry a wide variety of sensors, including video and thermal cameras, with auto-target acquisition and capture, sensitive microphone, powerful loudspeakers and two way radio.

The vehicle can also be equipped with lethal or less than lethal weapons which can be directed and operated from the Main Control Center (MCC). A fleet of USV sentries is controlled from the MCC, from where they are launched on routine patrols, ambushes or operating in response to events received from an early warning or perimeter defense system.

The MCC is also provided with automatic tactical area definition, by terrain, doctrine and intelligence, which assist in preparation of the operational planning and programming for USVs. Each USV can also be manually controlled by remote control.

Virtual Fence Prototype...going...going..gone

According to Security Management, DHS is dismantling its prototype virtual fence. If you remember, the GAO told Congress the $20 million project was not completely functional or effective. According to the report, sensors gave false positives on wildlife and debris and the system was slow at catching some illegal crossers.

The virtual fence project is an $8 billion Secure Border Initiative, called SBInet, which aims to harden the nation's border by networking traditional barriers, vehicles, sensors and agents.

Although controversial, DHS is still proclaiming this was just a prototype and heralded its assistance in over 3,000 captures.

The New Equalizer?

As we approach the time of the year when we'll see more terrorist attacks, I wanted to post some videos of how the threat from VBIED is truly evolving. Just take a look and let me know what you think. Remember to practice OPSEC though.




This second video is posted by a guy on his mobile phone of the aftermath of the 7/7 attacks in the UK. I love citizen journalists. They can get in where big media outlets can't.



This last video is from a dump truck filled with explosives. You can see the shock wave and the blast expansion. Perfect illustration of what VBIED's could look and feel like.

FBI Mystery Man has been identified

The FBI has identified its mystery man as Scott Andrew Shain, born in 1955. The FBI says Shain was identified thanks to the help of the Social Security Administration. Who dimed him out? His parents apparently identified him by checking his picture on the FBI website.
For those of you who don't know or remember this the guy I talked about briefly last week when I mentioned "hide-and-go seek". While the FBI knows his name, aAgents still don't know the full extent of his criminal background, but they do know that he served in the U.S. Air Force and was from Boston.
Shain is now in federal custody on multiple counts of aggravated identity theft, such as stealing a dead man's identity. If you recall, this guy had 33 aliases and had a rap sheet for some of them. I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't just a paranoid individual who suffered a mental illness and the aliases were a combination of personalities and/or identities to hide. I say that because unlike most identity thieves, he never sold his new identity and never turned it to profit for himself. As I read more, the more I'm suspicious of why he needed 33 aliases.

Hiding In Plain Sight

Do you ever have one of those conversations where you come up with a pretty remarkable revelation? I had such a revelation yesterday with my wife. We were discussing how good we both were at "hide and go seek". I'm sure we all discovered sooner or later it was much better to hide somewhere close to our "seekers" and in a place they would normally overlook. In other words, you have to "hide in plain sight". That thought found me no matter where I went this weekend. Getting a new birth certificate, burning your fingerprints, or playing dead seems a bit much like a semi-decent Hollywood movie. But the lessons are the same. Disguises don't work. Nothing works if you can't find a way to hide your real identity while you try to live your life as normal.

I know most of my security aficionados are probably somewhere asking, "Where's he going with this? And why discuss this in a public forum?". My answer to them is we should talk about this in the open because the bad guys already know what I'm telling you. In order to win at the proverbial game of "hide and go seek" in the security world, we must first think like our "hiders" and become much "seekers". For example, if you operate a CCTV system and need to know how to spot shoplifters and other rogue parties, I would begin to look at the ways in which they often try to appear as normal as possible such as dress and appearance, behavior, and demeanor. If you get a guy in an aisle who's trying his best to appear normal when in fact he is far from it, then hopefully you'll recognize this is as a "critical indicator".

