DHS Delays Classified Report on NWA flight #327

Tamara Faulkner, spokesperson for Homeland Security, emailed me the following with regards to the unclassified summary of the classified report about Northwest Flight 327 (June 2004) originally due out today:

Annie, Not today. It was delayed one day. Now scheduled for a Monday, April 24 web posting: www.dhs.gov/oig The report (unclassified summary) will be accessable by clicking on "Management Reports". Thanks for checking. Tamara

Here's what the project entailed, this from the DHS Fiscal Year 2006 Annual Performance Plan:

Carryover Projects Review of the Department’s Handling of Suspicious Passengers and Activities Aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 327, June 29, 2004 This review was initiated as a result of media reports concerning actions taken by departmental personnel in response to alleged suspicious activities onboard Northwest Airlines Flight 327 from Detroit to Los Angeles. On this flight, 13 Middle Eastern men behaved in a suspicious manner that aroused the attention and concern of the flight attendants, passengers, air marshals, and pilots. As a result, a federal air marshal instructed the pilot to radio ahead for law enforcement personnel to meet the flight upon arrival at Los Angeles. Audit Objective: Determine the specific circumstances related to Flight 327, including the department’s handling of the suspicious passengers before boarding, during flight, and after the plane landed; and, identify any lessons learned as a result of the alleged suspicious activities. Office of Audits

Wonder why the government's report on Northwest flight #327 is classified? My book on the subject, "Terror in The Skies, Why 9/11 Could Happen Again" examines and explains that. From Damascus to Detroit and inside just about every three-letter government agency inbetween, grave errors were made by Homeland Security and Department of Justice officials and now these errors have been classified.

--Annie Jacobsen in Los Angeles

Comments

[Zossima]

Jeebus, Rick, are you a traitor? You have the temerity to publish someone who suggests that the gov't is less than competent? Are you suggesting that while bazillions of dollars are being spent in Iraq that we've actually left ourselves unsecure here? The existence of this very kind of speech only empowers our enemies, the terrorists. I think this kind of writing is worthy of jail.

[Leslie]

Zossima you've let your disagreements with Rick cloud your manners.

Welcome Annie. I'm very interested to hear more about this from your perspective. As details arise I'll look forward to hearing your take. Thanks.

[Zossima]

I treat Rick no differently than he treats "moonbats"---which is getting to be 70%+ of the population. One thing I'm sure about Rick is that he can take it. Rick left himself wide open with this post, which frankly has me perplexed, because it indicates that Annie is going to write about the very things Rick has worked so hard for years now to deny. It was the perfect opportunity for a little humor that satirizes the very things that the "Right" (they're not conservatives) have been saying.

[Leslie]

I just thought manners would call for addressing the one who wrote the post.

[Zossima]

Rick owns the blog. He decides what gets published here. That's why we write letters to the editor and not necessarily to the reporter/columnist.

[Leslie]

Suit yourself.

[Rick]

Rick does own the blog, and Rick's with Leslie...

Methinks that Zos you're making charges that don't carry water...

To suggest that I rubber stamp anything this adminsitration does is to be myopic... and I wonder why...

Perhaps you can cite for me who you think might've handled things better...

John Kerry?

[Zossima]

Rick, you pander to the lowest ploy of the right, which is, What would the left have done? It doesn't matter if Clinton or Kerry or whomever would or couldn't have done better. I loathe the Clintons as much as I loathe the Bushies. What Bush has and hasn't done needs to stand on its own merits, and you're a big enough boy to know that. Quit hiding behind Clinton's skirts and be a man. Stand for truth instead of a political figure.

In this case, my charges absolutely carry water: You are a hypocrite. You deny any evidence of Bush's wrongdoing that comes from the left. But you've been caught in the duplicity of your own position. I called you on it. You can't print Annie's article and not be a hypocrite to your previous positions on anti-Bush evidence.

Show me something you don't rubber stamp. Weak. Think for yourself. You can protest all you want. Your sellout is obvious.