| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Curious assertion and retraction about a disturbance on a flight from London. Where did anyone get the idea that this material existed? Why was this confirmed and then retracted? "Flight diverted to Boston over passenger disturbance," from AP, with thanks to Amber:
BOSTON, Massachusetts (AP) -- Fighter jets escorted a London-to-Washington, D.C., flight to Boston's Logan airport Wednesday after the pilot declared an emergency because an apparently claustrophobic passenger caused a disturbance, federal officials said.The federal security official for Logan said there was no indication of terrorism and denied reports that the woman had a screw driver, matches and a note referring to al-Qaeda.
The passenger aboard United Flight 923 said she was claustrophobic and became very upset and got into some kind of confrontation with the flight crew, said George Naccara, security director for the Transportation Security Administration for Massachusetts' airport.
The disturbance -- coming just a week after authorities in London said they foiled a terror plot to blow up trans-Atlantic flights -- was enough to concern the pilot to issue an alert, which activated two fighter jets to escort the plane into Logan, Naccara said.
Two F-15s were scrambled from Otis Air National Guard Base on Cape Cod to escort the airliner, said Master Sgt. Anthony Hill, spokesman for the North American Aerospace Defense Command in Colorado Springs, Colorado. He said the fighter pilots can intercept, shadow or escort commercial aircraft and, if ordered, shoot down an aircraft deemed to be a threat.
Naccara said he did not believe any items the passenger was carrying were the cause of the outburst. An airport spokesman, Phil Orlandella, previously confirmed broadcast reports that the woman was carrying Vaseline, a screw driver, matches and a note referring to al-Qaeda, but backed off the statement. Naccara said it wasn't true.
"I don't know what she had on board with her, but we have been told she did not have a screw driver, she did not have any liquids such as Vaseline, and any notebook she may have had, it did not contain an al-Qaeda reference," Naccara said. "This is still playing out, of course."
"There was speculation in the beginning of all those items, but those have been proven untrue," he said. He said he had no information about matches.
Posted by Robert at August 16, 2006 2:47 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
What I want to know is, is she old aged with perhaps dementia? or is she a muslim? Because no sane geriatric would do such a thing unless they are either suffering mentally or belong to a terrorist group. No person in their right mind suffering claustrophobia could surely have a plane diverted when there are heaps of grown men on board a plane, they could easily deal with a female in her sixties, this is just not right.
Posted by: M![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at August 16, 2006 3:37 PM
Another odd facet to this story: Debka reports that the disturbance was sparked by three passengers; not one.
The reporting on this story is certainly odd.
Posted by: vergescue at August 16, 2006 3:37 PM
Latest info says she had hand cream and matches, but no screwdriver, 60 years old and having a panic attack.
3 guesses as to why she may have been slightly more nervy than normal about flying??
Posted by: Uriel Septim at August 16, 2006 3:37 PM
Another odd facet to this story: Debka reports that the disturbance was sparked by three passengers; not one.
The reporting on this story is certainly odd.
Posted by: vergescue at August 16, 2006 3:37 PM
seems to me , if you know you are claustophobic, epiletic or pscho, you would notify the airlines ahead of time, in order for them to be prepared to handle your malady. (maybe sitting you next to a burly 6'6" 275 lb man.) (or maybe having a knockout drug availiable). It amazes me how often people have problems only on the plane, but not in the terminal.
I would be wary of any unusual behavior on a plane. Could just be a test run.
Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 16, 2006 3:40 PM
Well if she is a muslim there will be an uproar!
Posted by: M at August 16, 2006 3:43 PM
The general heightening of anxiety, the way in which bits and pieces of fact become changed as they go from one person to another, that famous isnad-chain that Muslims know so much about, the slightly off stories, the stories that are exaggerated or wrong, are merely the tip we see, and sometimes, foolishly, assume must mean that there is no threat, or far less of a one than some would have us believe.
