My theory is that she was playing along with their demands, so that they wouldn't kill her, and, so that she'd be able to get back to the USA. Remember the late Eldridge Cleaver, who left the country a fugitive from justice, a very radical leader of the Black Panthers? After spending time on the lam in Algeria where he found sanctuary, he voluntarily returned to the USA, saying that he'd rather be in prison in this country than "free" anywhere else in the world. He became a stalwart conservative.
Sounds very plausible -- I sure hope the authorities did a life-proctological exam on any possible Islamo-Nazis on that flight!! Certainly she showed she could smuggle some banned items onto the plane -- was that just for her own amusement or was she working (whether or not willingly) with some terrorists as you have described?
I'm not suggesting that she followed that path, let alone that she has the character, courage, and integrity that Cleaver demonstrated. She definitely seems to be more than a little bit of a flake. However, after a protracted time in al Qaida camps in the Paki/Afghan mountains, seeing (and evidently photographing) various horrors, it's not hard to believe that she'd want more than anything else to get the hell outta Dodge and back to the USA.
So, I'm thinking that she played along with them, pretended to be a loyal, suicidal jihadi, in order to get on the plane. Once there, she began trying to put the kibosh to whatever it was the terrorists had planned. The fact that her "erratic behavior" began with a request to speak with the air marshalls, and, show them the contents of her bag (which would have resulted in an instant lockdown condition on that plane!) speaks volumes, as does her increasing "upping the ante" via increasingly outrageous behavior, trying to get the attention of the sky marshalls.
Pretty much everything she did seems to be pretty obvious attempts to draw their attention to her, and, to get someone in a position of authority to look in the damn bag! In that context, I see the urinating on the aisle floor to be not an act of derangement so much as an act of desperation, i.e., "What the hell do I have to do to get you people to stop ignoring me and look in the damn bag???" (I know that if my only way to "invoke a Flight 93 reaction" )on a flight about to be taken over by terrorists) was to piss on the floor... well, I'd be pissing on the floor! Compared to the alternative, well, there's no comparison.)
Her actions were NOT what a jihadi intent on fulfilling "the operation" would have done! They are what someone "trapped in the nightmare would do, particularly if she began by discretely attempting to speak with the air marshalls so as to apprise them of the situation -- and failed to get anyone's attention! (Almost reminds me of that old Twilight Zone, Richard Shattner's first acting job, I believe -- he was a "mental case" on an airplane trying to convince the crew that there was "something" on the wing. He was politely ignored.)
Now, as to "the bag" (and more to the point, its contents, I see two possibilities, both of which ring ominous for the west.
I honestly do not give either possibility greater weight of probability than the other, nor do I think it matters in the final analysis.
In short, the way I see it, either someone working security in Pakistan was directed to let her through with her materials, or, someone working "in the secure area" planted the stuff on the plane. And, quite likely in either case is the potential for them to have allowed other "stuff" (either on the person(s) of, or, pre-positioned on the plane for the other jihadis presumably on that flight.)
The fact that the British arrested a jihadi who was an airport employee with a FULL access pass... is very unsettling.
If that kind of stuff is going on in the UK, then I think it an act of folly to think that even worse stuff isn't going on at airports in muslim countries.
The above is my analysis of the likely scenario, based on the known facts that have come out in the press, at first released, then officialy (and vociferously) denied, and finally, once the witnesses confirmed it, acknowledged as being the truth. The pathetic cover story (fabricated of whole cloth, IMO) about her being a panicking claustrophobe, seems to have deflated as the failed trial balloon that it apparently was. As another poster pointed out, what kind of claustrophobe hangs out in an airplane lavatory? Those things make a phone booth feel like Grand Central Station! The are cramped with a capital C!
I've tried to be as dispassionate, clinical, and objective as I can while analyzing these known facts, and "the above" is what I've concluded to be the most likely scenario. It fits the known facts, and, I can't come up with any alternative scenario that fits (without needing major shoehorning or outright disregard for some of the facts).
I realize that this conclusion is not consonant with the consensus as reflected in this thread, but I didn't look at this situation with an eye towards coming up with a conclusion that would be received enthusiastically. (I'm not real big on "outcome-based investigations", LOL!) I wanted to know what really went down on that flight, and after considering the known facts, I'm fairly confident that my conclusion is fairly accurate.
I'll close by saying that I think there are decent odds that after extensive debriefing (and perhaps therapy, in a "safe-house" environment), this woman may end up in the Witness Protection Program.