I've attached a video I thought was relevant to this topic. Most fugitives evade capture by learning how to camouflage themselves with multiple behavioral patterns which suit their new identities. In the security disciplines, we find this sort of subterfuge with spies and terrorists. In order to gain the advantage, we must learn what mistakes someone like this would make. Maybe, their behavior will lead us to believe something is not quite right. Good cops know what these mistakes look like. If you've been to any escape and evasion course, you know this is one of the first things they teach. If you don't have this skill, might I recommend a good game of "hide and go seek" with your favorite five year old. I know it sounds strange but the games we play as children always come back to us as adults.

Homeland Security Week

I found a website I think my readers might enjoy called Homeland Security Week. It is an Internet television network dedicated to homeland security. the topics they have are very thought-provoking and well presented. Click here for a video I just finished watching on airport security. It gives behind the scenes footage of GAO red-teams penetrating airports. Ouch!

Chertoff's Self -Evaluation

DHS Secretary Chertoff gave his evaluation of Homeland Security's progress over 5 years to Congress on March 5th, 2008. He summarized the Department's progress in 5 areas:

1. Strengthening border security through greater deployment of infrastructure, manpower, and technology
2. Enhancing interior enforcement at worksites, providing new tools to employers, and identifying and arresting fugitives, criminals, and illegal alien gang members
3. Making temporary worker programs more effective
4. Improving the current immigration system
5. Assimilating new immigrants into our civic culture and society.

On strengthening border security, he discussed the "installation of tactical infrastructure, including pedestrian and vehicle fencing; hiring and training new Border Patrol agents; and deploying a range of technology to the border, including cameras, sensors, unmanned aerial systems, and ground-based radar."

We made a commitment to build 670 miles of pedestrian and vehicle fencing on the Southern border by the end of this calendar year to prevent the entry of illegal immigrants, drugs, and vehicles. We are on pace to meet that commitment. We have built 302.4 miles of fence, including 167.7 miles of pedestrian fence and 134.7 miles of vehicle fence....For example, in February of this year, I traveled to Hidalgo County, Texas, to meet with county leaders who were planning to build a levee along the Rio Grande River for purposes of flood control. Although we still need help from Congress, we were able to negotiate an agreement to design our fence plans in coordination with their levee construction, allowing us to effectively satisfy two goals at the same time.

He also spoke about Border Patrol:

Over the past year, we have accelerated recruitment, hiring, and training of Border Patrol agents. 15,439 Border Patrol agents are currently on board and we will have over 18,000 agents by the end of this year – more than twice as many as when President Bush took office. This represents the largest expansion of the Border Patrol in its history, and we have grown the force without sacrificing the quality of training the Border Patrol Academy prides itself on delivering.

As an additional force multiplier, we continue to benefit from the support of the National Guard under Operation Jump Start. This has been an extremely fruitful partnership. We are grateful to the Department of Defense as well as governors across the United States for allowing us to leverage the National Guard in support of our border security mission.

On P-28 (which we covered in previous articles), Chertoff had the follwoing to say:

P-28 was designed to be a demonstration of critical technologies and system integration under the broader SBInet initiative. Specifically, its purpose was to demonstrate the feasibility of the SBInet technical approach developed by the contractor, Boeing, and to show that this type of technology could be deployed to help secure the Southwest border. After successful field testing, we formally accepted P-28 from Boeing on February 21st of this year. We have a system that is operational and has already assisted in identifying and apprehending more than 2,000 illegal aliens trying to cross the border since December....A P-28-like system would be neither cost-effective nor necessary everywhere on the border. Accordingly, we are building upon lessons learned to develop a new border-wide architecture that will incorporate upgraded software, mobile surveillance systems, unattended ground sensors, unmanned and manned aviation assets, and an improved communication system to enable better connectivity and system performance.

The department is looking at implementing more UAV's to include one for the entire northern border. He plans to increase the number of ground-based mobile surveillance systems from six to forty. And we will acquire 2,500 additional unattended ground sensors this fiscal year, with 1,500 of those planned for deployment on the northern border and 1,000 on the southwest border. These will supplement the more than 7,500 ground sensors currently in operation.