That is partly a failure of those whose duty it is to instruct us. We know nothing, or almost nothing, of many schemes and plots that have been nipped in the bud, or somewhere along the way -- in this country, in England, in France. Why? Why is it impossible to tell us more about them? And why does someone not intelligently pre-empt possible criticism by noting that when there is a world-wide threat, a threat that can come from a group, or a groupuscule, or an individual intent on assuring himself a place in the Muslim Paradise (its rewards spelled out much more clearly and vividly than those of the Christian Heaven, of which we scarcely get beyond those cartoonish pearly gates somewhere in the clouds), of course there will be incidents like this, of course there will be mistakes and mischaracterizations. But that does not and should not permit people to pooh-pooh the threat.
We are not well led. We are not correctly instructed. The American public has been taught absolutely nothing about Islam, either by government officials, or by the mainstream press. Those who have learned something have done it by dint of their own efforts, by reading books and articles, some of the former recommended, some of the latter posted and retrievable at, various samaritan websites.
The negligent attitude by our government is unforgivable. That obstinate and hallucinating president and his loyal aides, those far too submissive generals who accept the messianic mission in Iraq instead of arguing for a withdrawal in order to allow us to exploit those sectarian and ethnic divisions (so as to weaken the Camp of Islam), the dopes -- Friedman, Kristof, Kristol, and the like -- who presume to tell us what to think, by telling us what they think --- posterity will not be kind to any of them.
So study on your own. If a billion people know what Islam teaches, you can too. This whole business is not beyond us. It is not Poincare's Conjecture, Fermat's Last Theorem, or Krapp's Last Tape. It's only current events -- or rather, current, and past, and future events.
Posted by: Hugh at August 16, 2006 3:44 PM
There is something fishy here regardless. Either someone is intentionally trying to deceive the authorities by concocting such specific items, or officials are spinning this. What is this woman's name and background? Why would this incident differ from other drunkin or claustophobic/mental related incidents on flights? The pilot notifying air control of a disturbance and the F-15's indicates something was probably implied by her,during the struggle, which had hints of some terror/jihadist related theme. Hopefully, she was just a lone nut who was just running her mouth and was no threat. But how did these SPECIFICALLY described items originate?
Posted by: We need G.C. Scott at August 16, 2006 3:44 PM
I saw and read the earlier report of this woman passenger, apparently claustraphobic, off the Drudge Report, via al-Reuters, which listed this gal as a Vermont resident. Now, however, at 20:00 GMT, the story is suddenly not there.
The oddly missing artifact missing from either story is the fact that today, 8-16-06, was the day allegedly scheduled to be the day when from six to 10 airliners were to be targeted by Jihadis from Great Britian....
So, is this still a dry run for future acts of terrorism?
Posted by: localmalcontent at August 16, 2006 4:09 PM
I saw and read the earlier report of this woman passenger, apparently claustrophobic, off the Drudge Report, via al-Reuters, which listed this gal as a Vermont resident. Now, however, at 20:00 GMT, the story is suddenly not there.
The strangely missing note unmentioned in either story is the fact that today, 8-16-06, was the day allegedly scheduled to be the day when from six to 10 airliners were to be targeted by Jihadis from Great Britian....
So, is this still a dry run for future acts of terrorism?
Posted by: localmalcontent at August 16, 2006 4:11 PM
((Sorry about the first post's redundancy))
localmalcontent
at August 16, 2006 4:12 PM
OH a Vermont resident (probably a Democrat) , this explains the irrational behavior.
Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 16, 2006 4:27 PM
I was thinking "dry run" action taken to see if the US SKY MARSHALLs would show their hand and location in the plane and/or any action taken.
Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 16, 2006 4:29 PM
Oh Hugh, you are so on point. Homeland Security in my state told the State Legistlature and the public (through the local newspaper) that there were no al qaeda members here. This is not true and when I challenged DHS, showing them my research, they said I was right, al qaeda was here but they didn't want to alarm our citizens. I told DHS they didn't have to lie to us, that they were insulting our intelligence and making a grave mistake in withholding this information.
Many in our government, both democrats and republicans, law enforcement and armed services, are willfully and arrogantly ignorant and will cause us to suffer greater catastrophes than 9/11.
