Posted on 08/05/2004 7:33:48 AM PDT by timpad
For much of the past month a fight has been raging in news reports and over the Internet about the behavior of 14 male Middle Eastern passengers on Northwest Airlines Flight 327 from Detroit to Los Angeles. Were the men terrorists casing the plane for a possible attack, as freelance journalist Annie Jacobsen suspected in a long article about the incident? Or were they, as the men said and federal investigators later concluded, a Syrian band on their way to a gig?
Until now, news accounts have only featured government spokesmen or airline personnel who were not actually on the June 29 flight. But in an exclusive interview with TIME, the lead Federal Air Marshal who flew on Flight 327 tells what happened that day. "Bottom line," the FAM says, "there was never a time when my main partner or I felt there was an imminent threat to that airplane or the passengers."
The controversy began in mid-July, when WomensWallStreet.com posted an account of the incident written by Jacobsen, a passenger on Flight 327. She detailed what she said was odd behavior of the passengers (for instance, getting up several times during the flight, going to the bathroom often, congregating in the aisle) and described the increasing concern she and her husband felt. She said the flight attendants were also frightened, so much so that they seemed too scared to confront the men.
Upon arrival in Los Angeles, the 14 men were interviewed by FBI agents and Federal Air Marshals, who determined the men were a Syrian band heading to play a casino in San Diego. After being checked through government databases, they were not charged with any crime or detained beyond questioning.
Jacobson continues to say that something very suspicious was going on. She's written two follow-up articles, and bloggers and mainstream media outlets have picked up the story.
This week, TIME conducted a detailed interview with the lead FAM on board Flight 327, one of the thousands of covert, armed government agents who patrol the skies. The man, who authorities did not allow to be identified by name, is 35 years old and worked previously for another federal law enforcement agency. In that job, he often dealt with foreign citizens.
The FAM, who says for security reasons cannot say exactly where he was sitting, was aware of the group of Middle Eastern men from the beginning of the flight. About 25 minutes after takeoff, a flight attendant discreetly told the FAM that she thought the men were "acting suspiciously" and were congregating near one of the lavatories in the back of the plane. He alerted another marshal on the plane and also told the flight attendant to notify the captain. A short while later, the FAM asked the flight crew member to get physical descriptions of the men and their seat numbers.
He watched the men and saw nothing out of the ordinary. In a long, single aisle plane like the Boeing 757 that was carrying Flight 327, there are often many people standing or moving around. That was the case on this flight, says the FAM, who has flown hundreds of missions in his two and half years on the job. The FAM never saw — nor was he told — of any example of the men interfering with the flight crew (which is a federal crime). He never saw any activity that caused him to ask the pilots to turn on the seat belt sign (which he can request) and keep people in their seats. "Nothing my main partner or I saw on Flight 327 brought us anywhere near a conclusion that we considered breaking our cover or deploying as we've been trained. And we never came close to drawing our weapons."
There was, the marshal admits, one incident that did concern him: when one of the group came from the back of the plane forward to use the lavatory in First Class. The FAM timed the man, dressed in a green jumpsuit with Arabic writing on it; he stayed about ten minutes in the toilet. Immediately after the man returned to the back to the plane, the FAM searched the washroom and found nothing. In contrast to Jacobsen's version, the FAM said at no time did any people congregate near the First Class bathroom.
When the flight was an hour from landing in Los Angeles, the FAM informed his superiors and, as is standard procedure, suggested they meet the plane to interview the men. He told the flight attendant to ask the pilot to alert the authorities at Los Angeles International Airport. That was why the flight was met by federal agents and why the men were interviewed but then allowed to leave in time to make their concert. The FAM's take? "I understand why the passenger felt some anxiety about activity on Flight 327," he says. "But that kind of activity was unusual but not a security incident. There was never a threat to the plane."
I tend to agree. The FAM appears to have done his job, taken the report seriously, observed carefully and reported upline. But then, I am troubled by the inconsistencies. How could the FAM so unequivocally state that there was no congregation near the lavatory? This was the thing that really got Ms. Jacobsen going and a central theme of her account. It's an objective fact. Either she's outright lying or the FAM missed it or saw it differently. Strange, indeed.
What you're missing is the part where we need two FAMS to say what happened when one will do.
What is it? Are you just CONVINCED that Homeland Security is cooperating with the terrorists or something? Geeeez.
