Return to Transcripts main page
Live From...
Woman Tries to Board Plane with Hidden Wires
Aired January 06, 2004 - 14:44 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MARTIN SAVIDGE, ANCHOR: Turning now to other news that is just coming in to CNN, there has been a problem on board an international flight that was going from Paris -- that is Paris, France, obviously, to Cincinnati Ohio.
We are joined now by Kelli Arena, who has the details on this breaking story.
Kelli, what happened?
KELLI ARENA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Martin, the plane, according to U.S. officials, is being escorted by military fighter jets out of an abundance of caution.
According to those U.S. officials, there was a woman who tried to board that flight in Paris who, it was discovered, had wires hidden in her coat jacket. That woman was not allowed aboard the flight.
However, the Paris officials passed on that information to U.S. officials once that flight was in the air. And so U.S. officials are now concerned that there may be someone on that flight who may have been an accomplice or in some way involved with this woman, because these wires raised enough suspicion that something may have been up.
No one is giving us any real concrete details as to what those suspicions were, but she seemed to be hiding these wires in her coat, and so we are told that when that plane does land, that all of the passengers will be re-screened before they are let out of the airport and onto U.S. -- you know, into the United States.
Again, the military fighter jets, we're told, are out of an abundance of caution. One intelligence official says this could be nothing, but we'd rather be safe than sorry.
SAVIDGE: And don't we have to assume there had to be some sort of air marshal that is on board this aircraft? Isn't that now a requirement of international flights coming into the U.S.?
ARENA: No, it's not. That's not a blanket policy, Marty. And I'm glad you said that, because there seems to be a lot of confusion about that.
There is only -- are only air marshals that are required to be aboard international flights when the United States has specific intelligence regarding a specific flight.
So for example, we saw what happened with British Airways Flight 223 last week. It was canceled because the U.S. had specific information regarding that flight.
That is not the case here. What happened here was that the ordinary passenger screening, this woman, wires were discovered on this woman's person. She was not allowed on that flight, because there were other procedures that had to take place.
But it was the French government's decision to let that plane go forward. They passed on that information to the U.S.
Out of an abundance of caution, the U.S. says, "Wait a minute, there may be something up here. We're not sure. We're going to do due diligence, get the fighter jets to escort the plane, re-screen the passengers when they land."
But, no, the assumption that U.S. air marshals are on every single flight is wrong, that the policy as outlined by the Bush administration is only if there is specific intelligence. Then an air marshal would be required -- Marty.
SAVIDGE: We're expecting that the plane is probably going to arrive at the Cincinnati airport there in about -- within the 3 hour.
ARENA: That's right. About 3:20. An FBI agent is supposed to be on hand to conduct those interviews.
SAVIDGE: Do we have any idea as to whether or not the passengers on board this aircraft even know, aside from maybe seeing aircraft flanking them, what is going on?
ARENA: We don't know that. We don't know that. But if you're looking out the window and you see -- I've actually been told that you can't necessarily see the fighters jets if you're on the plane. But I'm assuming that they may have been -- you know, this is all -- Let's not even go there, Marty.
This is all speculation. We don't know what's going on on the flight at this point, but we do know what's going to happen when they land.
SAVIDGE: Well, I was on an international flight on Sunday, coming from London back to Atlanta. And with the raising of the security alert level here in the United States, it was explained to passengers once you're in the air that there are very strict rules for being a passenger on board the aircraft.
I believe the same rules apply domestically, such as you're not allowed to get up and congregate in the aisles, congregate near the bathrooms on board the aircraft. In other words, they don't want a lot of people up and about moving in the aircraft itself.
I mean, is that true? When the nation goes up a certain elevation of alert status, that the rules on board an aircraft changes?
ARENA: Well, the rules everywhere change. And each sector deals with that threat information very differently. And -- but even when the nation isn't at Orange Alert, for example, there are certain airports like here in the Washington, D.C. area, where you cannot be out of your seat for a full half hour right after that plane takes off or lands. Because they don't want any interference at all, you know, right around take-off or landing.
So each airline does what it sees fit as a security precaution.
But I've heard actually about that rule, that no congregating in the aisles before. That seems to be -- it seems to have been described as a best-practices rule, that airlines have come together and said, well, this makes sense, it just makes common sense not to have a group of people together, because, obviously, there is strength in numbers.
