[Guest post by DRJ]

There are many opinions about proper cell phone etiquette.

For instance, schools usually require students to turn off their cell phones during class. In addition, most pharmacies and doctor’s offices in my town have posted signs that they will not talk to patients about health care matters while patients use their cell phones. It’s surprising how upset some people get when they see that sign and have to turn off their phones.

You can almost always tell when drivers are on the phone because of the way they drive or the way their heads are tilted as they hold the phone to their ear … or the presence of an earphone and the fact they are talking with no one else around.

When it comes to driving and airline travel, however, cell phone use is more than a question of etiquette. For instance, Federal Aviation Administration regulations bar cell phone use on planes because it could interfere with the flight’s navigation system, and airlines can be fined up to $25,000 for allowing the use of cell phones during flights.

Fifty-year-old Joe David Jones, president of Austin environmental technology company Skyonic Corp., has direct experience with this FAA rule. Jones was cited for disorderly conduct because he refused to disconnect his cell phone during a recent Southwest Airlines flight:

“Jones had forgotten to turn off his phone during takeoff and received the message about his father as the plane moved closer to Dallas, said Mark Clayton, Skyonic’s vice president of corporate relations.

“His father’s heart had stopped,” Clayton said. “The cardiac unit requested a call immediately to discuss decisions regarding his father’s immediate care. “So Mr. Jones attempted to call them back. And it took several tries.”

“He expresses regret for the inconvenience that it caused the airline and its passengers, but he felt compelled because of the life and death nature of it to make that call.”

According to a police report, Jones was on his cell phone for about 20 minutes at the end of the flight. The report said Jones, when asked to turn his phone off, responded with an obscenity.”

Jones’ father may have been in a dire medical situation but he was in the care of physicians, so it’s hard for me to understand why Jones was unable to communicate his problem to the flight crew and request assistance with emergency communications. My guess is he just didn’t care that his cell phone was a problem for someone else.

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ]

Today at the Orlando FL airport, airport security detained a passenger based on suspicious behavior and discovered bomb materials in his bags:

“A man behavior specialists spotted acting suspiciously was detained after components used to make pipe bombs were found in his luggage at Orlando International Airport.

Officials said agents noticed something about the man’s body language that prompted officers to move in near the Virgin Atlantic and Jamaica Airlines ticket counters.”

A witness described his behavior as “crazy” and “wacko,” and that he was rocking.

Video from Orlando’s Local6.com is here and there are several related reports at the links.

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ]

NASA released today its controversial National Aviation Operational Monitoring Service (NAOMS) report, a study of commercial airline safety that was previously deemed too disturbing to release because it would upset travelers and hurt airline profits. For several reasons, the Houston Chronicle was not impressed:

“NASA begrudgingly released some results today from an $11.3 million federal air safety study it previously withheld from the public over concerns it would upset travelers and hurt airline profits. It published the findings in a format that made it cumbersome for any thorough analysis by outsiders. Released on New Year’s Eve, the unprecedented research conducted over nearly four years relates to safety problems identified by some 29,000 pilots interviewed by telephone.

Earlier characterizations from people who have seen the results said they would show that events like near collisions and runway interference occur far more frequently than previously recognized. Such information could not be gleaned from the 16,208 pages posted by NASA on its Web site, however, because of information that was edited out. The data was based on interviews with about 8,000 pilots per year from 2001 until the end of 2004.

The NASA Web site shows formatted, printed reports that the space agency scrubbed to ensure none of the pilots who were interviewed and promised anonymity could potentially be identified. The data was posted as NASA officials began a telephone news conference, allowing no time to look at the material and ask them questions about it.

NASA did not provide documentation on how to use its data, nor did it provide keys to unlock the cryptic codes used in the dataset.

NASA Administrator Michael Griffin told reporters the agency typically releases information in Adobe System’s portable document format, known as pdf, which presents the information on formatted, printed pages. But there are dozens of reports available from NASA’s Web site about other subjects in Microsoft’s Excel data format, which would permit researchers to conduct a meaningful analysis more easily.

Griffin said NASA wanted to ensure that no one modified the survey results and circulated false data as NASA’s research product. He said even inexpensive optical character recognition software could convert the formatted reports. Such software can risk introducing errors in the data as it performs these conversions. “We’ve gone the extra mile with this data, and well beyond our original intentions,” Griffin said.

He dismissed suggestions that NASA chose to release the data late on New Year’s Eve, when the public is distracted by holidays and news organizations are thinly staffed. “We didn’t deliberately choose to release on the slowest news day of the year,” Griffin said.

