Charge against American Airlines’ mechanic highlights ‘insider threat’- Suspect allegedly tried to sabotage navigation gear on Boeing 737

In this March 22, 2016 file photo, passengers check into their flights near a security checkpoint sign at O'Hare International Airport in Chicago. The arrest of an airline mechanic suspected of being sympathetic with terrorists and charged with sabotaging a jetliner has renewed fear about the “insider threat” to aviation security. Despite security upgrades since the hijacking terror attacks of 2001, breaches including a gun-running operation at the nation’s biggest airport illustrate the possibility that a well-placed airline or airport employee could bring down a plane. (AP Photo/Teresa Crawford, File)

By DAVID KOENIG,  AP Airlines Writer 09/21 –  The arrest of an airline mechanic suspected of being sympathetic with terrorists and charged with sabotaging a jetliner has renewed fear about the “insider threat” to aviation security.

Despite security upgrades since the hijacking terror attacks of 2001, breaches including a gun-running operation at the nation’s biggest airport illustrate the possibility that a well-placed airline or airport employee could bring down a plane.

“Should people be worried? Hell, yeah,” says Doron Pely, a former aviation security consultant in Israel. “This doesn’t require a suicide bomber. It requires access to an airframe, an aircraft and motivation.”

Several experts interviewed for this story said it would be difficult if not impossible to stop every determined criminal or terrorist. They said steps that might beef up defenses against an insider attack — such as requiring aviation workers to go through security checkpoints just like passengers — could add costs and slow down work that goes on at airports.

While there have been several cases in recent years of insiders using their special access to board planes without going through security — in one case, even steal a plane — they haven’t harmed passengers, and there hasn’t been clamoring for tougher security.

Under federal law, people applying to work in secure areas of an airport must pass a three-part vetting process run by the Transportation Security Administration — a criminal-records check, a “security threat assessment” that includes checking their names against a terrorism watch list, and proof that they are eligible to work in the United States.

Abdul Alani, who was born in Iraq and became a U.S. citizen in 1992, passed that test and got a job repairing planes for American Airlines. There were setbacks in his career — Alaska Airlines fired him in 2008 for shoddy work, something that American apparently didn’t know — but there was no criminal history, no other outward signs of problems.

On Sept. 5, Alani was arrested in Miami and charged with trying to disable or damage an aircraft. According to an air marshal’s affidavit, Alani admitted that in July he used his access to the back side of the Miami airport terminal to drive up to a Boeing 737, open a compartment below the cockpit, and glue a piece of foam inside navigation equipment in such a way that pilots wouldn’t be able to tell how fast or high they were flying. The blockage triggered an alert when pilots powered up the plane, and they canceled the takeoff.

Incidents of insiders sabotaging planes are considered extremely rare, although the Federal Aviation Administration does not track them and has no numbers, a spokeswoman said.

In 2013, a technician with access to the tarmac was arrested as he tried to plant what he thought was a bomb at the airport in Wichita, Kansas. He had told an FBI undercover agent that he wanted to carry out a jihad for Al Qaeda.

In 2014, a Delta Air Lines baggage handler was arrested and later convicted for using his security badge to avoid checkpoints and help smuggle guns on flights. In 2018, a Horizon Air employee stole a plane from the Seattle airport and crashed it 25 miles away. Neither of those incidents was believed related to terrorism, but both underscored the threat posed by insiders.

Investigators have found that TSA reviews sometimes fall short of the mark.

In 2015, the inspector general of the Homeland Security Department, TSA’s parent, found that TSA failed to identify 73 aviation workers with security badges who should have triggered terrorism-related red flags. The reason: TSA wasn’t authorized to get all terror-related information from other federal agencies. After an outcry, TSA got more access.

The watchdog office found that TSA’s checking of applicants’ crime history and legal status to work in the United States was even worse. “Thousands of records” were unreliable because they were missing Social Security numbers or contained merely an initial instead of a first name. TSA did not check records to see if aviation employees committed crimes after getting their security badges — it counted on the workers reporting that themselves — the inspector general said.

The same watchdog has raised concerns, most recently in 2016, about airport security IDs called SIDA badges that are lost or stolen. TSA currently requires all aviation workers to tell their airport if their badge is lost or stolen, and airports are required to deactivate those badges.

Nearly 1 million people work at the roughly 450 airports under federal control, and many of them avoid the kind of screening that passengers are subject to. Requiring them to go through security checkpoints would mean more spending on TSA and interfere with workers’ ability to go where they are needed.

