"Terror in the Skies, Again" — But Is It True?

If Annie Jacobsen underwent the experiences described "Terror in the Skies, Again?", she has every right to be frightened, and so do we. She relates a series of extraordinarily suspicious incidents on a June 29th Northwest Airlines flight, to which the crew reacted with strange passivity. The rather obvious moral is that, almost three years after 9/11, air travel remains insecure.

Before drawing conclusions, however, I should like to enter a caveat. Elements of Mrs. Jacobsen's story do not have the ring of truth. That doesn't mean that they are necessarily false; real life does not have to be probable. On the other hand, hoaxes, exaggerations and misunderstandings do occur. Here are points that need, I believe, further explication:

First, despite all of the suspicious activity, nothing dangerous occurred. Mrs. Jacobsen suggests that the 14-man group that she observed was rehearsing a future action, such as the in-flight construction of a bomb, but their reported movements — successive visits to the lavatories, ignoring "fasten seat belt" signs and congregating in the aisles — scarcely fit that or any other hypothesis. It doesn't take fourteen operatives to smuggle bomb parts on board an airplane, and calling attention to themselves in the obvious way that these men allegedly did would truly be a "stupid terrorist trick".

Second, we have these less than credible anecdotes of stewardess behavior:

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.

The Federal Air Marshal Service has only a few thousand personnel to cover (IIRC) roughly 40,000 domestic airline flights a day. The marshals work in two-man teams. How likely is it that they were "sitting all around" the cabin on this particular flight? Of course, the stewardess could have been telling a reassuring, but stupid, lie.

About 20 minutes later the same flight attendant returned. 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.

How hard is it for a stewardess to slip out of sight of a passenger? What would have been the point of obtaining a written description? (The suspicious-acting men were all, we are later told, detained upon landing, at which point there was ample opportunity to inspect their appearance.) Wouldn't the incessant note passing that Mrs. Jacobsen describes have tipped the suspects off to the fact that the passengers and crew were aware of their behavior?

Third, the description of the exit from the aircraft and detention of the 14 men doesn't fit well with what normally happens as passengers disembark from a crowded aircraft. In my pretty extensive experience, nobody "hurries off" any but the emptiest of flights.

The plane landed. My husband and I gathered our bags and quickly, very quickly, walked up the jetway. As we exited the jetway and entered the airport, we saw many, many men in dark suits. A few yards further out into the terminal, LAPD agents ran past us, heading for the gate. I have since learned that the representatives of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), the Federal Air Marshals (FAM), and the Transportation Security Association (TSA) met our plane as it landed. Several men — who I presume were the federal air marshals on board — hurried off the plane and directed the 14 men over to the side.

I have been on a couple of flights from which passengers were taken upon landing. The doors were kept closed, and we were instructed to remain in our seats. Medical or law enforcement personnel then came on board and escorted the targets off. It beggars belief that, in a case as strange as this, similar procedures would not have been followed.

Finally, while I have never been interviewed by the FBI, I doubt that the process involves "sworn statement after sworn statement" or "[writing] down every detail".

I have no way of knowing what happened on Mrs. Jacobsen's flight and apologize if I have mistakenly cast doubt on her recollections. Nonetheless, they do not sound credible.

Addendum: Just after posting this item, I discovered a fellow skeptic.

Update: Hi to visitors from Instapundit, and thanks to the Professor for the link.

As noted in a comment, Michelle Malkin has received confirmation from a (named) source at the Federal Air Marshals Service that "there were 14 Syrians on the flight; they were questioned by the Los Angeles Police Department, FBI, FAM, and so on; they were a musical band". Hence we know that Annie Jacobsen did not invent out of whole cloth. But did the Syrians engage in the bizarre rituals that she attributes to them? The anomalies in her account remain. I'll be interested to see whether other passengers come forward to confirm them.

Update II: Rod Dreher, an editorial writer for the Dallas Morning News, offers the reassuring information that, "I'm hearing from a trusted source that the federal air marshals have thwarted quite a few domestic hijacking plots since 9/11, but haven't told the public about them, presumably (this is my interpretation, not my source's) because they don't want to unnerve the public."

