No airline hijacking will ever again suceed in the United States

[bluestateguy]

After hearing this latest scare about the possibility of an Al Qaeda airline hijacking I thought to myself, either this is another phony warning, or Al Qaeda is really, really stupid.

We all now know that the old conventional wisdom about airline hijackings is out the window: cooperate with the hijackers, give them everything they want and most likely everything will be fine. After seeing and hearing the tale of the passengers of Flight 93, where passengers fought off their hijackers and prevented them from crashing a plane into the White House or the Capitol, the American people will never again allow hijackers to take over an airplane. I am absolutely convinced that if some Muslim terrorist tries to take over an airplane the passengers will have to line up for the chance to give them the ass whooping of a lifetime--unless it's a plane full of pacifists.

So I don't know if this is just Homeland Security blowing smoke or covering their asses or if Al Qaeda is incredibly stupid.

[linazelle]

1. If I'm on the plane...

I'll die trying to keep it from happening....

[ProfessorGAC]

18. I'll Be With You!

Nobody is screwing up a plane i'm on without a fight. End of story.
The Professor

[karlschneider]

2. I hope you're right, but I'm gonna archive this because I think you ain't.

Predicting that something will never happen is high risk gambling.
:D

[DemoTex]

6. Not only is he NOT right, he is whistling in the graveyard at midnight!

There will probably be hijackings of US commercial jets. I doubt that any will end up crashing into tall buildings. This time the F-15s and F-16s will have their afterburners on.

[Brian Sweat]

13. Don't count on it

It takes a lot of political courage to order the downing of a commercial just with hundreds of people on it. I doubt that anyone capable of achieving high political office has that kind of courage.

[mitchtv]

33. kill people? bush? yeah never happen

the man will be giddy the next day rationalizing it .They'll have to hide him.

[MercutioATC]

3. I'm not going to get into specifics, but there are many ways

to cause problems with an airplane. Actually hijack a plane? Maybe not (though I don't think it's nearly impossible). Disable a plane on takeoff/landing so it crashes into a populated area? Not so hard.

We're not out of the woods on this, folks. International policy decisions aside, we need to keep working on security and air travel.

[sexybomber]

9. disabling a plane on takeoff or landing is much easier

takeoff and landing are the two most dangerous times of an airplane flight, because if one little thing goes wrong... well, you know what happens.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

4. What if the terrorist is white?

BTW, if that's what you think of pacifists then you have apoor understanding of the principle of pacifism which mostly allows for self defense.

[DemLikr]

12. ...yeah, so what IF the terrorist is white?

...so the passengers attack a white hijacker, no?

[Paschall]

5. I've already responded to this silly idea

I'll just mention Richard Reid. What if he'd been a bit smarter and had an electronic detonator in his shoes? His point wasn't to hijack the plane, but to destroy it in mid-air. No amount of chest-thumping and vigilante justice can prevent a crime like that.

[Brian Sweat]

14. What does Richard Reid have to do with hijacking

You just said that he wasn't trying to hijack the plane. The original poster said that a hijacking would not succeed. He didn't say a bombing wouldn't succeed.

I don't necessarily agree with the oringial poster, but you response is off topic.

[Paschall]

20. I assumed the original poster's concern...

...was in regard to a repeat of 9/11. Planes being used as missiles. A properly timed detonation inside an aircraft--taking off, landing, or flying over an urban area or other "target"--would accomplish the same thing. A 747 falling out of the sky creates quite an impact. Hence my reference to Richard Reid. But I thought that was obvious.

[Atlant]

7. I guarantee you that creative people could still brainstorm...

I guarantee you that creative people could still brainstorm several
dozen methods of either seizing control of an aircraft (to use it
as a weapon) or simply destroying the aircraft and everyone on board.

The security measures we've implemented are a bad joke and would be
easily circumvented. The easiest way, by far, would be to corrupt
("bribe") people who have access to the plane to service it, but
there are plenty of other methods.

(And I'll be expecting a call from the TSA any moment now...)

Atlant

[DoYouEverWonder]

8. It's true

that there can be more hijackings. It's also likely that the sun will come up tomorrow. However, I would be more concerned with explosives. Either way, someone clever can easily figure out ways to attack other people. Thanks to W, there are even more people in the world who would like to do the US harm, not less.

