A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travelling Style » Air travel
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

FAA Downplayed Chance Of Suicide Hijacking -Panel



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 28th, 2004, 07:21 PM
DALing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FAA Downplayed Chance Of Suicide Hijacking -Panel

which illustrates the fallacy about what the "old" system assumed - not
using the aircraft ITSELF as a weapon. Focusing on the "old rules" of
"hijack" rather than the "new' (as in 'current') rules of hijack - what goes
on the back of the aircraft is SECONDARY to prevention of the take-over of
the aircraft controls itself and that pax will take whatever action they can
to prevent the situation from manifesting itself. Contrary to what they
will undoubtedly find, as was demonstrated by the Pennsylvania plane, once
it became clear that the intent was to crash the plane somewhere, the PAX
took action (exactly what the result of that action (as in speculation that
the hijackers crashed in order to prevent capture) was will probably either
never be known or alternsatively never be released). That action can be
expected to be repeated as a FIRST rebuff to any attempt to commandeer an
aircraft. Which is also why I support the position of 'keep off the bombs
and guns and the pax will fend for themselves quite nicely". No entry to
the flight deck during flight. but the focus of this investigation is more
akin to locking the barn door after the horse is out of the barn.
(hindsight ALWAYS being 20-20)

You gotta knife? better stick me with it fast or you'll EAT it. (capturing
the hijacker is an option - kiilling THEM is another option - which ever is
easier)

"None" wrote in message
k.net...
WASHINGTON (AP)--The Federal Aviation Administration focused on the danger
of explosives aboard planes rather than a suicide hijacking before the

Sept.
11, 2001 attacks even though its own security officers warned terrorists
might try to crash an airliner, a federal panel said Tuesday.

The FAA's Office of Civil Aviation Security considered the risk of a

suicide
hijacking at least as early as March 1998, says the preliminary report by
the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.

The commission report acknowledges there was no specific intelligence
indicating suicide hijackings would occur but says the FAA still had a
responsibility to protect the flying public against such a threat.

The commission wrapped up two days of hearings that focused on aviation

and
border security lapses. The panel, which has been investigating the Sept.

11
attacks for a year and has held seven public hearings, wants Congress to
extend its May 27 deadline by at least two months, saying it needs more

time
to review all the material.

At Tuesday's hearing, the commission provided documents showing the FAA

was
aware of the possibility of suicide hijackings but didn't pass the
information along to airlines.

In a presentation to airline and airport officials in early 2001, the FAA
discounted the threat of a suicide hijacking because there was "no
indication that any group is currently thinking in that direction." And

when
the agency issued a terrorism warning to air carriers in July 2001, it

noted
the risk of explosives inside luggage but did not mention suicide
hijackings.

At a commission hearing, panel member Timothy Roemer read from an FAA
document published in the Federal Register on July 17, 2001, stating that
terrorism could occur "anytime, anywhere" in the U.S. and cautioning that
the risk "needs to be prevented and countered."

"The dots are connected and they're large," said Roemer, a former

Democratic
congressman from Indiana. "Why didn't they result in a change in policy?"

Cathal L. Flynn, former associate administrator of civil aviation security
at the FAA, responded that the agency only had a generalized sense of the
risk and that security efforts were hampered somewhat by poor

communication
with the FBI.

"It isn't that we disregarded them. There were disconnects," he said. "How
would you coerce a pilot to fly into a building that's got people in
it?...How would you do that? The notion of a full-fledged al-Qaida member
being a pilot ... did not occur to me."

Executives from United Airlines(NASDAQ-OTCBB:UALAQ) and American Airlines
told the commission they rely on the FAA and federal agencies to provide
guidance on aviation security as well as counterterrorism efforts. They
proposed a more integrated security plan to improve coordination among
federal agencies.

Other preliminary findings disclosed Tuesday by the commission:

-Nine of the 19 Sept. 11 hijackers had been stopped by the airlines for
additional security screening.

-Weaknesses in airport screening of carry-on baggage in the 20 years prior
to 2001 were rampant and widely reported in popular literature, which the
hijackers apparently read and used to their advantage.

The 10-member, bipartisan commission was established by Congress to study
the nation's preparedness before Sept. 11, 2001 and its response to the
attacks, and to make recommendations for guarding against similar

disasters.






  #2  
Old January 28th, 2004, 11:56 PM
Mike Schumann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FAA Downplayed Chance Of Suicide Hijacking -Panel

I predict that the next generation of attacks will be an inside job - an
armed pilot who is an airline employee shooting his co-pilot and being
protected by the new ultra secure cockpit doors.

With all of the anti-terrorist hysteria, no one is looking at the worst case
unanticipated consequence scenarios. We would probably be a lot better off
with no weapons or locks on board any aircraft at all, and rely on the
passengers to keep or retake control. No one will ever sit by and meekly
permit a hijacking again after 9/11.

Mike Schumann

"DALing" daling43[delete]-at-hotmail.com wrote in message
...
which illustrates the fallacy about what the "old" system assumed - not
using the aircraft ITSELF as a weapon. Focusing on the "old rules" of
"hijack" rather than the "new' (as in 'current') rules of hijack - what

goes
on the back of the aircraft is SECONDARY to prevention of the take-over of
the aircraft controls itself and that pax will take whatever action they

can
to prevent the situation from manifesting itself. Contrary to what they
will undoubtedly find, as was demonstrated by the Pennsylvania plane, once
it became clear that the intent was to crash the plane somewhere, the PAX
took action (exactly what the result of that action (as in speculation

that
the hijackers crashed in order to prevent capture) was will probably

either
never be known or alternsatively never be released). That action can be
expected to be repeated as a FIRST rebuff to any attempt to commandeer an
aircraft. Which is also why I support the position of 'keep off the bombs
and guns and the pax will fend for themselves quite nicely". No entry to
the flight deck during flight. but the focus of this investigation is

more
akin to locking the barn door after the horse is out of the barn.
(hindsight ALWAYS being 20-20)

You gotta knife? better stick me with it fast or you'll EAT it.

(capturing
the hijacker is an option - kiilling THEM is another option - which ever

is
easier)

"None" wrote in message
k.net...
WASHINGTON (AP)--The Federal Aviation Administration focused on the

danger
of explosives aboard planes rather than a suicide hijacking before the

Sept.
11, 2001 attacks even though its own security officers warned terrorists
might try to crash an airliner, a federal panel said Tuesday.

The FAA's Office of Civil Aviation Security considered the risk of a

suicide
hijacking at least as early as March 1998, says the preliminary report

by
the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.

The commission report acknowledges there was no specific intelligence
indicating suicide hijackings would occur but says the FAA still had a
responsibility to protect the flying public against such a threat.

The commission wrapped up two days of hearings that focused on aviation

and
border security lapses. The panel, which has been investigating the

Sept.
11
attacks for a year and has held seven public hearings, wants Congress to
extend its May 27 deadline by at least two months, saying it needs more

time
to review all the material.

At Tuesday's hearing, the commission provided documents showing the FAA

was
aware of the possibility of suicide hijackings but didn't pass the
information along to airlines.

In a presentation to airline and airport officials in early 2001, the

FAA
discounted the threat of a suicide hijacking because there was "no
indication that any group is currently thinking in that direction." And

when
the agency issued a terrorism warning to air carriers in July 2001, it

noted
the risk of explosives inside luggage but did not mention suicide
hijackings.

At a commission hearing, panel member Timothy Roemer read from an FAA
document published in the Federal Register on July 17, 2001, stating

that
terrorism could occur "anytime, anywhere" in the U.S. and cautioning

that
the risk "needs to be prevented and countered."

"The dots are connected and they're large," said Roemer, a former

Democratic
congressman from Indiana. "Why didn't they result in a change in

policy?"

Cathal L. Flynn, former associate administrator of civil aviation

security
at the FAA, responded that the agency only had a generalized sense of

the
risk and that security efforts were hampered somewhat by poor

communication
with the FBI.

"It isn't that we disregarded them. There were disconnects," he said.

"How
would you coerce a pilot to fly into a building that's got people in
it?...How would you do that? The notion of a full-fledged al-Qaida

member
being a pilot ... did not occur to me."

Executives from United Airlines(NASDAQ-OTCBB:UALAQ) and American

Airlines
told the commission they rely on the FAA and federal agencies to provide
guidance on aviation security as well as counterterrorism efforts. They
proposed a more integrated security plan to improve coordination among
federal agencies.

Other preliminary findings disclosed Tuesday by the commission:

-Nine of the 19 Sept. 11 hijackers had been stopped by the airlines for
additional security screening.

-Weaknesses in airport screening of carry-on baggage in the 20 years

prior
to 2001 were rampant and widely reported in popular literature, which

the
hijackers apparently read and used to their advantage.

The 10-member, bipartisan commission was established by Congress to

study
the nation's preparedness before Sept. 11, 2001 and its response to the
attacks, and to make recommendations for guarding against similar

disasters.








  #3  
Old January 29th, 2004, 01:59 AM
Fly Guy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FAA Downplayed Chance Of Suicide Hijacking -Panel

Mike Schumann wrote:

We would probably be a lot better off with no weapons or locks
on board any aircraft at all, and rely on the passengers to
keep or retake control. No one will ever sit by and meekly
permit a hijacking again after 9/11.


Something as simple as inserting the phrase "You may be called upon by
the crew to help subdue or incapacitate individuals posing a threat to
the safety and security of the plane" could have made all the
difference in cancelling the plans of the hijackers, had such a phrase
been implimented before 9-11.

Immediately after 9-11 there is no doubt that the intent of such a
phrase was clear in the minds of the flying public, and institutiing
such an annoucement would have easily been superior to all the
subsequent anti-terrorist mechanisms and proceedures put into place on
planes and at airports since 9-11. Instead such a phrase remains
absent, and in time confusion and uncertainty will creep back into the
psycology of the average passenger when (or if) faced with another
9-11 type situation in the future.

The potential of hijacking for suicidal purposes has clearly been a
recognized for some time prior to 9-11. The suicidal plunge of Egypt
Air flight 990 in 1999 should have been a clear warning of what was to
come:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=25523

If the more recent crash of an Egypt Air plane a few weeks ago in the
Red Sea was also suicide you can be sure it will never be revealed as
such because the flight recorders are being analyzed by Egyptian
authorities:

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentSe...=1074160582297

"Egypt's Civil Aviation Minister Ahmed Mohamed Shafiq Zaki said Egypt
had the technical means to analyse the data from the flight recorder,
while personnel from U.S. plane manufacturer Boeing would act as
observers in the investigation. Egypt has asserted its sovereign
right to command the crash inquiry and has defended its air safety
record against allegations that Switzerland banned Flash Airlines from
its air space because of safety violations. Zaki said: "If it turns
out there was a flaw in the plane, we will announce that straight away
without any embarrassment."

(Note that he did not say "indications of intentional pilot actions
will be announced straight away without any embarrassment.")

Is there anyone from Egypt that reads (or can post to) R.T.A? Are
Egyptians allowed to have internet access? I'm curious to get the
opinion from a real Egyption as to why the idea of a suicidal Egyption
pilot is do dangerous to the stability of their society.
  #4  
Old January 29th, 2004, 11:07 AM
nobody
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FAA Downplayed Chance Of Suicide Hijacking -Panel

Fly Guy wrote:
If the more recent crash of an Egypt Air plane a few weeks ago in the

Red Sea was also suicide you can be sure it will never be revealed as
such because the flight recorders are being analyzed by Egyptian
authorities:


It was not an Egypt Air, it was Flash Air, a very small charter company.

"Egypt's Civil Aviation Minister Ahmed Mohamed Shafiq Zaki said Egypt
had the technical means to analyse the data from the flight recorder,
while personnel from U.S. plane manufacturer Boeing would act as
observers in the investigation.


And lets not forget the French who are providing the hardware and logistical
help for the investigation (including the submarines as well as FDR/CVR
analysis. The wreck is between 600 and 800 metres deep. The FDR was
recuperated on january 17th, the CVR on the 18th. (crash on 3rd)

Latest news is that the FDR revealed some contradictory information in terms
of direction of flight versus what FDR thought was happening. CVR revealed
that crew were alert. It was also confirmed that there were no external
influences (eg: no missiles).


French media are still tracking closely this event.
  #5  
Old January 29th, 2004, 03:35 PM
DALing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FAA Downplayed Chance Of Suicide Hijacking -Panel

Egypt Air was a different case - the deranged pilot wanted to snuff
hoimself - the fact that there were others on the aircraft didn't enter the
equation, This was a different scenario - use the aircraft as a weapon
against a target.

"Fly Guy" wrote in message ...
Mike Schumann wrote:

We would probably be a lot better off with no weapons or locks
on board any aircraft at all, and rely on the passengers to
keep or retake control. No one will ever sit by and meekly
permit a hijacking again after 9/11.


Something as simple as inserting the phrase "You may be called upon by
the crew to help subdue or incapacitate individuals posing a threat to
the safety and security of the plane" could have made all the
difference in cancelling the plans of the hijackers, had such a phrase
been implimented before 9-11.

Immediately after 9-11 there is no doubt that the intent of such a
phrase was clear in the minds of the flying public, and institutiing
such an annoucement would have easily been superior to all the
subsequent anti-terrorist mechanisms and proceedures put into place on
planes and at airports since 9-11. Instead such a phrase remains
absent, and in time confusion and uncertainty will creep back into the
psycology of the average passenger when (or if) faced with another
9-11 type situation in the future.

The potential of hijacking for suicidal purposes has clearly been a
recognized for some time prior to 9-11. The suicidal plunge of Egypt
Air flight 990 in 1999 should have been a clear warning of what was to
come:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=25523

If the more recent crash of an Egypt Air plane a few weeks ago in the
Red Sea was also suicide you can be sure it will never be revealed as
such because the flight recorders are being analyzed by Egyptian
authorities:


http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentSe...eed/WireFeed&c
=WireFeed&cid=1074160582297

"Egypt's Civil Aviation Minister Ahmed Mohamed Shafiq Zaki said Egypt
had the technical means to analyse the data from the flight recorder,
while personnel from U.S. plane manufacturer Boeing would act as
observers in the investigation. Egypt has asserted its sovereign
right to command the crash inquiry and has defended its air safety
record against allegations that Switzerland banned Flash Airlines from
its air space because of safety violations. Zaki said: "If it turns
out there was a flaw in the plane, we will announce that straight away
without any embarrassment."

(Note that he did not say "indications of intentional pilot actions
will be announced straight away without any embarrassment.")

Is there anyone from Egypt that reads (or can post to) R.T.A? Are
Egyptians allowed to have internet access? I'm curious to get the
opinion from a real Egyption as to why the idea of a suicidal Egyption
pilot is do dangerous to the stability of their society.


  #6  
Old January 30th, 2004, 04:57 AM
Fly Guy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FAA Downplayed Chance Of Suicide Hijacking -Panel

DALing wrote:

Egypt Air was a different case - the deranged pilot wanted to
snuff himself


I suppose he told you this personally. Strange (and complicated) way
to commit suicide. Typically, someone planning suicide does not
formulate a plan where there is opportunity to be stopped by others
(and very rarely are others injured or killed in the attempt - unless
suicide is not the main objective).
  #7  
Old January 30th, 2004, 03:52 PM
DALing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FAA Downplayed Chance Of Suicide Hijacking -Panel

from the CVR tapes and the flight data recorders what other conclusion is
possible? Whether it was a calculated act or not is the question (or
"merely" an act of opportunity)

"Fly Guy" wrote in message ...
DALing wrote:

Egypt Air was a different case - the deranged pilot wanted to
snuff himself


I suppose he told you this personally. Strange (and complicated) way
to commit suicide. Typically, someone planning suicide does not
formulate a plan where there is opportunity to be stopped by others
(and very rarely are others injured or killed in the attempt - unless
suicide is not the main objective).


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.