Better to have people in the aisles one at a time, just in case of any emergency. Also just for swift movement of airline personnel.
So, yes, I mean there are precautions like that are in place across the board. But it is up to each airline to decide how to implement those security procedures.
SAVIDGE: In case you just joined us, Kelli Arena is filling us in on information that an international flight coming from Paris that is scheduled to arrive in Cincinnati, Ohio.
During the boarding process, as I understand it, Kelli, there was a passenger that was suspicious. That passenger did not board. Is that correct, Kelli?
ARENA: That's right. That's right. French officials held her back. It was a woman. Held her back.
But out of an abundance of caution, the United States decided to have military fighter jets accompany that aircraft to the United States. Upon landing, all of those passengers will be re-screened again, out of an abundance of caution.
But it hasn't even yet been decided that there is any terrorist connection, that this woman had any plans to do anything wrong at this point. But, these days, Marty, as you know, no second-guessing here. There is action taken to try to be preventative.
If there is anyone on this flight who may have been part of a plot, again, no evidence to prove that, but if there's somebody who may have been part of any plot, they want to make sure that the people that they're letting off this plane and onto U.S. soil have been cleared.
SAVIDGE: All right. Well, we're going to bring in security expert Mike Brooks in just a minute. But we have Major General Don Shepperd, who is a constant contributor to CNN, on the telephone.
General, thanks very much for joining us on such short notice.
Tell us about this escort, if you will. Would it be possible, do they try to stay out of sight of the aircraft? Or would they be in plain view under normal practices?
MAJ. GEN. DON SHEPPERD, U.S. AIR FORCE: It depends, Martin. Under normal practices what they'd do is intercept the aircraft and be behind the aircraft and shadow the aircraft in case they are needed.
Although they will be in contact with their higher headquarters and their higher headquarters may request them to do other things, such as be visible alongside of the airplane, to dissuade anyone on board that might be trying to do harm, to let the passengers know that they are safe, if you will. And so it just depends on the instructions they receive from the ground.
It sounds to me right now, just guessing, as though the airplane would be back behind the airliner and watching and standing by to receive any instructions if at all necessary.
SAVIDGE: Well, since the U.S. authorities were informed and knew when this flight took off, when did you begin your intercept? I mean, do you start it as soon as it crosses into U.S. territory? Or do you try to monitor it even earlier than that?
SHEPPERD: No. Basically what you do is you want to make sure that you can make a successful intercept and stay with the airplane as long as possible. So you look at your fuel, you look at the flight that the -- the route of flight the airplane is taking.
And then you've got to have it in radar contact so that can you direct the fighters on to the aircraft itself. So radar contact is the idea.
And basically, a good rule of thumb is sometimes within 200 miles of the coast is where you would be on the aircraft.
The other thing you'd want to know and watch in this case is are there armed marshals on board. Hopefully, with the advance notice they had of keeping one passenger on, there would be armed people on board as well. It's hard to say.
SAVIDGE: OK. Thank you very much, Major General Don Shepperd joining us on the telephone.
Mike Brooks joins us now here in Atlanta.
Mike, what more can you add to this? This was a Delta flight?
MIKE BROOKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This was a Delta flight, Delta Flight 43. It's a Boeing 67 -- 767-300. It took off from Charles de Gaulle and is scheduled to get into Cincinnati now at about 3:20.
Again, what General Shepperd was saying is right on target.
Back in June of 2002, Delta actually took part in an exercise with NORAD and the FBI on a hijacking exercise similar to this. And that's also where they tested what they call the common strategy. It's what airline pilots and what flight attendants and gate people, airline employees go by in case of a potential hijacking. But again, we just want to reiterate, this is not a hijacking. A person is on board. There is no concern to this. But it was done, I was told, by an aviation security official, this was done just as a precautionary measure by TSA to go ahead and have the plane escorted.
But it's common, as General Shepperd says, the planes do just shadow it across the ocean and all the way to landing.
Now, if it had been an actual hijacking, there's a number of other procedures that would come up, where they would come, they would shadow the plane, try to make radio contact with it.
If they get no radio contact, then they come up alongside, try to look into the cockpit and see if anything was done. And then they would also give other instructions to the pilot.
