Department of Homeland Security's New Two-Tier System: My Take

The Department of Homeland Security is dropping the old - and much-maligned - five-step color system for alerting folks in America on how wary we should be.

The new system includes a Twitter account - which I'm now following. They haven't tweeted anything yet: which is good news, in a way.

My guess is that the new system will be praised by some, reviled by others - and prove to be imperfect.

Before anything else, here are two links. I put these, and more, under "Background," at the end of this post:

• "@NTASAlerts"
  on Twitter
• "Department of Homeland Security
  On Facebook
• "National Terrorism Advisory System"
  dhs.gov (last reviewed / modified on January 28, 2011)

Following the KISS Rule

Back when I was doing marketing for a small publishing house, I ran into the KISS rule. Or, for the more polite and/or sensitive, the KIS rule. Here's the full version:

Keep
It
Simple,
Stupid!

If you follow this blog (thank you!), you know that I don't always follow that excellent advice.

Looks like the Department of Homeland Security decided to embrace KISS, though. In principle, anyway.

National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS): Two Tiers; No Colors; Online

Like I said, I'd be very surprised if the new system was perfect.

I'm also pretty sure that some folks will hate it, some will love it - or say they do - and most of us will try to use it. At least, I hope that most Americans will pay attention. I'm on Twitter (where I'm Aluwir ), and started following NTASAlerts earlier this afternoon. So far, "@NTASAlerts hasn't tweeted yet." Which is fine by me, considering possible implications of an alert.

About those alert levels:

Elevated
• A credible threat against the U.S.
• Probably not specifying when or where an attack might happen
• Giving Information which officials think should be shared
  • To prevent the attack
• Expiration date
  • No more than 30 days from first issue
  • May be extended
• Imminent
  • Warning about a terrorist threat or attack against the U.S. which is
    • Credible
    • Specific
    • Impending
  • Expiration date
    • No more than seven days from first issue
    • May be extended
  (Information from Associated Press, via FoxNews.com)
  

I think this two-tier system makes sense, at least on paper. Having expiration dates will help, I think, avoid the 'boy who cried wolf' situation.

Still, this system is designed and administered by human beings - and we've got a knack for making mistakes.

And, it'll be used by human beings.

I'm pretty sure that some of the alerts will be massively misunderstood. And some may be - imprudently written.

Like I said, we're all human beings.

With the new system, I think there will be less room for foul-ups. And, happily, folks who are interested can go directly to Twitter or Facebook (see "Background," below) and see what the DHS actually said. Not what a reporter says an expert thinks about what the DHS said.

A few excerpts, and I'm done:

"The U.S. government's new system to replace the five color-coded terror alerts will have two levels of warnings - elevated and imminent - that will be relayed to the public only under certain circumstances for limited periods of time, sometimes using Facebook and Twitter, according to a draft Homeland Security Department plan obtained by The Associated Press.

"Some terror warnings could be withheld from the public entirely if announcing a threat would risk exposing an intelligence operation or an ongoing investigation, according to the government's confidential plan.

"Like a gallon of milk, the new terror warnings will each come with a stamped expiration date...."

"...According to the draft plan, an 'elevated' alert would warn of a credible threat against the U.S. It would not likely specify timing or targets, but it could reveal terrorist trends that intelligence officials believe should be shared in order to prevent an attack. That alert would expire after no more than 30 days but could be extended.

"An 'imminent' alert would warn about a credible, specific and impending terrorist threat or an on-going attack against the U.S. That alert would expire after no more than seven days but could be extended...."
(Associated Press, via FoxNews)

---

"...The new system, called the National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS), reflects the reality that we must always be on alert and ready. Under the new, two-tiered system, DHS will coordinate with other federal entities to issue formal, detailed alerts regarding information about a specific or credible terrorist threat. These alerts will include a clear statement that there is an 'imminent threat' or 'elevated threat.' The alerts also will provide a concise summary of the potential threat, information about actions being taken to ensure public safety, and recommended steps that individuals and communities can take....

"...The alerts will be more focused to a two-tier system - 'imminent' or 'elevated threat.' At a minimum, alerts will include a statement of whether there is an imminent or elevated threat...."
("Sharing the Responsibility for Our Collective Security," Secretary Janet Napolitano, The Blog @ Homeland Security (January 27, 2011)

Somewhat-related posts:

• "Information Technology, People, and a Changing World"
  (February 23, 2011)
• " 'The System Worked' - Napolitano and an Unscripted Interview"
  (December 28, 2009)
• "Test: Bombs Built in Government Buildings"
  (July 8, 2009)
• "Right-Wing Extremists Really Are Terrorists, Sometimes"
  (June 6, 2009)
• "Department of Homeland Security No Longer Fears American Veterans?"
  (May 14, 2009)

In the news:

