Was There a "Dry Run" Before Flight 253?

Douglas Hagmann has had this information posted over at Northeast Intelligence Network since late December. Hagmann conducted a telephone interview with a passenger, name concealed as "REDACTED", who had witnessed what appeared to him to be suspicious behavior on Delta-Northwest flight 253 a week before the attempted bombing. As Hagmann notes, there may be a perfectly innocent explanation. However, since there appear to have been "dry run" or back-up aspects to even the actual December 25th bombing try, this testimony may be significant.

There is quite a bit more at the NIN site, but these are the essentials from the interview:

REDACTED stated that he was a passenger aboard Delta-Northwest Airlines flight 253 flying from Amsterdam to Detroit on 17 December 2009, seated in . He stated that he has taken international flights in the past. At the onset of the flight, he observed two individuals seated in seats 41-G and 41-K, possibly with an empty seat between the two individuals. REDACTED denied seeing either individual within the terminal or at any time prior to boarding the aircraft.

Subject one was an adult male, approximately 32-35 years-old, slight build, short dark, well-trimmed hair and a dark colored closely cropped beard, possibly of Yemeni ethnicity. (REDACTED stated he was able to determine ethnicity with a high degree of certainty due to his experience and time spent in the Middle East.) This male was smartly dressed in dark colored dress pants, dress shirt and a tie, the latter which he kept on during the entire flight.

Subject two was an adult female of undetermined origin/ethnicity, appearing to be older than the male, possibly in her early to mid forties, dark black hair, medium build, wearing jeans and a very loose fitting sweater possibly worn over another shirt. The sweater was of specific interest as it was more bulky than necessarily fashionable.

It is important to note that upon boarding the aircraft, the subjects described above provided no indication that they knew each other or were otherwise traveling together.

Throughout the entire duration of the nearly 8-hour flight, the above-referenced male remained seated, barely moved, and engaged in what best could be described as surveillance of the aircraft and the flight crew. His actions could best be described as calm, collected and “focused.” Meanwhile, the female made at least nine-(9) separate trips to the lavatory during the flight, and was closely observed by the well-dressed male on each occasion. Although one could explain the frequency of trips to the lavatory citing a number of normal causes, REDACTED stated that his concern was elevated by a number of other factors, including but not limited to non-verbal communication that appeared to take place between the male and female following these lavatory visits. Mr. REDACTED stated that this non-verbal communication was definitely out of place, suspicious, and timed with or consequential to the lavatory visits.

Mr. REDACTED further advised that the male appeared to be “extremely focused” on various aspects of the flight, flight crew and events taking place aboard the aircraft, well beyond anything that could be reasonably explained by the actions of a nervous passenger. The male showed no signs of nervousness whatsoever, and remained very attentive to his surroundings. He explained that he did not alert flight attendants to the behavior of either passenger, instead opting to continue to monitor the situation during the course of the flight. Although his concern grew as the flight progressed, he believed that the actions of the two passengers, particularly the female passenger, could possibly have a reasonable explanation, and did not want to cause an unnecessary alarm. His concern grew proportionate to the interaction between the two passengers progressed during the flight, although by the time his concern reached the point of notifying the flight crew, the flight was about to land without incident.