President Bush said in his first speech after 9/11 that we were entering a war in which many of our victories would go unreported. That's worth bearing in mind.

Incidentally, this blog is a spinoff from a site whose principal original purpose was to discuss science fiction, wargaming and Shakespearean authorship theories. Any visitors who are interested in those areas might want to look at the pertinent links in the left hand column. (The Shakespeare material is under "Literature".)

Further Reading: Donald Sensing, "Casing Northwest #327 — Threat or Hoax?", goes over problems with the Jacobsen account in detail from the point of view of someone with investigative experience (but vide counterpoints from a professional). His conclusion:

Annie Jacobsen was indeed scared witless by predisposition to be scared, and this fact affected how she understood and reported everything. Lots of embellishments, psychologizing and dramatic reporting here.

He links to me as a fellow skeptic, for which I thank him.

Update III: Iraq Incognito chimes in for the skeptics:

I'm a Federal Law Enforcement Agent and I think the story by Annie Jacobsen does not indicate a "dry run", rather it is a well written story by a woman who was terrified when normal actions by Arab males confirmed her pre-conceived notions. I have flown on commercial flights in the Middle East on many, many occasions. The behavior of the Syrian group was not unusual, IMHO.

More importantly, he calls for an e-mail campaign to book the Flight 327 Syrian Band on the National Review Post-Election Cruise.

Update IV: Further thoughts from Donald Sensing (still skeptical but not unconcerned).

Addendum II: A commenter writes, "The real moral of all this is that our airline security today is still not what it should be, and that the Bush admin could have better spent our Iraq war money on internal defenses. THAT'S how to fight terrorism."

No, that's how to transform America into a police state. Passive defense leaves the initiative to the enemy and requires a steady escalation of surveillance and control as terrorists learn to counter existing protective measures. When I was growing up, metal detectors were for ultra-high security, not an accessory to every airport, government office building and inner city high school. And I didn't have any need for a photo ID until I was over 40 years old. If ever another generation is going to know that kind of freedom, this generation will have to burn the terrorist vipers out of their nests.

Addendum to Addendum II: I just noticed this Daniel Drezner post, from which I took away the same message as one of the commenters:

There is no realistic defense for homeland security. Our only option is to kill the existing cells, deter terror sponsors, and drain the swamps.

That doesn't mean, as another commenter notes, that we should neglect prudent security measures, but we can't depend primarily on them, unless we are willing to put up with much more government than ever before.

Update V (7/19/04): Annie Jacobsen has published a follow-up, the major point of which is that fear of appearing to be prejudiced against Arabs hampers airline secruity. I certainly agree and am happy to see that third rail touched by someone who evidently is not a conservative of any stripe. (Incidentally, if you go to the story via the WomensWallStreet home page, you'll get a popup poll asking whether you believe that the airline security should racially profile passengers. When I looked at it, the responses were 85 percent "yes".)

Mrs. Jacobsen offers a good round-up of media reaction to her original piece and prints e-mails that she has received from people who work in the airline industry. Unfortunately for our curiosity about what really happened on Flight 327, she provides no confirmatory statements from other passengers. Were the Syrians' actions really as strange as she reports, or did her understandable apprehension lead her to exaggerate the extent of the suspicious activity? The fact that the Syrians were questioned by law enforcement authorities does indicate that they didn't stay innocently in their seats for four hours, but it may take only a fairly small quantum of unusual behavior to gain a post-flight FBI interview, and the fact remains that the authorities let all 14 go. Until further information emerges, I'm not going to assume that they were wrong.

Update VI (7/20/04): This story has grown too many branches for any one person to count, much less comprehend, but these two items impress me as significant:

1. A reasonable grumble from John Derbyshire:

The astonishing thing about this story is the laziness and incompetence of this country's journalistic establishment. Annie Jacobsen's story has been out there a week now. By this time we should know all sorts of things: the name of this Syrian band, the place where they played their gig (or certainty that there was no such place), interviews with other passengers who were on Annie's flight, and so on. The NY Times, the nation's other broadsheet newspapers, and the big Network and cable TV outlets all have highly-paid staffs of reporters who should be digging these things out. So... where are they? The piece in today's Times is pathetic, telling us nothing we didn't know. Any London tabloid could do better investigative work than this. Perhaps the National Inquirer will come up with something?