On the other hand, the chances of any of us being hit directly in a terrorist attack, is probably still less than getting killed in a car accident. Despite all the 'dangers', most of us will still be here tomorrow, ranting and raving against the beast.

BTW: The alert system should be canned because so far it hasn't been right once and it is only being used for political manipulation of the masses.

[Loonman]

10. Anybody tries it again

Is going to get the shit beaten out of them.

[quinnox]

11. It would be a lot tougher

I don't say it can't be done, but it certainly would be a lot tougher.

[cmf]

15. Aren't the cockpit doors reinforced now?

Unless they're in there at takeoff, they're not going to get in.

[Atlant]

19. Do you honestly believe there are no keys to those doors?

> Aren't the cockpit doors reinforced now?"
> Unless they're in there at takeoff, they're not going to get in.

Do you honestly believe there are no keys to those doors?
No explosives that would breach them?
No force that would break them?
No way around them?

Atlant

[Bandit]

16. Never say never

You are probably correct but people can be cowards and if somehow a terrorist gets an automatic weapon on board people would be less inclined to make the first move. Hope springs eternal. They would hope that they weren't being used as a bomb but as ransom. :shrug:

[StandWatie]

17. it will be the pilot next time

no hijacking.

[Fescue4u]

29. Wouldnt be the first time...Remember Egypt air??

When the Muslim copilot dove the aircraft into the ocean after the pilot went to the bathroom.

[Trek234]

31. And the fact that he was muslim

is important why?

[Fescue4u]

36. terrorist.

You must not have noticed the rash of Muslim terrorism lately.

May I suggest you do a google search on "9/11"?

You can thank me later.

[Simeon Salus]

21. How many successful hijackings have been executed since 9/11?

It's almost two years.

I don't remember reading about any hijackings.

Did I miss a morning news?

I always thought that once we began treating hostages like casualties, the terrorists' mindset would have to change. I made this assessment years ago, thanks in part to Jack Vance's wonderful "Lyonesse".

How many successful HOSTAGE situations have you read about recently? Can you imagine this administration faced with a Ruby Ridge or Waco?

The wind has changed for terrorism, folks. Hostages can no longer be trusted to act as cattle.

And this is an important sign of societal maturity.

[RedSock]

23. Flight 587

Flight 587 was pretty suspicious, crashing out of JFK. November 11, 2001. Could have been tampered with. ... I flew to Ireland that night on a similar plane out of the same airport. A bit nervous? Yeah!

And if it was a possible problem with the kind of plane, why not grounded all of them (Airbuses)? They didn't do that. In fact, they were denying terrorism even before they got the plane out of the water.

(Wasn't that the day before the "Gore Actually Won the Election" stories were sent to run?)

[Robb]

24. Well, I wouldn't go that far

The 9/11 hijackings "worked" because they were a novel application for the existing situation. That's all. Now, the situation may be different -- but another similarly novel application has the possibility of "working" just as well.

Also, security is hardly the issue. Anyone who has worked in any kind of security will tell you there's no such thing as effective security against someone with the will to defeat it; if someone really, really wants to steal your car, there's nothing you can do about it.

9/11 wasn't about boxcutters, it was about force of will. And the only countermeasure for force of will is to deny the inspiration of that will. In auto-theft terms, don't park the Civic by the docks at night. In foreign policy, don't humiliate and deny human rights to people.

[rustydog]

27. The question is: how many have been tried and failed?

since 9/11 how many incidents have been attempted?

How many have been thwarted prior to 9/11? I'll bet the "success" ratio is about the same.

[JackRiddler]

22. What about electronic commandeering?

Drone planes or "unmanned aerial vehicles" (UAVs) have existed in various forms since the 1950s.

They were to be used in the Northwoods self-staged terror plot of 1962.

Recent UAV models like Global Hawk and Predator can be guided from take off to landing, across oceans.

Most of what flies a passenger jet nowadays is in the software - auto pilot - even landings are possible on it.

No doubt a team of Raytheon or other think-tank scientists and engineers was asked decades ago to come up with half a dozen ways to hijack (or if you prefer: un-hijack) passenger planes by remote.

Possibilities include
--bolt-on modules (piece of hardware surreptitiously attached to a key point in the system and overriding what the pilot commands, including his command to turn off/reboot the system)
--software replacement, accomplishing the same;
--commandeering by electronic interference, unlikely to be failsafe; --any of the above to be controlled from the ground by beacons or from a plane flying in the vicinity;
--with the additional possibility of killing the crew and passengers by a timed gas attack and taking over the auto pilot.

