CEO'S BLOG
11 March 2011
With all the events of the world right now, there did not seem to be much fanfare surrounding the retirement of Lance Armstrong from cycling on 16 Feb 2011. He won a record seven Tour de France titles and survived cancer. He should be regarded as one of the world's greatest athletes, however speculation continues into allegations of doping and this article published in Sports Illustrated on 24 January 2011 is very interesting from an investigation perspective (are the dates of the events in the article and Armstrong's retirement coincidental?).
The Case Against Lance Armstrong
As the cyclist and cancer crusader faces possible indictment by a grand jury, SI takes a close look at old and new allegations that he used performance-enhancing drugs while winning Tour de France championships
By Selena Roberts, David Epstein
Around 8 p.m. on Nov. 11, 2010, Italian police and customs officials acting at the behest of agents of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) pulled over Yaroslav Popovych as he drove on a roundabout in Quarrata, a quaint Tuscan village of stucco facades and colorful shutters between Pistoia and Florence. The officials had been looking for Popovych, one of Lance Armstrong's Radio Shack teammates, to execute a search warrant. Italian authorities say the Ukrainian cyclist was startled but cooperative. He led them through olive groves to his house beside a cemetery. There the officials found drug-testing documents, medical supplies and performance-enhancing drugs. They also found e-mails and texts that, they say, establish that as recently as 2009 Armstrong's team had links to controversial Italian physician Michele Ferrari, with whom the Texan had said he cut ties in 2004.
This new evidence is now part of the FDA's investigation, directed by agent Jeff Novitzky, into whether Armstrong was involved in an organized doping operation as a member of the team sponsored by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS), an independent agency of the federal government. In light of this criminal inquiry involving the greatest Tour de France rider of all time, SI reviewed hundreds of pages of documents and interviewed dozens of sources in Europe, New Zealand and the U.S. Because the case could potentially involve accusations that are more than a decade old, SI also examined doping allegations against Armstrong throughout his career as a pro cyclist, discovering information that is reported here for the first time.
The federal inquiry focuses on the period from 1999 to 2004, during which Armstrong won six of his seven Tour de France titles and the USPS team received more than $40 million toward sponsorship of the squad, which was managed by Tailwind, Inc., according to documents reviewed by SI. Through his attorney, Armstrong claims that he "started at USPS as a low paid, regular rider" and "was never the boss, director, the owner, or the doctor." But because government sponsorship is involved, if evidence suggests that Armstrong was directing illegal doping activity, the inquiry could result in charges against him of conspiracy, wire fraud, money laundering, racketeering, drug trafficking and defrauding the U.S. government.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1180944/1/index.htm
11 March 2011
The 24 January bombing at Moscow's Domodedovo International Airport and the recent killings of two U.S soldiers at Frankfurt Airport, this article offers timely advice for everyone travelling through airports around the world. Note that both attacks took place in soft areas of the airports (arrival areas where adequate security is almost impossible to maintain.
The Moscow Attack and Airport Security by Scott Stewart (republished with permission of STRATFOR)
The Jan. 24 bombing at Moscow's Domodedovo international airport killed 35 people and injured more than 160. The attack occurred at approximately 4:40 p.m. as passengers from several arriving international flights were leaving the airport after clearing immigration and customs. The attacker (or attackers; reports are still conflicting over whether the attack was conducted by a man or a man and a woman together) entered the international arrivals hall of the airport, a part of the facility that is outside the secure area and that is commonly packed with crowds of relatives and taxi and limo drivers waiting to meet travelers.
Once the attacker was in the midst of the waiting crowd and exiting passengers, the improvised explosive device that he (or she) carried was detonated. It is not clear at this point whether the device was command-detonated by the attacker as a traditional suicide bomb or if the device was remotely detonated by another person. The attack was most likely staged by islamist militants from Russia's northern Caucasus region who have conducted a long series of attacks in Russia, including the Aug. 24, 2004, suicide bombings that destroyed two Russian airliners.