But again, right now, we want to reiterate, there was no hijacking. The person is still in France and the plane...
SAVIDGE: There may be concern that if you had one person, there could be someone else.
BROOKS: Right.
SAVIDGE: You know what I want to interrupt you just for -- Kelli Arena has some new information, I'm told.
Kelli, what more have you got for us?
ARENA: Marty, just in the interest of keeping this all in perspective.
U.S. officials are telling us that French officials did, as you know, keep this woman off the plane. They checked it out thoroughly. They said she did not pose a threat, and she was actually allowed to rebook on a later flight.
So in terms of this person being a security risk, that has been dismissed by French officials. And U.S. officials reiterating that to us.
Again, there's no one on this flight that specifically is causing any concern. It's just out of an abundance of caution, because this information was passed on to U.S. officials after the fact. So that the reaction under Code Orange, and knowing that aviation has been a particular concern, the government decided to provide military escorts with this plane, and there will be a re-screening.
But in terms of any individual being on that flight that is posing any special concerns, nonexistent. And in fact, the woman who raised the red flag in the beginning has been cleared by French officials and allowed to rebook a flight.
SAVIDGE: Right.
ARENA: So keeping this all in perspective, this could -- Right. This could very well be nothing.
SAVIDGE: Right. An exercise at the most, as far as how authorities, how to handle people like this. But even if it is -- and hopefully will be just an exercise -- what happens when the plane gets on the ground?
BROOKS: When the plane gets on the ground, most likely they'll go ahead and meet the flight. People and the security officials in Cincinnati will meet the flights, make sure that the passengers are all taken care of.
The airlines -- I used to be with Delta Airlines corporate security before coming full-time with CNN. And I can tell you that they'll be handled very, very gently.
Now, if there is any other concern -- But again, Kelli is saying that there is not. I'm hearing from my sources there is no other concern on board. They're just making sure these people get to their connecting flights and go about their business.
And the jets will come in, they'll escort them, and then they'll fly back to their normal combat air patrol, wherever they came from.
SAVIDGE: Is this the way of the future now when it comes to transatlantic flight? We've seen what's been happening with the flights of British Air going into Washington, D.C. That these disruptions are going to become more frequent or these scares, if that's the way to refer to it, that that's the new modern age of flying internationally?
BROOKS: Well, and right now we're under Code Orange.
And I think you're probably going to see more air marshals. The Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, those agents are now teaming up with the regular federal air marshals. We don't know how many federal air marshals there were.
If you look back before 2000 -- before 9/11, Marty, there were only 31 federal air marshals that only flew on international flights here in the United States. There were none on any domestic flights. But the U.S. air marshal program, there's only 31.
Now we don't know how many. We estimate there is somewhere -- my sources tell me somewhere around 4,000.
But with the addition of the federal air marshal program being brought in to under the -- under ICE, that will now give a number of more agents to support the federal air marshal program. And you're going to see the regular federal air marshals teamed up with those agents now, and you're going to probably see them on many more flights.
SAVIDGE: Kelli, why is it that the aircraft seems to be so much the target of concern again for authorities?
ARENA: Well, first of all, al Qaeda has for a very long time had this bizarre obsession with aircraft. And as we saw obviously on 9/11, that cemented it. You know, they used weapon -- airline -- aircraft as weapons.
SAVIDGE: But you would think they would move on, though. They might have...
ARENA: Well, no. They were very successful, you know? If it ain't broke, don't fix it, sort of mentality. They were very successful using aircraft. And they still believe that there are vulnerabilities, according to intelligence that's come in to U.S. officials.
But specifically regarding Paris, Paris was one of the locales that there was specific intelligence on. It was Paris, Mexico and London. And we saw action taken against flights from all three of those locations.
The last conversation that I had with intelligence officials regarding Paris was that actually, the concern level had dropped somewhat, because the intelligence that had come in regarding both Paris and Mexico was very time-specific. It was very clear that there was -- if anything was amiss, it would happen around the holidays.
Now that the holidays have passed, there's a reviewing of that information and trying to determine whether or not it was indeed credible.
But the concern regarding flights out of London, still very real, because there was no time reference given to that intelligence. And so we continue to see delayed flights and extra security precautions underway at London's Heathrow Airport.
