Posted on 12/03/2009 7:15:46 AM PST by Sequoyah101
This squib appeared on the KHOU website on November 18 but is seems to be only a fraction of the story. Read the comments below the story please.
ATLANTA -- AirTran Airways says a flight from Atlanta to Houston with more than 70 passengers on board was delayed when a passenger refused to end a cell phone call.
... Flight 297, a Boeing 717, was taxiing on the runway in Atlanta Tuesday afternoon when a crew member asked a passenger to turn off his phone.
... after several failed attempts by the crew member to end the conversation, the captain returned the plane to the gate.
... the passenger complied when he was asked to get off the plane. He says no charges were filed, and that the plane departed for Houston 2 ½ hours later.
(Excerpt) Read more at khou.com ...
Unsurprising. The airlines remember what happened the last time they tried that stuff. CAIR sued the crap outta them and won.
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts on this matter; years ago I used to read your very interesting postings to TM, and I was very curious what your thoughts about this incident were - as your conclusions were typcial spot-on to my own.
Unfortunately we live in a target rich environment throughout our entire nation, and this already target-rich environment is geometrically multiplied & many times magnified due to the general complacency of the "NON-PARANOID" couch potato public.
SAD.
It was a setup for another lawsuit and even more...
“they’re always picking on Muslims”...
publicity, IMO.
.
I think this very well could have happened. As crippled by PC as America is, the airline could have hushed it all up.
.
.
I think this very well could have happened. As crippled by PC as America is, the airline could have hushed it all up.
.
One thing that has me thinking on this. The plane was a relatively small Boeing 717 - a 100 pax DC-9 equivalent, just about a step up from a commuter jet. 11 jihadi for a much smaller jet (and bang).
Second thing, if this was a dry run, the overt attention they received should have tipped off TSA (provided there are some who are competent there) and alertness increased. If I was a jihadi thinking about using the tactic, I’d think twice given the crew and passenger response. I would have expected a more subtle attempt, not one to draw attention the way they did - it just sends flags up all over the place.
Didn't they settle out of court for an undisclosed settlement?
My friend personally spoke with Mr. Hackamack over the phone and by email yesterday and this appears to be legitimate. Mr. Hackamack also mentioned that his friend Mr. Petruna has since lost his job with NASA.
Hackamack, Petruna, NASA?
Where were these mentioned?
It will be interesting to see if anyone else steps forward. Of course, maybe they’re afraid of a lawsuit.
Could well be.
Yeah, 'Zilla, I was thinking the same thing. But I kind of doubt these guys are known for being either subtle or smart. It's also possible this was an actual operational team, which would make them even less likely to be either smart or subtle. I don't think the size of the jet makes a lot of difference when you're thinking of seizing a dozen or more aircraft all headed in different directions. What damage do you think that aircraft would do to the structure of the US Capitol Building? Especially fully fueled?
If the TSA does raise security in light of this incident, might CAIR send forth their lawyers once again and charge racial profiling? I think the airlines are running scared and this is evidenced by their readiness to put a substitute crew on the plane. The passengers realized the danger and wisely got off; thus forcing the cancellation. I'd be thanking the good Lord for the two Texans who took action and praying they'd be on my flight next time or somebody like them. I'd also be determining that I myself would step into those shoes and take appropriate action. CAIR can sue me if they want but I've got to be alive for them to take such action and I'd rather be a live defendant than a dead plaintiff.
Anyone else think these people wanted to get caught? Suing the airlines to get millions on “profiling” charges would be smarter and faster than working for it for their people here in the U.S., they would have the $ w/o drawing attention to their other sources of income, and the irony of using U.S. funds to attack the U.S. is not something I’d put past these sub-human life forms....also, you don’t waste recruits prematurely. Just an idea...
Settling out of court is a solid win without the judgement. Ask any lawyer if he'd rather collect that way than to have to do battle in court. If the lawyer took their case on a contingency basis he collects 30% minimum without ever having to step foot in court. 'Course if he does take it to trial and wins, he might get more like 45% of the proceeds. If he takes it to court and loses, he collects ZIP. So lawyers love out of court settlements.
If we look at the 911 terrorists as our 'type' hijackcrash standard, while they did do test runs, they seemed to be careful not to draw overt attention to themselves. If the jihadi-wannabe's on this flight were actual operatives, boy did they get their names on the watch list pretty fast. If operatives, I would suspect that this is a 'head fake', something to distract officials from a real test run.
What damage do you think that aircraft would do to the structure of the US Capitol Building? Especially fully fueled?
911 jets were 757 & 767, large long-haul planes. These 717 are smaller regional sized - thus carry less fuel.
So we have to factor these two things in
1. Higher number of jihadi (11 vs 4)
2. Substantially smaller planes = smaller targets
3. If multiple targets - still need people who can adequately pilot them - harder if needing many, vs the 8 needed on 911.
Makes me wonder about the reliability of the information. If more rumor than fact, then the story may be inflated. If the reliability of the witness is solid, then either we have some very stupid jihadi's or a probable head fake to throw off law enforcement / intel from the real test runs.
2) Concur on the rest. Folks: Ears Unplugged, Eyes Open, Heads Up. Don't count on TSA or airport police to do your looking for you. Even assuming the best of motivation on their part (Hah!), they can't be everywhere.
Let's assume that the events in the story are true. Even if true, it does not mean these guys were doing a dry-run or were affiliated with Al Quada, etc. It does not mean they were planning anything other than what they did. But they can still be considered terrorists, IMO. If this unfolded as described, it could well be that their goal was to instill fear and terror into the people on the flight, or the people reading about it here.
In their ignorant jihadist mentality, anything they can do to inconvenience the great Satan is a victory for them. If the only thing they accomplished was to cause a flight to be canceled, and to cause people to fear flying, then they have struck a blow for their death cult. The musicians on Annie Jacobson's flight and the Flying Imams were doing the same thing. Plus they get to play the "aggrieved minority" card and clean up in court when our gutless/traitorous judges and the ACLU bend over backward to accommodate them.
If this really happened, it was a terrorist attack and it succeeded.
I agree, if it was their intention to instill fear, they were committing an act of terror. If that is the case, the TSA REALLY messed up by letting them back on the plane without interviewing other passengers/crew.
I don't think that was the plot - they could have created similar fear without exposing themselves by a simple bomb threat or such.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.