The Beginning Of The End Of Air Travel?

ROMULUS, Mich. (AP) - An attempted terrorist attack on a Christmas Day flight began with a pop and a puff of smoke - sending passengers scrambling to tackle a Nigerian man who claimed to be acting on orders from al-Qaida to blow up the airliner, officials and travelers said. (WTOP)

Before we start bashing the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which you know I have very little trouble doing, we need to look at some facts:

1) The flight originated in Amsterdam. That is in Europe for the average, geographically challenged American, and they follow a different security regime than the TSA follows here in the United States. I would normally have said it is more stringent and in reality it probably is.

2) This nut job carried an explosive in a small quantity through a checkpoint. In actuality he could probably have carried it through a US checkpoint just as easily as they screen for metal and large concentrations of explosives, which does not sound like what he was carrying

3) It does not take even the most inventive mind to circumvent the security procedures. It is pointless to point out how silly the 3oz rule is and how easy it is to circumvent if you really want to. Similarly, it is easy, if you are willing to go down with the aircraft, to bring down an airplane with the basic tools on board. Again, I do not need to go into details - any good search of the web and a couple of episodes of Mythbusters can tell you all you need to know.

Now, if we follow the bouncing ball, I am afraid it goes to some pretty ugly places. To start with, if you are flying to anywhere over the next 48-72 hours, I would tell you to expect worse security procedures than you have seen since they banned liquids at the checkpoints. If you normally allow two hours for security, you might want to make that four hours. And if you are traveling with inexperienced travelers, might I suggest the train?

What is more depressing about this breach, is not that it happened. TSA has been dinged for security breaches almost weekly it would seem by the GAO and the Congress and their own Inspector General, but that it happened on a plane, coming into the United States and it made the press, so now not only does TSA have to do something about it in the way of making sure it never happens again, but so does every other security agency in the Western world. And what do you think they are going to do to prevent this sort of thing from happening again?

If past history is any indication, it cannot be anything that the traveling public will consider positive.

- Following September 11, 2001, the Federal Government decided that the minimum wage, minimally screened private security screeners at the Nation's airports were not doing a good enough job, so they were replaced with a brand new bureaucracy of minimum wage, minimally screened federal employees. Forget for the moment that the hijackers were, up until the moment of the actual attack not violating any provisions of the security checkpoints. Forget for the moment that in the late 1980s it had been recommended by the NTSB and the FAA that all cockpits be locked from take-off until landing and the recommendations where never implemented. But hey, it improved security so it must be a good thing!

- For Reed, the shoe bomber they took away our shoes. Now we have to remove them and send them through the x-ray machine. Not a real problem if you are in good shape and wear slip-ons when you travel (and frankly, can you afford not to be spry and wear slip-ons to travel anymore?). If you are slightly infirm, the process of getting out of your shoes and back into them can cause backups. But hey, it improved security so it must be a good thing!

- For the liquid bombers, in the UK they actually went so far as to ban carry-on baggage for a short period of time, but the end result was that you could no longer carry liquid of more than three ounces per bottle per gallon bag through the check point. Of course, this also resulted in higher food prices behind security for the vendors and the now irreversible checked bag fee that you could go so far as to claim is sexist because most men can travel with a tube of toothpaste and some shaving cream and call it done while most women cannot travel with less than three ounces of anything, and since most premium manufactures have not made travel sized bottles, women are kind of in a bind. But hey, it improved security so it must be a good thing!

- Lately, they have introduced back-scatter x-ray technology at some airports. These are the x-ray machines that essentially render you naked for a group of observers in a back room somewhere and verify that you are not carrying some sort of unknown powder strapped to your leg. Of course, these devices have a number of people upset, especially those who are concerned about their modesty, among other things, and those that are wondering, with good reason what happens to the images afterwords. While TSA assures us they are not going to keep them, anyone who believes this should read up on what the State Department is currently doing with those who snooped on passport applications of celebrities and other famous people. How much for a back scatter picture of Angelina Jolie? But hey, it improves security so it must be a good thing!

So where do we go from here? Assuming the US federal government can find a couple of billion dollars, and the companies that make back scatter machines can churn them out fast enough, that is a very good question. But here are some scenarios.

Ban it all: This is perhaps the most extreme form of response, but I am not discounting that it is being discussed at some levels. This is the Aeroflot model if you will. All passengers will be prohibited from taking anything on board the aircraft, including but not limited to personal clothing. You will be forced to strip down to bare skin, put on some sort of modesty covering and proceed to the waiting airplane. You will be allowed, in fact, enforced, to carry your identification with you, but everything else, wallet, jewelery, pants, hats, and shoes will go via some other mode. Do not expect to receive them at the end of your journey. And do not expect the airlines to start feeding you again either.

