1 Comment »
The rest of the article is available almost anywhere…
By EILEEN SULLIVAN, Associated Press Writer Eileen Sullivan, Associated Press Writer – 3 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Two men arrested in Amsterdam may have been conducting a dry run for a potential terrorist attack, U.S. officials said Tuesday after a cell phone taped to a Pepto-Bismol bottle and a knife and box cutters were found in one of the men’s luggage.
U.S. investigators are pursuing leads in Detroit, Birmingham, Ala.; and Memphis, Tenn., according to officials speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the ongoing investigation.
The arrests come at a time of heightened alert just days before the ninth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks.
On Sunday, authorities found the suspicious items — a cell phone taped to a Pepto-Bismol bottle, multiple cell phones and watches taped together, and a knife and box cutter — in one of the men’s checked luggage in Virginia. The man and his luggage were headed to separate international destinations, which also raised concerns.
A U.S. law enforcement official identified the men as Ahmed Mohamed Nasser al Soofi and Hezam al Murisi….
So let me get this straight, two guys named Ahmed Mohamed Nasser al Soofi and Hezam al Murisi can carry Pepto-Bismol bottles taped to cell phones (yeah, I carry my cell phone like that all the time) and get detained AFTER they’ve left the US by Dutch officials with holstered weapons…
Yet two American citizens named John and Martha King, flying an airplane legally registered with a legal N-number issued by the FAA get met with drawn weapons, cuffed and put in a police car for a half an hour. And when the mistake is learned, well, cops don’t apologize.
Isn’t it time for Secretary Napolitano to tells us the system worked again?
Posted: August 31st, 2010 | Author: admin | Filed under: Uncategorized
1 Comment »
John And Martha King Held At Police Gunpoint (Really)
Aviation’s most prominent husband and wife team is calling on government agencies to keep their databases up to date and warning pilots and aircraft owners they could be next to be surrounded by heavily armed police, handcuffed and detained because of a bit of miscommunication. John and Martha King say there’s a lesson to be learned after they spent about 30 scary minutes in the custody of Santa Barbara, Calif., police at the Santa Barbara Airport Saturday. Authorities thought their leased Cessna 172 was a Cessna 150 that had been stolen eight years previously in Texas. The 172, which is owned by Cessna Aircraft, was assigned the N-number of the stolen 150 in 2009, years after the FAA had cancelled that registration on the 150. Apparently no one told the El Paso Intelligence Center, an arm of the Drug Enforcement Agency, and other government departments that keeps tabs on, among other things, flights of stolen aircraft. When the Kings filed IFR for their flight from San Diego to meet friends in Santa Barbara, the local police were alerted to intercept the aircraft when it landed. As Martha King told us in the accompanying podcast, what followed was, in her opinion, unnecessarily dangerous and uncomfortable.
King says they were approached by police prepared for the worst, with guns drawn and others taking cover behind the doors of the four police cars that responded. Although anyone who has met the Kings would describe them as anything but threatening in appearance and demeanor, the police took no chances and maintained their aggressive stance through the ordeal. “I would have thought at that point when they got us out it would have ratcheted down quite a bit because I don’t think we exactly look like your typical airplane thief,” she said. The Kings were not hurt and the airplane was not damaged. The police did not apologize but did justify their actions by saying it was a report that had to be checked out, King said. The Kings said they went public with their experience in hopes that law enforcement agencies will double-check stolen aircraft reports and to warn pilots that there’s a chance their N-number could come up under similar circumstances.
Now what was all that about ‘checking data bases’ and stuff?
First, there’s the difference between a 150 and 172; should I expect your average cop to know that? No. But, the airplane’s been stolen NINE YEARS, and now the thief is stupid enough to file a flight plan (like Osama filling out all that ICE paperwork) to El Paso.
Second there’s the cancelled registration on the 150, as AvWeb points out that nobody told the DEA about.
Lastly, I’m not sure the link will work here so cut and paste or go to AvWeb and listen to the podcast. Then get ready for LASP II.
Posted: August 30th, 2010 | Author: admin | Filed under: Uncategorized
1 Comment »
From Canada: “Frequent fliers know the drill: take off your shoes, surrender your tweezers and pack your shampoo in those littl plastic baggies befor lining up for the naked body scanners. But lift your niqab? Apparently not.
QMI Agency (Quebec Media, Inc. Agency) can reveal that neither airlines nor security services are asking Muslim women to lift their veils and prove that the face beneath matches their photo ID.”
Air Canada says it’s CATSA’s (thier TSA) job and CATSA says “we just look for metal”; so much for ceramic, explosive or biologic [the sarin, a nerve agent, dropped in the Japanese subway years ago was in a light bulb].
And to further explain why veils may be an issue: Mustaf Jama, a Somali witha long criminal record escaped back to Somalia by wearing a full veil and boarding a flight at Heathrow.
AND, to tell you how really screwed up this is, consider that the Muslim Canadian Congress and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Canada BOTH say you should NOT be allowed to wear a veil in the secure area of an airport.
So what’s it got to do with the Large Aircraft Security Program?
Well: 1) these flight come to the US, not just intra-Canadian airspace.
2) the CAIR, Canada spokesman says they probably don’t do it because of political correctness concerns. No kiddin’, ya think? And give the political correct morass that is the US government, we would never fall in that trap would we? It’s already happening, in my day job I’ve seen Captains try to throw disruptive Arabs off (actually no idea of their religion) and told they can’t. Yet any drunk, loud, disorderly other ethnic or regilous type gets the heave-ho.
3) Yet, my children, my wife, my friends won’t be able to board my private property without a background check and a search if LASP goes into effect. Unless they are wearing a veil I guess. Somebody should tell that to Sen. Rockefeller (D-WV), if he wants to get through the line fast, he just has to wear a veil.
I want you to understand, this is a style of dress. Yes, there’s a set of beliefs that require it, however it doesn’t list a religion on your passport, and there’s nothing that says you can’t throw a veil on and then use false papers to get on an airplane.
That’s the issue. That we have become too scared of offense to tell (not ask) somebody the picture has to match the face and I need to see the face to know that. And we are willing to strip search private citizens on private property without warrant (how many times does that violate the Constitution) but wouldn’t dream of bothering an individual in a veil on public transportation because we might offend.
The lunatics are running the place, I’m telling you.
Posted: August 4th, 2010 | Author: admin | Filed under: Uncategorized