Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BA Flight #0222 from Dulles to Heathrow Cancelled
MSNBC News

Posted on 01/01/2004 2:14:14 PM PST by nwctwx

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-112 next last
To: Peach
Hah, Fox is too busy interviewing Nicole Richie. Fat chance they'd be interested in actual news.
61 posted on 01/01/2004 2:57:06 PM PST by MizSterious (First, the journalists, THEN the lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
The FBI, the ATF, and the CIA all had agents working at Elohim City. They had infiltrated so many people that it's doubtful whether there were any actual criminals to watch. These included a German intelligence agent on liaison with the CIA, who was rushed out of the country after the explosion.

There were numerous signs of the FBI involvement, including Brigadier General Partin's report indicating that the fertilizer bomb could not possibly have brought down the building, but that explosives must have been strapped to the concrete columns in the basement.

As with Waco, ALL of the wreckage was quickly bulldozed out of there, carried off, and buried under government seal. Among the things that disappeared at Waco, for instance, was the front door, where it could have been seen which way the bullets had pierced it. At OKC, the reinforced concrete columns were key evidence that were quickly destroyed.
62 posted on 01/01/2004 2:59:08 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: nwctwx
Flights leaving Dulles, BWI and Reagan airports are among the most dangerous to the nation's Capitol. That is why passengers are required to remain seated until the plane is thirty minutes away.
63 posted on 01/01/2004 2:59:10 PM PST by billhilly (If you're lurking here from DU, I trust this post will make you sick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
but when you say "involved", I can understand the sloppy investigation et al, but the FBI was actually complicit in blowing up the building? something like that would go to the very top of the agency, up the chain of both career people and the politicos, the entire agency would have to be totally corrupt to sanction something like that.
64 posted on 01/01/2004 2:59:38 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious
Go to the BA website. The 9:40 flight from IAD (Dulles) to LHR (Heathrow) has been cancelled. Another astute poster earlier gave the most likely explanation: If the flight TO washington was cancelled, so then must the RETURN flight be cancelled!
65 posted on 01/01/2004 2:59:58 PM PST by Trust but Verify (Will work for W)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
Yes, I think that SOME agents were involved, and that there were a number of corrupt agents at the top of the agency willing to cover for them. For this, you need to read Ambrose Evans Pritchard and Gary Aldrich's book on White House security. Aldrich makes it clear that a lot of honest agents were cleared out, and the timeservers were promoted.
66 posted on 01/01/2004 3:01:24 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
" Yeh, all that hassle got his nose out of joint."......While he was getting out of the joint.
67 posted on 01/01/2004 3:04:16 PM PST by billhilly (If you're lurking here from DU, I trust this post will make you sick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
What was the incentive for FBI agents to assist in blowing up a federal building?
68 posted on 01/01/2004 3:09:58 PM PST by Monti Cello
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Trust but Verify
Of course you're probably right, but I was responding to #53, which was a rather different question.
69 posted on 01/01/2004 3:12:47 PM PST by MizSterious (First, the journalists, THEN the lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Trust but Verify
You are correct. Local TV news reporting the return flight was canceled because the plane never left London.
70 posted on 01/01/2004 3:14:33 PM PST by kristinn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

U.K. Flight to U.S. Canceled Amid Boarding British Airways Cancels Flight to D.C. a Day After U.S. Authorities Board Its Jet at Dulles Airport

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON Jan. 1 — U.S. authorities were acting on intelligence information and not just suspicious passenger names when they boarded a British Airways jet on New Year's Eve at nearby Dulles International Airport, a national security official said Thursday. Meanwhile, the security concerns affected the same British Airways scheduled flight again on Thursday, when the airline canceled one of its three daily flights from Heathrow Airport to Washington.

Thursday's decision was based on security advice from the British government, a spokesman for the airline said.

In London, a Department of Transport spokeswoman said she was unable to comment on matters of security or whether the cancellation was due to a specific threat.

As for the New Year's Eve flight, a U.S. official said no evidence of terrorism was found and the major consequence appeared to be inconvenience, with the 247 passengers waiting more than 3 1/2 hours before getting off the plane while some of them were questioned.

"We had concerns with individuals on the flight, but threat reporting information led us to make the decision to have the flight escorted," the national security official said, speaking only on condition of anonymity.

"It was fact-related," the official said, and not just connected to the passenger list the United States now receives from airlines flying to the United States.

The official added the long delay at Dulles was caused in part by weapons screening of passengers, and partly because authorities waited for some law enforcement specialists to arrive.