NASA drew harsh criticism from Congress and news organizations for keeping the information secret. Rejecting an Associated Press request under the Freedom of Information Act, NASA explained that it did not want to undermine public confidence in the airlines or hurt airline fortunes. Griffin later overruled his staff and promised Congress that he would release at least some data by the end of the year.

NASA’s survey, the National Aviation Operations Monitoring System, was launched to see if a massive pilot survey would help pinpoint problems and prevent accidents. Survey planners said it was unique because it was a random survey, with an 80 percent response rate, that did not rely on pilots to take the initiative to report problems but rather reached out and interviewed them.

Griffin said NASA never intended to analyze the data it collected, but rather they planned on passing on its methodology to the aviation community. He said he had only looked at a few results, but that, “It’s hard for me… to see any data here that the traveling public would care about or ought to care about.” That would be up to others who chose to analyze the data, he said.

Pilots were asked how many times they encountered safety incidents in flight and on the ground, such as near-collisions, equipment failure, runway interference, trouble communicating with the tower and unruly passengers.”

Based on this article, it’s hard not to share the Chronicle’s disdain for NASA’s attitude. On what planet is it logical to believe the traveling public would not be interested in “near-collisions, equipment failure, runway interference, trouble communicating with the tower and unruly passengers”?

It seems others are concerned, too:

“Griffin outraged some NASA employees by saying the project had been poorly managed and its methodology not properly vetted. Survey experts who worked on it, however, said they used state-of-the-art industry techniques and carefully validated the results.

NASA’s handling of the matter prompted a congressional investigation and separate investigations by its inspector general and by a union representing NASA workers.

Jon Krosnick, a Stanford University professor who helped design the project for NASA, said the release of information was inadequate. “The data they released are intentionally designed to prevent people from analyzing the rates properly and are designed to entrap analysts into computing rates that are much higher than the survey really shows,” he said Monday.”

Here is the NASA NAOMS website that contains links to the study the Chronicle described as too “cumbersome for any thorough analysis by outsiders.”

This sounds like a job for the internet!

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ

Annie Jacobsen of The Aviation Nation has another example of passengers engaging in what may be dry runs or probes on US airplanes:

“This TSA Suspicious Incident #177, Unclassified but For Official Use Only (U//FOUO), “has many of the elements of pre-operational terrorist planning” according to TSA Office of Intelligence. It was leaked to me earlier today in my ongoing efforts to compile terrorist dry runs and probes on airplanes.

A FFDO (Federal Flight Deck Officer — i.e. armed pilot) flying in non-mission status on October 24, 2007, on a flight from Washington D.C. to Milwaukee, identified himself to flight crew in advance of take-off. When flight crew witnessed suspicious behavior by four passengers, they reported the information to the FFDO. The following unfolded:

(U//FOUO) Suspicious Activity Onboard Flight to Milwaukee

(U//FOUO) On 24 October 2007, crewmembers aboard a Reagan-Washington National to Milwaukee General Mitchell International Airport flight reported to a Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) flying in non-mission status that they noticed suspicious behavior by four passengers.

One of the subjects entered and exited the rear aircraft lavatory three times and failed to comply with crewmembers’ verbal instructions. The FFDO seated himself near this subject to observe his behavior. Shortly afterward, two more of the subjects moved into the aisles and entered both lavatories. After one of the subjects vacated the rear left lavatory, the FFDO searched it, noting that the mirror above the sink was not properly latched.

He exited the lavatory and a fourth subject was waiting second in line with a passenger in front of him. The FFDO offered the fourth subject access to the right lavatory, but the subject declined, claiming the right lavatory was dirty.The FFDO noted the right lavatory was clean, and the subject reluctantly entered the right lavatory and remained there for an extended period of time. (TSA/SD-10-3849-07)

(U//FOUO) TSA Office of Intelligence Comment: Although there is no information that the aircraft was being specifically targeted for a future terrorist attack, the actions of the four passengers are highly suspicious. FFDO confirmation of possible tampering of the lavatory mirror in one of the lavatories could be indicative of an attempt to locate concealment areas for smuggling criminal contraband or terrorist materials. In this case, it appears the left lavatory was the sole area of interest for the passengers. One subject’s excuse that the right lavatory was dirty when it was confirmed to be clean shows the four passengers had a specific, operational objective. Although unconfirmed at this time, this incident has many of the elements of pre-operational terrorist planning.

Source: TSA Suspicious Incidents Report #177

Before August 2006, the TSA refused to admit publicly that terrorists took dry runs and probes on U.S. aircraft (after the London Planes Plot, the White House stated, “we know they do dry runs” and TSA quietly agreed).”