Ban Carry On: It is more likely that you will be forced to undergo some form of invasive examination, like a backscatter with a follow up cavity search, but you will be allowed to wear your own clothes onto the plane. You will not be permitted any carry on however. While this is a likely scenario, it is also the death knell of the airline business. The majority of money made by airlines is in business travel, and business travelers, not permitted to take laptops and roller bags will not travel. And let's face it, there are things I would not entrust to the goons who load the planes either and would only take by carry on. If that privilege was taken away, I would be looking for other ways to travel, or I just would not do it. Imagine what would happen to places like Hawaii who rely on the airplane for their tourists? Or Alaska?

Tighter Screening: I cannot imagine how much tighter the screening can get. Really. It is about as impersonal as it can get. It has become so arduous to travel by air that I refuse to do it unless I am being paid to. It is not worth the pain and suffering, the constant waiting and the scoping as if I were a criminal and the person searching me was the good guy. Based on the IG reports from TSA, you would not let the screeners at most airports look after your children, much lest trust them to pick out the good guy from the bad guy.

You cannot kill an ism Terrorism is as old as man and will continue as long as there is a cause to fight for and people to fight for it. Sadly, while the world has shrunk to the point that data can circumnavigate the globe in a matter of seconds, it will be decades, if ever, before the human population is able to travel freely from point to point like they used to. And that is the sad result.

UPDATE: I had forgotten about the stay in your seat rule, since it was only enacted when flying in or out of National Airport here in DC, but even then it was thirty minutes on either end...not an hour.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Some airlines are telling passengers that new security regulations prohibit them from leaving their seats beginning an hour before landing.(AP)

TORONTO — New restrictions on U.S.-bound flights are causing "very significant" delays and headaches for travelers at Canada's busiest airport Sunday...Among the stricter regulations are passengers are to have nothing on the lap and no moving around the flight cabin in the final hour before landing and only one carry-on is bag allowed.CP 24

New Security Rules Could Limit In-Flight Laptop Time December 26th, 2009 | by Adam Ostrow49 Airplane WiFi might be getting more prevalent on planes, but the amount of time you’re actually allowed to use your laptop and take advantage of it might be about to take a significant hit....The TSA has not posted specific new guidelines publicly yet, writing only that they are “working closely with federal, state and local law enforcement on additional security measures, as well as our international partners on enhanced security at airports and on flights.”

However, it appears that at least one of those measures involves no personal belongings on one’s lap in the last hour of flight, as a statement on Air Canada’s website reads:

“New rules imposed by the U.S. Transportation Security Administration also limit on-board activities by customers and crew in U.S. airspace that may adversely impact on-board service. Among other things, during the final hour of flight customers must remain seated, will not be allowed to access carry-on baggage, or have personal belongings or other items on their laps.” Mashable

Let's be clear here. So far, these new rules are for those poor souls traveling into the United States from other countries. If you are coming in from Europe or the Far East, saying in your seat for the last hour of the flight, while annoying, is not that much of a hardship. You have already had your work time and the battery on your laptop is already dead. But from countries like Canada and Mexico, it will but a significant crimp in traveling. I have already heard comments from travelers with children who are rethinking their trips to American destinations. Let's face it - if you have kids under the age of 18, keeping them in their seats is a full time occupation. Keeping them in their seats and not allowing them to have anything in their lap for more than half the flight is a non-starter. And remember, keeping them in their seat means not letting them go to the bathroom. There are many in the traveling public that are over the age of 18 that cannot be held to that rule, much less newly potty trained toddlers.

The point here is this. If these rules go into effect, it will not improve safety one little bit, and will make an already arduous travel experience that more difficult, which will have people start rethinking how they spend their vacation dollars and where they spend them. Look at what the slumping economy and the fall out from the Wall Street Fat Cats did to Las Vegas. Now start looking at places like Orlando and Anaheim. Do you think Disney and Universal Studios theme parks can survive if people will not travel to visit them? And that is the sort of traffic that is easy to gauge. This will impact business travel, convention travel, which is already hurting as anyone who has been to a convention lately can tell you, and casual travel.

I can only begin to wonder how many phones are ringing this morning with the following dialogue:

"Hello, your favorite tourist destination."
"Hello, this is Bill Smith, I want to cancel my reservation for the week of the 12th."
"Certainly Mr. Smith, can we reschedule that for you?"
"No, thank you."
"Alright and why are you canceling your reservation?"
"Because I don't feel like putting up with the airline security."

If you think I am kidding, keep an eye on the attendance records for Disney World over the next few months, and listen to the deals being offered by the Chamber of Commerce in places like Washington, DC, Honolulu Hi, Los Angeles, Ca, and San Diego, Ca. I do not think it will take long to register.

Laissez les bons temps rouler!

Loosely translated, it means let the good times roll, and as this is Fat Tuesday (Mardi Gras) and the day before Lent starts (on the Christian calendar), I thought I would take a moment to look at the "good times" and make sure we are in the right frame of mind for Lent this year.

