Grounded Again?


When I read that the FBI plans to mobilize 5,000 agents in the U.S. as soon as the shooting starts in Iraq, I begin to wonder. When this ramp-up is compared to the days immediately following 9/11, I get suspicious.

Are the nation's airlines going to be grounded again, too? This would comport with the "threat reduction" stance that the feds are ready to adopt. At a minimum I would expect some flights in and out of Reagan National Airport to be re-routed elsewhere.

Until I hear some official denials—maybe even after I hear them—I'm assuming the worst.


NEXT: Summer Soldiers

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Jeff, I must agree with DavidMSC. What is this “threat reduction stance”, and just what “official denials” are are you waiting on? Jeffy m’boy…are you into the cough syrup again? Sounds like you wanna say SOMEthing…but what..?

  2. Jeff’s talking about ground airlines. That’s fine. As long ass they don’t ground Hooter’s Air!

  3. I can’t see antiwar types doing anything worse than obstruction and vandalism. Maybe the radical wing of the Buchananite/isolationist/militia-type movement?

    There were violent attacks from domestic dissidents during the Vietnam War, but that was when the antiwar people actually identified with the enemy, an anti-colonial, marxist, third world popular movement. I don’t think there’s sympathy for Saddam or Baathism among any of the antiwar groups.

  4. OK, Joe, so maybe I am just paranoid. I agree with you that no one seems to identify with Hussein, but I do see a lot of people that are so anti-Bush, that they not just fear that an attack might happen, but seem to be hoping for it.

  5. Sorry for any encryption. Plainly, will the US gov. ground the airlines for a few days once the shooting starts in Iraq, on the presumption that terrorists will try to attack/weaponize them? Haven’t heard anyone official say this will not happen, would like to.

  6. Jeff,

    I haven’t heard any official denial that the government won’t shoot all readers of Reason once the bombs drop, but I’m not really worried. The President did raise the terror alert level, but I personally think that a non-al-Qaeda terror attack is much more likely than an al-Qaeda attack. They seem to use their own time schedules and are probably not particularly upset with our war with Iraq. I would even say that a terror attack from some anti-war nut is more likely than from al-Qaeda. Anyone else share this paranoia?

  7. I don’t understand your post, or your implications…clarify, please…?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.