Check the blogs though (linked above) - the guy has confirmed to others that he called this woman and discussed the whole business. This was not made up. She may have read more into it than was really there, but the flight and issues were not imaginary, unless she has pulled a whole lot of people in on it.

Received this article from a friend by email and it struck me as a pure propaganda piece. I was glad to see some critical thinking applied in this forum which reinforces my incredulity. However, this still does not change my opinion that TSA is a paper tiger and needs some major rethinking.

I'm with you. As I read it, I was thinking why doesn't the flight crew do something? If I'd been in the author's situation I would be sweating too. Would it be an invasion of their civil rights to ask these people to sit down? What if the pilot put the seat belt sign on and left it on? I'm disturbed to read that the air marshals won't do anything until something happens. If it is possible to assemble a bomb on board (and I don't think that's out of the realm of possibility - not much is after 9/11) then it's a little late once "something happens". We read all the time about stuff that makes it onto planes even though the passenger went through screening. No system is perfect and I think any strange behavior should be dealt with at the time. Apologies can be made later. All the behavior she observed could be perfectly innocent, or it could be very sinister. In these times, I'd rather see those in charge err on the safe side. It's unfortunate, but those are the times we live in. Isn't the 9/11 Commission trying to discover what could have been done to prevent 9/11? Haven't we learned anything? If a plane is blown up, will the explanation be that we didn't want to harrass the perpetrators?

I was also curious as to why the flight attendants didn't do anything - perhaps they were afraid to escalate something that, thus far, only looks suspicious? I'm curious to know, too, whether they had an opportunity to check the lavatory bins for anything suspicious.

The seat belt sign? Since when have you known passengers to obey the seat belt sign? ha! (Clearly it wouldn't have made a difference as they all stood during approach to LAX.)

As for the FAM's - no, they don't get involved in minor problems or in suspicious behavior. Doing so would give up their position and anonymity (let's assume this group did not know they were on board..) and could compromise their effectiveness. Let's reserve them for truly dire situations, just in case.

I'm not going to re-read the article and pick apart every possibile misguided or erroneous statement...it seems clear that the passengers and crew were fearful of some potentially suspicious behavior on board. As to why this or that didn't happen - it's very difficult to say without having been in that particular situation. The writer observed quite a lot, but she doesn't know the communications between the crew members or their plan of action, the reasoning behind any decisions that may have been made, etc. We are not getting an in-depth behind-the-scenes look at a trial run at a bombing or hijacking - we are getting one passengers perspective and limited information, no more, no less.

Because the journalistic credibility is practically zero. The article is not only racist and xenophobic but also is loaded with ...umptions and illogical conclusions.

Monkeys banging on typewriters could have written a more credible article.

To hell with apologies. The United States was not founded on the principle of "harass now, apologize later". If you're prepared to harass, you better be prepared to pay restitution.

Isn't it shoot now, ask questions later?

or

Kill them all, let God sort them out.

And that, I'm afraid, is why many people don't get involved - afraid of being wrong and having to pay big time later.

Precisely!

It's why the police are not allowed to detain people without clear, probable cause to do so.

It's why newspapers are required to check their facts before printing a story.

It's why your home can't be searched "just to be safe".

Welcome to the United States of America. Let's not let people change who we are.

I suppose these situations will be analogous when homes and newspapers can be filled with jet fuel and plunged into large buildings.

Airplanes consitute unique environments and the element of risk is much greater - as such, they require unique guidelines and regulations. There is nothing un-American about that.

Yes there is.

Keep labeling places where the Constitution does not apply and you'll be living in the Land of Exceptions and not the Land of the Free.

Oh holy cow....

Tell you what...why don't you sue, take it to the Supreme Court, and see what the big wigs in the black robes have to say about constitutionality.

They already have ruled on the issue. With regards to commercial aviation (and most other public facets of American life), discrimination on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, political affiliation, or beliefs is prohibited.

When one deems people to be "more suspicious" based on their appearance, not only is one a racist, but one may be breaking the law and violating their civil liberties if one acts on that prejudice.

In your opinion, of course.

You are right that it's an opinion, but that opinion is also currently the law of the land. Of course your opinion and others may be different than the law of the land. As a side example, the opinion of the Kahane Terrorists, the KKK and neo-Nazis generally won't change regardless of the law of the land; furthermore, such bigots will advocate and implement certain "special" changes if given a way to realize their opinion and crush others -- especially disliked minorities.