Also, let me add, reporters should by now have tracked down and interviewed other passengers on Flight 327. Can't these bozos find any information that isn't prepackaged and leaked to them?

2. An e-mail received by National Review from someone who identifies himself as an airline ticket agent:

Have you ever checked in at the airport and ever got the dread SSSS on your boarding pass? That of course will direct you to secondary screening. Now for most people that's a "random" thing.

I have checked many of the rich and famous and of course many of the poor and obscure. I have seen a retired astronaut as well as Sir Richard Branson get the SSSS on the boarding pass I handed to them. They were the "randoms".

However there is one other condition that will guarantee SSSS on the boarding pass. That is that the traveler presents identification from a state sponsor of terrorism. Syria and Iran among others appear on that FAA list. There is an entry I can make that will guarantee the SSSS. For passengers that have state sponsor of terrorism identification I am required to make this entry.

Needless to say to Syrian passports are very,very rare but I have seen them along with the others on the list. So anybody presenting a Syrian passport checking in with Northwest Airlines would have to get SSSS on their boarding pass and get the secondary screening. This is an FAA requirement and failure to do so is considered a security violation.

So everyone of those "Syrians" if that is indeed what they were should have had secondary and there is no PC way or not for that to have not occurred. Even if they did not check in with same agent they would still wind up in secondary all 14 of them. A group of "musicians" with a lot bags and equipment would have to see an agent.

The mystery deepens. Where are the other passengers? If they all die strange deaths over the next three weeks, I'll know that I've slipped through a reality warp into a Jasper Fforde novel.

Update VII (7/21/04): A Stanford graduate student and part-time disk jockey has scooped the major media by identifying the Syrian band and locating the place where it played.

Update VIII: Scrappleface discovers that there are two sides to every feeling of terror.

Update IX (8/5/04): The Stanford DJ, who is starting to look like the only real reporter in America, has uncovered more information about what really happened on Flight 327. As often happens, more data do not produce greater clarity.

Comments

[Sara]

I changed my mind - I do have more to say. (See my previous post below.)

WRT Annie stating that the flight attendant asked her husband to write down a description of the man in the yellow shirt - It is quite possible that she did do this. Not because she couldn't do it herself, but because assigning responsibility to someone is a good way to get them to focus about something specific and not focus on the terror they are experiencing. If he concentrates on describing someone, he is more likely to calm down and do the task at hand. If the Airmarshal's statement was correct and Annie and her husband were getting hysterical, then I know the flight attendant would do these things to calm them down (tell them there were airmarshals on board, ask them to describe the men, confide in them). She was trying to avoid a panic. She did what she thought would help. Sounds like it did.

My second thing is in regards to the Airmarshal stating that Annie was the real threat on the plane. The Airmarshal/s were afraid that Annie would cause them to reveal themselves. Why would they care if there was no perceived threat with the Syrian men? Why did they call the FBI and other law enforcement agencies to meet the plane, instead of airport security (as you would do in the case of un unruly passenger)? Why, when the plane landed, did they not target Annie, instead of the 14 men?

I think a lot of people on that plane were a bit scared and a bit concerened. Now that it is after the fact, everyone can point blame at little ole Annie - to protect the airline industry and protect the fact that the goverenment agencies are still unprepared.

Now I do sound like a conspiracy theorist... haha

I don't know, I just think there is waaayy more at play here then we know. (See my previous post).

[Sara]

I think it is unfair for people to attack Annie Jacobsen. I believe her fear was real and that she did not intentionally try to create a story.

Did you all forget what happened on 9/11?? Would any of you, previous to 9/11 have believed that it was possible for terrorists to level the twin towers??

I think Annie and others on that flight were scared, and they have a right to be. Middle eastern men killed 3000 Americans by hijacking a plane. Did she read more into their behavior and become hysterical with fear? Maybe, but can you say you would have acted differently in the same situation? Something scared her, and others on the plane. Why?