How much does this cost? Not much really considering what we spend money on already. Could we do better? I'll let you decide. Just remember the old addage: You get what you pay for.

To continue to support these kinds of technology investments, we have requested $775 million in funding as part of the President’s Fiscal Year 2009 budget.

How are things going? That depends on who you ask. Secretary Chertoff says

For Fiscal Year 2007, CBP reported a 20 percent decline in apprehensions across the Southern border, suggesting fewer illegal immigrants are attempting to enter our country. This trend has continued. During the first quarter of Fiscal Year 2008, Southwest border apprehensions were down 16 percent, and nationwide they were down 18 percent over the same period the previous year.

Port security received a lot of help in the form of biometrics and citizenship checks. Current travelers into the US were checked for proof of citizenship and against various criminal/terrorist databases. Chertoff testified:

In January of this year, we also ended the routine practice of accepting oral declarations of citizenship and identity at our land and sea ports of entry. People entering our country, including U.S. citizens, are now asked to present documentary evidence of their citizenship and identity. Not only will this help to reduce the number of false claims of U.S. citizenship, but it reduces the more than 8,000 different documents our CBP officers must currently assess. By requiring a narrower set of documents, we are able to improve security and efficiency at the ports of entry, and create an effective transition period for implementation of the land and sea portion of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative in June 2009.

You ever get those stories on the news where it seem like we never arrest illegal immigrants. I know in most places ICE won't come out for less than a large froup of illegals. According to Chertoff, ICE removed over 280, 000 illegal aliens. He lists some of their operations:

Universal Industrial Sales, Inc: On February 7, 2008, fifty-seven illegal aliens were arrested during a worksite enforcement operation conducted at Universal Industrial Sales Inc. (UIS) in Lindon, Utah. ICE forwarded roughly 30 cases to the Utah County Attorney's Office for possible criminal prosecution for offenses such as identity theft, forgery, and document fraud. On the federal side, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Utah unsealed two indictments charging the company and its human resource director with harboring illegal aliens and encouraging or inducing workers to stay in the United States illegally.

George’s Processing: In January of 2008, a federal jury convicted a former human resources employee at George’s Processing – a poultry plant in Butterfield, Missouri – of harboring an illegal alien and inducing an illegal alien to enter or reside in the United States. Under federal statutes, this individual is facing up to 10 years in federal prison without parole. Another former employee recently pleaded guilty to aggravated identity theft. A total of 136 illegal aliens were arrested as part of this investigation into identity theft, Social Security fraud, and immigration-related violations at the plant.

RCI Incorporated: In October of 2007, the former President of RCI Incorporated – a nationwide cleaning service – pled guilty to harboring illegal aliens and conspiring to defraud the United States. He will pay restitution to the United States in an amount expected to exceed $16 million. He also agreed to forfeit bank accounts, life insurance policies, and currency totaling more than $1.1 million for knowingly hiring illegal aliens.

Stucco Design Inc.: On March 7, 2007, the owner of an Indiana business that performed stucco-related services at construction sites in seven Midwest states pled guilty to violations related to the harboring of illegal aliens. He was sentenced to 18 months in prison and forfeited $1.4 million in ill-gotten gains.

Michael Bianco, Inc.: On March 6, 2007, in New Bedford, Massachusetts, a textile product company owner and three other managers were arrested and charged with conspiring to encourage or induce illegal aliens to reside in the United States and conspiring to hire illegal aliens. Another person was charged in a separate complaint with the knowing transfer of fraudulent identification documents. Approximately 360 illegal workers were arrested on administrative charges as part of the operation, representing more than half of the company's workforce.