The "good times" have been limited to a very few things. Give me a minute and I will come up with something. In the meantime, let us revisit what has already been a turbulent 2008.

1) $3 Trillion Federal Budget. Well, this horse will beaten dead in the next few days but Congress is already saying it is DOA and they are already working up their version.

2) $150 Billion Stimulus package. By the time it gets finished, it will probably be close to $200 Billion. And the jury is still out on the actual effect it will have on the economy going forward. Even if the Congress passes it today, it will still be May before the $300 hits your mailbox and by May there will be other things to contend with (I am thinking that $3/gallon gas will be normal and we could be looking at $3.50 as the average). Further, if the Government gives back $150 Billion, that is $150 billion they don't have to spend on other programs that could do more to benefit the economy than returning money to individual people.

3) Credit Crunch. I am sure we are all feeling it, whether in mortgage prices or our own personal credit lines. America has been living on credit for so long, we have forgotten why it is bad to live that way. While one comedian has a great line about it "I have no children, no family, so basically, if I die in debt, I win!" most of us are not that lucky and between credit card interest rates that are close to usury and the continued depression in real wages when compared against inflation, the United States is in a bad way. Add too that the problems of an increasing federal deficit (at the rate of $1 Million/day) and you have a monetary problem looming on the horizon that even hording gold might not off-set.

4) The Ongoing Wars. The United States still has far too many soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan doing who knows what. The mission, which is costing somewhere in the vicinity of $275 Million per day and costing lives. Although the actual number killed in action is low (around 4,000, or about the same as a single month of fatal accidents, the long term costs are going to be in the medical and mental services required by the thousands of soldiers who will come back from these war zones and will have to reintegrate into society. Some will have no problem. Many will have (and are already having) problems. Of course, the costs of the war do not take into account small businesses that have failed because their sole proprietor or large parts of their staffs have been called up to serve, or families that have been ripped apart as one or both parents have had to go or return to the region. What is truly sad is that the dunderhead-in-chief of this mess still has not clearly defined the mission. They are not fighting for our rights. They are not fighting terrorism. In the first case, we have fewer rights here in the United States today than we did before September 11, 2001 and what is worse, we have given most of them up willingly and without any sort of a fight. In the latter case, you cannot kill an -ism and, in the case of terrorism, it is a guerrilla war which you would think by now the United States would have learned you cannot win with a conventional ground force.

5) Homeland (In)security. The travel industry is suffering. Between high fuel costs, increased delays and draconian yet ineffective security, air travel is suffering. Sure, people are traveling, but the discretionary money that might actually lead to profits are not there. Add to that the pressures of issuing a national ID card (RealID is nothing less), the costs that states will have to bear and the increased times for processing passports just so you can travel domestically and you will see a large number of people find some other mode or stay home all together.

6) Its the Economy Stupid. It does not take a rocket scientist to see the problems in the economy. Travel is one of them. Along with hotels, attractions are all reporting decreases in bodies through the turnstiles and as a result are cutting back on staffing or closing rides. As the price of gas increases, families that might have bought family passes to local amusement parks will rethink the trips to those parks and you will see a larger downturn. That is the tip of the iceberg and when that downturn comes, start looking at other leisure activities and leisure company performance. They are the true bellwether of the health of the economy. When people do not have disposable income, they do not take recreational trips. This is basic economics. Track the health of companies like REI, Coleman, Schwin, Rawlings, and other sports retailers and see what happens. They are the first ones to dip.

So, on the eve of Lent, I hope I have put you in a proper frame of mind. With the Dow closing down more than it closes up lately, the best advice is to pay down your debt, save your money and pitch a tent in the back yard. Oh, and you have less than 45 days before tax time.

Au chante!

Milk, bread and TP won't cut it.

Region Lacks Unified Evacuation Plan February 4, 2008 - 9:00am WASHINGTON - In the event of a catastrophe, officials have prepared evacuation plans for the Washington metro area. In fact, they've prepared lots of them. (WTOP)

Sadly, this only tells us what many in the region already knew. Sadly, none of us is truly ready for an emergency and the chaos that was Katrina will pale to insignificance should the National Capital Region ever have to deal with a real emergency.

All you need is a magazine article...

W.Va. Mayor Uses Magazine to Prove ID January 28, 2008 CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) - Charleston Mayor Danny Jones had a problem as he tried to get through the security gate at a California airport: He had misplaced his driver's license, and the expired one in his wallet wouldn't do. (WTOP)

As funny as this article is, it points out two things that really need to be pointed out.

First, the regulations are fickle. If an expired driver's license is not acceptable proof if identification, why is an article in a magazine? The TSA and the Department of Homeland (In)security have been pounding into our heads the rules for the last six years. Any normal citizen would not be able to use a magazine article as proof if identity, why should the mayor?

Second, it comes back around to the concept of proof. If you are issued an ID that proves who you are and you loose it (a common occurrence for many), how do you proof who you are? And if you loose it on travel, you are destined to become a stranger in a strange land.

