About Contact Archives RSS Columns Photos

Who’s freaking out?

By Michelle Malkin  •  July 24, 2004 01:47 AM

Following the lead of anonymous air marshals (see Eric Leonard’s KFI news story), some in the blogosphere are piling on Annie Jacobsen. One blogger calls her a “sniveling little twit.” Kevin Drum pooh-poohs “Panic in the Skies.” Armed Liberal advises Annie to take a “chill pill.” And Commissar at Politburo Diktat writes:

We are freaking out. Panicking. Overreacting. Getting jumpy. For Chrissakes, GET A GRIP, comrades. We (I mean Ms. Jacobsen) are, by the words of our federal air security officials, creating a danger in the air.

I respectfully take issue with this characterization. Let’s remember what exactly Annie and Kevin Jacobsen did on their flight. By one unnamed marshal’s own words:

Jacobsen and her husband had a number of conversations with the flight attendants and gestured towards the men several times, the source said.

Who’s freaking out? The unnamed marshals who spoke to KFI are popping veins over the Jacobsens for having merely discussed their concerns with the flight crew and “gestured towards the men.” The couple didn’t jump up and scream “We are going to die!” They didn’t faint or have heart attacks. And they didn’t confront the 14 Syrians while they all stood up before landing, went to the bathroom, and congregated in the aisles in violation of security regulations. (No one confronted them, for crying out loud. That is the problem.)

The Jacobsens didn’t even muster up the courage to say meekly to the Syrians, “Hey, could you please sit down. You are making me nervous.” And they didn’t blab to other passengers about their fears.

The Jacobsens talked to the flight attendants and they kept to themselves. In fact, in their MSNBC interview, Kevin Jacobsen said he sat quietly with his wife and son during the landing and resignedly wrote about his concerns in his journal. Out-of-control menaces in the air? Come on.

The message that the alarmed and panicked marshals are sending out is that if and when we view suspicious behavior, we should all just sit tight in our seats, shut up, and do nothing until it’s too damned late lest we possibly risk blowing their cover.

Meanwhile, Tom Ridge and Norm Mineta ask us all to be vigilant, buy our duct tape, hand over our nail clippers and knitting needles, keep our lips sealed, and relinquish complete control and responsibility for homeland defense–and self-defense–to The Professionals.

Two words: Hell, no.

(Now, read this: When government failed: Passengers of Flight 93 saved America from even greater horror.)

***

Some annoyed bloggers wonder why I keep “flogging” this subject. For the same reasons they keep discussing it themselves: Very simply, it’s interesting and it’s important and there’s much to learn here about how both the government and citizens should properly respond to real and perceived homeland security threats. If you’d rather read about what the Bush twins are wearing and who saw whom at what restaurant, you are in the wrong zip code.

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

  1. The Laughing Wolf
  2. The Spoons Experience
  3. Captain's Quarters
  4. Rox Populi
  5. Blogs of War
  6. InTheBullpen.com
  7. Serenity's Journal
  8. BLACKFIVE
  9. Right Moment
  10. Twisted Spinster
  11. Tom McMahon
  12. Dean's World
  13. Winds of Change.NET
  14. LilacRose
  15. Who Tends the Fires
  16. damnum absque injuria
  17. Media Lies
  18. The Blue State Conservatives
  19. The Blue State Conservatives
  20. The Blue State Conservatives
  21. planck's constant
  22. planck's constant

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: « 1 [2]

  1. #101
    On July 25th, 2004 at 6:04 pm, James Kotthoff said:

    Liberal Avenger,
    Actually you are wrong the guarentees in the constituation apply to citizens, we as a caring nation have just generally extended them to illegal aliens

  2. #102
    On July 25th, 2004 at 9:07 pm, The Liberal Avenger said:

    No, you are wrong.

    The protections of the Constitution of the United States of America and the Bill of Rights extend to everyone, with one notable exception:

    We don’t allow foreign-born nationals to become the President of the United States.

    We may be drawing dangerously close to the police state many of you would like to see, but fortunately, cooler heads have prevailed.

  3. #103
    On July 25th, 2004 at 10:56 pm, Matt S. said:

    Michelle,
    Thanks for staying on top of this.

  4. #104
    On July 25th, 2004 at 11:48 pm, Blogingham! said:

    Liberal avenger,

    you are a total moron. The Constitution is a framework that defines what government CAN NOT do to its citizens. Under the Constitution, foreigners have no due process. It’s up to the Executive Branch to determine these matters when dealing with foreigners. I refer you to the preamble of the Constitution:

    “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

    ‘The blessings of liberty to OURSELVES and our Posterity…’

    Have fun voting for John Kerry this fall. Then you’ll know what being in the minority is really like.

    -Respectfully

  5. #105
    On July 25th, 2004 at 11:56 pm, Ironbear said:

    “Nice comments, Ironbear, but I am convinced that not all of us are in “blogistan.” It’s just too difficult to morph the two words “blog” and “turkey”.
    How do we define the place from which the far-libs who enjoy randomly calling names and refusing to be confused by the facts? Blurkey, anyone?” - Blogbat

    *ROFL* Thanks. Maybe we can get the Commissar to locate Blurkey on his next mapping project? ;]

    Samizdata’s glossary has a nice selection of choice terms we can draw from also. And there’s always “blogweasel”, for blogdom’s equivalent of the forum weasel.

    No, you’re right: it’s not all of it from bloggers. But it’s the ones who *are* bloggers, and especially the ones from the conservative/libertarian end of the blogpool that have me a bit annoyed.

    You expect blogroaches to ehrmm… what’s the term? Ah “overreact hysterically”. That’s their speciality. ;]

Comment pages: « 1 [2]

You must be logged in to post a comment.

DHS researching electric-shock bracelets to subdue airline terrorists (UPDATE: DHS denial)

July 9, 2008 05:53 PM by see-dubya

49 Comments | 6 Trackbacks

Look, I’m fine with just taking my shoes off, okay?

Good news: Federal Air Marshals to be removed from No-Fly list.

April 30, 2008 06:35 PM by see-dubya

25 Comments | 1 Trackback

Quick response.

Found: Box cutter hidden in book

February 20, 2008 02:35 PM by Michelle Malkin

105 Comments | 12 Trackbacks

Homeland insecurity alert.

Another TB/homeland security debacle

December 27, 2007 05:30 AM by Michelle Malkin

31 Comments | 1 Trackback

Video: Meltdown on an alleged Air Canada flight

December 13, 2007 11:48 PM by Michelle Malkin

75 Comments | 5 Trackbacks

“Allahu Akbar!”

TSA horror story of the week

December 1, 2007 04:53 PM by Michelle Malkin

62 Comments | 2 Trackbacks

Honor guard ordeal.

“Terror on the tarmac”

November 20, 2007 11:00 AM by Michelle Malkin

100 Comments | 2 Trackbacks

John Doe S.O.S.


Categories: Airline Security, Annie Jacobsen, Norm Mineta


Weekly Standard

» Why Not Baghdad?