Fines have in creased for employers who allow illegal immigrants to work for them by 26 percent. What tools did Chertoff give employers to help them weed out illegal immigrants? Well, he's given them E-Verify, an on-line system administered by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services that allows employers to check, in most cases within seconds, whether an employee is authorized to work in the United States. Some states have begun to require employers to enroll in E-Verify, most notably Arizona, where the system is adding about 1,000 new users per week.

Nationally, we are adding 1,800 new E-verify users per week. More than 54,000 employers are currently enrolled, compared to 24,463 at the end of Fiscal Year 2007, and nearly 2 million new hires have been queried this fiscal year. We are expanding outreach to Georgia and will be working in other states to increase participation. To support this work, we have requested $100 million in the Fiscal Year 2009 budget.

Have your calls to ICE gone unanswered? Not anymore. Chertoff has told Congress

ICE Agreements of Cooperation in Communities to Enhance Safety and Security (ICE ACCESS) program, which includes training under the 287(g) program, participation in Border Enforcement Security Task Forces (BEST) and Document and Benefit Fraud Task Forces (DBFTF)....Through the 287(g) program, ICE delegates enforcement powers to state and local agencies who serve as force multipliers in their communities. As of September 30, 2007, ICE has signed 38 memoranda of agreement (MOAs) with state and local law enforcement agencies to participate in the program. Last year, ICE trained 426 state and local officers. In the program’s last two years, it has identified more than 26,000 illegal aliens for potential deportation.

ICE also has continued to expand its BEST teams to work cooperatively with domestic and foreign law enforcement counterparts to dismantle criminal organizations operating near the border. In Fiscal Year 2007, ICE launched new BEST teams in El Paso and the Rio Grande Valley, and in San Diego, bringing the total number of teams to five. These task forces have been responsible for 519 criminal arrests and 1,145 administrative arrests of illegal aliens, the seizure of 52,518 pounds of marijuana and 2,066 pounds of cocaine, 178 vehicles, 12 improvised explosive devices, and more than $2.9 million in U.S. currency.

ICE DBFTFs are a strong law enforcement presence that combats fraud utilizing existing manpower and authorities. Through comprehensive criminal investigations, successful prosecutions, aggressive asset forfeiture and positive media, the DBFTFs detect, deter and dismantle organizations that facilitate fraud. The task forces promote the sharing of information, ensure the integrity of our laws, and uphold public safety. In April 2007, ICE formed six new task forces, bringing the total number of DBFTFs to 17. These task forces have been responsible for 804 criminal convictions and 1,917 seizures worth more than $8 million in value.

In Fiscal Year 2007, ICE Fugitive Operations Teams arrested 30,407 individuals, nearly double the number of arrests in Fiscal Year 2006. The teams, which quintupled in number from 15 to 75 between 2005 and 2007, identify, locate, arrest and remove aliens who have failed to depart the United States pursuant to a final order of removal, deportation, or exclusion; or who have failed to report to a Detention and Removal Officer after receiving notice to do so. In Fiscal Year 2008, Congress authorized an additional 29 teams. Fugitive Operations Teams have arrested more than 10,000 individuals this year.

ICE also expanded its Criminal Alien Program (CAP) in Fiscal Year 2007, initiating formal removal proceedings on 164,000 illegal aliens serving prison terms for crimes they committed in the United States. ICE has already initiated more than 55,000 formal removal proceedings against additional criminal aliens in the first quarter of Fiscal Year 2008. ICE is developing a comprehensive strategic plan to better address CAP.

In addition, in Fiscal Year 2007 ICE arrested 3,302 gang members and their associates as part of Operation Community Shield. This total includes 1,442 criminal arrests. For Fiscal Year 2008, ICE has arrested 723 gang members and their associates, which is a 34 percent increase over the same period last year.