Yes, the rules are "there for our protection" but I am still awaiting instructions for what the rules are protecting me from.

September 11 - Are We More At Risk Today?

Today is September 11, 2007.

In 2001, I reported to work. It was not a normal day. I had my infant daughter in my arms and we were scheduled to perform a series of network tests. Otherwise, I would have been at home on my couch. When I arrived at the office, the first plane had hit the towers, but I was unaware of this because I had been listening to silly songs rather than the news. The IT team was glued to the web feed. The CIO was not amused about it and wanted us to get back to work. I was not sure what all the excitement was about either having just come in the door, but I was looking out the window from the sixth floor and could see what I later learned was the smoke from the Pentagon on the horizon. By lunch time, I was in my driveway with multiple radios. the county having lost phone service, my daughter playing in the grass under the tree. Four days later, I was down at the Pentagon, ready to lend my aid. Ironically, it was determined that my presence at a management seminar was a more important use of my time. This was not a determination I made, but was made for me by my employer. This was, perhaps, the first indication to me just how little the attacks truly meant to the county and explains why the nation as a whole, even today is not ready for another incident, but I will discuss that in a moment.

In August 2002, I went to Seattle, Washington to attend a friends wedding. While most of the East Coast was still talking about the events of the previous year, it was not even a topic of conversation in Seattle. What was ironic is most people associated Washington, DC with the Cherry Blossoms, not an airplane hitting the Pentagon. It was almost as if they did not even know that the Pentagon was near Washington, DC.

Today, six years later, the nation seems to have gone from a state of readiness to a state of laissez faire, more interested in what their government is prepared to do for them than the state of their own plans. And, sadly, the state of the government's plans is more interested in preventing things, in the name of security than they are about working towards effective preparation. It reminds me a lot of the sage wisdom in Frank Herbert's Dune. The United States has become very much like House Harkonnen while Al-Qaeda is following the path of House Atreides and their Fremen allies. When the Harkonnen go to ground, Paul Maud'Dib and Gurney Halleck are talking about the events.



Says Gurney "They say they've fortified the graben villages to the point where you [Paul] cannot harm them. They say they need only sit inside their defenses while you wear yourself out in futile attack."

"In a word," Paul said, "they're immobilized."

"While you can go where you will," Gurney said.

"It's a tactic I learned from you," Paul said. "They've lost the initiative, which means they've lost the war." (pg. 415)



While I am not saying that the United States has lost the war, it certainly has adopted a bunker mentality that seems to be more focused on preventing than it is on being prepared for it to happen again, which is most assuredly will.

In Sunday's Washington Post, in the Opinion section, Messrs. Keen and Hamilton, the Chairs of the 9/11 Commission Report asked the question "Are we safer today?" Their answer, which I happen to agree with, is no, but I think a better question is "Are we more at risk today?" This is less clear cut.

Clearly, many of the issues addressed in the 9/11 Commission report are still issues that need to be resolved. There are still a large core of young, predominantly male, Muslims that have no job, and no hope of betterment in the near future. This is further compounded by the power vacuum created by the United States invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq and a failure, as pointed out by Michael Scheuer, of the intelligence community to check the checkables. The United States has invested large amounts of money into questionable policies and procedures that, while on the surface look like positive steps, begin to show cracks and serious failings as you dig deeper.

As an example, let us take air travel. For obvious reasons, this was one of the first targets for "improvement" following the events of September 11. The problem, and a question that still to my mind has not been answered satisfactorily, is how did the hijackers get into the cockpits in the first place? Remember that following the CIA shootings in Washington in the early 1990's the FAA ordered all cockpit doors to be secured at all times. This, to me raises some very serious questions about how seriously the current regulations are being taken if previous directives were ignored. Further, while the traveling public is all but stripped searched (and with the new back scatter devices being installed in select airports, you might as well be naked) before being allowed on an airplane, the cargo being loaded into the belly of the very same plane is barely looked at, besides making sure it is actually getting on the right aircraft. For those of you who follow this stuff, I am sure you are jumping up and down to point out my error. Sorry, but I am one step ahead of you. In August, what was HR-1 became Public Law 110-53 and ordered the screening of all cargo. As of today, that is not happening and under current TSA guidelines, most of that "checking" will be done by the air cargo carriers with random "enforcement" checks by TSA rather than formal TSA procedures. If you think for one minute this is an improvement over the current set of procedures, I have a genuine piece of the Pentagon to sell you. And it will be years, if not decades before the United States is capable of examining every rail, road and ship borne cargo brought into the United States.

On the home front, the Department of Homeland (In)security started several programs to enhance safety. These include the Ready program, RealID, National Incident Management System (NIMS), and HSPD-12. With the exception of NIMS, these programs are close to being outright failures.