• "US to use Facebook, Twitter to issue terror alerts"
  Associated Press, via Foxnews.com (April 7, 2011)
• "U.S. to issue terror alerts on Facebook, Twitter"
  Computerworld (April 7, 2011)
• "U.S. to replace color-coded terror threat alerts"
  Jeremy Pelofsky, Edited by John O'Callaghan, Edition: U.S., Reuters (January 26, 2011)
• "Color-coded threat system to be replaced in April"
  CNN (January 26, 2011)
• "Homeland Security Department Considers Ending Color-Coded Terror Alerts"
  Associated Press, via FoxNews.com (November 24, 2010)

Background:

• @NTASAlerts
  on Twitter
• "Department of Homeland Security
  On Facebook
• Department of Homeland Security
  • "National Terrorism Advisory System"
    (last reviewed / modified on January 28, 2011)
  • "Secretary Napolitano Announces New National Terrorism Advisory System to More Effectively Communicate Information about Terrorist Threats to the American Public"
    Press release (January 27, 2011)
  • "Prohibited Items"
    About airline carry-on luggage:
    • Among other things, no:
      • Baseball Bats
      • Cattle Prods
      • Brass Knuckles
      • Hand Grenades
    • Common sense, pretty much
      • In my opinion
    • There's such thing as a foolproof system, though
      • In my opinion
      • As demonstrated in the nipple ring incident (March 27, 2008)
  • "Citizen Guidance on the Homeland Security Advisory System" (.pdf)
    
    • Designed with the old color-coded system in mind
    • Still useful
      • As a set of guidelines
      • In my opinion
  • "Homeland Security Presidential Directive 3: Homeland Security Advisory System"
    HSPD 3 Abstract and Full Text (March 11, 2002)

Transparency: For the Right People, Apparently

This blog isn't political. Not in the sense that I consistently write that a Ms. Smith is the most intelligent woman in the universe, who by rights should have won every election she ran in - or that a Mr. Jones is a doo-doo-head who is unfit to serve as a human being. (more at June 21, 2009, and elsewhere)

This blog is concerned with the war on terror - whether that term is supposed to exist or not. (March 30, 2010) What America's government decides to do - or not do - about the real threat of people who want to kill us is determined, for the time being, by politicians.

As a result, I have to look at political matters from time to time.

Like this:

"Contrary to the Obama administration's promised commitment to open government, the Department of Homeland Security, in a highly irregular move, filtered hundreds of public records requests through political appointees, allowing them to examine what was being requested and delay releasing sensitive material, according to internal e-mails obtained by the Associated Press.

"The political appointees were allowed to vet records requests that were deemed politically sensitive and require career employees to provide them with information about who requested records — for example, where the requester lived and worked, whether the requester was a private citizen or journalist and, in the case of congressional representatives, whether they were Republican or Democrat.

"The DHS issued a directive to employees in July 2009 requiring a wide range of public records requests to pass through political appointees for vetting. These included any requests dealing with a 'controversial or sensitive subject' or pertaining to meetings involving prominent business leaders and elected officials. Requests from lawmakers, journalists, and activist and watchdog groups were also placed under this scrutiny.

"The reviewers included Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano's top staff members, including her deputy chief of staff, senior department lawyer and deputy director of scheduling...."
(Threat Level, Wired)

I think it's a good idea to be careful about what information is released to which people. The old adage, 'loose lips sink ships,' may sound corny - but there's good sense in it. (May 11, 2010)

However, I think that deciding what information is "sensitive" should be in the hands of someone whose job security isn't dependent on keeping a politico happy.

I was impressed, positively, when candidate Barack Obama said that he would promote 'transparency' in government. It's a fundamentally sound idea.

The problem is, it has to be turned from a sound idea into an established practice.

From the Office of Deniability: No Information Was Withheld

Like that one-time favorite of Hollywood, the letter of pardon from the Governor, some information becomes less and less useful, the longer it's withheld.

"...Although the vetting did not prevent information that should have been released from getting released, the AP noted, it did cause numerous delays - sometimes lasting weeks - in releasing records to Congress, watchdog groups and reporters. The delays led some department officials to worry about potential lawsuits, according to one internal e-mail the AP obtained.

" 'All this article points out is that senior leadership had visibility into FOIA releases to enable the department to be as responsive as possible to requests from the press and other stakeholders, especially as it pertained to documents generated during the previous administration, DHS spokeswoman Amy Kudwa told Threat Level in an e-mail statement. She noted that the department, under the Obama administration, had reduced a FOIA backlog inherited from the Bush administration from 74,879 requests at the end of fiscal year 2008 to just 12,406 requests as of this January and had also reduced the typical processing time for requests.