I also think we should remember that the airline industry was almost crippled after 9/11 because everyone was afraid to fly. If the airline industry goes under, so do a lot of other businesses - travel agents, advertising agencies, food/beverage distributers, training schools, hotels, cruise ships... and all of those companies buy advertising space in newspapers, on radio stations, on the internet and TV. Is it possible that a lot of those larger companies fund political campaigns or sit on boards with other industry/business/political leaders??

I am not one for huge conspiracy theories or anything but I think there is more to this story. If our country panics and people stop flying again... well, there is a lot to lose - a lot of money. There are people out there who I am sure do not want the airlines to crumble.

We do know this much:

1. The men were detained and interrogated. SOMEONE believed these men to be a threat, besides just Annie.

2. The FBI had issued a warning that morning about possible terrorist activity - so the FBI believed that activities such as trial runs were happening or possible that day out of those two airports. So, the FBI believed it, and Annie thought she was living it...

3. These men all entered with expired visas. Nobody noticed. We have a FAR way to go still wrt training...obviously.

That's all I have to say.

[George]

Read George Carlin's "Brain Droppings" and learn how to seriously -- and not so seriously -- unravel crap like Ann Jacobsen's. What a jerk, and I don't mean just here! She does it on a regular basis.

Me: Except for a rather commonplace article on home equity loans for the WomensWallStreet site, I haven't been able to locate anything by the Annie Jacobsen who wrote "Terror in the Skies, Again". (The "Creative Writing, Dreamwork, Individual Psychotherapy" Annie Jacobsen doesn't appear to be the same woman.) Can you provide references to her other writing? This is, of course, obvious "due diligence" that is too much trouble for our vigilant professional news media.

[Anonymous]

July 21, 2004, 7:21 p.m.
The Syrian Wayne Newton
The man inadvertently behind a scare in the skies.
By Clinton W. Taylor

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/taylor200407211921.asp

[Patrick]

The attitude of the so-called "skeptics" is what got 3,000 innocent americans killed! I feel that it is our duty as citizens of this country to be vigilant. I also think that we cannot stop this war against terror by sitting back and waiting for them to attack us. I believe that sometimes a good defense requires a good offense.

Me: For the record I was advocating "a good offense" as long ago as December 1, 2001.

[Kevin]

I think it is the "skeptics" who are being too creative in their writing.

Re: flight attendant's actions, maybe she wanted him to write the description because she didn't want to write it, fearing she might catch flak for "profiling" those passengers, whereas another passenger would not.

In terms of her whispering, maybe she just got nervous and made some mistakes. Or maybe she was trying to stop passengers from getting involved and making things worse. Yes, it doesn't seem like the proper procedure, but that doesn't mean a flight attendant didn't do it. People under stress make mistakes and/or scr-w up.

Re: number of suspects being too high for one flight (a criticism I find very flimsy) - maybe there were TWO TEAMS doing a dry run on the same flight. They were using separate lavatories yet following the same behavior patterns. Maybe they think multiple dry runs on ONE FLIGHT is less conspicuous overall than doing separate runs on a separate flight. Maybe it's easier to compare notes with more eyes on one flight. Maybe one man (the man in yellow?) was overseeing a training run, to see who is ready, etc. Who's to say?

The real moral of all this is that our airline security today is still not what it should be, and that the Bush admin could have better spent our Iraq war money on internal defenses. THAT'S how to fight terrorism.

[Johnny Cakes]

Quote: "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." End quote

So, while passing his comrade the hijacker doesn't lean over and just whisper, but rather makes an obviously incriminating gesture that the whole plane can see? Yeah, right.

[bob]

Isn't the fact that she quotes Ann Coulter enough to discredit the whole story? Or at least her interpretation of events?

[The Beacon]

I too share some skepticism, particularly here account of the what the flight attendant said and did. But…

"But did the Syrians engage in the bizarre rituals that she attributes to them?"

If several law enforcement agencies did question them, as confirmed, it would seem logical that there was some level of 'bizarre' behavior. I would be more skeptical that in our politically correct time law enforcement would question 14 middle eastern men without suspicious behavior to boot.

[KS]

Maybe it was these guys...

[Jason]

My take on it here .

[William]

Michelle Malkin is able to confirm the essential details of Mrs. Jacobsen's encounter.