The Ready Program is a great idea. While I think it tends to focus too much on terrorism rather than being an all-hazards approach (after all, why should we worry about bird flu and bio-terrorism. Treat them as a hazard and mitigate the risks). The problem is that in the years since September 11, like my friends in Seattle, the memory has faded and most people are less prepared today than they were prior to September 11. Further, more are looking to the government to be prepared for them rather than taking the responsibility themselves. Yes, this is a problem because when the next incident occurs, whether it is domestic, foreign, weather or illness, the country will again be wringing its hands and asking what more could we have done when the answer has been spelled out clearly and repeatedly.

I have documented numerous times the problems with RealID. From the costs, to the inability for most citizens to qualify for the documentation, RealID is nothing less than a National ID card, and frankly, the United States already has too many forms of identification for too many purposes, some of which are crossed. Until there are real discussions about the privacy of this information and who is going to bear the costs of the program, RealID is dead on arrival.

Along the lines of RealID, is the HSPD-12 initiative. There are dozens of little things in HSPD-12, but the major focus is the attempted establishment of a single, federal ID card. Like all things in the United States, single is a word that is a difficult concept to grasp. The goal may be to archive a single ID card, but at the moment there are no less than three competing standards for what the card will encompass. To add insult to injury, the costs for moving to this single card systems are borne by each agency out of their operating budgets (as compared to separate and distinct appropriation) which must compete with a forced move to IPv6, data center relocations and other routine issues that every agency deals with. Without a single, enforced standard, the mandates of HSPD-12 are doomed to failure.

The National Incident Management System (NIMS) has a lot of good qualities. It attempts to establish a single model for incident response, a unified plan and a process for interagency cooperation. Many parts of the program are good and it is nice to see that many agencies are beginning to adopt the core concepts. That being said, there are large sections of NIMS that are "to be decided," or worse, can never be decided because of the sheer size of the implementation project. A single (there's that word again) data network for passing information just is not realistic (I would argue that several already exist, why re-engineer, but that is just me), especially when each jurisdiction has to buy its own gear and train its own people. Interoperations in communications have come a long way but there are still monumental hurdles to overcome, least of which is cooperation between the various first responder agencies and their local, state and federal counterparts. When it comes to human interaction, there is not much you can legislate, as much as you would like to.

The other piece of NIMS that has a long way to go is the National Response Plan (NRP). There seems to be a disconnect between the writers of the NRP and the writers of NIMS. A disconnect that I understand is being rectified, but will take some time. As we saw with the response to Katrina, the NRP is so new, that even the federal government did not follow it, which of course, begs the question, why should I follow it when the federal government does not? This will bear further examination as the next revision of the NRP is released.

I asked earlier if we were anymore at risk? Frankly, I do not believe the United States is any more at risk from a terrorist attack than it was prior to September 11. What I do believe is that the risk of damage from such an attack is significantly higher and that the ability to execute an attack is significantly higher. Man, as an animal, does not like restrictions generally. Ask any security expert who has thought about it and you will discover that the more stringing the security measures, the more man will try to work around them. While this is particularly true in computer security, we are beginning to see it as an issue in immigration, transportation and economics. This becomes even more critical when you consider the patchwork of enforcement or just following the policy. Again, as any air traveler will tell you, TSA enforcement is haphazard. In some airports you have remove your shoes and belt, take your electronics out and submit to a cavity search. In other airports, you can walk through with nary a glance at the magnetometer. It is this sort of enforcement that really makes most of us upset rather than the requirement for enforcement to begin with. As a result, in the words of Michael Scheuer:



"This dire lack of discernment - few senior bureaucrats will discount a threat if there is a one-in-a-billion chance it might occur and cost a promotion - results in a massive misapplication of manpower, computer time, and national-level intelligence collection systems against a mass of threats, most of which are palpably absurd. As a result, like a fire department plagued by false alarms, analysts, spies, equipment and police at all levels are worn out chasing nonextant threats. In doing so, moreover, an atmosphere is created where the constant crying of wolf dulls our analytic edge and increases the risk of the career-ruining oversight senior bureaucrats fear." (pg. 85).



Finally, there is the "sense of national grief" that seems to pervade the whole incident and has gotten progressively worse as time goes on. Yes, some people died. But the people that died on September 11 were a minority. To put it in perspective, if you assume 2000 people died, that would still be less than then number of people who died on the road in the United States in one month! So far, only one other person seems to get the irony, and that is OpEd cartoonist Jeff Stahler who's rather poignant piece appears today. So if we are going to grieve as a nation, perhaps we need to be looking a different statistic. Further, as pointed out in the 9/11 report, some 600 of those who died did not have to because they violated their own procedures and self-deployed without proper gear or following safety protocols.

Is the United States safer? No, absolutely not. Is the United States more at risk? From another attack? No I would argue that the United States is at no more risk than it was prior to September 11, 2001, but the United States is certainly at more risk for damage and death from an attack when it next occurs. Whether it is from Al-Qaeda, the Illinois Nazis, or Mother Nature. So go and get prepared. It is not up to the government. It is up to you.