Posted by: the poetess at August 16, 2006 4:55 PM
FWIW, vaseline is HIGHLY flammable. A well-known camping trick is to coat cotton balls (like commonly used on faces/skin) with vaseline to start fires in the rain. They burn quickly and for some time with just one match, wet or dry.
It's no secret that a fire on an airplane in flight is nearly as deadly as an explosion.
Hmmm.
Posted by: perpster at August 16, 2006 5:53 PM
The woman also threatened to urinate in a sink, according to ABC news!
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/08/terrorist_scare.html
Posted by: Silvester at August 16, 2006 6:22 PM
Silvester, the ABC story also re-claims that she did have Vaseline. First she had it, then she didn't, now she did have it. Also, her age is not 60-something, according to ABC she is 47.
This was a sloppily reported story at the very least. I understand that information can be slow in coming out, but how can the media manufacture a list of four items that (apparently) never existed?
Posted by: special_guest at August 16, 2006 6:42 PM
I hate to suggest it...but did they think to do a 'strip search' on this 'passenger'? The items are somewhat suggestive that she may have brought something on board concealed as people conceal items brought into prisons.
Also, no mention of this woman's ethnic or religious background. Seems very hush hush.
Perhaps our government have shut down this 'event' to keep the airlines from losing more money?
Posted by: The Goobs at August 16, 2006 6:42 PM
Answer: Profile all Muslims and, when that is not possible, all who might be Muslims. Pay less attention to the rest.
Profiling is not a perfect science. There will be holes and flaws.
In this situation we are in, there will be more holes if we continue not to profile Muslims and all who might be Muslims (through racial data).
at August 16, 2006 8:48 PM
The big question is.....why aren't we profiling and checking out each passenger before boarding like El Al does? They do a background check on every passenger who books a flight with them. If they can do it, why can't we?
Posted by: Bonniea at August 16, 2006 9:43 PM
The media life cycle of this story is fascinating and underscores the unprofessionalism so common in modern outlets. Watching troops of journalists pounce like a pack of wild Dog Whisperers, while dancing with the 800 pound Muslim gorilla, is at once sad and somewhat entertaining.
Here are the classic steps to what passes as "oh no, this might involve a burka babe, what do we say?" journalism these days: (1) before tangible facts are evident, hype the story through TV and web outlets but never mention anything east or south of Istanbul; (2) fill the broadcasts with teasers and "alert" messages implying a cutting edge grasp of the story; pump the ratings! (3) bring in the "experts" who know less of the incident than the journos; (4) as the facts begin to trickle out, blame law enforcement for conducting a routine investigation which slowed the release of information; those scoundrels! (5) finally, bask in the collective sigh of relief that either the perp was not Muslim or that law enforcement twisted the story to hide the identity of the perp's religion. This removes the burden of having to discuss Islam on air, thrilling the media bosses. In any case, just rest easy that you and your network do not have to publicize another case of airborne jihad within one week of the foiled London plot. Another bullet dodged for political correctness.
Posted by: bcore1973 at August 16, 2006 10:01 PM
Yes, something is funny with this story.
Why launch jet fighters whose only use is to shoot down a commandeered plane?
Why hasn't the name of the passenger been released?
Would it reveal her religious and ethnic background?
We need profiling Now!
at August 17, 2006 1:52 AM
Hugh,
Very true.You are so perceptive.I read you are 98.
May You Live Many More Years in Peace and Good Health!
Posted by: Crows&Cows at August 17, 2006 4:04 AM
" The woman also threatened to urinate in a sink according to ABC news."
..........................
She must have been quite tall.
at August 17, 2006 4:40 AM
And, now a Pakistan connection:
"The woman, identified by two local security officials as Catherine C. Mayo, will probably be charged today with interfering with a flight crew, authorities said. Mayo's former husband said she had ``emotional issues" and had been on her way home from vacationing in Pakistan."
Source: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/08/17/security_scare_ends_at_logan/
Emotional issues, Im sure. All Jihadists have "emotional issues". No, nothing going on here...
And who VACATIONS in Pakistan?!?!?!
Posted by: AJane at August 17, 2006 12:56 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)