Bomb dowsing for dollars to continue in Iraq

After numerous complaints that the ADE651 bomb detector is little more than a high tech, very expensive ($16-60k) dowsing rod, an investigation by the Iraqi government has determined that the problem is that half of them were defective or fakes.  Their solution is to not only keep using them, but to replace those they found to be be non-functional.

According to an article in the February 23 Washington Post, "...an investigation ordered by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki found the devices - used primarily at Iraqi checkpoints - generally work, though some were fake or ineffective. Those would be withdrawn from service and replaced with new versions, according to a statement by government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh.

"Iraq is still investigating individuals involved in the procurement and import of the devices and plans to sue the manufacturer over those that did not work, he said.

"The statement did not say exactly how many of the wands would be withdrawn from service, but al-Dabbagh later told The Associated Press that only 50 percent of the gadgets were operational"

But The National, a United Arab Emirates online paper, has a slightly different take on the story in an article posted last month.

"Aqeel Turaihi, the inspector general of the ministry of interior’s anti-fraud watchdog, said he had raised concerns that the ADE-651 bomb detectors did not work and had been purchased as part of a corrupt contract.

“There are strong indications of corruption in the deals to buy these explosives detectors and I submitted a report to that effect to the minister of interior and the parliamentary integrity commission,” he said in an exclusive interview.

“I referred [in my report] to a buying process marred by suspicions over the equipment and the efficiency and value of the contracts. There were senior officials involved in these transactions."

“These detectors are not working well. There is something seriously wrong with their performance and now Baghdad is facing more bomb attacks.”

Since there are separate anti-fraud units in each Iraqi ministry, it's unclear, at least to yours truly (who is admittedly unschooled in the ways of this newly established and often byzantine bureaucracy) who has the say over how this will come out. But since this contract was for some $85 million one wonders just how much obscurity was built into it.

Perhaps the Iraqi government needs to invest in a fraud detection wand I've been developing.  The BS651, expected to retail for $23k, is still in the development stage and requires special training, but a newer model with flashing lights and perhaps even batteries, is coming out as soon as anyone complains that the original model is less than totally effective.

(Apologies to the reading audience for using the suffixes k and million on prices; but this is due less to sticker shock than the fact that in dealing with such large figures my  word processor is running low on zeros.)

Chris O'Brien and His Suggested Rules of Investigation

Enough of those pesky dowing rod bomb detectors, since I've been divining that this isn't really where this blog was supposed to be going.  After all, fraud, waste and sheer incompetence on the part of governments isn't exactly an anomaly, and I have no doubt about it's existence.

So what's on the bookshelf that I can exert some sort of armchair expertise over? 

Well, one subject that's sure to be brought up is the work that Chris O'Brien did in the San Luis Valley and encapsulated in his trilogy of books on the subject.  I'm slogging through first of these, The Mysterious Valley, and have to admit that I'm really enjoying it!  His experiences have that high strangeness that attracts my Inner Fortean Child, and his experiences investigating some truly odd experiences in the SLV seem to have grounded him in a most admirable fashion.

For instance, he opens the book with his "Suggested Rules of Investigation", which seem to be words to the wise to anyone looking into anomalistic phenomena.  I quote these at length (as well as in italics), and will beg his forgiveness later, acting in the spirit that it is easier to ask for forgivenss than permission.

• Rule #1  Controversial subjects generate polarized responses.
• Rule #2  Record or write down everything as soon as possible, no matter how inconsequential or inconsequential it might seem at the time.
• Rule #3  Always credit your sources and respect requests for anonymity.
• Rule #4  Always be ready for anything, anytime.  Look for coincidences when investigating claims of the unusual.  Often, there may be a synchronistic element at work.
• Rule #5  It is impossible to be too objective when scientifically investigating claims of the unusual.
• Rule #6  Always assume there is a mundane exlanation until proven extraordinary.
• Rule #7  Appearances can be deceiving.  There may be more happening than meets the eye.
• Rule #8  If you publicize claims of the unusual, choose your words wisely, for your "spin" may have tremendous influence.
• Rule #9  Media coverage of the unusual, becasue of its sensational nature, is often inaccurate and cannot be accepted as totally accurate by the investigator.
•  Rule # 10  The human mind, when faced with the unknown, revert to basic primal symbols to rationalize its experience.
•  Rule # 11  When investigating claims of the unusal, one cannot reach conclusions based on intuition alone.
•  Rule #12  There is a possibility that the (sub)culture itself may cocreate manifestations of  unexplained, individually perceived phenomena.  
•  Rule # 13  We must be extremely careful not to perpetrate our own beliefs, suspicions, or actual experiences into the minds of those who desperately want to have a "special" event happen in their lives.

In The Mysterious Valley, O'Brien does an excellent job of not only setting up the story of how he came to the San Luis Valley but how he became a prime investigators of unusual phenomena there, which include unexplained lights in the skies, mystery helicopters, livestock mutilation, unusual sonic phenomena, and weirdest of all, bizarre range wars which may have been attempting to monopolize on all the uneasiness such experiences can have on a rural population.

More on high tech, high dollar dowsing rods

I really hadn't expected to make this a blog exclusively on the scam by ATSC Ltd. to sell high tech dowing rods, but when starting out a blog the only story becomes the exclusive topic!

Digging into the story a little has produced interesting additions.  Of course, trying to contact the ATSC website is futile.  Or rather, "website is under repair..."

However, thanks to the miracle of the interweb and the use of multiple marketing sites, it is possible to get a little peek at their marketing and claims at ecplazaglobal ("More Trade Chances for You"). 