You're Fired. No I'm Not.

Rhee Seeks Authority to Terminate Employees: Planned Legislation Is Aimed at Reorganizing the D.C. School System's Central Command By David Nakamura Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, August 29, 2007; Page A01 D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee is preparing plans to fire up to several hundred employees over the coming year, part of a major restructuring of the school system's central office aimed at streamlining operations, District government sources said. (WashingtonPost)

This is only the latest in articles about the power of unions, the screwy rules related to hiring and firing in the government, both at the District level as well as the Federal level and the realities of the commercial world.

First, let me start by saying that, in general, I feel unions have long outlived their usefulness and it is articles like this that really drive that point home. Further, let me say that I understand why the federal regulations about hiring, firing and promotion exist, but that they too are archaic and can only lead to more and more federal bloat, wastefulness and eventually the disillusionment most people feel when dealing with federal agencies. Finally, I am and have been a government contractor and while I am not always happy with the way things work, there is also not a whole lot I can do and I do get a paycheque for doing my job. So, with all that up front, let us look at this from the article:

...Rhee has begun drafting legislation that would ask the D.C. Council to suspend personnel laws so that the chancellor would have the authority to terminate employees without having to reassign them to other jobs...she wants to bring in new upper-level managers and downsize the central administration by as much as 30 to 40 percent.

Typically, central office employees who are removed from a position have the contractual right to be placed in a lower-ranking position in the system while maintaining their salary. These rights have hampered superintendents who have sought in the past to downsize the school administration and remove poorly performing employees.

This is not the first time someone has attempted to clean house, either at the DC School Board or in the Federal Government. The Department of Homeland (In)security, when it was formed, tried to get Congress to allow it to move to a pay for performance basis system. This move was blocked at every turn by the various labor unions that represent hundreds of thousands of workers. One worker was quoted as saying something to the effect of "what would I do if every day I went to work not knowing if it was my last?"

Right about now, your blood should be boiling, especially if you are, or have been the victim of a reduction in forces, or laid-off or had your job outsourced. For the majority of workers in the United States today, going to work and no knowing that you will have a job the following day is the status quo. It is normal, and expected and if you are not in that category, you are living on a cloud. Further, we know that we have to perform to a certain level or we will not be paid or receive and increase in our pay. That is what pay for performance is all about and why it is so critical that the government be able to do it. How many federal employees would not have a job today if they had to justify their existence? As any contractor will tell you there are some good people working in federal service today, but there are also a lot of people that would not have a job otherwise and are incapable of doing the job they have now. In the private sector, these "poor performers" would be show the door. In the federal sector, they are promoted, traded, pawned off, but still draw a paycheque from our tax dollars.

There are those that wonder why the federal government is so big and spends so much money. One is because it has so many people on its payroll that if it were a business would not be there. Two, it has to hire contractors and pay street wages, instead of the grossly deflated GS wages to get projects done that its own people are incapable of. Three, it is very hard to get most agencies to make logical business decisions about equipment, staffing and budgets. The reasons are varied, but come down to the underlying fundamental issues related to the federal employment methodology that "anyone who is a manager can manage any department and does not need specialized knowledge in that group." As a result, the people making technical decisions may not have the first clue about what needs to go into a good technical decision. Similarly, the people making HR decisions may not have any idea about how Human Resources really should work. This is a sad way to run a nation.

Ms. Rhee is doing what any manager, hired to turn an organization around, would be expected to do. Come in, get rid of the dead wood and move the organization forward and she should be given the power and authority to do so. Now if only we could do the same thing at the federal level.

Sittin' on the dock of the border....

So, it is Saturday morning and regular readers will note that I almost never post anything on the weekend. Today is special. I am on the road back from Canada, about to make the crossing at Fort Erie in to Buffalo, New York. And yes, I am driving. I am about to enter the "no man's land" that is the border area between Canada and the United States of America. It is 12:14. Why all this detail? Well, for those who missed the memo, entering the United States is no longer the speedy procedure it used to be. In fact, from where I am sitting, there is over 4 KM of backed up, unmoving traffic that would make rush hour in Washington, DC seem like a speedy affair. Did I mention this is Saturday?

By comparison, traffic is flowing quickly and efficiently from the US into Canada, including the payment of a $3.00 toll charge for using the bridge over the Niagara River. So what is the delay? Well, I am not really sure. There are two lanes into the US, compared with one into Canada, so it is not an issue of lanes available. There seems to be a steady stream of cars coming into Canada and at least four inspectors open. Delays on the Canadian side seem to be no more than a couple of minutes. Is it the shear volume of people wanting to get into the United States? Complex border entry issues? Lack of "official documentation?" I do not know. In the last five minutes we have gone six car lengths. A couple of dozen metres.

