Another Flawed Security Approach: Defense Contractors & Security Toys

3 Firms Will Compete to Build New Border Network

Northrop Grumman Corp., Lockheed Martin Corp. and Raytheon Co. are putting together rival teams to compete for the Homeland Security Department's new contract to set up an integrated network of sensors and cameras along the U.S. northern and southern borders.

Why wouldn't these three companies get in on the action. For Raytheon this is a growth opportunity in the face of consistent layoffs (including some of my family members) while still posting profits. Lockheed has not been as competitive in the airplane production end of their business as they once were. Together with Northrop these three make up part of the defense industry stranglehold on our tax dollars. The entire defense contractor industry is a shameful part of our history.

I am still smarting over the image of Casper Weinberger sitting in the cockpit of a military jet fighter complaining about $500 ashtrays for pilots in the cockpit. His commentary was to give the pilots "old mayonaisse jars," not realizing that there shouldn't be ANY smoking allowed in a multi-million dollar fighter jet filled with JP-5 "go faster and burn brighter than hell" jet fuel.

But Weinberger isn't the only Secretary of Defense that has been out of his element. Remember this quote? "You don't go to war with the army you want. You go to war with the army you have."

The Secure Border Initiative, announced by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff in November, is expected to be one of the department's largest contracts, with an estimated value of $2 billion, according to market research firm Input Inc. of Reston.

The money would go toward technologies, such as advanced video cameras and heat sensors, that could be mounted on poles and fences or in movable unmanned vehicles. If an intrusion is detected, an alert would sound for Border Patrol units.

We are right back to using technology when what we need is personnel, training AND the technology. We are not paying attention to the layering methodology of security, which starts with putting people in place, training on the methods, testing the training and people, and then the use of technology. The technology will NOT be effective unless we have people that can use the technology, the methodology, and enforce the border security.

The new system will replace the proposed America's Shield Initiative, a less comprehensive program that would have updated cameras and sensors along U.S. borders with Canada and Mexico. It also is intended to build on an even older program, the controversial "remote video surveillance" initiative, that began in 1998. That surveillance system has been criticized in recent months.

And how effective have these "older" programs been in the absence of having adequate numbers of personnel? Answer: not very effective. These programs put money and resources into technology without putting equal emphasis on people. The IS FIRST a PEOPLE PROBLEM!

Although $429 million has been spent to install video surveillance cameras and sensors at U.S. borders, the cameras are not fully coordinated with the sensors, and it is not clear whether the system is increasing border control agents' productivity, according to a recent report from Richard L. Skinner, inspector general at the Homeland Security Department.

Duh! Doh! The Homer Simpson plan for managing homeland security. If it works at all it is because of blind luck.

The project has been marred by delays, cost overruns and ineffective oversight, as well as numerous false alarms, Skinner found.

Anyone want to bet we kept paying the contractors and the managers involved in the delays and cost overruns? For all you church-goers out there supporting the Bush plan of homeland security, please add a prayer that someone doesn't bring a dirty bomb up from Central America.

One of the challenges for the winning team on the new contract will be to integrate its cameras and devices with the existing systems. Department officials said at a Feb. 9 day-long industry briefing that they expect to issue a request for proposals for the project in March and to make an award in September.

Hello! The existing system is ineffective and costly. Why would we want to do this?

Good God! What are these idiots doing? Well, let us see.

1. Our airport security remains a joke. My mother just resturned from a flight to Florida and she absent-mindedly left some prohibited things in her purse. Neither airport caught these items as she passed though security at the Boston or the Tampa ends of the travel itinerary. But even our baggage handling systems are manned by improperly trained and under-paid staffs that have rapid rates of employee turnovers.

2. Our port security is a joke. Only 6% of our containers are actually searched and our x-ray technology only detects "anomalies" which in one case turned out to be cookies (c.f. 60 Minutes 02-26-06). There is no universal system of security at the points of origin and anything could be shipped via these containers.

3. Because our ports are not safe, the railroads and trucks that pick up the 40 foot containers and take them all over our nation (you mid-westerners know what I mean) without ever knowing if they are secure.

4. Recent news reports in Chicagoland raised the issue of the safety and security of our chemical producing plants. Seriously folks, Greenpeace has been raising this issue at several plants in Hammond and East Chicago, Indiana. In Boston, "gasoline alley" runs through parts of Revere, Winthrop and East Boston, has millions of gallons of fuels stored in tanks, and has unsecured ports where fuels are off-loaded. Just south of Boston proper, in the Dorchester area along the Expressway (right along the Big Dig) there are natural gas tanks. The number of vulnerable sites producing chemicals is astounding. And all of these places ship via trucking or railways.

But NONE of this is news. The Boston concerns go way back to the 1960s and 1970s when we had all kinds of SLA wannabes sending pipe bombs through the mail. Railroad and trucking security has been concerning us for decades, as have been our ports.

But we keep spending hard-earned tax dollars in the wrong places and on the wrong toys. Rest well tonight. Your government is putting national security at the top of the list of your concerns. NOT!