...but CSIS moves quickly to distance itself from article and
put it in context
On Friday, August 26, the Boston Globe published a story by Karen
Schafer entitled "Analysts warn of small-plane terrorism
threat." In it, she quoted Mr. Phil Anderson, "a senior
associate at the [Center for Strategic and International Studies]
who specializes in homeland security issues." In the story,
Anderson is quoted as saying that "...the possible scenarios
include situations in which Al Qaeda members could use a small
aircraft, such as a single-engine, four-seat Cessna 172, to cause
catastrophe. One potential target could be a stadium packed with
tens of thousands of people."
The reaction to this and other statements in the story was
immediate and swift, but here at ANN we were somewhat surprised at
where it came from: CSIS itself. In a press release obtained
through AOPA, CSIS distanced itself from the conclusions presented
in the article and made it clear that the statements made by
Anderson and David Heyman, director of the homeland security
program at CSIS, were of a personal nature and did not reflect the
conclusions of an ongoing study. The following text reflects the
content of the press release in its entirety:
An article in the August
26, 2004, edition of the Boston Globe that suggests that the Center
for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is scheduled to
release soon a report on aviation security that has reached
conclusions regarding the general aviation industry is
incorrect.
CSIS has a number of
efforts underway in the homeland security arena, including
examining transportation systems. However, CSIS has not yet drawn
any conclusions regarding the current vulnerability of, or
recommendations to benefit, the entire transportation industry or
general aviation in particular.
In addition, personal
statements made before a study’s completion -- including by
CSIS staff or associates and, particularly, those that, in this
case, do not place into context the full range of threats against
the transportation system of the United States – cannot be
fully representative of the final conclusions of a CSIS study
report.
“As a result,
the Globe article is incomplete and does not take into account a
broad range of findings that are still under development,”
said Jay Farrar, CSIS vice president for external relations.
“We are not faulting the Globe reporter. We simply want to
put the article into the appropriate context.”
Over the past few years,
CSIS has examined a broad range of issues in the area of homeland
security. All forms of transportation have been examined, and
in fact continue to be examined, as part of our work on homeland
security. Among those issues are transportation methods, including
ocean shipping, overland vehicles, rail, scheduled airlines and
cargo aircraft, and general aviation assets. CSIS study
methodology always looks at the full spectrum of possible scenarios
in order to assess the range of probable outcomes and policy
responses.
In 2002, CSIS conducted
a threat scenario exercise called SILENT VECTOR that examined the
policy fault-lines in countering a terrorist attack that made use
of transportation assets. It was posited along the track that
credible but imprecise intelligence reporting indicated a
transportation-based terrorist threat against energy infrastructure
in the United States.
CSIS work in the
transportation area of homeland security is ongoing, and the Center
will release reports as and when final conclusions are
reached.
(This is not the first time
that the Boston Globe has published stories attacking GA with
little more than overactive imaginations in support of the
arguments.
Read the other stories that ANN has published about the Boston
Globe. -- Ed. JJ)