Hardly. What she confirmed was that a group of Syrian musicians were indeed on the flight and were questioned. The essence of Jacobsen's story is that they were behaving in a fashion so suspicious that any reasonable person would have thought them terrorists.

Given that the musicians were apparently released after questioning by multiple agencies, it seems reasonable to assume that it was a false alarm. In which case, Jacobsen's article seems to mainly serve as an example of how quickly even a professional journalist can ramp up from a reasonable fear to raving paranoia.

Certainly she fails to mention that the Detroit area, where she departed from, is known as the Arab capital of North America; in my experience it's not unusual to see people of Arab descent at DTW. And after writing, "the man in the yellow shirt he ran his forefinger across his neck and mouthed the word No," she doesn't even stop to ask herself why native Arabic speakers rehearsing a terror attack would be communicating in English and with gestures familiar to her.

[IDOlog]

I have elsewhere lamented the absence of great Americans like Todd Beamer on this flight. Having read the foregoing doubts, many of which I share, I add mine to the list. Can it really be believed that in post 9-11 America, not a single passenger on this flight would have the moxy to, say, ask for a french fry? See the flute? I think not. At least, I hope not.

[Eric]

The thing that I noticed early on in the story was that the author remembered WAY too many details about these Syrian passangers, even before they were suspicious. It just does not seem believable that she would remember this amount of detail:
Standing near us, also waiting to pre-board, was a group of six Middle Eastern men. They were carrying blue passports with Arabic writing. Two men wore tracksuits with Arabic writing across the back. Two carried musical instrument cases - thin, flat, 18 long. One wore a yellow T-shirt and held a McDonald's bag. And the sixth man had a bad leg -- he wore an orthopedic shoe and limped.

Frankly, this reads more like a novel than a witness statement.

As aware Americans, my husband and I exchanged glances, and then continued to get comfortable.

This is just too corny to be believed.

One by one, they went into the two lavatories, each spending about four minutes inside.

Seriously, did she have a stop watch and was she keeping notes? Again, this reads like fiction.

My conclusion? This is work of fiction that was inspired by a true story and a good deal of paranoia.

[Andy]

Regarding the levels of air marshals, this flight had 14 Syrians with one way tickets. For all we know, major airports could have a group of air marshalls that sit around in shifts waiting for such 'red flag' flights. Upon finding such a flight they dump a team of marshals on the flight just in case. This may explain the notion that there were plenty of air marshals on the flight (althought I doubt it, last I heard they were all busy protecting the flight in and out of Washington and damn the rest of us).

What I do find hard to believe is the idea that the stewardess would be so open talking about it. Did she go around everyone telling them this? It seems quite a few were able to spot the activities going on.
Why would the stewardess ask them to write the description? Surely it would be better for her to do it since she is 'in the business' and probably has had some sort of training on being observant. If a bank is robbed, you don't ask the blind old lady what she saw, you get the scoop from the police officer that was parked across the road.

[U.S. Cavalry]

Remember that they load certain flights with Air Marshals disproportionately. I believe this one was going to LAX, so I'm not a bit surprised that they would have a few on board.

[gijoe]

who cares if its true?
probably just a neurotic wannabe journalist but if it makes all of us more watchful while flying the better

[Craig]

This story is flying around the internet at near-record speed (getting linked by Instapundit has a way of doing that). At some point, someone else who flew on flight 327 is going to read it. Seeing as how the basic facts of 14 Middle Eastern men on the flight checks out, I doubt anyone on that plane forgot it.

I tend to believe Ms. Jacobsen, especially in light of Michelle Malkin's background work. If I was on that plane in any capacity -- pilot, attendant, passenger -- I don't know how I would have reacted other than I would have been scared out of my wits.

[Nick Hodges]

The terrorists may be taking 14 on board to better be able to fend of passenger interference. They assume passengers will no longer sit idly by, so a small cadre of guys hold off the passengers -- those aisles are pretty skinny -- the rest do the deed.

[Don Yassin]

Michelle Malkin is able to confirm the essential details of Mrs. Jacobsen's encounter.

http://michellemalkin.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/27

http://www.michellemalkin.com/