I've been waiting for this. This concept of building bombs on-site occurred to me years ago.
Posted on 07/15/2004 6:19:30 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
A WWS Exclusive Article
Note from the Editors: You are about to read an account of what happened during a domestic flight that one of our writers, Annie Jacobsen, took from Detroit to Los Angeles. The WWS Editorial Team debated long and hard about how to handle this information and ultimately we decided it was something that should be shared. What does it have to do with finances? Nothing, and everything. Here is Annie's story.
On June 29, 2004, at 12:28 p.m., I flew on Northwest Airlines flight #327 from Detroit to Los Angeles with my husband and our young son. Also on our flight were 14 Middle Eastern men between the ages of approximately 20 and 50 years old. What I experienced during that flight has caused me to question whether the United States of America can realistically uphold the civil liberties of every individual, even non-citizens, and protect its citizens from terrorist threats.
On that Tuesday, our journey began uneventfully. Starting out that morning in Providence, Rhode Island, we went through security screening, flew to Detroit, and passed the time waiting for our connecting flight to Los Angeles by shopping at the airport stores and eating lunch at an airport diner. With no second security check required in Detroit we headed to our gate and waited for the pre-boarding announcement. Standing near us, also waiting to pre-board, was a group of six Middle Eastern men. They were carrying blue passports with Arabic writing. Two men wore tracksuits with Arabic writing across the back. Two carried musical instrument cases – thin, flat, 18" long. One wore a yellow T-shirt and held a McDonald's bag. And the sixth man had a bad leg -- he wore an orthopedic shoe and limped. When the pre-boarding announcement was made, we handed our tickets to the Northwest Airlines agent, and walked down the jetway with the group of men directly behind us.
My four-year-old son was determined to wheel his carry-on bag himself, so I turned to the men behind me and said, "You go ahead, this could be awhile." "No, you go ahead," one of the men replied. He smiled pleasantly and extended his arm for me to pass. He was young, maybe late 20's and had a goatee. I thanked him and we boarded the plan.
Once on the plane, we took our seats in coach (seats 17A, 17B and 17C). The man with the yellow shirt and the McDonald's bag sat across the aisle from us (in seat 17E). The pleasant man with the goatee sat a few rows back and across the aisle from us (in seat 21E). The rest of the men were seated throughout the plane, and several made their way to the back.
(Excerpt) Read more at womenswallstreet.com ...
My two cents:
If there were more than one air marshall on this flight, then this is an indication that the authorities had prior knowledge of this gathering on this flight. This would suggest that there was some degree of prior knowledge of the activities that would take place on the plane.
I am suggesting that the air marshalls had prior knowledge that this was only a dry run. The purpose of the air marshalls on this flight was to act as observers of the technique and methodology of the would-be terrorists. In this case, they would almost certainly have to let the cabin hostesses know of their presence, and to ask them to let things happen naturally (without interference) and to calm anxious passengers as best as possible.
The purpose of the detention after the flight had ended would have been to search for items that may have been removed or altered from the plane, as well as to question them about their intent.
What I cannot understand is why is it ok to use racial profiling AFTER the flight is over, but not BEFORE the flight begins? These middle eastern men were all detained by the authorities after the flight had ended - without any rason for their detention other than suspicious activity that was based on their ethnicity. While I approve of the racial profiling as common sense detective work, why is it necessary to put passengers at risk - while still doing the racial profiling (after the fact)?
Another story, or the same story?
BTW, love your tagline.
oh, I see post 851 now - they are sitting on a wider release of the story.
FYI to all, Hugh Hewitt is reading this article and discussing on his radio show right now.
I've been waiting for this. This concept of building bombs on-site occurred to me years ago.
If it was, we failed miserably.
I don't know...it isn't clear.
Uhhhh.....sorry I don't agree.
Is this the same Washington Post that sat on the Monica Lewinsky story?
Further up the thread, someone said Michelle Malkin confirmed it was true too. Ok, so did your source tell you any more?
The passengers sat, the Post is sitting, and the RATS are telling everyone to sit down and don't worry.
Bookmark for later reading
Michelle Malkin is well respected and valid!
Detroit has a suburb which has calls to prayer over loudspeakers....we're living in bizarro world. We get attacked by ragheads and then bend over backwards not to offend them.
No, he didn't. In fact, he said don't dig deeper.
I thought perhaps some of that story was a bit fanciful...or perhaps I didn't want to believe it.
Hugh Hewitt talking about this now
Donald says, "Count me as one of the skeptics." and has a website to make his word sound more important. Big deal. Count me as one of the believers. There, it's a draw so we'll all see who wins when the rest of the story comes out.
Why would a gaggle of air marshals be on a flight that carried so much risk?
I don't think they were living in fear of anyone who doesn't look like them. It was the BEHAVIOR that frightened them and made them suspicious. Perhaps the men were playing a joke and trying to look suspicious and then if arrested they could sue. Make sense?
Maybe we should wait & see....
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.