from American Thinker

December 11, 2009

Was Air Tran Flight #297 a terrorist dry run?

Apparently this story has still not been reported by the state-controlled politically-correct media. I have been reading multiple accounts of this incident, some embellished, some downplayed, in the past few weeks. There have been other possible "dry runs" by groups of muslim men on other planes and also on trains. Combine this information with the fact that we have muslims in top positions in the DHS and TSA as well as all the subordinate positions down to the checkers at the airport gates. Combine that with the recent "accidental" online posting of the TSA procedures manual.

Folks, how many clues do you need? I suspect that even Joe Biden could figure out what's going on if you gave him time to think about it. Or does our muslim leader want it to happen? Is it all part of some big plan? Am I getting paranoid or has the entire freaking government gone crazy?

By John Leonard

Like Climategate, there is another story the national mainstream media has either missed or largely ignored, and that is the story of what really happened November 17th on Airtran's Flight 297 from Atlanta to Houston.

Much confusion remains about exactly what transpired that afternoon on a plane preparing for takeoff at Hartsfield International Airport. By every account the undisputed facts are a large group of men disturbed procedures and upset the flight crew to the point it caused the flight to be delayed. At least one passenger allegedly refused to comply with repeated requests from flight attendants to discontinue his use of a cell phone (in compliance with FAA regulations) while the plane was taxiing on the runway, causing the pilot to turn the plane around. The entire group was asked to deplane and TSA officials questioned them before allowing them back on the flight. The original flight crew was replaced. Twelve passengers not involved with the group of belligerent Middle Eastern men deplaned and requested another flight.

According to AirTran's whitewashed version of the story reported by the Atlanta Journal Constitution,

"A flight attendant had apparently asked a male passenger twice to put away a cellphone or camera, but the man had not done so. The flight attendant then took the device from the man. At the gate, the passenger -- who didn't speak English -- and a companion were asked to leave the plane, which they did without incident. When it was determined the problem was caused by a language barrier, AirTran and Transportation Security Administration officials allowed the man, and 12 others traveling with him, to reboard, and the flight left for Houston a little more than two hours later. Later, officials said the entire incident was the result of a miscommunication."

That sounds harmless enough, doesn't it? To borrow from the late Strother Martin as he famously said in the movie Cool Hand Luke, "What we have here is [simply] a failure to communicate" - right? Well...not so fast, my friend.

The confusion begins with a widely circulated (now partially discredited) email written by a man named Tedd Petruna who has since admitted his email was not intended for public consumption and some details were embellished, particularly those of his alleged heroic actions reminiscent to some degree of those on Flight 93 to San Francisco on September 11, 2001. According to Mr. Petruna's account, eleven Muslim men acted in concert to disrupt the flight and did far more than refuse two requests to stop using a cell phone but were in fact using cell phones to call each other on the plane, distracting two stewardesses and displaying other bizarre, threatening and defiant behavior that terrified the passengers and flight crew.

Mr. Petruna's full account of the incident rightfully warranted more than a little skepticism and demanded some scrutiny and verification. The website snopes.com that is most useful for fact checking urban legends was somewhat inconclusive about the veracity of the disputed information in the case, warranting further investigation. Articles at World Net Daily and a few other online sources are beginning to piece together more information about what really happened.

AirTran took the odd step of refuting Mr. Petruna's account point-by-point, even disputing his presence on the plane when the incident happened. According to AirTran, Mr. Petruna had not arrived in Atlanta at the time of the incident and was never on the passenger manifest for the flight in question. AirTran followed that claim with a list of other alleged errors in Mr. Petruna's account, which would seem unnecessary if he were really not on the plane. Some issues were rather silly (his account mentioned eleven "terrorists" and AirTran said the group had thirteen men) or innocuously explained (the swap of the flight crew was a routine procedure).

Interestingly and apparently in conflict with AirTran's version, Laura Armstrong with the Marietta Daily Journal reported that she spoke with Mr. Petruna and he claims to still have his boarding pass, which should not be easy to fake. Because he claims he deplaned before the flight actually took off and took a later flight, Mr. Petruna would not be on the final passenger manifest, would he?

But several much bigger problems exist with Air Tran's attempt to whitewash the story - there were actually other passengers on the plane, and their versions of the story come much closer to Mr. Petruna than AirTran and confirmed the truth lies in between Air Tran's air-brushed version and Petruna's urban-legend. A reporter with WSB TV interviewed a highly credible passenger named Brent Brown who said

"[I]t was extremely tense. I've never experienced anything like that after flying for company reasons for more than twenty years now. You can imagine just about everything you can think of has happened on a flight, and some pretty hair raising experiences. This was like nothing I've ever experienced before. After being in law enforcement and twenty years in the security industry, this was tension at its highest."

Another eyewitness interviewed by Houston television station KHOU was Chaplain Keith Robinson, who missed the incident on the tarmac but took the rescheduled flight. He boarded in spite of being warned by deplaning passengers, one of whom refused to continue the trip because "these Middle Eastern men were taking pictures, wouldn't sit down, and besides that a couple of them were making gestures with their hands as though they were shooting people". Robinson witnessed "flight attendants were weeping openly" and provided second hand corroboration of many of the details in Brown's account, hardly the simple "miscommunication" AirTran claims.


In another article written by Michael Carl for World Net Daily, private investigator and terrorism writer for Family Security Matters Mark Taylor was quoted to say his investigation suggests Muslim terrorists were indeed carrying out a dry run.

"There are three independent versions of the story that corroborate the possibility that 11 or 12 Middle Eastern men appeared to be testing AirTran's security. The evidence tends to show that someone was doing what is referred to as a dry run, or what one television commentator calls a 'shark bump,' just to see if we're paying attention."

It is understandable to a degree that AirTran would wish to minimize the public relations damage to their business by minimizing the seriousness of what really happened on Flight 297. But the lesson of United flight 93 is that an alert and aroused citizenry functions as a defense against airborne terror attacks. We deserve a full and honest account of what happened on Airtran 297.

John Leonard can be reached at johnleonard@mindspring.com. His first book, titled Hybrid Theory: Reconciling Creationism and Evolution Theory, is awaiting publication.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/12/was_air_tran_flight_297_a_terr.html