Annie concludes her article with this very good question: “Unless there have been 177 such incidents in the past fifteen months, one wonders when TSA Suspicious Incident Reports #1-#176 occurred — and what information they contain?”

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ]

Here’s another example of the breakdown between air security, national security, and illegal immigration:

“Nearly two dozen illegal immigrants were arrested Wednesday, accused of using fake security badges to work in critical areas of O’Hare International Airport, including the tarmac, authorities said.

The 23 illegal workers were employed by Ideal Staffing Solutions Inc., whose corporate secretary and office manager also were arrested after an eight-month investigation that involved federal, state and Chicago authorities. The company contracted work for carriers including United Airlines, KLM and Qantas, said Elissa A. Brown, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent.

“The investigation identifies a vulnerability that could compromise national security, while bringing criminal charges against individuals who built an illegal work force into their business practice,” Brown said.”

Over 100 arrest warrants were issued in the case, and there were arrests of 21 workers from Mexico and two from Guatemala. The report states they can be charged under state criminal laws and be deported. The investigation also showed some workers were using previously deactivated badges:

“The affidavits allege that Ideal Staffing told workers they needed to have identification, but that the documents did not have to be legitimate, and also accused the company of supplying some workers with deactivated badges issued in other names.

Brown, [U.S. Attorney Pat] Fitzgerald and other officials declined to answer questions about how workers could use deactivated badges to enter secure areas of the airport, saying that the investigation continued and that not all details could be revealed.”

I’m glad officials conducted these raids and are working to enforce security, but it’s troublesome that contractors can get this out-of-control. Instead of calling it the Transportation Security Administration, it sounds more like the Transportation No-Security Administration.

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ]

Following up on these Oakland I and Oakland II posts, the Oakland International Airport has apologized:

“Oakland International Airport officials apologized for prohibiting a planeload of U.S. troops, just back from Iraq, from entering the passenger terminal during a layover Thursday, prompting conservative pundits and bloggers to hold up the incident as an example of the Left Coast dishonoring soldiers.

“We apologize, I apologize to any members of the military that were on this flight and may have experienced some discomfort or perception of disrespect,” said Omar Benjamin, executive director of the Port of Oakland, which operates the airport.”

In addition, here’s some perspective from the charter airline:

(more…)

[Guest post by DRJ]

The Oakland International Airport (and the charter airline that handled this flight) needs to update its press release in light of this TSA Statement:

“TSA Statement on Incident Involving U.S. Troops at Oakland International Airport

On Thursday, September 27, 2007 North American Airlines flight #1777 carrying soldiers and marines landed at Oakland International Airport from New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) where passengers were screened by U.S. Customs upon landing from overseas.

At no time were service men and women prohibited from entering the sterile area of Oakland International Airport by TSA personnel or regulations. Airport officials, the airline and ground handling company coordinated the arrival and all services associated with this flight, including refueling, refreshing supplies on the aircraft, maintenance checks and all passenger services.

TSA personnel across the country have worked closely with airports to ensure the utmost care when handling flights involving our troops and will continue to facilitate their movement to the greatest extent possible while ensuring a high level of security for all travelers.”

H/T TSA.

– DRJ

UPDATES below:

(more…)

[Guest post by DRJ]

Via the Instapundit, Michael Ledeen recounts an email from a Marine Chaplain returning from Iraq:

“As we came in for the final approach to Oakland a Lieutenant who served in Afghanistan with the same unit in 2006 mentioned how when they landed in Oakland they were not allowed in the terminal. He said, “they made us get out by the FED EX building and we had to sit out there for 3 hours”. He also indicated he was almost arrested by the TSA for getting belligerent about them not letting the Marines into the terminal.

Well the same thing happened again. This time we did not park by the FED EX building, instead we were offloaded near the grass that separates the active runway from the taxi ramp, about 400 yards from the terminal. When we inquired why they wouldn’t allow us in the airport they gave us some lame excuse that we hadn’t been screened by TSA. While true, the screening which we did have was much more thorough than any TSA search and was done by US Customs. Additionally, JFK didn’t seem to have a problem with our entering their terminal, nor did security in Germany.

It felt like being spit on. Every Marine and soldier felt the message loud and clear, “YOU ARE NOT WELCOME IN OAKLAND!”

This is unacceptable.

– DRJ

UPDATE 1: DKos thinks it’s a hoax and notes that CNN is investigating. Stay tuned.

UPDATE 2: Michelle Malkin confirms the story is true. Note especially the Oakland Airport PR department’s response.

