There's something I want to add to this story:

On Dec. 24, Air France canceled six flights between Paris and Los Angeles at the urging of American officials, who said they suspected that as many as a half-dozen passengers had "links to terrorism." French officials said last week that they had found no terrorist links to the people booked on those flights, but American officials said the United States was still investigating people who had reserved seats but did not show up for the flights.

If the U.S. did indeed have solid information that terrorists were planning to board Air France flights to the U.S., wouldn't it have more sense to keep the flights officially scheduled and get France to arrest the terrorists when they showed up at the airport, rather than make a public announcement that the flights were canceled due to terrorism concerns and ensure that the terrorists would not show up?

From what I heard, what happened was not terribly complicated. American authorities discovered that Air France was going to allow persons on the "no fly" list to fly on a particular flight. The Americans told them that the flight would not be allowed to take off, and the French threw a hissy fit and told American authorities that if they wanted to be that way, the French would not allow any of their scheduled flights to leave the US that night. The Americans told them they couldn't care less, so the French grounded their own planes. The US was not embarrassed in the least (even if some want the US to be embarrassed). As to my information, the source is highly placed and of impeccable integrity, but I would never name him or her -- and I will not even name whatever agency he or she might work for. You can just take my word for it. Or leave it.

Anyway, I for one couldn't care less whether the French ground their stupid planes -- or, for that matter, whether the US orders their stupid planes grounded. For anyone in the United States to be embarrassed about it is ridiculous.

Have people forgotten that this a war?

In which planes are used as weapons?

A "no fly" list strikes me as eminently reasonable under the circumstances.

I am beginning to think that if Muhammad Atta and the other September 11 terrorists were kept off planes tomorrow because of a "no fly" list, the French, (and people who think along similar lines) would be screaming about civil rights violations....

UPDATE: The following observation from Eric S. Raymond is quite apt:

In the warped moral universe that Reuters and the BBC and much of America's own elite media inhabit, American power is so frightening and loathsome that Islamist barbarians are actually preferable to George W. Bush. They'll print with a straight face quotes by al-Qaeda apologists condemning the U.S. as a ‘rogue state’ and U.S. policies as terrorism, while refusing to use the word ‘terrorist’ for Al-Hamas attacks that target Israeli children for mass murder.

(Via Instapundit.)

Do you want them in charge of security on your next flight?