But ironically, Paris has sort of fallen down a notch in terms of the level of concern, at least among U.S. officials for now.
But as you rightly point out, Martin, aviation and aircraft, very big concern in terms of al Qaeda and any related groups that are looking to do the United States harm.
And several terror analysts have put it this way. They said, first of all, if a terrorist group goes and hits the airline sector again, well, what does that do?
A, it sends a message to Americans that, despite the extra security precautions, despite the lessons learned, you are still vulnerable.
Two, it does a great deal of economic damage to the United States if the airline sector is hit again. And that is a primary goal of al Qaeda and related groups, is to undermine economic security in the United States.
And three, as I said before, they have been very successful using aircraft in the past. There is intelligence that they have trained pilots within their ranks. This is -- this has been a concern for many years, continues to be a concern. So you look at that whole broad, you know, mix of information, and the threat is a very real one. Again, it's not only using airplanes as weapons though, Martin. It's also the possibility of surface-to-air missiles or, you know, some sort of an explosion or missile being used to knock a plane out of the sky that's also a continuing concern.
SAVIDGE: Mike, is this the same thing you're hearing within the industry, people talking? Is there still great concern that, despite all these security improvements, aircraft continue to be targets?
BROOKS: It is, as Kelli says. They are very vulnerable. And especially surface-to-air missiles.
Years ago when, I was in Washington, you use to think about all the time, you'd look at some airports around Washington, D.C., and other areas. How vulnerable planes were.
And that's why when we went to Code Orange, I was hearing from law enforcement sources that you were seeing additional patrols outside of the fence of the airport. Not just inside, but they were also additional patrols with local law enforcement surrounding the airports on take-off and landing patterns, just to make sure that these kind of things did not happen.
Because we could see these over the years with some of the foreign aircraft, the international aircraft that would take off from international airports here in the United States. Some of their own international foreign government intelligence people and security people would be outside the airports and local law enforcement would sometimes run into them and ask them what they're doing there.
But you know, they were addressing that concern. But it's something we've addressed here in the United States. And I don't think it's going away.
SAVIDGE: We want to just remind you why we are talking on this subject. It was a flight coming out of Paris, going to Cincinnati, Ohio. Initially a passenger female trying to board that aircraft was detained and questioned for some time but then cleared to go on a later flight.
However, U.S. authorities, having heard from French authorities on that issue, decided that the better part of caution was to monitor the flight, which they are doing now, just out of the extreme remote possibility there could be a problem.
None is expected. It appears to be all clear. We are simply waiting the safe arrival of that airplane in Cincinnati, Ohio.
We'll take a break. Be back with more after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SAVIDGE: In case you were just joining us, we are monitoring Delta Flight 43. It took off from Paris; it is expected to arrive safe and sound -- if you're looking for anyone on board that flight in Cincinnati, Ohio -- in about 20 minutes from now.
But the reason for the concern was French authorities reported during the boarding process that one passenger, a female, was suspicious with some technology on her. That woman has now been cleared and actually allowed to take a later flight.
However, U.S. authorities were notified and in the extreme erring on the side of caution, they decided to send up U.S. fighter aircraft to monitor the aircraft and watch it, simply as a precaution.
But as we say, now it appears the woman did not have any clandestine efforts on her mind, and she's been cleared to fly. And so it's believed that all is safe on Delta 43.
But it shows out the sensitivity in the aviation industry and in the United States, especially.
Let's take a look at what the cancellation and delayed flights that have taken place over this holiday season.
Wednesday, December 31, Aeromexico 490 from Mexico City to L.A.; British Airways 223 -- you hear that a lot -- London to D.C.
Thursday, January 1, Aeromexico 490, Mexico to L.A.; British Airways 216. And British Airways 223 and British Airways 222 canceled, delayed, canceled, canceled, in that order.
And then you had the Air France to New York -- New York to Paris, rather, that was diverted Friday, January 2. Take a look at the way it went there. British Airways 217, London to D.C. delayed. And London -- the British 223, British Airways, London to D.C. canceled. British Airways 222 D.C. to London.
And it goes on, including into Saturday, when you had British Airways 224 from Washington, D.C. to London canceled.