"The e-mails obtained by the AP, however, reveal that political appointees were less interested in vetting record requests for these reasons than for determining — based on the kinds of requests coming in - what areas of the government might be under scrutiny. Knowing what records journalists were requesting might help the administration prepare a response in anticipation of a news story. For example, the e-mails show concern about making sure the department didn't release information about Obama's father without first coordinating with the White House...."
(Threat Level, Wired)

I was impressed that the DHS spokesperson mentioned the size of the backlog at one point during the previous administration, compared to the size under Obama's enlightened oversight - without saying how the size of the backlog compared to the number of requests. I've talked about using, and misusing, facts before.

Can't We Just Trust the Government?

There are systems of government in which 'the masses' don't have to know what's going on. Instructions come from the Emperor, or whatever the top level is called: and responsibility for folks at my level ends when we receive our instructions, and obey.

A system like that can work, but it's not the way America gets things done.

Our system requires an informed electorate. That's informed, not fed whatever our betters think we should know.

As the upcoming midterm elections will probably demonstrate once again, it's messy: but the system works.

And I rather like it.

Related posts:

• "President Obama, an Op-Ed Piece, and a Possible Historical Parallel"
  (June 22, 2010)
• "Yes, it Could be Worse: Venezuela, Interpol, and TV Station Owner"
  (June 18, 2010)
• " 'Loose Lips Sink Ships,' Times Square Bomber, and News Leaks"
  (May 11, 2010)
• "Obama Limits Nuclear Weapons: That's Nice"
  (April 6, 2010)
• "If We Don't Discuss It, It Doesn't Exist?"
  (January 5, 2010)
• "White House Reporting, John Ensign, Freedom and a Reality Check"
  (October 19, 2009)

In the news:

• "Political Appointees Vetted DHS Public Records Requests: Report"
  Threat Level, Wired (July 22, 2010)

"The System Worked" - Napolitano and an Unscripted Interview

As I've written fairly often, this isn't a political blog. I'm not dedicated to the premise that one politico, or one party, is always right; and that everybody else is always wrong.

That's not the same as having no opinions, though.

I think that Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano goofed recently. Big time. It's the sort of thing that can happen to anybody - particularly when trying to think on your feet.

"And one thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked."

The New York Times was kind enough to point out Ms. Napolitano's take on what she said yesterday, on CNN. Yesterday, it sounded like she thought that the system handled the little incident on Northwest Flight 253 over the Christmas weekend very well.

Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano now says that her remark - "And one thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked." - was taken out of context.

Fair enough. That sentence comes from a much longer interview on CNN's "State of the Union With John King." Candy Crowley was the host for this interview. As of this afternoon (December 28, 2009), CNN has a transcript of the interview online. Before making up your own mind, I suggest reading the whole transcript. Here's an excerpt:

"...Joining us now from San Francisco is homeland security secretary, Janet Napolitano.

"(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

"CROWLEY: Secretary Napolitano, thank you so much for joining us. If I am about to get on a plane today in the U.S. or headed toward the U.S., I think my big question is, is this part of a larger plot, or do you think this is a lone wolf?

"NAPOLITANO: Well, right now, we have no indication that it's part of anything larger, but obviously the investigation continues. And we have instituted more screening and what we call mitigation measures at airports. So I would advise you during this heavy holiday season just to arrive a bit early, and to know that we are going to be doing different things at different airports. So don't expect to do the same thing at one airport when you transfer through to another airport.

"But the traveling public -- this is my message for you, Candy. The traveling public is very, very safe in this air environment. And while we continue to investigate the source of this incident, I think the traveling public should be confident in what we are doing now.

"CROWLEY: So, just to finish up on the question-- I do want to talk to you about security measures -- but do you think -- has there been any evidence of the Al Qaida ties that this suspect has been claiming?

"NAPOLITANO: Right now, that is part of the criminal justice investigation that is ongoing, and I think it would be inappropriate to speculate as to whether or not he has such ties.

"What we are focused on is making sure that the air environment remains safe, that people are confident when they travel. And one thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked. Everybody played an important role here. The passengers and crew of the flight took appropriate action. Within literally an hour to 90 minutes of the incident occurring, all 128 flights in the air had been notified to take some special measures in light of what had occurred on the Northwest Airlines flight. We instituted new measures on the ground and at screening areas, both here in the United States and in Europe, where this flight originated.

"So the whole process of making sure that we respond properly, correctly and effectively went very smoothly...."
(CNN) [emphasis mine]

Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano was rather clearly referring to actions of Flight 253's passengers and crew when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's wearable bomb failed to detonate properly, when she said: "And one thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked." That, and the way that the official system took no more than an hour and a half to let 128 other flights know that someone had tried to bring down an airliner.

For a large bureaucracy, that's doing pretty well.

As I wrote yesterday, it would have been nice if Mr. Abdulmutallab hadn't been allowed on the Northewest Flight 253 in the first place.

