Talk:Aircraft hijacking
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Have there been any U.S. hijackings since 9/11? Could Wikipedia share a list of them?
Thank you, TulsaDavid 9/29/2006
Have there really not been any non-islamic hi-jackers since 1968? jimfbleak 12:39 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- There have been all those Cuban asylum seekers. Rmhermen 13:58 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- The key word is 'significant' at the top of the list, major and firsts only, a 'quiet' and successful Cuban hijack isn't significant. ²¹² 14:11 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Was the Lockerbie flight hijacked? I thought it was just blown up. Rmhermen 13:58 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- Agreed. I'll cut it out. ²¹² 14:11 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] International law issues
This article simple lacks internal law issues. -- Toytoy 04:49, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Miss Macao
Numerous web sources give the date for the Miss Macao hijack as June 16th (or possibly 15th). Only one independant source has July 16.
compare with July 16
I'll change the article.
Zeimusu | (Talk page) 15:23, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Neutrality
"Opponents proposed that shooting down the aircraft and killing everyone onboard would be more reasonable than a pilot firing a pistol in an airliner at a flight deck intruder."
Is there a source for this statement? It looks like it was designed to ridicule opponents of armed pilots. PK9 22:35, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
It was meant to ridicule, as the argument is pure logic, and does not need a source, IMO. the fact that there were opponents to armed pilots here in the USA proves the point. Either you have an aircraft shot down when it is hijacked, or you have a crewmember who can shoot at a hijacker. If you get hijacked, you're getting shot down and everyone dies. If you have an armed flight deck, a federal air marshall, FBI agent, Secret service, or any other special person allowed to carry a pistol on a commercial aircraft, there is some chance everyone onboard will not be killed. If the fight goes bad, everyone dies. same result. --Kvuo 04:31, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Movies
Can we have a list of movies relating to of revolving around
[edit] First Hijacking in Civil Aviation
The article seems to contradict itself listing the 1954 Israeli hijacking as the first act in civil aviation when the Background paragraph preceeding it states this was actually the Miss Macau incident? It's also a little out of context when most think of hijackings as having a hijacker on a plane, not military or other jets forcing another to land in order to take control. I wonder if this incident should be removed all together or at least more details supplied to make more clear what happend? I also should be modified to state the hostages were held for 2 days, not just "days" (this could mean any length of time really). Your thoughts? Macutty 19:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC)macutty
Made a couple edits, take a look...I think their a little more clear and accurate now.
[edit] Flags
Updated some flags to represent counrties of origin for the Hijackers rather than the home countries of the respective airlines (does it really matter what country the plane was from?). Working on identifying remaining countries for those not listed. Macutty 17:23, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cubana 1976
Seems like we missed the Cubana hijacking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubana_Flight_455
Also note the comments: "In September of 2005, a US immigration judge ruled that Posada should not be deported to either Cuba or Venezuela because he could be subject to torture"
- Cubana 455 was a bomb not a hijacking.--Zleitzen 03:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 7500
Can anyone confirm what is claimed at 7500, that this is some kind of special hijacking code. Thanks. Not a dog 04:22, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- See my reply on Talk:7500. I removed your tag. -- AirOdyssey (Talk) 04:29, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pan Am 1931 Hijacking, Arequipa Peru
The aircraft involved was a Fokker F.7 Trimotor, not a Ford Trimotor. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.145.174.220 (talk) 14:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC).