There are apparently four different devices (the ADE 650, 651, 101 and 750), with the picture at right showing one being used in the Niger desert for landmine detection. The 650 and 651 are decribed as "Advanced Explosive and Narcotic Detection Equipment", features such as both "Non-Vapor" and "Non-Vapour",
"Overt or Covert operation," "Detection range exceeding 100- metres!*(in ideal conditions)", "Land-Mine detection" and able to "...detect all current known drug & explosive based substances" (or "..all know substance in the Narcotic or Explosives field."

The applications listed are "Government, (Police, Army, VIP's, etc;), VIP/Presidential Protection, Airport Authorities, Hotels, Wildlife Reservse, Private Security, Secure Premises/Shopping Malls".  No price is given, though under payment the entries range from "terms negotiable" and "CALL or email" to "CIP".  (The only acronym  for this cryptic reimbursement method I can find that would seem to apply here is "Classical Internet Protocol Over ATM" from The Free Dictionary.)

Now I don't know a whole lot, but I do know that when I start coming across such blatant errors in spelling, grammar and syntax, reflags start going up.  Of course, this is not the official website of ATSC, and judging from the overall quality of this site and wide variety of items offered (food stuffs, handbags, bust massagers, used engine oil recycling machines, cement mills, tool kits, Ugg boots, unlicked iPhones, skid loaders, flash drives and so very much more) it doesn't seem like the best place to be buying critical materials to protect the lives and limbs of military and police personnel, to say nothing of civilians. 

But wait, there's more! So very much more!

Pro.Sec ("A World of Security") is a Lebanese based "Professional Security S.A.R.L." (I couldn't even find an acronym for that one) that also lsits the ADE 651, described as a "PORTABLE EXPLOSIVE DETECTOR. This equipment detects traces and particles of explosive substances, narcotics or any other that are same substances of the cards used in the card box holder.  It works on nuclear quadrupole resonance (NQR)or nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). It can detect substances at long range to levels as low as simple contamination. The range of detection is around 50 meters with obstacles and up to 600 meters in outdoor areas, the unit can also detect explosives submerged in water or buried underground. Detection from a hovering helicopter is also possible."  There's even a nifty little mpeg "add" link there as well, complete with explosions and a fellow pulling out a bundle of sticks explosives with wires coming out of it, which surely is what most explosives look like these days. 

Okay, so enough of this selling of wishes to a gullible fear ridden security marketplace with more dollars than sense.  As I delved into this story from the comfort of m'armchair, more starts to come about.  This is not a new story, but actually the subject of an earlier NYTimes article, Iraq Swears by Bomb Detector U.S. Sees as Useless.  Back in November of 2009 they were being described by a retired USAF officer as little more than "an explosives divining rod", even though over 1,500 were  in Iraq, at most police stations and many military checkpoints, largely at the instigation of the Iraqi Ministry of the Interior's General Directorate for Combating Explosives, Major General Jehad al-Jabiri.  He's quoted saying "Whether it's magic or scientific, what I care about is it detects bombs...I don't care about Sandia or the Department of Justice or any of them.  I know more about this issue than the Americans do.  In fact, I know more about bombs than anyone in the world." 

The NYTimes did a little testing of their own, and drove right through 9 police checkpoints using the ADE-651 and was stopped at none of them, despite the two AK-47s and ammunition in the car.  When they later interviewed Jabiri in his office, they were offered an opportunity to use the device to detect a weapon and grenade sitting out there.  While a policeman there was able to detect those weapons hidden in plain sight, the reporter failed to get it to work for him after several attempts, leading the general to chide him that "You need more training."

After all, backers of the ADE-651 "...often argue that errors stem from the human operator, who they say must be rested, with a steady pulse and body temperature, before using the device. Then the operator must walk in place a few moments to “charge” the device, since it has no battery or other power source, and walk with the wand at right angles to the body. If there are explosives or drugs to the operator’s left, the wand is supposed to swivel to the operator’s left and point at them.  If, as often happens, no explosives or weapons are found, the police may blame a false positive on other things found in the car, like perfume, air fresheners or gold fillings in the driver’s teeth. "

Oh, but I weary of such back and forth, and this little debacle is not really about what this blog is supposed to be about, aside from the insight it offers into the malleability of human belief systems.  Someone is always out there waiting to capitalize on your most fondly held notions.

There are several much better sites on the ADE-651 issue than this.  Jon Starbuck's ADE651 - the milliion - dollar bomb detector scam, which led me to the Pro.Sec site, was posting on this back in early November of 2009, and the comments section has a number of links that should be followed up on by anyone with an interst in this subject.  (My favorite comment on one of those links was "What happened to the days when you can buy a divining rod for $100?") 

There's also Questions About Sniffex, ADE651, GT200, H3 Tec, HEDD1, and Other Explosive Detectors, which was questioning similar devices back in April of 2008, as well as on a surprisingly large number of divining rod type detectors.  There are links to a official US government test of a similar device that was brought to light by The (Not So) Amazing Randi, comments by Randi, and an update on similar problems being encountered by the Thai government.

The depth to which governments through out the world (and the depth of their pockets) are accepting an anomalistic mode of detection once relegated to the paranormal is truly astounding, to say nothing of the abysmal depths to which individuals hiding behind corporate facades are willing to cash in on such openmindedness. 

Consider everything, but beleive nothing, especially when large amounts of cash are operating behind the scenes.  And when it comes to corporations, rest assured that their fiduciary feasibility comes before the common good.