"Did the 9/11 Hijackers Case Boston's Logan Airport?"

Monday, April 9, 2007

Did the 9/11 Hijackers Case Boston's Logan Airport? 
By Brian F. Sullivan FAA Special Agent (Retired) 
opinioneditorials.com


The 9/11 Commission said that, despite security problems at Boston's Logan
Airport, no evidence suggests that such issues entered into the terrorists'
targeting. Evidence is mounting that the Commission was in error in this
regard, at least as far as Logan is concerned.

We know from the 9/11 Report that the hijackers took a number of test
flights (dry runs) in the lead up to 9/11. One of these was a flight from
Logan Airport to Los Angeles six weeks prior to the attacks. This was the
flight on which actor James Woods reported four suspicious Middle Eastern
passengers. He later learned from the FBI that two of the men were Hamza
al-Ghamdi and Khalid Almihdhar, who were among the 19 terrorists responsible
for the 9/11 attacks.

When Hamza and Khalid traveled through the terminal and screening
checkpoint, are we to suppose that they wore blinders to preclude them from
observing security at Logan? Of course not!

Terrorist cells are organized into three basic functional entities -
planning, observation/surveillance and execution. To assume that the 9/11
hijackers selected their targets (Logan, Newark and Dulles) and then failed
to insure that security wouldn't upset their plans is simply ludicrous.
Sure, security at our nation's airports was a systemic problem, but it is
incredulous to believe that the hijackers would have simply assumed this to
be so, as versus validating security, or the lack thereof, at the targeted
airports, particularly in view of their penchant for meticulous planning.

Now we move to May '01, when it was later reported that an American Airlines
mechanic spotted Mohammed Atta at Logan involved in "suspicious activity."
This was four months prior to the attacks. After 9/11, it was reported that
Janice Shineman, another Logan witness, saw Atta at the American gate on
September 9, 2001, again involved in "suspicious activity." More recently,
USA Today reported that Waleed al-Shehri sent money by Western Union from
Logan Airport to alleged terrorist financier Mustafa al-Hawsawi on September
9, 2001, coincidently the same day that Janice Shineman reported seeing
Mohammed Atta at Logan.

It appears that the 9/11 Commission's stance in this regard is certainly
open to some scrutiny, as evidence continues to mount that the 9/11
hijackers did indeed conduct observation/surveillance at Logan airport in
the lead up to the attacks. Security there simply had to be factored into
their targeting.

We should learn more on this topic in the months ahead, as the FBI is now
poised to begin release of information specific to Logan in the on-going
9/11 litigation. That information will include interviews conducted of
witnesses at the airports in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, information
which relates to logs and records of screening equipment and the airlines
and screening companies seized as part of the FBI's investigation, and
materials that were in possession of the hijackers such as the contents of
Mohammed Atta's suitcase.

Stay tuned. More should be forthcoming on this topic in the months ahead. My
question is, "Will the 9/11 Commission revisit their position in this regard
as evidence continues to mount that the 9/11 hijackers did consider airport
security, at least at Logan, in their target planning?"

Related Stories:

"Massport: Logan safety record typical"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg02090.html

"FAA overhauls airport, airline security"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg16074.html

"Massport records detail security breaches"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg16999.html

"Logan has among the nation's worst airport security"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg17284.html

"DiFava promises a tougher Logan"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg17550.html

"Logan liability capped for Sept. 11 terrorism"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg18563.html

"FAA put Logan security testing on hold"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg18931.html

"U.S. Probes Whistle-Blower Complaint on Air Security"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg20156.html

"Logan security study called into question"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg20325.html

"Security breach at Logan part of larger problem"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg20683.html

"For use any time"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg22746.html

"9/11 probers study Logan security efforts"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg27515.html

"Logan attempts to move beyond terror attacks and remember past"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg27727.html

"9/11 terror panel probes Logan"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg30488.html

"Lawyers for 9-11 victims want to use Logan security report"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg31749.html

"Boston Logan's Team Approach Is Backbone Of Security Effort"
http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg32003.html

 Do you have an opinion about this story?
Share it with other readers in our CAA Discussion Forums

http://www.californiaaviation.org/dcfp/dcboard.php


*****************************************