But, as it turned out, the bomb sewn into Abdulmutallab's underwear didn't detonate properly. He survived - and is out of the hospital now, I read - and everybody else survived, too.

So, if the homeland security system consisted entirely of alert passengers and flight crews; relied on terrorists having defective weapons; a certain amount of luck; and letting other flights know, after an attack, that there might be a terrorist on their airliners, too - then yes, the system worked very well.

Assuming that there's a reason for maintaining comparatively massive databases on possible and known terrorists - not so much.

And, now that there's been some criticism of her statement on CNN, Secretary Napolitano has clarified what she meant:

"...Ms. Napolitano said Monday on NBC'S 'Today' that her remark the day before — “the system has worked really very, very smoothly over the course of the past several days” — had been taken out of context. 'Our system did not work in this instance,' she said. 'No one is happy or satisfied with that. An extensive review is under way.'..."
(The New York Times)

"An extensive review is under way." If that review includes identifying what went wrong, and fixing the problem: good news. Note, please: identifying what went wrong, not finding someone to blame; and fixing the problem, not condemning someone in an effort to make critics feel better.

Related posts:

• "Northwest Flight 253: Near Miss on Christmas Weekend"
  (December 27, 2009)
• "Getting Called an Islamophobe, Saving Lives"
  (November 10, 2009)
• "Anita Dunn, John Ensign, and Beliefs"
  (October 21, 2009)
• "ACORN, News, and Business as Usual"
  (September 15, 2009)
• "Waterboarding, Moralizing, Politics, and Security"
  (April 23, 2009)
• "Obama Reaches Out to Taliban: This Might Actually Work"
  (March 8, 2009)
• "Nancy Pelosi's 757: Security, Common Sense, and Getting the Facts Straight"
  (December 10, 2008)

In the news:

• "Security System Failed, Napolitano Acknowledges "
  The New York Times (December 28, 2009)
• "US acknowledges flaws in air security"
  Financial Times (December 28 2009)
• "Security System Failed, Napolitano Acknowledges"
  The New York Times (December 28 2009)
• "Interview With Janet Napolitano"
  STATE OF THE UNION WITH JOHN KING, CNN (aired December 27, 2009)
• "Terror suspect out of hospital, held at undisclosed location"
  CNN (December 27, 2009)

Department of Homeland Security No Longer Fears American Veterans?

It may be that something of monumental importance has happened at the Department of Homeland Security.

It is possible that the new DHS, under the current administration, now realizes that people who fought to protect America's freedom are not all potential terrorists.

I wrote a little more, with links to my sources, in another blog:

"DHS Report Identifying Veterans and Pro-Lifers as Potential Terrorists (Quietly) Withdrawn"
A Catholic Citizen in America (May 14, 2009)

As I said in that post, "...Maybe they'd never actually seen an American veteran, and had only read about what Code Pink had to say about America's military...."

Other explanations, which gives a little more credit to the intelligence and knowledge of Department of Homeland Security staff, are more disturbing. I think it is possible, however unlikely, that key DHS people really believe that Timothy McVeigh is a typical American veteran, and that people who object to killing babies are prone to violence.

Related posts:

• "Homeland Security Report: American Veterans are Potential Terrorists - I am Not Making This Up"
  (April 15, 2009)
• "The 90% Solution: American Guns, Mexican Raids, and Common Sense"
  (April 2, 2009)
• "No More "War on Terror" - Officially?"
  (March 30, 2009)
• "Pro-Life? You May be a Dangerous Domestic Terrorist! MIAC Says So"
  A Catholic Citizen in America (March 23, 2009)
• "Feeling Ungood About Doublethink? Here's Help"
  A Catholic Citizen in America (March 23, 2009)
• "Somalia, Minnesota, and Common Sense"
  (March 22, 2009)
• "Banning Online Terrorist Recruiters? Be Careful About What You Wish For"
  (March 10, 2009)
• " 'Towelhead,' 'Retard,' and Talking Sense in a Global Society"
  (February 24, 2009)
• "Kaffiyeh Craziness at Gateway High"
  (February 19, 2009)
• "Assumptions; the Ames Anthrax Strain; Ames, Iowa, and Fort Deterick"
  (August 15, 2008)
  • What 'everybody knows' isn't always so.
• "All Those Poor, Uneducated, Minorities Being Drafted in America!"
  (January 4, 2009)

Homeland Security Report: American Veterans are Potential Terrorists - I am Not Making This Up

'As is well known,' ¹ American soldiers are trained to use weapons, including explosives.

Timothy McVeigh was an American soldier.

Veteran Timothy McVeigh helped blow up Oklahoma City's Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in 1995.

Obviously, American veterans are very dangerous people, and should be watched closely.

No, I don't believe it: but that's apparently the sort of logic that Homeland Security is using these days.

I'm Not Making This Up

"Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," is a Homeland Security/FBI collaboration. And, parts of it may make sense.

