Another 9/11?
 

Has anyone read this? What do you make of it?

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...e.asp?ID=14249

Paranoia? Nonsense?, (and) or just utter :mad:!

A critical review here.

If the F/A's were that concerned, they would have notified the captain, and he would have diverted ASAP. No way would they continue to a crowded city like LA. I think she was overreacting. Besides - 14 men to plant a bomb?

Surely in todays times, if the Captain was aware of the on-board scenario, and had made contact with security forces on the ground, this would have been just cause for a "fighter escort" to an alternate airport, especially in US airspace. I also agree that the covert alliance between the F/A and the passengers is a little strange? Why couldn,t one of the on-board federal marshalls make a written description of the "suspect" if it was needed?? A chilling read nevertheless!!

The article is from an extremely alarmest paper. Absolute rubbish.

Guarantee it sold a lot more copies this issue for her.. which (we must remember she is a paid writer) is her JOB, to rattle off a nicely embellished, detailed - but not quite bedtime- story.
Probably paid for her family ticket, and not a pang of guilt either I bet for all the 'real' people scared or put off by this

Now I've read it too.... GRRrrrr...(but at least she's not benefitted financially from me and others here.. phew... !)

Just to get to the bottom of this:

Are there any NWA crews on this forum, maybe even the ones flying 327 on June 29 between DTW and LAX, that could comfirm this story?

What this story makes abundantly clear is that it’s very easy for people to interpret innocent behaviour as sinister, but the flip side of this is that it’s very easy to interpret sinister behaviour as innocent.

Carrying a musical instrument case is apparently sinister, but would the writer have become concerned if she saw someone messing around with their shoe?

Two aspects of the story sound a bit suspect to me…

1) After the cabin crew had “strapped themselves in for landing” seven men stood up and stood waiting to use the lavatory but “not one of the flight attendants asked them to sit down.” Surely cabin crew would not allow this on final approach? In fact surely there isn't enough time for seven people to take it in turns to use the toilet on finals?

2) A flight attendant told the writer and her husband that there were “federal air marshals sitting all around us”. Surely cabin crew aren’t meant to tell passengers this under any circumstances?

The airline i work for, the Captian gives the F/As 15 mins to land! thats enought ime to secure the cabin etc, so we probably take our seat with 5 mins to land, if 7 men stood up for the toilet, and each took approx 4 mins in the toilet each, thats 28mins, it doesnt make sence, as there would still be people waiting for the toilet as the nervous family hurried up the jet bridge. a little far fetched one might say!

This has been making the rounds of various groups/boards for the last couple of weeks, but few have so far risen to the bait (for that is what I consider it to be).

At best it's simply a case of a distraught harpy letting her imagination loose, the middle-eastern-appearance syndrome if you will. Different cultures behave differently, infrequent flyers do things on airplanes which don't fit the 'norm'. Reminds me of the East Indian choir who were subject to similar scrutiny for 'passing notes' on a flight - although that case was much sooner after 9/11. I imagine the little red book was the Qu'ran, perhaps she would have been less discomfitted had it been the Bible.

A cynic might read something into the timing of the article, coinciding as it did with Ridge's warning that the election might have to be postponed. GWB down in the polls again ? Nah, that couldn't be it. :hmm: :ouch:

Nothing but complete and utter rubbish, not even worth commenting on the "events".:mad:

Consider also that the writer, Annie Jacobsen, turns to Ann Coulter as a good source for her "research" and to bolster her claims.

Coulter, one would do well to remember, is the same person who, soon after the Sept. 11 attacks, wrote in her syndicated column that the United States should invade the Middle East and convert the Muslims to Christianity.

That's pretty much all I need to know to make up my mind about Ms. Jacobsen's credibility.

The author wasn't Mrs Tom Clancy was it?

Sorry but I doubt that if these individuals were being watched then they wouldn't have got as far as boarding without questioning.

Danger. Rant...

A few first-blush observations…

1. When the husband gets up to speak to a FA, the FA pulls him into the galley and, among other things, tells him that, “…the flight attendants were passing notes to each other.” Then, 30 minutes later the FA comes to the husband… “Leaning over and whispering, she asked my husband to write a description of the yellow-shirted man sitting across from us. She explained it would look too suspicious if she wrote the information. She asked my husband to slip the note to her when he was done.”
----So, the FAs are not having any trouble writing notes to each other, but when it comes to writing down a description of a particular individual, it would look suspicious? FAs write stuff all the time for crying out loud, and if they want to do so privately, can do it behind a curtain in a galley or in a lav. Finally, the guy is sitting right across the aisle! Leaning in and whispering isn’t suspicious? Please..

2. “Approximately 10 minutes later, that same flight attendant came by with the drinks cart. She leaned over and quietly told my husband there were federal air marshals sitting all around us. She asked him not to tell anyone and explained that she could be in trouble for giving out that information. She then continued serving drinks.”
----Puts me in mind of Otto lying to Wendy when she catches him talking to Archie in “A Fish Called Wanda…” Dimwitted Otto makes up a story on the spot and claims that he works for the CIA and is just going around the neighborhood to let the public know that the CIA is debriefing KGB defectors in a nearby safe house. Wendy, seeing the utter nonsense in the CIA’s telling all of the neighbors about a secret safe house, challenges him on it, and Otto responds…
***
Otto: Look, you obviously don't know anything about intelligence work, lady. It's an X-K-Red-27 technique.