All this enforcement has not been without consequences. Secretary Chertoff recognizes the impact their operations have had on certain "economic sectors" like agriculture. He stated, "Of the 1.2 million agricultural workers in the United States, an estimated 600,000 to 800,000 are here illegally. This is not an argument for lax enforcement. Rather, we need to make sure our temporary worker programs are effective. To this end, we have joined the Department of Labor in proposing changes to modernize the H-2A seasonal agricultural worker program to remove unnecessarily burdensome restrictions on participation by employers and foreigners, while protecting the rights of laborers."

Customs has created the Office of Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS) to enhance the integrity of the legal immigration system by identifying threats to national security and public safety, detecting and combating benefit fraud, and removing other vulnerabilities. During Fiscal Year 2007, FDNS submitted approximately 8,700 fraud or criminal alien referrals to ICE. While USCIS works through the backlog of cases, it remains committed to ensuring the preservation of high quality standards and anti-fraud counter-measures.

The nation's new naturalized citizenship test will be implemented some time this fall. It will emphasizes fundamental concepts of American democracy and the rights and responsibilities of citizenship.

Update on DHS Fencing Project from DHS

Well ladies and gents, it appears the Department of Homeland Security got a bit upset at the Wall Street Journal for its article I mentioned earlier. This is the DHS's reply:

The Wall Street Journal Inaccurately Asserts That First 28 Miles of the Virtual Fence Will Be the Last: "But The Problems That have plagued the high-tech barrier mean that the fence's first 28 miles will also likely be its last. The Department of Homeland Security now says it doesn't plan to replicate the Boeing Co. initiative anywhere else." ("US Curbs Big Plans for Border Tech Fence," The Wall Street Journal, February 23, 2008)

But, P28 was a proof of concept and a building block. It was never intended to be replicated across the entire border: “Let me remind everybody, of course, the border is not just a uniform place. It is a very complicated mix of different kinds of environments -- ranging from urban areas, where the distance between the border and a major transportation hub is measured in maybe less than a mile, to very remote and desolate rural areas or wilderness areas, where there's really, frankly, quite a bit more distance to be covered and therefore a lot more flexibility in how and when you interdict those crossing the border. That's why SBI Net, as a critical element, has been designed to be a flexible tool. It is not a cookie cutter approach. What applies in one stretch of the border is not going to be what applies in another stretch. What will be common, however, is that all of the stretches and all of the tools will be integrated and bound together.” (Transcript of Press Briefing by Secretary Chertoff on the Awarding of the SBInet Contract, 9/21/06)

It's an out-of-the box concept: "I would say it is a partial model for the future. I think that it was a concept. We wanted to make sure that, A, there's the basic concept functionality work and, B, the thought was to give the contractor an opportunity to present something that essentially thought out of the box, that wasn't just a follow-on to the traditional way of doing business." (Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Hearing on the Fiscal 2009 Budget for the Department of Homeland Security, 2/14/08)

And, we'll use more technologies at the border: "…by the end of this calendar year, we will be a 670 miles of barriers. Plus, we will have deployed 40 what we call mobile surveillance systems. That is ground-based radar. We will have our P-28 system, and begin to employ other camera-based and sensor-based systems…we will have substantially put either real or virtual fencing or barriers across the entire border." (Secretary Chertoff at a House Homeland Security Committee hearing on the Fiscal 2009 Budget for the Department of Homeland Security, 2/13/08)

The Wall Street Journal Claims That DHS Will Be Mothballing the Concept Behind the Virtual Fence: "The effective mothballing of the concept is a setback for the government's border-protection efforts, an embarrassment for politicians backing the idea of an electronic fence and a blow to Boeing, the project's designer." ("US Curbs Big Plans for Border Tech Fence," The Wall Street Journal, February 23, 2008)

But, that's wrong: Technology used for P28 will continue to be deployed along the border. In fact, the FY09 budget requests $775 million for SBI to continue the development and deployment of technology and tactical infrastructure on the border.