So for all of that, we will keep you posted on how things develop in Cincinnati, Ohio. Again, the concerns are pretty much gone about that particular flight. It's expected to be just fine.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired January 6, 2004 - 14:44 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MARTIN SAVIDGE, ANCHOR: Turning now to other news that is just coming in to CNN, there has been a problem on board an international flight that was going from Paris -- that is Paris, France, obviously, to Cincinnati Ohio.
We are joined now by Kelli Arena, who has the details on this breaking story.
Kelli, what happened?
KELLI ARENA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Martin, the plane, according to U.S. officials, is being escorted by military fighter jets out of an abundance of caution.
According to those U.S. officials, there was a woman who tried to board that flight in Paris who, it was discovered, had wires hidden in her coat jacket. That woman was not allowed aboard the flight.
However, the Paris officials passed on that information to U.S. officials once that flight was in the air. And so U.S. officials are now concerned that there may be someone on that flight who may have been an accomplice or in some way involved with this woman, because these wires raised enough suspicion that something may have been up.
No one is giving us any real concrete details as to what those suspicions were, but she seemed to be hiding these wires in her coat, and so we are told that when that plane does land, that all of the passengers will be re-screened before they are let out of the airport and onto U.S. -- you know, into the United States.
Again, the military fighter jets, we're told, are out of an abundance of caution. One intelligence official says this could be nothing, but we'd rather be safe than sorry.
SAVIDGE: And don't we have to assume there had to be some sort of air marshal that is on board this aircraft? Isn't that now a requirement of international flights coming into the U.S.?
ARENA: No, it's not. That's not a blanket policy, Marty. And I'm glad you said that, because there seems to be a lot of confusion about that.
There is only -- are only air marshals that are required to be aboard international flights when the United States has specific intelligence regarding a specific flight.
So for example, we saw what happened with British Airways Flight 223 last week. It was canceled because the U.S. had specific information regarding that flight.
That is not the case here. What happened here was that the ordinary passenger screening, this woman, wires were discovered on this woman's person. She was not allowed on that flight, because there were other procedures that had to take place.
But it was the French government's decision to let that plane go forward. They passed on that information to the U.S.
Out of an abundance of caution, the U.S. says, "Wait a minute, there may be something up here. We're not sure. We're going to do due diligence, get the fighter jets to escort the plane, re-screen the passengers when they land."
But, no, the assumption that U.S. air marshals are on every single flight is wrong, that the policy as outlined by the Bush administration is only if there is specific intelligence. Then an air marshal would be required -- Marty.
SAVIDGE: We're expecting that the plane is probably going to arrive at the Cincinnati airport there in about -- within the 3 hour.
ARENA: That's right. About 3:20. An FBI agent is supposed to be on hand to conduct those interviews.
SAVIDGE: Do we have any idea as to whether or not the passengers on board this aircraft even know, aside from maybe seeing aircraft flanking them, what is going on?
ARENA: We don't know that. We don't know that. But if you're looking out the window and you see -- I've actually been told that you can't necessarily see the fighters jets if you're on the plane. But I'm assuming that they may have been -- you know, this is all -- Let's not even go there, Marty.
This is all speculation. We don't know what's going on on the flight at this point, but we do know what's going to happen when they land.
SAVIDGE: Well, I was on an international flight on Sunday, coming from London back to Atlanta. And with the raising of the security alert level here in the United States, it was explained to passengers once you're in the air that there are very strict rules for being a passenger on board the aircraft.
I believe the same rules apply domestically, such as you're not allowed to get up and congregate in the aisles, congregate near the bathrooms on board the aircraft. In other words, they don't want a lot of people up and about moving in the aircraft itself.
I mean, is that true? When the nation goes up a certain elevation of alert status, that the rules on board an aircraft changes?
ARENA: Well, the rules everywhere change. And each sector deals with that threat information very differently. And -- but even when the nation isn't at Orange Alert, for example, there are certain airports like here in the Washington, D.C. area, where you cannot be out of your seat for a full half hour right after that plane takes off or lands. Because they don't want any interference at all, you know, right around take-off or landing.
So each airline does what it sees fit as a security precaution.
But I've heard actually about that rule, that no congregating in the aisles before. That seems to be -- it seems to have been described as a best-practices rule, that airlines have come together and said, well, this makes sense, it just makes common sense not to have a group of people together, because, obviously, there is strength in numbers.