Wendy: My father was in the Secret Service, Mr. Manfredjinsinjin, and I know perfectly well that you don't keep the general public informed when you are "debriefing KGB defectors in a safe house."

Otto: Oh, you don't, huh?

Wendy: Not unless you're congenitally insane or irretrievably stupid, no.
***
In much the same way, it would be irretrievably stupid to even begin to indicate locations of any FAMs to the pax.

3. “Right in front of us, two men stood up against the emergency exit door, waiting for the lavatory to become available. The men spoke in Arabic among themselves and to the man in the yellow shirt sitting nearby.” OK. Fine. But just a few minutes later, “The last man came out of the bathroom, and as he passed the man in the yellow shirt he ran his forefinger across his neck and mouthed the word ‘No.’”
----No? In English? I’m not an Arabic speaker, but I’d think that he would have mouthed the word, “la.” How about another angle? Did the young man get in trouble with the FA for being up and mouth the word “nahono” as in “we” and drew his finger across his neck signifying that the FA verbally “killed” the guys for being up when the seat belt sign was on? Look, I’m not saying that this is what happened. Only curious about other possibilities, assuming the story is even remotely accurate. (And again, I'm not an Arabic speaker and I'm not equipped to get into a discussion of verb conjugation, etc)

4. “We gave sworn statement after sworn statement.”
----Nonsense. Multiple sworn statements in one sitting does not fit well with reality.

5. “So here's my question: Since the FBI issued a warning to the airline industry to be wary of groups of five men on a plane who might be trying to build bombs in the bathroom, shouldn't a group of 14 Middle Eastern men be screened before boarding a flight?”
----Yup. You can bet your bottom dollar they should be screened, and that they WERE screened. This is the stuff that really gets my goat. All pax are screened (in general terms. Let’s not pick nits here). End of story.
--She goes on, “No one checked the passports of the Syrian men. No one inspected the contents of the two instrument cases or the McDonald's bag. And no one checked the limping man's orthopedic shoe. In fact, according to the TSA regulations, passengers wearing an orthopedic shoe won't be asked to take it off. As their site states, ‘Advise the screener if you're wearing orthopedic shoes…screeners should not be asking you to remove your orthopedic shoes at any time during the screening process.’”
----Again, nonsense. This woman and her family stayed on the air side in DTW. They did not get anywhere near security. How, in the name of all things holy would she have been able to tell whether these guys were adequately screened? She had no idea whether these gentlemen had started their trip at DTW or were, like her and her family, changing planes there. She knew (or should have known) that they had been subjected to security screening the first time they entered the air side, but for some reason concentrates only on the fact that the gate agent didn’t do a strip search on them. Further, she cites only enough of the TSA orthopedic policy to make her point. Truth is, the policy info that she quotes from says that “…screeners will need to see and touch your prosthetic device…as part of the screening process… A screening supervisor or a lead screener will need to perform an explosive trace detection (ETD) screening of your prosthetic device…” So, if this guy DID have a prosthetic device, it probably got closer scrutiny than any of HER carry-on baggage. Although they would not have made him take it off during screening, they WOULD have run an ETD on it. If the ETD would have shown traces of explosives, well, THEN he’d have been made to take it off…

6. I’ve ranted too long already, so allow me to add just one thing… Much as I love NWA, I have to say that in all my travels, among all the carriers I fly, the NWA FAs appear to be the least likely to manage pax when the seat belt sign is on. I’ve often wondered whether this was some sort of company policy (the logical evolution of the “all we can do is ask them to sit down” line of thought). Perhaps this less-than-aggressive approach reinforced any idea this author had (and nope, I'm not saying that NWA FAs let pax stand during landing. Just wondering whether a predisposition regarding these guys was kicked up a notch by a lax seat belt policy...).

Sure, there’s more, but that’s enough for now.

Dave

I personally liked the age old bit where she desperately tried to prove she wasn't racist. Yeah right lady, that report had "closet Nazi" written all over it!

Maybe she should go and work for airport security, she'd be much better placed.

Wait!

There's more!

She wrote a follow up to the original article:


http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...e.asp?ID=14301[/URL]

Skimmed about half that link, just looks like a load of self-congratulatry self-back slapping.

:rolleyes:

NWA incident
 

See additional info under NWA 327.

No one in the gov't, the FBI, the air marshals onboard, the airline, TSA etc disputes this woman's claims of what happened at all. Food for thought.

It just shows how your innate biases colour your perception of events. Does anyone remember the Grauniad advert showing the black youth running at a man holding a briefcase, viewed from different angles? Some showed it looking like an assault or mugging, the final view showed he was saving his life.

The best bit I found was that the "Middle Eastern" men looked at each other!:oh: When you're in foreign lands, do you make eye contact with other westerners? Does that make you a terror suspect in their eyes?

Besides, if they had been terrorists, we wouldn't have heard this story at all:\

The best bit was one of them going into the bog with a full McD's bag and when he came out it was empty. To shamelessly plagiarize from another group, it was suggested that the toilet was the most convenient place to be when eating from a McD bag :D