“Just like (with) police officers, there is a certain amount of trust you have to extend to certain people if you want the system to work,” said Jeffrey Price, an aviation professor at Metropolitan State University of Denver and author of books on security. Still, he thinks we don’t pay enough attention to the insider threat. “It’s not easy to prevent, it’s not easy to detect.”

Alani, the airline mechanic arrested in Miami, was not on a terrorism or no-fly list, according to an air marshal who testified in federal court this week. He had no criminal record. When FBI agents examined his phone, according to prosecutors, they found video of mass murders carried out by Islamic State fighters and other evidence of possible terrorism sympathies.

Alani hasn’t been charged with terrorism-related crimes, but he does face a charge of disabling an aircraft. If convicted, he could spend 20 years in prison.

The question for aviation and security officials is whether he could have been stopped with more careful screening or supervision.

“Hopefully this will serve as a reminder to all those that work in aviation that they need to take the existing security procedures more seriously,” said Price, the security expert in Denver, “because the threat is still out there.”

___

Associated Press Writers Bernard Condon in New York and Curt Anderson in Miami contributed to this report.

https://www.apnews.com/ce13931c2dae4bd482d9ace2ce28db92

Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Posted in: Arrests, Background Checks, Public Safety, Sabotage

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

3 × five =

Terms of Use for Posting Comments

Terms of Use

This site (the “Site”) is operated and maintained by Law Enforcement Education Foundation, Corporation (“Company”). Throughout the Site, the terms “we”, “us” and “our” refer to Company.  The words “user,” “you” and “your” as used herein refer to you.

Please read these terms and conditions of use (“Terms of Use”) carefully before contributing content. If you do not agree to these Terms of Use, please do not contribute content. Your use of the Site is subject to the Terms and Conditions found here .

By contributing content to the Site, you represent and warrant that you are at least eighteen (18) years old and that you have read and understand these Terms of Use and any amendments thereto and agree to be bound by them. If you are not at least eighteen (18) years old or you do not agree and accept these Terms of Use, you are prohibited from contributing content.

From time to time, we may permit users to submit content to the Site.  You hereby acknowledge and agree that by submitting remarks, comments, suggestions, ideas, graphics, feedback, edits, concepts, comments, photographs, illustrations and other materials (other than personal information and/or registration information) through the Site (individually and collectively, “Submissions”), you (i) grant us a nonexclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, transferable, irrevocable and fully sub-licensable right to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, translate, distribute, publish, create derivative works from and publicly display and perform such Submissions throughout the world in any media, now known or hereafter created, without attribution to you; (ii) grant us the right to pursue at law any person or entity that violates your and/or our rights in your Submissions; and (iii) forever waive any and all of your rights, including but not limited to moral rights, if any, in and to your Submissions, including, without limitation, any all rights or requirements of attribution or identification of you as the author of the Submission or any derivative thereof.  We reserve the right to remove any of your Submissions from the Site, in whole or in part, without notice to you, for any reason or no reason.

Submissions are made voluntarily. Any submissions which include personally identifiable information are subject to our Privacy Policy found here .  You may not upload or otherwise publish content on the Site that (i) is confidential to you or any third party; (ii) is untrue, inaccurate, false or other than an original work of your authorship; (iii) that relates to or impersonates any other person; (iv) violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property rights of any person or entity; (v) contains any content, personally identifiable information or other information, or materials of any kind that relate or refer to any other person or entity other than the provider of the products, goods or services to which the Submission relates; or (vi) violates any law, or in any manner infringes or interferes with the rights of others, including but not limited to the use of names, information, or materials that (A) libel, defame, or invade the privacy of any third party, (B) are obscene or pornographic, (C) are harmful, threatening, offensive, abusive, harassing, vulgar, false or inaccurate, racially, sexually, ethnically or are otherwise objectionable or otherwise contrary to the laws of any place where such Submissions may be accessed; (D) constitute personal attacks on other individuals; (E) promote criminal, immoral or illegal activity; (F) promote or advertise any person, product or service or solicit funds; or (G) are deemed confidential by any contract or policy.

You are solely responsible for any Submissions you make and their accuracy. We take no responsibility and assume no liability for any Submissions posted by you or any third party.

Unless approved by us in writing in advance, you agree not to: (i) provide or create a link to the Site; or (ii) create any frames at any other sites pertaining to any of the content located on the Site.

We reserve the right, in our discretion, to update, change or replace any part of these Terms of Use for Posting Comments by posting updates and/or changes to our Site.  It is your responsibility to check this page periodically for changes.  Your continued use of, and/or access to the Site, following the posting of any changes to these Terms of Use for Posting Comments, constitutes your acceptance of those changes.