I mentioned there were three lanes over the bridge, two into the US and one into Canada? There are no less than four lanes of traffic merging into those two (unmoving) lanes and a guy from Customs walking along telling people to drive on the shoulder, completely ignoring the fact that he is creating more lanes that have to merge into the limited capacity of the bridge. In this case, three lanes into one where we are situated and two lanes into one from the duty-free entrance.

More than 10 minutes has passed, we have gone less than three-tenths of a mile.

We can see the abutment of the bridge. All the lane markings have disappeared and the great three-lane-into-one-merge has begun. Bets on how often an accident occurs here? Elapsed time, 15 minutes. Distance traveled. 4/10ths of a mile. By the way, the "zipper" theory of merging, so heavily endorsed in Washington by those who really do not know any better does not hold up when thirty cars are all trying to merge into the space of one car. This is not funny. If we were moving any faster than my late great-grandmother with her walker used to move, I would be very concerned for the health of my automobile. Total elapsed time, 20 minutes. Total distance traveled, 1/2 of one mile.

We are in the queue for the last of the merges. Three lanes into two. Trucks, buses, RVs, minivans, cars. Everyone has to play nice if we are going to get onto the bridge and the trucks are supposed to stay in the far lane.

12:36: We are on the bridge.

12:38: I expect there will be DHS agents waiting on the US side of the border. There is a car in front of us with Iowa plates on it and they are taking pictures out the window. Surely that is illegal on several levels. Taking pictures at a border crossing, of a bridge. Hey, I am just hoping it does not fall into the river. Posted speed limit, 50 km/h. Actual speed of motion....well, zero, with occasional gasps to 1 km/h.

12:41: Still in Canada. Border in sight, 1/2 mile.

12:43: At this rate, they will have to install restrooms on the bridge....

12:44: We are astride the border, or possibly on the US side. They have taken down the flags that used to indicate where it actually was. Probably for National Security reasons.

12:46: I can see Customs and Immigration. They are no less than 10 deep at each check point. At least there are 20 check points open.

12:50: The delay seems to be caused by the crossing. Average time is upwards of three minutes a vehicle. Still ten cars from the gate. At least this time we did not have to pay a toll. They are pushing the new border crossing certification cards (Nexus) not to be confused with the law database (lexus-nexus).

13:03: We are next.

13:05: We are underway, headed south. I do not know why it took so long for such a short interrogation, but that is what happened. Next stop, Washington, DC.

Label Definition: DHI

I have started applying a few labels to my posts so you can find things that might, at least to my mind, be related to each other.

DHI: The United States Department of Homeland (In)security.

The "National Strategy for Homeland Security" and the Homeland Security Act of 2002 mobilized our nation to secure the homeland from terrorist attacks. The Department of Homeland Security united 22 agencies on March 1, 2003, putting the strategy into action. (DHS)

Since March of 2003, this single agency has probably been responsible for more confusion, fear, uncertainty and doubt about just what it means to secure the homeland. From the bonehead responses to Anthrax, to the chaos at the airports, from the response to hurricanes and other natural disasters, to the lax practices at immigration, the creation of the Department of Homeland (In)security has almost single handedly proven to those of us that pay attention why we really should not trust the government to have our best interests at heart.

By the way, I do not claim to have invented the term, but I know I have been using it ever since reading Marcus Ranum's The Myth of Homeland Security

First, Take Off All Your Clothes...

Airports Warned About Terror Dry Runs July 24, 2007 - 9:35pm By MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - Airport security officers around the nation have been alerted by federal officials to look out for terrorists practicing to carry explosive components onto aircraft, based on four curious seizures at airports since last September. (WTOP)

TSA to the rescue. I certainly applaud them for confiscating those items that could be in just about any technician's bag or little old lady's shopping list, but why stop there? Let's face it. If the TSA wants to rule out any possible threat, the solution is simple.

1) Do not permit ANY item on the aircraft that has not undergone a thorough inspection. By this I mean the chairs, and other components of the airframe.

2) Do not permit ANY luggage, parcels or personal items to be taken on an aircraft.

3) Do not permit ANY passengers, staff or crew to access the aircraft without undergoing a full body cavity search, and changing into approved clothing AFTER decontamination/security check.

Essentially, if you are going to fly, it will be in all the luxury of a steel cage in a tyvek suit (that you will have to pay extra for). Expect that you will not be permitted to leave your seat for the duration of the flight and do not expect to receive any food or drink. Think 1970s Aeroflot without the frills of seat cushions.

This of course, is the same level of absurdity that is applied to computer security whenever there is some sort of outbreak. Essentially, pull the connections from the PC, put it a vault, encase the vault in concrete and bury the concrete to a depth of over 100 feet.