The Wall Street Journal Erroneously Reports That DHS Issued Boeing a New Contract to Fix the P28 Common Operating System: "In early December, the government said it was closing in on taking delivery. But that same month, the government gave Boeing another $64 million contract to fix the "common operating picture," which lets agents in vehicles see imagery from the towers' surveillance systems." ("US Curbs Big Plans for Border Tech Fence," The Wall Street Journal, February 23, 2008)

But, this contract was to develop the new Common Operational Picture and to enhance systems capabilities for future deployments as initially planned. ("DHS Moves Forward on Border Fencing and Technology Improvements", December 7, 2007)

All I have to say is, "Wow!" I understand this was supposed to be just a "proof-of-concept" to see if this would work across the board. And I don't think this was supposed to be our only lines of "defense". But I do think DHS has to step-up the deployment a notch. If it's working like Secretary Chertoff says, then let's get this thing rolling.

According to most immigration watchdogs and other concerned parties, every day wasted testing or delaying is another day wasted keeping bad guys out. If I live in a really bad neighborhood and all I have is a big mean guard dog and pistol to protect my home, this may work to some extent. It does not keep intruders from gaining in the first place and may not achieve the results I had intended as well as welcoming me up to substantial liabilities.

As I welcome the idea of a "virtual fence", I believe we have to have other means to secure our borders. In addition to new technologies, we need new tactics and methodologies when dealing with our current immigration debacle. That's the end of me being political but I hope you get the picture.

Old Scary news from Phoenix

I just finished watching some pretty scary footage of airport security at Phoenix International from July 2007. ABC15 News did an expose of security issues at SkyHarbor . The information they reported was quite scary. They found the City of Phoenix used a private security firm (more intel on that as I get it) who provided security during non-flying hours. Does anybody remember the days before TSA? TSA can be scary but at least they're an improvement from where we were at before. The City of Phoenix had certainly forgotten this.

The results were disastrous almost. The news crew found bags were not searched adequately or not at all. Employee badges were checked by a guard who may or not have been following standard security procedures. Many times entire suitcases and huge newspaper dollies made their way in. At one point the news crew found a guard sleeping who readily admitted sleeping on the job for periods at a time. You don't have to be genius to figure out that some got fired (as they should have been).

Any time a news crew (no offense) can expose the flaws within your security you've got problems. Phoenix has made some improvements, but I would bet their weakest link is their people. Watch the video here. It speaks volumes.

And you thought you had fencing issues...

Ladies and gents, it appears the United States' "virtual fence" has run into some snags, according to Security Management. I won't even go into how a CCTV system is as only good as its operators and software/hardware platforms. Nor will I mention the same goes for IDS as well. I won't even go into how with all CCTV and IDS systems your biggest weakness lies in the money you're willing to spend to fix your problem (porous borders). I will, however, talk a bit about the virtual fence and what it means for us as a citizenry and as professionals in this field.

The Washington Post broke the story with its report that despite the Bush Administration's approval of the fence this past Friday, the construction and implementation of the fence will have to be delayed by at least three years.

It appears there we were technical problems from a prototype system as well as a test system located along a stretch of the border in Arizona. According to the report, the problems included:

1. According to the Washington Post, "Boeing's use of inappropriate commercial software, designed for use by police dispatchers, to integrate data related to illicit border-crossings. Boeing has already been paid $20.6 million for the pilot project, and in December, the DHS gave the firm another $65 million to replace the software with military-style, battle management software."

2. According to the Washington Post, "Technology originally central to the project, such as mobile radar/sensor towers, has been dropped, the article reports, in favor of "[m]ore traditional ground-based radar and airborne surveillance drones," according to Business Week."

This past Tuesday, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff asserted in his blog, "I’ve seen this system work with my own eyes, and I’ve talked with the Border Patrol Agents who are using it. They assure me that it adds value. That’s what matters to me, and it’s a fact that cannot be denied."

While the virtual fence is better than what we currently have, I'm having trepidations about a system that has so many setback and issues which are core to its very success. For more information click here for the Post's article on the virtual fence or here for the full article from Security Management.