MM also reprinted Mr. Chips’ comment #17 from this thread. Good comment, Mr. C., and thank you for your service to our country.

Annie Jacobsen has received some confirmation of that incident I mentioned here this morning. A TSA spokesman tells her:

We ID’d twelve passengers at the checkpoint with suspicious items. Yes, there was a positive hit, I can’t get into the level of detail of what or what wasn’t a match. We immediately closed two checkpoint lanes and called in a TSA Bomb Appraisal Officer who determined, ‘yes, these are suspicious.’ We called in three TSA canine teams to come to the check point and the FBI was called as well… The FBI took over from there. I can’t comment on the FBI.

Ms. Jacobsen says that ICE is checking on the part that most concerned me (well, together with the positive SEMTEX tests, that is): the apparently fraudulent documents held by one or more of the male passengers. Keep watching Annie’s site for more on that.

Meanwhile, it’s unclear whether I will get any information from Mr. Hagmann. He replied to my e-mail, but seemed a little put out by my update in which I quoted an opinion of his web site as alarmist. I told Mr. Hagmann that I understood his reaction, but that I was unfamiliar with his organization, so when I ran across that caveat about his organization I thought I owed it to my readers to pass it along. For what it’s worth, one of my air marshal contacts says that he generally finds Mr. Hagmann’s information reliable. I owe it to readers (and to Mr. Hagmann) to pass that along too.

Still, I emphasized that I am interested primarily in the facts, as we all should be. We’ll see if he replies to me further. I hope he does.

Douglas J. Hagmann, the director of an organization called the Northeast Intelligence Network, has a potentially disturbing report about a Delta Airlines flight that the feds are saying was benign — but that Mr. Hagmann says appears to have had some characteristics of a terror plot. The participants, some of whom allegedly had fraudulent documentation, were released.

Keep in mind that the following is based on anonymous reports, so it’s tough to know what to make of it at this point. Still, it seems worth looking into. Here’s Mr. Hagmann:

The passengers aboard Delta Airlines Flight 1824 flying out of Orlando International Airport last Thursday at 7:15 a.m. heard the following statement over the intercom as they were preparing to taxi onto the runway on their way to Atlanta, Georgia:

Ladies and gentlemen, we have been informed that there is “a credible security risk with this aircraft” and we are returning to the terminal.

Delta Flight 1824 was scheduled to take off at 7:15 a.m. on September 6, 2007, but did not take off until 10:19 – three hours and 5 minutes behind schedule, landing in Atlanta without incident at 11:52 a.m. . . .

If you rely on official government statements and the major media, the entire incident involving Flight 1824 was “benign” and was never a security risk. It involved 12 people from two families, all of Middle Eastern origin, reportedly carrying suspicious items in their luggage. Again, if you rely on official government statements and the major media, the “suspicious items” inside of checks luggage turned out to be “a bottle that had been covered with tape to prevent leaking.”

“It was all benign,” said Dave Couvertier, the FBI agent from the Tampa, Florida Orlando FBI office. The flight ultimately took off about 10:20 a.m. without the two families, who were still undergoing FBI questioning at that time. They were ultimately released, stated FBI spokesman Couvertier.

But Hagmann claims to have developed sources, including a “trusted federal source” and a passenger from the flight, who provide additional details which, depending on your point of view, are potentially disturbing . . . or just weird, coincidental, and benign:

During a routine test of the baggage, Transportation Security Administration authorities ran the luggage through x-ray detection and then conducted an explosive trace detection of the bags belonging to the 9 Middle Eastern passengers. The x-ray of the bags found questionable items inside the luggage, and the explosive trace detection tests resulted in a “positive hit” for explosives – specifically, SEMTEX, an explosive commonly used by Islamic terrorists. To be certain, however, the luggage was test no less than 4 times by four different machines and operators. Each time, a “positive hit” for explosives was registered. “The presence of explosive traces was ‘no mistake,’” stated one federal source talking to this agency on condition of anonymity.

Due to the multiple independent “hits” for traces of SEMTEX, TSA authorities emptied the luggage in a secured area, and were astonished by what they found. Authorities found 3 jars of Vaseline duct taped together to make one large cylinder. An inspection of this Vaseline-filled cylinder determined that someone had previously removed the Vaseline and replaced it back into the containers, something that was proven by air pockets left within the containers. Based on a thorough inspection of all the luggage belonging to these Middle Eastern passengers, authorities also found multiple strands of electrical wire with the ends stripped of the insulation, thus exposing the copper wire, small eyeglass screw drivers, clocks, cocoa butter, 2 tubs of butter, batteries of various sizes and types, a computer laptop, and multiple bottles of hydrogen peroxide – 144 ounces in all.