Better to have people in the aisles one at a time, just in case of any emergency. Also just for swift movement of airline personnel.
So, yes, I mean there are precautions like that are in place across the board. But it is up to each airline to decide how to implement those security procedures.
SAVIDGE: In case you just joined us, Kelli Arena is filling us in on information that an international flight coming from Paris that is scheduled to arrive in Cincinnati, Ohio.
During the boarding process, as I understand it, Kelli, there was a passenger that was suspicious. That passenger did not board. Is that correct, Kelli?
ARENA: That's right. That's right. French officials held her back. It was a woman. Held her back.
But out of an abundance of caution, the United States decided to have military fighter jets accompany that aircraft to the United States. Upon landing, all of those passengers will be re-screened again, out of an abundance of caution.
But it hasn't even yet been decided that there is any terrorist connection, that this woman had any plans to do anything wrong at this point. But, these days, Marty, as you know, no second-guessing here. There is action taken to try to be preventative.
If there is anyone on this flight who may have been part of a plot, again, no evidence to prove that, but if there's somebody who may have been part of any plot, they want to make sure that the people that they're letting off this plane and onto U.S. soil have been cleared.
SAVIDGE: All right. Well, we're going to bring in security expert Mike Brooks in just a minute. But we have Major General Don Shepperd, who is a constant contributor to CNN, on the telephone.
General, thanks very much for joining us on such short notice.
Tell us about this escort, if you will. Would it be possible, do they try to stay out of sight of the aircraft? Or would they be in plain view under normal practices?
MAJ. GEN. DON SHEPPERD, U.S. AIR FORCE: It depends, Martin. Under normal practices what they'd do is intercept the aircraft and be behind the aircraft and shadow the aircraft in case they are needed.
Although they will be in contact with their higher headquarters and their higher headquarters may request them to do other things, such as be visible alongside of the airplane, to dissuade anyone on board that might be trying to do harm, to let the passengers know that they are safe, if you will. And so it just depends on the instructions they receive from the ground.
It sounds to me right now, just guessing, as though the airplane would be back behind the airliner and watching and standing by to receive any instructions if at all necessary.
SAVIDGE: Well, since the U.S. authorities were informed and knew when this flight took off, when did you begin your intercept? I mean, do you start it as soon as it crosses into U.S. territory? Or do you try to monitor it even earlier than that?
SHEPPERD: No. Basically what you do is you want to make sure that you can make a successful intercept and stay with the airplane as long as possible. So you look at your fuel, you look at the flight that the -- the route of flight the airplane is taking.
And then you've got to have it in radar contact so that can you direct the fighters on to the aircraft itself. So radar contact is the idea.
And basically, a good rule of thumb is sometimes within 200 miles of the coast is where you would be on the aircraft.
The other thing you'd want to know and watch in this case is are there armed marshals on board. Hopefully, with the advance notice they had of keeping one passenger on, there would be armed people on board as well. It's hard to say.
SAVIDGE: OK. Thank you very much, Major General Don Shepperd joining us on the telephone.
Mike Brooks joins us now here in Atlanta.
Mike, what more can you add to this? This was a Delta flight?
MIKE BROOKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This was a Delta flight, Delta Flight 43. It's a Boeing 67 -- 767-300. It took off from Charles de Gaulle and is scheduled to get into Cincinnati now at about 3:20.
Again, what General Shepperd was saying is right on target.
Back in June of 2002, Delta actually took part in an exercise with NORAD and the FBI on a hijacking exercise similar to this. And that's also where they tested what they call the common strategy. It's what airline pilots and what flight attendants and gate people, airline employees go by in case of a potential hijacking. But again, we just want to reiterate, this is not a hijacking. A person is on board. There is no concern to this. But it was done, I was told, by an aviation security official, this was done just as a precautionary measure by TSA to go ahead and have the plane escorted.
But it's common, as General Shepperd says, the planes do just shadow it across the ocean and all the way to landing.
Now, if it had been an actual hijacking, there's a number of other procedures that would come up, where they would come, they would shadow the plane, try to make radio contact with it.
If they get no radio contact, then they come up alongside, try to look into the cockpit and see if anything was done. And then they would also give other instructions to the pilot.
But again, right now, we want to reiterate, there was no hijacking. The person is still in France and the plane...
