The following incident took place on November 14th at the Baltimore Washington International Airport (BWI). From the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database — an information system run by the FBI:

On 14 November 2007, an identified individual on the public side of the (BWI) airport reportedly asked a behavior detection officer questions regarding security procedures, training, and security cameras. Additionally, the subject was caught photographing a motorized room freshener located near the ceiling in the men’s room. Law enforcement officers (LEOs) responded and interviewed the subject, who stated he was a college student doing a project for his American Studies class. LEOs located the photo of the aerosol container, as well as a security camera from an unknown location. A search of the subject’s vehicle resulted in negative findings.  

In my analysis, there are a few important things to consider. For starters, the fact that the "identified individual" was able to himself identify TSA behavior detection officers is cause for concern. Behavior Detection Officers are supposed to be undercover.

Behavior Detection Officers are TSAs "high performing" screeners who have earned "merit-based promotions" as part of TSAs "Career Progression Program." If said "college student" was able to identify TSA's undercover agents –  tasked with spotting terrorists at airports based on how people behave — as easily as mentioned above, it becomes clear that TSA "layers of security" are nets with scary holes. Who's watching whom? 

The TSA agents made the decision not to blow their cover (further) and called Law Enforcement Officers to the scene. The LEOs discovered the "college student" had photographs of the aerosol container in the men's bathroom. Aerosol containers dispense pressurized substances into an environment in a fine spray or gas. Said "college student" also had a photograph of a security camera "from an unknown location."

Of the incident, my law enforcement source noted that this is the second incident involving an air freshener at a major east coast airport — in the last three months.

Note:
On 25 September 2007, (Boston) while conducting weekly maintenance, a worker discovered a vandalized restroom deodorizer. Some of the deodorizer’s internal components were removed, to include the timing mechanism, two D-cell batteries, and the actual de-odorizer container. It should be noted that the internal components removed from the deodorizer could all be used in the construction of an improvised explosive device.

I can be reached at Annie@TheAviationNation.com

Share This Article