"Though the nine-page report said it had 'no specific information that domestic right-wing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence,' it said real-estate foreclosures, unemployment and tight credit 'could create a fertile recruiting environment for right-wing extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and government authorities similar to those in the past.'..." (CNN)

"Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" may be very nice and sensible. But if it's anything like the (draft, I trust) copy of a MIAC report with a similar subject, everybody to the right of Pelosi could be in trouble.

MIAC identified people who supported Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, or Bob Barr in the last election as potential terrorists. Also people who were pro-life.

As I said, I am not making this up.

I wish I were.

Looking Forward to a Nicer America?

I think I can understand the current administrations preference for dropping the term "War on Terror." It's so, well, warlike. And most people agree that war isn't nice.

From the sounds of the current Homeland Security head, we may be in for at least four years of euphemisms.

"...During her confirmation hearings, Napolitano told a Senate committee she preferred to use the term 'man-caused disasters' in lieu of 'terrorism' to describe the threats and potential threats with which her department must deal...." (USN)

If this keeps up, we may have to learn contemporary newspeak, just to figure out what our leaders are saying.

Overseas, a Mixed Bag of Opinions

I found two rather different takes on the report:

• "The Obama administration has issued a chilling warning to US police forces about the threat of a rise in violent rightwing extremist groups...." (guardian)
• The Homeland Security/FBI report "is the latest wheeze dreamed up by the Obama administration to distract us from the fact that roughly half America now realises the man's New Deal II project is a slow-motion car crash...." (telegraph)

I won't go as far as Lamar Smith, a Texas Republican, in throwing terms like "leftwing" and "rightwing" around. But, I think he may have a point:

"...'Their leftwing assessment identifies actual terrorist organizations, like the Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front. The rightwing report uses broad generalizations about veterans, pro-life groups, federalists and supporters of gun rights,' said Smith. 'That's like saying if you love puppies you might be susceptible to recruitment by the Animal Liberation Front. It is ridiculous and deeply offensive to millions of Americans.'..." (FOXNews)

Actually, I'm delighted and a bit surprised that ELF and ALF were identified as being similar to 'terrorist' organizations. For much of my life, their sabotaging of logging operations and setting the odd fire was viewed as overly-fervent political statements. Or, by the news, ignored outright. As I've said before, I've done time in academia.

'Those People' Again?

It's possible that the report suffered from lack of direct contact with dangerous people like veterans. I don't know exactly who put the report together. It's quite possible that they were people who have had extremely little direct contact with American veterans.

There hasn't been a military draft since 1973. I don't have statistics, but I think it's possible that an all-volunteer armed forces has resulted in fewer people having had personal contact with people who served, or are serving, in the armed forces. The American military today isn't, demographically, an exact replica of America as a whole. They're better educated, more likely to be from the middle class, and disproportionately Asian or Hawaiian / Pacific Islander than your group of "average American." (January 4, 2009)

It's possible that, after leaving the armed forces, veterans don't go into the elite circles that drafted "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment."

And, the people who drafted the report are human beings. It's a very human thing to fear the unknown.

Lets Hope the Nice Talk Today is True

As Timothy McVeigh demonstrated, you don't have to be an Islamic Arab to be a terrorist.

And, as I've written before, every system of belief has it's crazies.

I'm glad that Homeland Security realizes that not everyone who is concerned about environmental issues is a potential terrorist. I just wish that the same courtesy would be extended to people who served in America's armed forces, supported Ron Paul, or have views that are not in accord with Nancy Pelosi's.

Related posts:

• "The 90% Solution: American Guns, Mexican Raids, and Common Sense"
  (April 2, 2009)
• "No More "War on Terror" - Officially?"
  (March 30, 2009)
• "Pro-Life? You May be a Dangerous Domestic Terrorist! MIAC Says So"
  A Catholic Citizen in America (March 23, 2009)
• "Feeling Ungood About Doublethink? Here's Help"
  A Catholic Citizen in America (March 23, 2009)
• "Somalia, Minnesota, and Common Sense"
  (March 22, 2009)
• "Banning Online Terrorist Recruiters? Be Careful About What You Wish For"
  (March 10, 2009)
• " 'Towelhead,' 'Retard,' and Talking Sense in a Global Society"
  (February 24, 2009)
• "Kaffiyeh Craziness at Gateway High"
  (February 19, 2009)
• "Assumptions; the Ames Anthrax Strain; Ames, Iowa, and Fort Deterick"
  (August 15, 2008)
  • What 'everybody knows' isn't always so.
• "All Those Poor, Uneducated, Minorities Being Drafted in America!"
  (January 4, 2009)

In the news:

• "Napolitano defends report on right-wing extremist groups"
  CNN (April 15, 2009)
• "Republicans criticize report on right-wing groups"
  The Associated Press (April 15, 2009)
• "The New McCarthyism: DHS Reports on Right-Wing Extremism"
  U.S. News & World Report (April 15, 2009)
• "Chorus of Protest Grows Over Report Warning of Right Wing Radicalization"
  FOXNews (April 15, 2009)
• "US govt faces veteran anger at extremism report"
  AFP (April 15, 2009)
• "Obama administration issues warning over rightwing extremists"
  guardian.co.uk (April 15, 2009)
• "Those Evil Right Wing Extremists who would DESTROY America"
  telegraph.co.uk (April 15, 2009)

---

¹ A tip of the hat to Walt Kelly, creator of the Pogo comic strip. "As is well known" was a catch-phrase, if I recall correctly, of a character in that strip: one Simple J. Malarky, Walt Kelly's take on Senator J. McCarthy.

Peanut Terrorism? Peanut Corp. of America Reveals Dangerous Security Gap

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is being criticized for not stopping Peanut Corporation of America (PCA) from shipping salmonella-laced peanuts to manufacturers across the country. It does look like the FDA may have dropped the ball, but I think focusing on that agency may be a mistake.

Deadly Bacilli in Food Supply: This Isn't a National Security Issue?!

There's a war on: presumably starting a small plague, making Americans fear peanut butter, and coming close to crippling part of the food industry could be considered an act of terror.

No, I don't think that the boss of PCA is in league with Al Qaeda. It looks like he's a businessman who knew that keeping expenses down is important - and had no clue about what can happen to a company that kills people with tainted food.

The point is that what Peanut Corporation of America did to this country is the sort of thing that terrorists might want to accomplish: spread fear, kill some people, and damage the American economy. It seems to me that this is something that the Department of Homeland Security should be interested in.

Maybe someone on Capitol Hill will think of that.

I rather hope so: This peanut problem is what happened when one clueless corporate head sabotaged his own company. If someone with access to part of America's food supply wanted to cause damage, I think things could be much worse.

Tainted Peanuts: Publicity, But the Wrong Kind

Peanut Corporation of America is now famous: known around the world as the company that killed nine people (so far), rather than lose money. As it stands today, Peanut Corporation of America stands to lose quite a lot of money anyway. And, if manufacturers of peanut-related products have any sense, every contract it ever had, or might get.

Cash Flow, Cutting Expenses, and Logical Consequences

The owner and president of PCA, Stewart Parnell, said, "On the advice of my counsel, I respectfully decline to answer your questions based on the protection afforded me under the United States Constitution," several times today, instead of answering questions in a congressional hearing. (Reuters)

That's probably smart, since it looks like he wrote "turn them loose" after finding one lab that couldn't detect salmonella in his products. (Atlanta Journal Constitution)

Americans are a bit touchy about being sold tainted food to begin with, and with the economy in the shape it's in, I don't think Mr. Parnell is going to be well-liked anywhere in the country.

Salmonella, Cash Flow, Cluelessness, and the Peanut Corporation

There's no reason to believe that Mr. Parnell wanted to kill anyone: but it's hard to believe that he didn't know that 'salmonella poisoning,' or salmonellosis, is a serious disease. And, that it's not a good idea to hunt for one lab that can't find the bacilli. So far, his money-saving tactic has resulted in:

• Around 600 sick people
• Nine dead bodies
• Over 1,800 products recalled
• Millions of dollars lost by other companies

And, a PCA plant in Texas is being closed. Thirty people work there. Or, used to work there. There's no guarantee that the Plainville peanut plant will re-open. The peanut workers may be better off that Detroit autoworkers, though. Plainview, Texas, has a population of about 22,000, is the Hale County Seat, and has businesses like Cargill Meat Solutions, with a payroll of 2,100. Just the same, these aren't the economic times I'd choose to lose my job in.

This Time, it's Personal: A Third of the Dead are Minnesotans

I'm taking this peanut affair a bit more personally than some other topics. Three of the nine deaths were here in Minnesota, all of them in Brainerd care facilities:

• Shirley Mae Almer, 72, formerly of Perham
• Clifford Tousignant, 78, originally of Duluth
• Doris Flatgard, 87, apparently of Brainerd
  (myFOX9.com, Brainerd Dispatch)

When someone's that age, it's easy to assume that something else might have been the cause of death - but it's quite a coincidence that all three had salmonellosis when they died.

There are lawsuits, of course: directed against the King Nut, the company that supplied the tainted peanut butter, and the Peanut Corporation of America that gave King Nut tainted peanuts. Apparently, King Nut was expected to test for Salmonella, too.

Sloppy work, at best. I've written about this sort of thing before.

