Compelling piece and quite frightening. My lady flies frequently between Burbank and Sacramento. For reasons that we have been unable to determine (she works as a transcriptionist for writers, hardly a politically-charged job)she has been pre-selected for a complete search every time she attempts to board a plane. We're talking before she even gets to the metal detector: "Would you please step out of line, Miss?"

It's become something that she has fun with: packing items in her luggage in plastic baggies and cellophane to expedite the process, alerting her always-friendly interrogator that she is wearing an underwire bra, etc.

Like I said, we have no idea why her ticket and/or boarding pass has been flagged but it has and here's the catch: It only occurs at Burbank Airport. On return flights from Sac she is never detained. Raises a lot of questions. Are there different security protocols at Burbank and Sac Airport? That's just one question.

One more thing, however, that might explain her selection: despite a parental lineage of British and Scotch, she has features that can be described as distinctly Middle Eastern. In fact, here in Glendale she is frequently stopped by lost-looking strangers who begin asking her for directions in Armenian.

The whole system is broke and I'm afraid we're going to pay for the mistake with more lost lives.

These 14 guys were acting even weirder than the six that James Woods observed on his LA-bound flight.

Look at it from a purely tactical point of view. If you're planning to take over a plane, you have two obstacles to deal with -- an armed air marshall and a supposedly hardened cockpit door. How do you neutralize the marshall? You rush him with six or seven guys. Even if the marshall kills a couple (and they don't care because they're all dying anyway) there are plenty left over to take him down and do the deed.

Now they've got the Marshall's primary gun, the backup gun in his ankle holster and two spare ammo magazines.

The cockpit door is "hardened" but not bullet-proof. You can blast through the lock with the marshall's gun.

You'll notice in her piece the activities seemed to peak when the descent began into the LA basin. That's close enough. We've stood down the 24/7 combat air patrols. So the closest F-16s are the 144th Fighter Wing in Fresno on hot alert on the ramp. They're the wing tasked to intercept "Unknown Riders." By the time the F-16s make their run, get in position and get final authority to shoot, the operators are through the cockpit door and at the controls. With the airliner already in the basin, terror wise, you're in fat city. Any big building will do.

If someone were to ask me how to take over a plane in the post 9/11 world, that's how I'd do it. The advantage always goes to the operators who don't care if they live or die. They don't need boxcutters. Their own bodies are weapons enough. Should we profile? You be the judge.

This story is full of more holes then Swiss Cheese. For starters, the men were speaking Arabic, but then mouthed the word "no"? Either this lady suddenly learned how to speak Arabic, or the big bad middle eastern terrorists decided to start speaking English for their most secretive mission. Also, early on in the story she sees a "blue" passport with arabic writing, then later she can read that it's a Syrian passport. Not to mention that the passports are just casually sitting there for her to inspect. Hmm.

I believe the fundamental story, that there was a large group of travelling musicians from the Middle East on a plane, and they were acting kind of weird, especially if you are an 'aware American' who reads Ann Coulter. Haha, that's a cheap shot, I probably would have been slightly concerned on the plane as well...

but what has clearly happened is that a scary incident, which was a misunderstanding, is being used by this woman to drum up support for racial profiling. Sad.

I did find her final summation to be rather xenophobic.

So you are against racial profiling Ted? You and Norm Mineta.

I really feel safer that my 79 year old mother gets stopped and searched and middle eastern men on the same flight don't.

Racial profiling works.

Ted, why on earth would you feel "slightly concerned as well?" Isn't that profiling? I think you just buried your argument.

Michelle Malkin confirmed Dave Adams' quote here.

I'm against racial profiling because it doesn't work. In my opinion, everyone should be searched and questioned before boarding a plane, and all luggage should be inspected and x-rayed, tested for explosives, etc.

The point is that racial profiling gives a clear message to terrorists about who won't get searched, and that's very dangerous. It's a "feel good" solution that is a cheap and easy way of doing things. I don't doubt that it would catch some terrorist suspects, but not all. Plus, it means that terrorists know that they can smuggle things with 79 year old mothers, or they can impersonate white people, etc. etc. and not be searched.

To me it's not a civil rights issue, it's an issue of what works.

Tony, as explained above, I think everyone should be searched and that anything suspicious should be looked into. Profiling based on race/ethnicity/religion is simply not broad enough or effective enough of a system to be feasible. Plus it has a downside of alienating certain segments of the population. But again, my main beef with it is that i's a "feel good" solution and not one that will make us safer in the long run.

Ted. I just outlined that they don't need weapons or explosives. You can do a full on cavity search and find nothing. All they need are the numbers. The bodies to tip the odds in their favor.

If that is the case, then there is no way to protect airplanes if everyone on the flight manifest comes back 'clean'. It means that any group of people could easily take over a plane. In that case, I think changes to the design of cockpits and airplanes is the best solution. Otherwise, how on earth do you defend the plane from people with 'clean' backgrounds. Even with racial profiling, you wouldn't be able to stop groups of seemingly unaffiliated people from boarding the plane and working as a group. Let's just break it down, you have 3 unaffiliated Arabs, a couple of Europeans, a couple of Russians, and a couple of Africans, all with clean backgrounds. There is no way to not let them on the plane, even with racial profiling, if they turn up clean there's not much you can do. So it's a matter of changing the dynamics of the airplane rather then the simple solution of profiling.

By the way, checked out your website and it's great stuff.

Tony R-

While we did stand-down 24/7 combat patrols, don't assume that means waiting for alert aircraft from Fresno. The Guard learned a lot from Sept. 11.

