Posted on 08/16/2006 7:17:21 PM PDT by traumer
It sounds like a stand-up comedian's joke: A nervous flier boards a plane with hand cream and a box of matches...
But the diversion of United 923 from London to Washington - and the arrest of a passenger for interfering with the flight - was no laughing matter.
Fighter jets scrambled to escort the plane into Boston, and the media scrambled to keep up with events.
Television news showed luggage laid out neatly on the tarmac, sniffer dogs searching them for anything suspicious.
And interest in the story was intense, as the BBC News website's own statistics show.
Within two hours of the story breaking - in the middle of the afternoon, London time - it had become our top-hitting story of the day, racking up more readers than articles that had been on the site all day long.
Rumours flying
Meanwhile, over on CNN and Fox News, experts speculated about early reports suggesting that banned items had been found on the plane.
Armed officer at Heathrow airport Ordinary items now trigger a security response
Was it Vaseline? That would be cause for alarm: last week's arrests in London reportedly centred on a plan to concoct explosives from liquids or gels while a plane was in flight.
Was it a screwdriver? Even worse: the 9/11 hijackers took control of four planes with nothing more than small, sharp hand tools - and the fifth anniversary of 9/11 is looming.
Was it a note about al-Qaeda? If so, apparent proof that a terrorist had got on board.
In the end, though, it seems that the passenger at the centre of the alert had none of those items.
Changed forever?
Whatever the exact nature of the disturbance, it tapped into some very real fears.
Consider this. As far as we know, from a security perspective the diversion of United 923 went exactly according to plan.
Cabin crew alerted the captain that there was an "unruly passenger" on board.
The captain has the final authority to divert a flight, and he exercised it, contacting air traffic control to find an alternative landing strip.
Since 11 September 2001, it is standard procedure to send fighter jets to intercept commercial flights that may have become terrorist threats.
The disruptive passenger was restrained in some way, United Airlines confirms.
That, too, should not be surprising - flight crews would hardly let a suspected terrorist remain free if they could stop it.
So if any lessons are to be drawn from the drama of United 923, one must be that the airlines and security agencies have plans in place to handle even the merest hint of a threat.
But the mere fact that those plans exist - and that they were put into operation to deal with a 59-year-old woman with a tube of hand cream - must make one wonder if the current generation will ever again be able to regard air travel as simply a quick and easy means of getting from one place to another.
And a number of psycho nuts who have had NO interest in hijacking airplanes have still attempted to get into the cockpit of a moving plane.
If they put the passengers at risk of DEATH, I have no problems with the person being forcibly restrained, by the passengers WITHOUT FEAR OF PROSECUTION.
A mother was among the Heathrow bombers. She was using her baby and "formula" as cover for the explosive.
Yeah and we were told that Charles Bishop was not a terrorist when he stole and crashed a plane in Tampa. But his suicide note which was released 4 months later called it a "terrorist act" and praised bin Laden.
Moose denied terrorism in the DC Sniper case too.
The authorities have been lying. That is not to say they are lying today, just that a denial is not proof it didn't happen.
3. If the problem was with one passenger who was restrained, why on earth did everyone have to be deplaned, re searched and questioned by the Feds.
Initial reports said it was 3 people (at least suspected).
QUESTIONING is done for witnesses as well as accused. The authorities needed to determine what happened.
Thank you on the "cowardice" correction.
Nonetheless, I think it's completely appropriate to do what the security officer tells you to do.
Just like any law/security enforcement body, the TSA doesn't make the rules. Most of them, in my opinion, are simply trying to do the best job they can.
What good, may I ask you, would it be for me, or anyone else, to refuse to do as requested?
The battle is not best engaged at the airline terminal, among people who have no decision making power at all. If you want to "be a man" it's best to take it to your elected representative's office. Otherwise, you're just treating the help like crap for your own satisfaction.
The core problem is not Vaseline on the plane, not deodorant on the plane, and not screwdrivers on the plane, it is Muslims on the plane!
Amazing the way the nation has changed in the past fifty years. And not for the better. I no longer go anywhere I cannot drive - WITH my CCW. And I consider that the government's requirement to have a CCW in order to carry a defensive sidearm is a blatant human rights violation and an unconscionable abrogation of the nation's constitution. This is the manner in which citizens lose their rights - slowly, and always "with good cause."
Funny. Put a frog in a pan of hot water and he'll jump out. But put him in a pan of cold water and turn on the heat, and he'll sit there until he boils.
We don't need that kind of help.
I quit flying commercially in 1992, when things were just starting to get silly.
I recommend that everyone else quit now. Either that, or engage the civil disobedience machine.
I would like to see an airport full of people arrested or every flight cancelled because everybody in there refuse to act like a bunch of trained monkeys for the TSA.
This is going to be me in a couple of weeks. We are flying on Sept. 1st. I have had both of my knees replaced and set off the alarm when I flew a couple of years ago. I tried to show the cards I got from my doctor, but they weren't interested. I was wanded and patted down. I'm sure I will be strip-searched this time. I'll let you know what happens. Oh, BTW -- I'm a 5'0", 50 something white woman.
Investigators found that the woman had carried hand lotion and a screwdriver aboard the flight, FBI spokeswoman Gail Marcinkiewicz said.
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2006-08-16-plane-diverted_x.htm?csp=34
From yesterday evening's USA Today:
Two fighter jets were scrambled Wednesday to escort a London-to-Washington flight to an emergency landing in Boston after a disturbance in which passengers said a woman in a jogging suit paced up and down the aisle, peppering her incoherent mutterings with the word "Pakistan.".
And from today's Boston CBS4:
Passengers say Mayo paced the aisles and peppered her incoherent mutterings with the word "Pakistan." They said two plainclothes men on board and flight attendants tackled the woman. She was handcuffed while the flight was diverted. After a day filled with conflicting reports about what she was carrying, an FBI spokeswoman confirmed Mayo had a screwdriver, lighters and matches when she was subdued
http://cbs4boston.com/topstories/local_story_229090749.html
So, in a nutshell, virtually all of the early reports were TRUE!!! Just as many of us suspected!
The people who go through packed luggage in the name of security (and the reason we cannot lock checked bags) also have been caught stealing from that same luggage.
It is more procedural than genuine security.
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.