Next Time, Tainted Food Could Be Terrorist Attack

Given how easy it was to get salmonella-laced peanut butter spread across the country, a terrorist attack on America's food supply isn't at all inconceivable. Particularly since the boss of one plant, in what looks like a really stupid cost-cutting move, managed to:

• Kill nine people
• Infect around 600
• Make quite a few Americans afraid of peanut butter
• Damage part of the American food industry

Imagine what could be accomplished, by someone who wanted to cause havoc! I don't think I will, right now. It's late, and I need my sleep.

More-or-less related posts:

• "Madoff's Ponzi Scheme, Laptops, Nipple Rings, and the War on Terror"
  (December 17, 2008)
• "Remember Melamine? It's Baaaack!"
  (October 4, 2008)
• "Assumptions; the Ames Anthrax Strain; Ames, Iowa, and Fort Deterick"
  (August 15, 2008)
• "Anthrax Suspect: Mad Scientist? Frustrated Businessman? Victim of Conspiracy?"
  (August 2, 2008)
• "China: Toxic Toys and Dubious Dumplings Aren't Signs of Terrorism"
  (January 30, 2008)

Related posts from another blog:

• "Salmonella in Peanut Products: the Recall List and Widget"
  Apathetic Lemming of the North (February 12, 2009)
• "Tainted Peanuts in America: Three of Nine Deaths are My State"
  Apathetic Lemming of the North (February 11, 2009)

In the news:

• "Lax Regulation In Peanut Factories"
  CBS News (February 11, 2009)
• "Local peanut plant may be linked to salmonella 02-11-09"
  Plainview Daily Herald (February 11, 2009)
• "Peanut factory owner takes Fifth in salmonella case"
  Los Angeles Times (February 11, 2009)
• "U.S. peanut firm owner refuses to testify on salmonella"
  Reuters (February 11, 2009)
• "Sen. Klobuchar issues statement on recalled peanuts "
  HomeTownSource.com (February 11, 2009)
• "E-mails show company knew of salmonella, shipped anyway"
  Atlanta Journal Constitution (February 11, 2009)
• "Peanut Corp. Gets Congressional Subpeona; Closes Texas Plant"
  Health Blog, Wall Street Journal (February 11, 2009)
• "Cracking the case of the poison processed peanuts"
  Atlanta Journal Constitution (February 9, 2009)
• "How Could it Happen? Salmonella Timeline"
  Channel 9 News, Chattanooga, Tennessee (February 10, 2009)
• "Lawsuit Expected in Third Minnesota
  Salmonella-Related Death"
  myFOX9.com (January 28, 2009)
  (Shirley Mae Almer, from Perham, Minnesota, was in Brainerd when she died )
• "All three state salmonella victims lived in Brainerd"
  Brainerd Dipatch (January 28, 2009)
  (Note: This paper requires visitors to fill out a lengthy and somewhat intrusive form before reading their articles. Not, in my opinion, a good idea ("Website Design: Just Because Everybody Else is Doing it - - - " Apathetic Lemming of the North (February 4, 2009))
• "Peanut plant knew of bacteria problem"
  Atlanta Journal Constitution (January 28, 2009)
• "3rd death in Minnesota is linked to salmonella"
  Minneapolis Star Tribune (January 23, 2009)
• "King Nut Issues Peanut Butter Recall"
  U.S. Food and Drug Administration press release (January 10, 2009)

Background:

• Plainview, Texas, Chamber of Commerce

Worm Spreading Fast in Pentagon Computers: (not) in the News

I've been impressed, over the years, at what is "news," and what isn't.

Today, for example, I found quite a bit about topics like these:

• "Obama daughters to attend Sidwell Friends"
  CNN (November 21, 2008)
• "U.S. influence is on the decline, report says"
  Los Angeles Times (November 21, 2008)

I have no problem with the first item. Americans are naturally interested in where the first family's children will go to school. Personally, I think it's smart to have them go to a private school. For security reasons, if nothing else.

The second news item has been handled a few ways. The Los Angeles Times didn't do anywhere near as much hand-wringing and/or gloating over how America won't be so powerful, 17 years from now.

Actually, that report seems to say that things are going to be different in 17 years. No surprises there. Today isn't just like 1991, and there's no indication that change is going to stop now.

From what I got out of the summaries, and a really quick glance at the report, America may lose a little ground, but the big changes include China, Russia, India, and Brazil becoming more powerful players in world affairs. Bottom line, there are other big kids on the block.

Another Day, a Few More Details About the Pentagon Worm

I had to dig a little, to find more information about the worm that's in the Pentagon computers.

Although quite a few news services are using the more familiar term, "virus," what's working its way through the Department of Defense networks is a worm: a self-replicating bit of code that sends copies of itself around a network, and can do other things when it's not replicating.

From the sounds of it, this is almost certainly a deliberate attack: not some bozo downloading the wrong Beyoncé video. The Pentagon is being very careful about what they let the news media tell us - and whoever is behind this. I'd love to know more about this, but I'm willing to wait. "National security" is a phrase that got a bad reputation several decades back, but sometimes it is a good idea not to tell a hacker what did, and didn't work in the latest attack.