This video is about an alleged gang member being arrested, but the point of interest for those of us concerned about terrorism is the end of the video -- very lethal plastic knives. Probably undetectable in current searches.

Or how about wooden knives?

Sure, have a team build a bomb on the plan. Sure, rush the marshalls and take their guns. These are also serious concerns. But the point I'm trying to make is that there are probably countless ways for terrorists to take control of a plane that we just simply cannot secure against.

I have two responses: 1) Tight security. Search everybody. No racial profiling, but don't be afraid to put extra scrutiny on Middle Eastern men. Make it has hard as possible for a terrorist to act. There's just no point in making it easy, even if perfect security is impossible; 2) Passengers, be proactive. Don't wait for the marshalls or the terrorist to act. Let disruptive or strange behaving fellow passengers know odd behavior won't be tolerated. I believe terrorists will abort a planned operation if it is disrupted, if they don't believe it won't succeed.

Ted, my man. Don't be shocked, but I agree with almost everything you said. Let's take a page from the El Al security doctrine. In addition to all the ground screenings, El Al assigns as many as six air marshalls to every flight. That tells me they've already addressed the multiple hijacker scenario and are ready for it. They have intrusion-proof, not just intrusion-resistant cockpit doors. In fact, there are two doors. And they'll never admit to any of this, but the pilots are armed and trained. All are former military. And on top of that, they profile like crazy. I understand your concern but I'm coming at this from a purely operational level. Part of the security spectrum is profiling. Sorry, but it's a fact of life. Would that it weren't so, but it is.

The most important lesson an operator learns is to get inside your opponents decision-making loop. Don't think like us. Think like them. We don't train operators to throw themselves on the muzzle of a blazing gun. They do. So get your program up with that possibility in mind. But as it stands, we only have single and sometimes two air marshalls per plane. And not on all planes. Not enough for the counter the 10 plus hijacker scenario.

To your point, you could have a collection of diverse individuals show up at flight time. A radical Chechen muslim for instance doesn't look all that different from a Slav. And he's maybe sitting next to a Filipino Muslim fresh out of the training cadre. This is when your profiling will start doing you some good.

The professional's definition of profiling goes beyond mere skin color and face features. You examine your universe of potential opponents. Compare that with the people getting on a plane. You already checked out the old people by searching their luggage, shoes, belts and asthma inhalers. Not a threat. The same with the very young. Now you start narrowing it down. Young, fit individuals. They could be male or, as we've seen in Chechnya and Gaza, females. And there may be one or two "senior" operatives who did all the organizational planning. Part of the profiling is watching the body language and micro-gestures. There's a whole science to that. Are certain apparently unrelated people deferring to this "senior" operative in subtle ways? Spend a month watching the body language ballet in the average prison yard and you'll come away with a profound appreciation for this science. That's profiling too.

This is where it's going to start pissing you off, Ted. See that twenty something female from San Diego State in the tube top and low-rider jeans? Probably not a graduate of the Salman Pak terror school and she's probably not going to throw herself on a gun. And how about that 300 lb. cab driver from Encino wheezing and sweating into his seat? Maybe. But low probability.

And that 18-year old male with tattoos, soda-straw arms and a West Coast Choppers T-shirt? Very, very low probable. But not to be entirely discounted because he fits into the age and gender profile. Johnny Taliban comes to mind.

You start ranking people and shuffling them into high, medium and low probability. Admit it. We all do this. It's inevitable. It's human.

Okay. You evaluate. Now you've got three females and six males who, while they may not look like Osama, they may fit into the larger universe of possible opponents. Until we see evidence that terrorists are recruiting in Finland or among street performers on the Third Street Promenade, you have to compare your passengers with the known database of possibles.

Okay, so here are 14 Middle Easterners acting weird. Red flag time? You bet. Based on everything you know, they have to go into the high probable category. Do you watch them closely? If you're an air marshall, you had better. And take the appropriate countermeasures.

Do you discount the other near probables? No. You start doing other stuff that I won't get into. I'll probably never convince those who believe that profiling is either useless or an infringement and it's not my intention to do that. But it is a tool. Certainly it's not to be relied on as the only tool. If the only tool you have is a hammer, then all your problems look like nails. The opponent is smart, resourceful, and will shape shift to suit the environment he operates in. Here's the bad news. I still don't think we're up to the challenge.

And hey, Ted. Thanks for looking. I'm hoping for the best in all this, but hope is not a viable operational plan.

Interesting discussion, but for a site that caters (somewhat) to writers, the fact that M-A-R-S-H-A-L has repeatedly been spelled incorrectly makes me wonder about the level of expertise being offered here...

Although a true BZ to the poster who knows what the 144th FW does, and where it is headquartered.

Not sure where it's HQ is, but I know where it's alert flight's hot ramp is. And, even though it can be seen by the general public driving in the right place, there's no need to make it more obvious.

No, you wouldn't want to be OBVIOUS...

http://www/fresno.ang.af.mil/

Since I found it elsewhere on the net....... The 144th FW Det1 is based at MARB and, if you drive down the 215 Freeway, you can see three F-16s sitting on a hot ramp, ready for war at all times. Having been witness many times to real world scrambles while posted in the mid-east, I can attest that their order-to-wheels up time is less than 90 seconds. At a top combat speed of 1400 MPH +, they could get from riverside to LAX in about 2 minutes. So, about 4-5 minutes total is the time we're looking at.

The original author has posted an update, including details about inquiries from larger media outlets:

www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/article_landing.aspx?titleid=1&articleid=714