Even more disconcerting, TSA and security officials observed that two of the Middle Eastern men intended for the flight had smeared Vaseline on their arms and neck areas – a common tactic among hand-to-hand fighters who want the advantage in the event someone tries to grab them or put them in a headlock. Covered by the greasy agent, they are better able to extricate themselves during close-quarters, hand-to-hand fighting.

Merely weird, or truly alarming? I don’t know — but there’s one detail that, if true, seems clearly not benign:

A closer inspection of the identification possessed by the Middle Eastern passengers determined that three-(3) of the men possessed false or fraudulent credentials. In fact, one of the Middle Eastern men possessed 2 passports with his picture on both, but the passport information was different on each one.

I’m going to e-mail Mr. Hagmann and some of my own federal sources to see what they can tell me about this.

UPDATE: Keep in mind that some sober commentators have called the Northeast Intelligence Network the “world’s most alarmist website.” Caveat lector.

UPDATE x2: More here, including an update from Annie Jacobsen, and an endorsement of Mr. Hagmann from one of my air marshal sources.

Via Malkin comes this tale of a man monkeying around with our airport security system:

CBS 2 HD has learned a monkey was apparently sneaked into the United States with a passenger from Peru and let loose during a Spirit Airlines flight that landed at LaGuardia Airport Tuesday afternoon.

Officials say the monkey, a pygmy marmoset, apparently belonged to a male passenger from Lima, Peru. He bought the animal off the streets in Lima.

The man then smuggled the animal, which measures only about a foot tall, through security in Peru onto a flight to Fort Lauderdale, Fla. He then got past security again when he took a connecting flight from there to New York City, and he even kept the monkey out in the open mid-flight.

Passengers of that flight say they noticed a small monkey clinging to the man’s ponytail during the flight and reported it to authorities.

Goofy as it sounds, there apparently is some health threat:

Now there are two major concerns as a result: how the man got the monkey past security, and any diseases that could be passed on from the marmoset to humans.

“We don’t know if it’s harboring any bacteria or diseases, so the CDC is rightly concerned,” an Animal Control official told CBS 2 HD.

Not to mention the very real possibility of rampant poo-flinging, which is never too pleasant.

TSA officials shrugged their shoulders:

Transportation Security Administration officials say the animal is so small it could have easily passed through security without detection, but they are investigating.

Then they returned their attention to seizing half-filled bottles of moisturizing liquid.

Yes, I can see it’s less then three ounces. You have to go by what it says on the bottle, ma’am. Federal regulations. Yes, sir, the monkey’s fine.

P.S. From the Unexamined Assumptions File: is a barrel of monkeys really fun?

My mother is visiting for a few days and I picked her up at the airport last night. As we drove home, she told me a little story about her dealings with the TSA at the D/FW airport.

First they took her can of frosting and made her throw it away. (Don’t ask me why she was bringing frosting.)

Next they wanted to seize a fairly expensive bottle of moisturizing liquid. “Liquids must be three ounces or less,” the guy told her.

“But this is a six-ounce bottle and it’s less than half full,” she said.

“We have to go by what it says on the bottle,” he said.

My mom also had with her one of those single-size two-ounce bottles of mouthwash. “Can I just pour out the mouthwash and put the moisturizing liquid in this two-ounce bottle?” she asked.

“It doesn’t work that way,” she was told.

So she threw the bottle of moisturizing liquid away.

But my mom is a frugal lady. My sisters and I spent our childhood in the car, being carted from one store to the next while my mom looked for the best bargains.

So she asked another TSA guy: “My luggage to be checked is right over there. Could I put the moisturizing liquid in it?” He said it was okay. So she dug the bottle of mouthwash out of the trash, went out of security — and went to a bathroom, where she performed the prohibited act of transferring the moisturizing liquid into the mouthwash bottle. Most of it fit into the two-ounce bottle.

She then went back through security. The guy who had told her that she wasn’t allowed to transfer the liquids was still there. A different person looked at her carry-on bag with the liquids, and asked Mr. Don’t Transfer the Liquids if her carry-on bag was OK. “Yeah, I already checked it,” he said, without giving it a second look.

She told me this story as we raced along the 110 Freeway. She added: “But they let me bring some cheese and grapes on board.” I munched on a few of the grapes as she said: “I wonder how they knew these grapes weren’t all little bombs.”

I laughed and munched on a few more grapes.

There was a lull in the conversation as I drove further down the freeway.

Then my mom said: “But they didn’t give me any trouble over my hypodermic needle . . .”