Millions In CIA Secrecy Blown By Geeks Who Obsess Over Tail
Numbers
It seems to have started in Britain, the rather peculiar pastime
of standing in the rain at the end of the runway, watching planes
land and take off and collecting photographs and lists of their
tail numbers, in the same way avid bird-watchers keep logs and
details of the variety of avian life they've seen. It makes as much
sense as any hobby, which is to say, not much, but it's always been
regarded as a harmless activity. But is it? According to Newsweek
magazine, the combination of these harmless eccentrics and the
Internet has made it extremely difficult for the CIA to maintain
the "cover" it needs for the aircraft it uses in clandestine
activities.
In a small item in the Periscope section of the March 7 Newsweek
(currently on the stands), Newsweek's Mark Hosenball describes how
plane spotters not only "outed" two reputed Agency aircraft, a 737
and a Gulfstream, they also may have exposed Agency activities in
some extremely sensitive locations. Hosenball helpfully describes
to Newsweek's readers how to do it, although he does keep the tail
numbers of the aircraft to himself (somewhat pointless... the cat
can only come out of the bag once). Someone in the US intel
community admitted to him that this kind of thing was "not
helpful."
To illustrate what Hosenball is getting at, it took Aero-News
less that five minutes to establish the following: The 737 in
question is actually a Boeing Business Jet (737-7BC), Construction
Number 33010 and Line Number 1037. It first flew December 12, 2001
and on the 20th was delivered to c company called Premier Executive
Transport Services with the registration number N313P. In November,
2004 it was transferred to a company called Keeler and Tate
Management LLC of Reno. The ownership trail on the Gulfstream V is
similar; although it may have passed through another firm called
Bayard Foreign Marketing. It flew under N379P while owned Premier
Executive Transport Services Inc and N8068V under Keeler and Tate
Management. (It originally had the test registration N581GV). In
the FAA's online database, 8068V shows up as a Robinson R-22 whose
registration was cancelled in 1993 due to export to South Africa.
(The old PETS numbers have already been reserved by new
owners).
Unfortunately, this may be much more than the tip of the
iceberg. The CIA is very unlikely to have more than one BBJ, and
the exposure of this machine -- if it is indeed an Agency machine
-- has not only eliminated *its* utility to the Agency, but also
made any reasonably likely replacement much less likely. There are
not many options left to the Agency for moving people and stuff
without raising a hue and cry. The G-V likewise is a machine that
is optimal for what that kind of organization does. It's not
exceedingly rare, it's not remarkable looking, and it has range and
speed. But from now on *every* Gulfstream operator is going to get
the hairy eyeball, all over the world, from folks who have reasons
to dislike or fear American spooks. Including any Gulfstream
operators who are really spooks.
Perhaps this is what DCI Porter Goss meant on February 17th when
he told Congress: "Our officers are taking risks, and I will be
asking them to take more risks--justifiable risks--because I would
much rather explain why we did something than why we did nothing."
Perhaps he was speaking of the essential paradox of clandestine
duty in an open society.
Once the CIA operated
numerous businesses, known as "proprietaries," the most well-known
of which were airlines: China Air Transport and Air America. Having
anonymous and untraceable aircraft is, of course, useful in
clandestine activity, which is, according to the National Security
Act of 1947, why there is a CIA. Without the larger proprietaries
of the fifties and sixties, legally constituted clandestine
organizations maintain a raft of costly shell companies among which
aircraft are shuffled in an attempt to make them untraceable by
foreign powers. But now the untraceable has been made
traceable.
Who's to blame for this setback in the Global War on Terrorism?
Well, like most such setbacks, the enemy can't take the credit.
Someone on our side - specifically, lawyers -- betrayed the secret,
according to Hosenball. "Intel sources say the CIA's own lawyers
... decreed that... the agency must register its aircraft ... with
public authorities like the FAA, even though this could provide
clues to clandestine activity," he wrote.
Efforts to put the cat back in the bag continue, and may lead to
some changes in the rules. The police can get an untraceable
license plate for an unmarked car, or they can get one that leads
to a false database entry. So can the FBI. Perhaps a similar
accommodation can be worked out for the spy agency's airplanes. Or
perhaps the FAA could charge extra for an "unlisted number." Many
corporations would happily pay for that ability.
But in the meantime: congratulations, taxpayer. You're a
fractional owner of a formerly-secret BBJ.