It's also possible that a failsafe remote commandeering alternative was built intentionally (and secretly) into recent Boeing models as a way of "un-hijacking" them (the "Home Run" scenario).

Who says this isn't what happened on 9/11?

Who says this isn't actually a simpler scenario to pull off than the official story?

Do your research before you say you know for sure.

JR

PS - Now go show your societal maturity and make that remote control turn itself off, okay?! Interesting statement, especially as it refers to one of the most infantile societies in history.

[poskonig]

25. Why wouldn't they just hijack a plane from Central America

or the Caribbean and crash it in Los Angeles or Houston?

[The Lone Liberal]

26. You could be correct ---- for one reason

That one reason is that in selecting targets you look for the softest target. Right now, because of Bush and Congress' unwillingness to spend the money the softest targets are maritime. Our ports are virtually unprotected because Congress' rush to give taxes back to billionaires and as a consequence do not have the money to pay for hardening our security at the country’s ports.

It worries me that it would be so easy to accomplish a horrendous act using shipping containers. We are relying solely on other countries to protect against that happening.

When weighing the degree of target hardness aviation is harder than maritime. Mainly due to the foolishness of the Republican Congress and Bush.

[Fescue4u]

28. BS. Its still just as possible as it ever was.

All it takes is a group willing to die with the money for a first class seat, and the patience for the pilot to go to the bathroom on a long flight.

You can still -easily- get knives on any flight you choose.

Factor in that once the terrorist are in the cockpit behind a reinforced door...

It can happen again as easily as the first time.

[wuushew]

30. Why not highjack a commerical frieght aircraft?

Are the doors on a FedEx plane reinforced the same as passenger planes? Al Queda for all their evil are not stupid. The fact they they are considering water targets illustrates their operational flexibility. Also where the hell is that missing 727 in Africa?

[sfecap]

35. The "missing" 727 was never really missing, and has been

found. It was "repossessed" and turned up a couple of weeks ago in Beiruit.

It's not missing anymore.

[Fescue4u]

38. This has been attempted already..

Several years ago a Fedex employee* attacked the flight crew in flight, bludgeoning the pilot with a wrench or some other heavy object.

His goal was to crash the aircraft into the Memphis Tenn Fedex facilty, which would ultimately destroy the company because at that time, this was -THE- fedex hub.

Fortunately, the pilot regained consequenness(sp?), retook the aircraft and the thug was apprehended and is spending life in prison at the moment.

His reasoning was to collect insurance, and "get back" at his employer for some slight.

* (He may have been a co-pilot, I cant remember, but he was obviosly on the flight)

[phaseolus]

40. probably not a pilot...

A few years ago a FedEx customer service rep said that each cargo plane has a couple jump seats in back of the cockpit, and many employees are eligible to use these for travel.

[sfecap]

42. He was a deadheading pilot.

The use of jump seats now has been severly curtailed. Cockpit access is strictly limited.

[Trek234]

32. You are probably correct

It could still happen though.

Say the pilot leaves to go to the bathroom. Hijackers bust in and close the reinforced door before anyone can jump in. Then what? No one on the plane can get in and stop them.

[sfecap]

34. Legislation has been passed that now permits

some pilots to carry guns while in the cockpit.

Entering a cockpit can now be a fatal event.

[Fescue4u]

37. I applaud armed pilots, but...

The odds of pilot being armed on any flight is proably less than 1 in 10,000

TSA has put huge hurdles and delayed and stalled this effort. Only a handful of pilots have been willing to go throught the process.

[sfecap]

41. Don't bet on those odds.

You never know which pilot is armed and which is not.

Believe me when I say that entering a cockpit inflight will be a fatal event.

[maynard]

39. Another Attack......

It will happen due to the nature of our stupidity. I teach school and every rule I try to enforce in my classroom, some kids can find the loopholes. A lot of my days are spent trying to outguess the kids. I am very good at it. Most of my students have given up on trying to outwit me.

When I see new airline rules and guidelines, I can think like a 16 year-old kid and find a way around it.

People who want to take down a plane will find a way around the rules. Our airline rules are only deterrants. The do not prevent the crime from taking place. I still fly. I just look at the reality of the situation. I pack my suitcases very lightly now and have avoided taking stuff I do not need.