One detail that isn't public is just what the worm is. Apparently, it's shown up in networks outside the American military's: so whatever marks this as a probable attack may be something in the way it got started in the Pentagon.

I also found out that Wired seems to have broken the story. I really ought to pay more attention to that publication.

Defense Department Computer Network Being Eaten by a Worm - and This isn't News?!

I might have missed something, but ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN don't seem to be covering this story. Why, I don't know. I'd like to think that the news editors are sophisticated enough to realize that malware spreading in America's military computer networks is a problem, and could affect American citizens: but I can't see why it isn't being mentioned.

Background:

• "Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World"
  Summary
  Office of the Director of National Intelligence (November 2008)
  • (Hardcopy may be purchased from the Government Printing Office (ISBN 978-0-16-081834-9)
  • Available in PDF format online

In the news:

• "DoD confirms computer virus in networks"
  NavyTimes (November 21, 2008)
• "Pentagon bans computer flash drives"
  Associated Press (November 21, 2008)
• "DoD orders ban on digital storage devices"
  AirForceTimes (November 21, 2008)
• "Military Looking Abroad for Source of Cyber Attack on Pentagon"
  FOXNews (November 21, 2008)
• "Military's ban of USB thumb drives highlights security risks"
  SC (November 20, 2008)
• "Under Worm Assault, Military Bans Disks, USB Drives"
  Wired (November 19, 2008)

NASCAR Cooties and Federal Intelligence

You can't make this kind of stuff up.

Congressional aids were advised to get immunized against several diseases, including hepatitis, diphtheria, tetanus and influenza.

This precaution may be quite understandable, since they were about to embark on a fact-finding journey to a remote, primitive region: the NASCAR tracks in Talladega, Alabama, and Concord, North Carolina.

Sensible, that is, if you regard everything that isn't in the New York-Washington megalopolis, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and a few other outposts of civilization as a more-or less primitive region, inhabited by wild natives and dubious drinking water.

I'd write this off as just another bit of Washington idiocy, except that the agency recommending inoculations before entering the wilds of Alabama is the Department of Homeland Security.

North Carolina's Representative Hayes is starting to get offended, and I can see why.

Homeland Security chief Thompson (a Mississippian) says that it's more than just NASCAR: the Congressional types are going to public health facilities, and criminals holding facilities.

Fair enough, but apparently Republicans weren't inoculated, and Democrats were.

Weird.

This is war: no time for federal nincompoopery

Again, I'm trying to keep this blog a-political, but this is wartime, and the mental acuity - and sanity - of our leaders is a vital part of the war effort.

And this inoculation foul-up smells like another case of coastal cognoscenti and wannabes with curiously insular assumptions about the flyover states.

Time for an admission: I'm biased. The state I live in is north of the flyover states. You may have heard of it: Minnesota. Land of 10,000 lakes and uncounted millions of mosquitoes. A place where it's gotten down to -60 in Tower, back in 1996. My town is home to a mere 4,000 people: and the nearest Starbucks is almost 40 miles away!

And, although many people out here in the heart of darkest Minnesota know quite a bit about the important parts of America, and the world, it's obvious that the opposite isn't true.

For example, a co-worker of mine told me about a call from someone in a federal agency. He had to get to Brainerd, a bit north of here. He had made flight connections to Minneapolis, and wanted to know if he'd need to rent an ATV, or if there were roads going out that far.

I sometimes wonder how the federal government manages to deal with other countries, when it knows so little about America.

There's Patriotic, and There's Crazy

This is crazy, in my opinion. It would be interesting to see what the courts are making of it.

I these post-9/11 days, the Department of Homeland Security has said that American Citizens should "Report any suspected criminal or terrorist activity" to the proper authorities.

That makes sense.

Then, there's the inmate who says that Michael Vick, the football player, is in cahoots with al Qaeda, stole his dogs, and bought missiles from Iran.

You can't make this sort of thing up.

Two excerpts from the complaint:

"Plaintiff seeks 63,000,000,000.00 Billion dollars backed by gold and silver delivered via "UPS" United States Parcel Service to the front gates of FCI Williamsburg, Salters S.C., collected from Defendant MICHAEL VICK."

"MR. VICK sold my dogs on EBAy Auction, and used the proceeds to purchase missles from the Iran Government."

There's a copy of the filing in pdf format on the Fox News website, and more about this crossover between sports scandals and national security, in "South Carolina Inmate Hits Michael Vick With '$63,000,000,000 Billion Dollar' Lawsuit Alleging Al Qaeda Ties."

To be serious for a moment: screwball claims like this can take valuable time and attention away from real threats.

One more thing: The person who filed this complaint has, it seems, copyrighted his name.

I'll get back to laughing, now.