This makes the system unusable, but that is rapidly where the airline industry, with a big shove by the United States Federal Government is heading, rather than attempting to manage risk. Already, the casual travelers are looking at alternate means of getting where they are going, or are just not going. Business travelers, long the backbone of the airline industry are taking fewer flights as both costs for tickets and the hassle factor begins to take its toll. The trained person can do as much or more damage with a pen and a set of keys as they can with some form of explosive. This is not science fiction, this is fact. As a result, the United States is becoming immobile with fear and doubt while the terrorist continues to move around at his will. And that is a truly sad state of affairs.

Preparation. Drill vs. Real Life

On my morning commute, I make a habit of looking around and trying to identify those things that, in an emergency I might need to take note of. Beyond the simple question of "where are the emergency exits and where are the emergency tools" I try to play a what if game and look for the obvious and not so obvious places where trouble could occur. For example, my train crosses a series of bridges, some more than forty feet in the air. A well placed explosive could have catastrophic effects. (As a side note, it does not take a genius to figure out where the obvious places are to cripple or do serious damage to the infrastructure in and around the Metro DC area. A good street map, available a the local 7-11 and Google is about all you need, so if you think that this blog is giving the bad guys ideas you need to get out more. If they have not thought of any of this yet, it is only because they are thinking of other more nefarious things.). In fact, a little over a year ago, a truck collided with one of the bridges and almost shut it down. This would have caused chaos, despite the fact that no lives were lost.

However, there are also several level crossings that could equally be utilized as well as rail maintenance access points, most of which are unlocked and appear to be unguarded. There might be a camera near by, but by the time someone notices the bad guys park a truck for example, it could be too late.

Further, I also take the Metro (subway) in my commute and as a long time resident, it does not take much of an imagination to figure out where you can shut down the rail line and cause a whole mess of trouble. Tokyo's sarin gas incident is only one of a dozen ways to cause terror.

So, with those thoughts in mind, Secretary Chertoff's gut and recent reports about an possible increase in a threat of terrorism (is that anything like the hurricane season predictions?), I wondered if over at the Department of Homeland (In)security they were discussing any drills. Now I am all in favor of a good drill, especially the type that really tests the systems. Could you imagine this conversation:

Sec: We need to have a drill.

Flunky 1: All right sir, what sort of drill?

Sec: How about...terrorist blows up Metro under Potomac River?

Expert 1: And how much confusion and realism do you want sir?

Sec: Hmm...how much can I have?

Expert 2: Well, sir, I guess it depends on how much you want to inconvenience people and how much you want to stress the systems. I suppose you could have full realism by not announcing it. Or you could announce it and have equipment pre-staged. Or you could work it out on a black board.

The problem with all exercises, is there is always some artificiality that has to be introduced. After all, you really can not blow up a train under the Potomac (or even simulate that) during rush hour without inconveniencing thousands of people. Yet the question remains, why not? Are we as a population not more prepared if we are inconvenienced by a disruption in our normal course of affairs? What if, each year, regions had a full scale exercise that just knocked the population off its axis for a day. Companies would be allowed to claim a tax credit for the day so people would be paid. Governments and other agencies would be able to practice in REAL situation (like normal events occurring as well as the drill itself). And the population would be better prepared. Think of it as a fire drill for grown ups.

Of course, it would never happen. And because it will never happen, the United States, as a nation, will continue to be unprepared.

And you thought I was kidding

Maybe Rob Rogers is reading my blog. Maybe great minds think alike. In any case, a good chuckle for a Tuesday morning.

Digestive Threat Level?

Perhaps it is just me, but should the Secretary of the Department of Homeland (In)Security be discussing the state of his digestive system as expert testimony on the viability of a threat against the United States? (Houston Chronical and others).

I am sure Sec. Chertoff would like to retract that statement. After all, as a career politician, in a Department that has been described as dysfunctional, lax and unfocused, and where recent reports say key positions being unfilled could lead to an increased threat of missing an attack, one has to wonder what the state of his gut has to do with anything? I think Bill Schorr is right on point. At least Chertoff did not recommend duct tape and plastic wrap.

The Trouble With Normal, again

FBI data mining programs target more than just terrorists, DOJ says: Sen. Leahy wants to look into the efforts more thoroughly BY Jaikumar Vijayan July 12, 2007 (Computerworld) -- The FBI is using data mining programs to track everyone from potential terrorists to individuals who file fraudulent automobile insurance claims, according to a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) report filed with Congress this week. (ComputerWorld)

Senator Leahy says it quite well: "the report was four months late and raised more questions than it answered. The report "demonstrates just how dramatically the Bush Administration has expanded the use of [data mining] technology, often in secret, to collect and sift through Americans' most sensitive personal information."

What saddens me, is the number of people, both in and out of the administration that feel this is not only the right thing to do, but see it as something the government must do. After all, if you have nothing to hide. Frankly that sort of argument, which has been debunked by so many, is just getting tired. If you are afraid, then how can knowing the government is reading your email make you feel safer? If they are going to break the law with impunity on such a small thing, what makes you think they will follow it on the bigger issues.