[Illbay]

I dunno. There sure is a lot of specific information in the original account, including the seat numbers and names of the two men involved.

Sorry, I'm one of the LEAST "tin-foil hat" types on FR, but I smell a coverup. AA, I'm sure, did NOT want it to get out that a passenger had smuggled a gun onboard.

[honway]

Based on what little information that has been made available to the public, I believe the Executive Summary linked in the original WND article is legitimate.

From an operational perspective the summary meets all the expected requirements of an executive summary and uses the language and terms you would expect in such a document.For example, the title FAA Principle Security Inspector(PSI) was used, this is an actual title for an individual that is not generally known to the public. There are other examples that establish the legitimacy of this document. I recommend you save this document.

The refusal of the FAA and American Airlines management to brief flight crews on the information that a gun was used in the hijacking represents gross negligence in my opinion. The flight crews are the last line of defense in protecting the passengers and to deny crews this information is inexcusable and this revelation deserves a full investigation. The credibility of the FAA and the U.S. government are on the line here. If a flight attendant on a cell phone reported to American Airlines SOC that a shot had been fired and that information was covered up by the FAA, then they will never be able to salvage their credibility.

[Dog Gone]

Maybe, but the government has no motive for covering this up that I can think of. If this guy had a gun, he appears to have been the only one. Certainly none of the hijackers on the Pennsylvania flight had one.

This was a carefully orchestrated hijacking. It makes no sense for one hijacker of the 19 to have a gun and risk the entire operation.