SAVIDGE: There may be concern that if you had one person, there could be someone else.
BROOKS: Right.
SAVIDGE: You know what I want to interrupt you just for -- Kelli Arena has some new information, I'm told.
Kelli, what more have you got for us?
ARENA: Marty, just in the interest of keeping this all in perspective.
U.S. officials are telling us that French officials did, as you know, keep this woman off the plane. They checked it out thoroughly. They said she did not pose a threat, and she was actually allowed to rebook on a later flight.
So in terms of this person being a security risk, that has been dismissed by French officials. And U.S. officials reiterating that to us.
Again, there's no one on this flight that specifically is causing any concern. It's just out of an abundance of caution, because this information was passed on to U.S. officials after the fact. So that the reaction under Code Orange, and knowing that aviation has been a particular concern, the government decided to provide military escorts with this plane, and there will be a re-screening.
But in terms of any individual being on that flight that is posing any special concerns, nonexistent. And in fact, the woman who raised the red flag in the beginning has been cleared by French officials and allowed to rebook a flight.
SAVIDGE: Right.
ARENA: So keeping this all in perspective, this could -- Right. This could very well be nothing.
SAVIDGE: Right. An exercise at the most, as far as how authorities, how to handle people like this. But even if it is -- and hopefully will be just an exercise -- what happens when the plane gets on the ground?
BROOKS: When the plane gets on the ground, most likely they'll go ahead and meet the flight. People and the security officials in Cincinnati will meet the flights, make sure that the passengers are all taken care of.
The airlines -- I used to be with Delta Airlines corporate security before coming full-time with CNN. And I can tell you that they'll be handled very, very gently.
Now, if there is any other concern -- But again, Kelli is saying that there is not. I'm hearing from my sources there is no other concern on board. They're just making sure these people get to their connecting flights and go about their business.
And the jets will come in, they'll escort them, and then they'll fly back to their normal combat air patrol, wherever they came from.
SAVIDGE: Is this the way of the future now when it comes to transatlantic flight? We've seen what's been happening with the flights of British Air going into Washington, D.C. That these disruptions are going to become more frequent or these scares, if that's the way to refer to it, that that's the new modern age of flying internationally?
BROOKS: Well, and right now we're under Code Orange.
And I think you're probably going to see more air marshals. The Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, those agents are now teaming up with the regular federal air marshals. We don't know how many federal air marshals there were.
If you look back before 2000 -- before 9/11, Marty, there were only 31 federal air marshals that only flew on international flights here in the United States. There were none on any domestic flights. But the U.S. air marshal program, there's only 31.
Now we don't know how many. We estimate there is somewhere -- my sources tell me somewhere around 4,000.
But with the addition of the federal air marshal program being brought in to under the -- under ICE, that will now give a number of more agents to support the federal air marshal program. And you're going to see the regular federal air marshals teamed up with those agents now, and you're going to probably see them on many more flights.
SAVIDGE: Kelli, why is it that the aircraft seems to be so much the target of concern again for authorities?
ARENA: Well, first of all, al Qaeda has for a very long time had this bizarre obsession with aircraft. And as we saw obviously on 9/11, that cemented it. You know, they used weapon -- airline -- aircraft as weapons.
SAVIDGE: But you would think they would move on, though. They might have...
ARENA: Well, no. They were very successful, you know? If it ain't broke, don't fix it, sort of mentality. They were very successful using aircraft. And they still believe that there are vulnerabilities, according to intelligence that's come in to U.S. officials.
But specifically regarding Paris, Paris was one of the locales that there was specific intelligence on. It was Paris, Mexico and London. And we saw action taken against flights from all three of those locations.
The last conversation that I had with intelligence officials regarding Paris was that actually, the concern level had dropped somewhat, because the intelligence that had come in regarding both Paris and Mexico was very time-specific. It was very clear that there was -- if anything was amiss, it would happen around the holidays.
Now that the holidays have passed, there's a reviewing of that information and trying to determine whether or not it was indeed credible.
But the concern regarding flights out of London, still very real, because there was no time reference given to that intelligence. And so we continue to see delayed flights and extra security precautions underway at London's Heathrow Airport.
But ironically, Paris has sort of fallen down a notch in terms of the level of concern, at least among U.S. officials for now.