Transportation Security Administration spokeswoman Jennifer Marty said officials began departing from the plane about 10:30 p.m., long after the 7:06 p.m. landing.

The plane was kept several hundred feet from the terminal during the questioning.

Passenger David Litwick told WJLA-TV in Washington that he and his wife were not questioned, but at least one other passenger was. Litwick said four FBI agents spoke to a woman who appeared to be from the Middle East, repeatedly asking her why she was not traveling with her husband.

Earlier this week, a scheduled U.S.-bound flight from Mexico was canceled because of security concerns.

"The government of Mexico made the decision to cancel Aeromexico Flight 490 after the U.S. government shared threat information with the Mexican government," Department of Homeland Security spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said.

Previous reports said the plane turned around in midair, but Roehrkasse and Mexican officials said it never took off. Roehrkasse denied that the U.S. government told Mexico it would refuse the plane landing rights.

However Agustin Gutierrez, Mexico's presidential spokesman, said the flight was canceled after United States authorities said they would refuse to allow it to land.

He also said Mexico did not receive convincing information for the cancellation.

"The question is what threat?" Gutierrez said. "This question must be answered by Homeland Security. If we are going to have a good climate of cooperation, the least that we can hope for are reasons."

The threat of terrorism also prompted the closure Tuesday night of the oil tanker terminal in Valdez, Alaska. The terminal remained closed Thursday, Lt. Cmdr. Jeff Carter of the Coast Guard said.

Tankers load Prudhoe Bay oil destined for the Lower 48 states at Valdez, the end of the 800-mile pipeline, which carries 17 percent of the nation's domestic oil supply.

Last week, security was strengthened in the Prince William Sound community after U.S. officials said al-Qaida operatives could target remote sites such as oil facilities in Alaska. Officials also said then they could not corroborate a report about an al-Qaida threat against the Valdez oil terminal.

71 posted on 01/01/2004 3:16:43 PM PST by knak (wasknaknowknid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
ping tp 27

(And I never have gotten over the fact that Padilla resembles the initial suspect sketch of John Doe in the OKC investigation.)
72 posted on 01/01/2004 3:17:01 PM PST by Pan_Yans Wife (Submitting approval for the CAIR COROLLARY to GODWIN'S LAW.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Peach
bump
73 posted on 01/01/2004 3:18:16 PM PST by bootless (Never Forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR
I suppose they could comandeer a flight taking off and plow it into any number of targets around DC from Dulles regardless of where it is scheduled to go.

naw,.....too.....ooooo..... easy.

/sarcasm

74 posted on 01/01/2004 3:19:49 PM PST by maestro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: HaloStatue; Jim Robinson
Speaking of Bush's success'... uh, tell me newby.... how many NEW terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11? How many bub?
75 posted on 01/01/2004 3:21:48 PM PST by Lion in Winter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dog
Hey, know I think we have us a disruptor...halo sure smells like one.
76 posted on 01/01/2004 3:23:45 PM PST by Lion in Winter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Monti Cello
Good grief..that is an outrageous thing to say!
77 posted on 01/01/2004 3:25:50 PM PST by MEG33 (We Got Him!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Peach
The flight from Mexico was #490 from Yucatan (Merida) to Mexico City to LAX. They have been watching this one since Christmas Eve along with Air France, Air Tahiti Nui and now British Airways.

Something must be up for them to be taking so many precautions. The Air France flight #68 for the last two nights since resuming their schedule has been made to dock at a small facility far from the terminal and all passengers screened again.

78 posted on 01/01/2004 3:26:01 PM PST by WestCoastGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Thanks for the link Peach, I purchased it. :-) It will make a nice addition to my growing library on the subject. Now... it better be good! ;-)
79 posted on 01/01/2004 3:26:53 PM PST by nwctwx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Trust but Verify
For crying out loud, maybe they just depend on people to be wise enough to realize that if a flight does not come in to Washington, it cannot leave later!

For crying out loud, I simply stated that when canceling the flight making a simple explanatory statement to avoid any misunderstanding would have been nice.

Given an "orange" alert, with everyone being extra vigilant and jittery how hard would it have been to say, "Because flight XXX was canceled earlier today there is no plane available for a return trip. Therefore flight XXX is canceled."

You're right, people do come at things from different perspectives. I guess mine is to think that adding a one senatence explanation wouldn't have been too difficult:)

80 posted on 01/01/2004 3:27:03 PM PST by not_apathetic_anymore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-112 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson