Department of Crow-eating

Does anyone recall the Annie Jacobson, Flight 327 story from 2004? A woman reported suspicious activity by some Muslims on the flight. I said she was “jumping at shadows.”

Oops. Bad call. Looks like there was something to her story.

Captain’s Quarters - Dry Run Confirmed (?)

A declassified report confirms that Annie Jacobsen accurately recounted suspicious activities on a Northwest flight from Detroit to Los Angeles in the summer of 2004, and that a number of Syrians attempted a dry run for a terror attack. Eight of the 12 had already been flagged for criminal or suspicious behavior, and the apparent leader was involved in a similar incident later as well. …

I screwed up again.

Update: My thanks to commenter Guav. Okay, this is a confusing story. No one was arrested for being a terrorist. But the suspicious activity merited Ms. Jacobsen’s notice. I’ll leave this tar baby at that. There appears to have been enough suspicious activity, such that Ms. Jacobsen should not (as I did), be accused of jumping the gun.

Comments

  1. Rod Stanton wrote:

    One thing that differentiates you from the liberal in the White House is that your have the integrity to admit when you make a big mistake.. Nobody (except me of course) is always right. Few are wrong as often as the lefty I voted for in 04. But he has never admitted he made a bad decision; and he has had hundreds of chances to do so the last 5 years!

    I admire both your honesty and your humility. Yesterday at Patterico’s I read your exchanges with him of a few years back. To openly say what you say today shows (in my humble opinion) real intellectual honesty. But you were deceived by Bush back in 04 – as I was, not on this issue but on many many others – like the War on Terror and Axis of Evil to mention2 biggies he lied ;to us about.

    Posted 30 May 2007 at 12:01 pm

  2. canuckistani wrote:

    “flagged for criminal or suspicious behaviour” - what the hell does that mean? Obviously they weren’t all on the record for attending terror camps, or they would have been on a no-fly list, or arrested on sight. I know a lot of musicians, and there are a few possession convictions among them. Does that count? Does having an expired visa count? As for suspicious behaviour, who knows what the means when you’re talking about Muslims in the post-9/11 era.
    Call me when they find the crate of plastic explosive, blueprints of the target buildings in their kitchens and the flight school logs with no landing class entries. This still smells like **** to me.

    Posted 30 May 2007 at 12:24 pm

  3. BloodSpite wrote:

    and the flight school logs with no landing class entries.

    I have to tell you Canuck thats the best line I have read all week :)

    Posted 30 May 2007 at 12:45 pm

  4. rabit wrote:

    Interesting but a few thinks stick out.

    1. It’s from the Washington Times, a newspaper that is widely known to be full of ****. Any credible major news sources cover this that, say, aren’t owned by a Korean cult leader?
    2. Lack of content. No credible names, sources whatever. I can’t read the full article (I refuse to give Washington Times my e-mail address)
    3. The woman who witnessed these men is Annie Jacobsen, is selling a book called “Terror in the Skies: Why 9/11 Could Happen Again” - like many conservatives in the media, she sees opportunity to sell Americans fear for big money.
    4. Snopes.

    Posted 30 May 2007 at 1:45 pm

  5. rabit wrote:

    5. National Review

    Posted 30 May 2007 at 1:49 pm

  6. Guav.dna@gmail.com wrote:

    The report does not vindicate the claim that they were in fact conducting a dry run, nor does it claim that these men were terrorists.

    All it vindicates is the claim that they were acting “suspiciously,” and that they have acted “suspiciously” in the past on other flights. The suspicious activity was found not to be a terrorist threat.

    Posted 30 May 2007 at 1:53 pm

  7. Guav wrote:

    That being said, had I witnessed them doing the things they did on that flight, I’d have been pretty sketched out myself. But to claim that it’s been “confirmed” that they were terrorists conducting a dry run is—unless I’m missing something—totally invented.

    Posted 30 May 2007 at 1:56 pm

  8. rabit wrote:

    Guav.dna@gmail.com, the posting on Captains Quarters asserts:

    Without a doubt, this vindicates Jacobsen and shows that either these men intended to conduct a terrorist dry run, or that they wanted someone to think that they were.

    Yeah, it has to be one of those two. It couldn’t be a third possibility, that the men were aware of how they were perceived by almost every other passenger (being a group of mid-eastern-looking guys on a plane and all) and by simply trying to act as unsuspicious as possible (trying hard to not acknowledge each other, as Jacobsen said), they appeared to be acting strangely.

    someone owes Annie Jacobsen an apology.

    How about an apology from Captain Quarters, for lowering the intelligence of his readers.

    Posted 30 May 2007 at 2:14 pm

  9. R.L.Page wrote:

    I met Miss Jacobsen in Burbank, California. Although she recounted her harrowing experiences on that fateful flight (in exquisite detail) I found her memories of her days as a college hockey-player much more entertaining.

    Miss Jacobsen and the current president have at least two things in common, and one is that they are both in need of counseling and therapy. To Miss Jacobsen’s credit, she has sought help.

    Posted 30 May 2007 at 2:26 pm

  10. DavidC wrote:

    As for suspicious behaviour, who knows what the means when you’re talking about Muslims in the post-9/11 era.

    Try reading the account of what happened. You don’t find their behavior suspicious?

    I read the article. The title is “Security Flaws Confirmed,” which is a major difference from confirming a dry run.
    Here’s a link

    Posted 30 May 2007 at 2:30 pm

  11. Guav wrote:

    Rabit, that’s a very good point.

    Posted 30 May 2007 at 3:20 pm

  12. R.L.Page wrote:

    The details of the alleged “suspicious activity” have only one source: Miss Jacobsen. At the time of the incident, Miss Jacobsen had only recently begun steps toward recovery, and, from my own observation, exhibits a marked tendency to exagerrate and to dramatize.

    Factoring in her socio-political views and biases, Miss Jacobsen is far from an objective or credible witness.

    Posted 30 May 2007 at 5:45 pm

« EIT - outmoded, amateurish and unreliable
The Problem with George »