But as you rightly point out, Martin, aviation and aircraft, very big concern in terms of al Qaeda and any related groups that are looking to do the United States harm.
And several terror analysts have put it this way. They said, first of all, if a terrorist group goes and hits the airline sector again, well, what does that do?
A, it sends a message to Americans that, despite the extra security precautions, despite the lessons learned, you are still vulnerable.
Two, it does a great deal of economic damage to the United States if the airline sector is hit again. And that is a primary goal of al Qaeda and related groups, is to undermine economic security in the United States.
And three, as I said before, they have been very successful using aircraft in the past. There is intelligence that they have trained pilots within their ranks. This is -- this has been a concern for many years, continues to be a concern. So you look at that whole broad, you know, mix of information, and the threat is a very real one. Again, it's not only using airplanes as weapons though, Martin. It's also the possibility of surface-to-air missiles or, you know, some sort of an explosion or missile being used to knock a plane out of the sky that's also a continuing concern.
SAVIDGE: Mike, is this the same thing you're hearing within the industry, people talking? Is there still great concern that, despite all these security improvements, aircraft continue to be targets?
BROOKS: It is, as Kelli says. They are very vulnerable. And especially surface-to-air missiles.
Years ago when, I was in Washington, you use to think about all the time, you'd look at some airports around Washington, D.C., and other areas. How vulnerable planes were.
And that's why when we went to Code Orange, I was hearing from law enforcement sources that you were seeing additional patrols outside of the fence of the airport. Not just inside, but they were also additional patrols with local law enforcement surrounding the airports on take-off and landing patterns, just to make sure that these kind of things did not happen.
Because we could see these over the years with some of the foreign aircraft, the international aircraft that would take off from international airports here in the United States. Some of their own international foreign government intelligence people and security people would be outside the airports and local law enforcement would sometimes run into them and ask them what they're doing there.
But you know, they were addressing that concern. But it's something we've addressed here in the United States. And I don't think it's going away.
SAVIDGE: We want to just remind you why we are talking on this subject. It was a flight coming out of Paris, going to Cincinnati, Ohio. Initially a passenger female trying to board that aircraft was detained and questioned for some time but then cleared to go on a later flight.
However, U.S. authorities, having heard from French authorities on that issue, decided that the better part of caution was to monitor the flight, which they are doing now, just out of the extreme remote possibility there could be a problem.
None is expected. It appears to be all clear. We are simply waiting the safe arrival of that airplane in Cincinnati, Ohio.
We'll take a break. Be back with more after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SAVIDGE: In case you were just joining us, we are monitoring Delta Flight 43. It took off from Paris; it is expected to arrive safe and sound -- if you're looking for anyone on board that flight in Cincinnati, Ohio -- in about 20 minutes from now.
But the reason for the concern was French authorities reported during the boarding process that one passenger, a female, was suspicious with some technology on her. That woman has now been cleared and actually allowed to take a later flight.
However, U.S. authorities were notified and in the extreme erring on the side of caution, they decided to send up U.S. fighter aircraft to monitor the aircraft and watch it, simply as a precaution.
But as we say, now it appears the woman did not have any clandestine efforts on her mind, and she's been cleared to fly. And so it's believed that all is safe on Delta 43.
But it shows out the sensitivity in the aviation industry and in the United States, especially.
Let's take a look at what the cancellation and delayed flights that have taken place over this holiday season.
Wednesday, December 31, Aeromexico 490 from Mexico City to L.A.; British Airways 223 -- you hear that a lot -- London to D.C.
Thursday, January 1, Aeromexico 490, Mexico to L.A.; British Airways 216. And British Airways 223 and British Airways 222 canceled, delayed, canceled, canceled, in that order.
And then you had the Air France to New York -- New York to Paris, rather, that was diverted Friday, January 2. Take a look at the way it went there. British Airways 217, London to D.C. delayed. And London -- the British 223, British Airways, London to D.C. canceled. British Airways 222 D.C. to London.
And it goes on, including into Saturday, when you had British Airways 224 from Washington, D.C. to London canceled.
So for all of that, we will keep you posted on how things develop in Cincinnati, Ohio. Again, the concerns are pretty much gone about that particular flight. It's expected to be just fine.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