The Domodedovo attack serves as a striking illustration of several trends we have been following for years now, including the difficulty of preventing attacks against soft targets, the resourcefulness of militants in identifying such targets and the fixation militants have on aviation-related targets.
11 March 2010
Here is a follow up to the previous article:
Self Preservation Techniques for Airline Passengers
(republished with permission of STRATFOR)
Jan. 24, 2011: Five years ago we published the following report warning readers that soft areas in airports outside the security hardline remain vulnerable to attack. An attack today at Moscow Domodedovo airport further underscores our analysis.
Editor's Note: This is the second in a seven-part series on personal security for international travelers.
The International Air Transport Association, a Montreal-based industry group, predicts the number of people who fly each year on business and leisure will soon top 2 billion worldwide. As traffic rises, airports around the world are increasingly jammed with crowds of passengers waiting to check in, pass security and board their flights. Although the congestion increases pressure on security authorities, the fact is that air travel is safer today - in the post-Sept. 11 environment - than it had been in years. Passengers, however, should not rely solely on outside security for their personal protection.
Air marshals are present on U.S. and many foreign airlines, cockpit doors remain locked while the plane is in flight and international "no-fly" databases are aimed at ensuring that people who pose a potential threat do not board international flights. Perhaps most effective is the heightened state of vigilance and awareness that air travelers have adopted since the Sept. 11 attacks. In addition to official security, hijackers also would have to contend with a plane full of passengers who know now that the highjacking could be a suicide mission - and that their lives are at stake.
Even with this atmosphere of security surrounding air travel, travelers nevertheless can take steps to ensure their own security while on a plane. Passengers who include a smoke hood and a small flashlight among their carry-on items, for example, could help themselves in an emergency situation, whether it be an attack or an accident aboard the aircraft. In such situations, smoke inhalation, especially from the extremely toxic burning plastics within a plane, poses a serious threat. In addition, a flashlight can be used to facilitate getting off of the aircraft when the power is out and the air is thick with smoke.
With more emphasis placed on securing aircraft, however, militants could be content to confine their attacks to terminals, where crowds of waiting people present an enticing target for militants aiming to cause mass casualties. Travelers, however, can mitigate the risks by maintaining a high degree of situational awareness and taking other personal protection measures.
In a security sense, airport terminals are divided into two parts. The "soft side" is before the security checkpoint - where passengers and carry-on luggage is screened - while the "hard side" is after. Time spent in line at the ticket counter and then at security checkpoints, therefore, should be minimized. In the first case, arriving at the counter early enough to avoid the mad dash of latecomers would help, while avoiding wearing clothes with lots of metal buttons and buckles, and minimizing carry-on baggage can expedite getting through security. Once on the hard side, travelers should avoid the waiting areas at the gate, if possible, by utilizing the members-only lounges operated by many airlines. This helps to keep the traveler out of a potential attack zone - away from crowds and out of plain view.
In many parts of the world, air travel can be dangerous because of lax maintenance and safety procedures. This is especially true in the developing world, where maintenance regulations and procedures often are not strictly enforced. The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration prohibits U.S. carriers from flying into foreign airports that do not meet security and safety standards. Although this information is not readily available to the public, determined travelers could contact the FAA for a list - and then avoid those airlines and airports that U.S. authorities consider substandard. The consular information sheets issued by the U.S. State Department also provide information about air travel safety.
At the destination airport, transportation can be arranged in advance to further minimize time spent on the soft side. For traveling executives, discretion should be employed when it comes to finding the local driver on the other end of a flight. A driver who holds up a sign bearing the executive's name and company could tip off potential kidnappers and terrorists to the presence of a high-value target.
Airport terminals, especially in the developing world, are notorious for criminal activity as well. When on the soft side, unattended luggage can be stolen and travelers can be victimized by pickpockets - especially when they are less vigilant after a long, exhausting intercontinental flight.
Situational awareness and preparation are the most effective personal security measures a traveler can take. Paying attention to people and events in the area and avoiding potential attack zones are two basics for self-preservation while in the terminal and on the plane.