There is nothing like completely violating OPSEC. What a bunch of idiots! I can't believe he said this!
I'm not a "blame-The-Man-first" guy, but really -- how likely is it that he'd say, "Yeah, we really screwed up. There was major reason to be concerned and, on reconsideration, we totally missed it"?
Dan
Jim Quinn hasn't been paying attention and neither have you. Their visas were in order; their extension paperwork was in with DHS and they were NOT overstaying their visas, even though the visas they were carrying did not have the new dates stamped on them.
One of the Syrian musician's hits praises suicide bombers (shaheed).
Well, here's one, sorta. It seems interesting to me that using the info provided, I'm having trouble running down someone actually saying on record that these visas were expired. Turns out, I just don't know about the expired visas. Help!
I was struck by that too. I'd think they'd be more circumspect about this sort of thing. I hope that this is not something the FAM said "off the record" that was printed anyway.
One interesting note on this story -
The FAM said the only thing that he was concerned with was the one who went from the back of the plane to the First Class lavatory. He said he checked out the lavatory right after the individual went back to his seat.
SO:
Terrorists who are well trained would also know that this would be considered possible suspicious behavior and so would do this very thing to "flush out" a FAM so that they can make notes about who to take out on the real run. Kind of like a baseball pitcher throwing to first when he suspects the batter may attempt a bunt. Once the bunt is exposed, defense can make adjustments.
Now that this FAM has been flushed out, he better switch airlines and hope his picture isn't circulating.
Every little detail is taken into account and the probing and research can take a long time - long enough for everyone to dismiss this story. Women's safety classes often try to teach women not to ignore what their senses are trying to warn them about. Our subconscious can tell us a lot if we listen.
I'm still waiting to see what an El-Al agent would have to say about this event. Not that it would have ever happened on one of their planes.
bump
Who was the dude in 1-A, then? Sharp dresser, stood in front of the cockpit door, fluently chatted up the Arab contingent on the plane...my next guess would be this was an Air Marshal.
Probably a very good guess. Who better than an Arabic-speaking type as a FAM? Sitting close to the cockpit.
The part about dealing with foreign citizens can be parsed to mean he was either foreign-born or had previously operated in foreign countries, either covertly or openly.
Even the FAM admits there was plenty of suspicious activity going on. The FAM checked out the bathroom, I wonder what for? And the FAM had the suspicious passengers detained and questioned. No threat? No suspicious activities? The FAMs own words and actions say he thought there was.
If you suspect there could be a threat, you must act. You do not wait for the threat to become a reality. That is the doctrine of preemption. That is why we invaded Iraq. When you don't know, you assume the worst and act on it.
Whether or not these guys were an immediate threat, or were collecting information for our enemies, or were simply musicians, is irrelevant to the question of reacting to their suspicious behaviors. It is not a bad thing to treat them as a threat, then find out they were not. However, the opposite is a disaster.
Thank you both.
If you suspect there could be a threat, you must act. You do not wait for the threat to become a reality.
Two points
1 If memory serves they can't act until there is an actual event. Preemption doesn't apply to federal air marshalls.
(IMO something that needs to be changed)
2 They did react. they checked they checked the bathrooms, (I'm assuming they found nothing, so nothing they could do.)
..or he was in the Border Patrol previously.
bump!
That said, we've been told over and over again that one-way tickets are a primary flag for increased scrutiny. Why doesn't the FAM talk about how suspicions were aroused prior to the boarding of the aircraft? Doesn't he realize that chord the article struck with millions of Americans isn't about imminent danger on the flight but rather on the possible scenario that this was a dry run?
What about the possibility that the person using the first class restroom retrieved rather than placed something in that facility? Tell us, FAM, if you did find a device in the first class lavatory, what would you do? Open a window and throw it out? Sorry Charlie, time's up; game over.
Another widespread warning to the public was about the sequential assembly of a weapon by a group using the lavatory for privacy. Isn't that specifically the behavior of these passengers? Haven't we all been told to watch for this behavior and report it?
Until those concerns are addressed, this interview with the FAM does more to instill a sense of incompetence, not competence, in our transportation security. There is the possibility that this is disinformation to throw the terrorists off guard but perhaps I give more credit than is due.
No kidding. I can't remember the last time I looked for sociologists in the Yellow Pages.
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.