Airline passengers subdue man screaming “Jihad!” on airplane


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

A United Airlines flight had to turn back when passengers on board were forced to subdue an unruly passenger who was yelling “Jihad!” as he charged the cockpit.

This is another example of why the TSA is a complete waste of money while doing terrible harm to our culture’s concept of freedom. No matter what the TSA does, it can never prevent bad guys from getting on a plane. In the end, it will always be the job of the passengers and crew to resist a terrorist. We should just give that responsibility back to them, as free Americans, and get rid of the TSA. It might increase the risk, but I promise you, if every flight had armed Americans aboard, randomly placed, terrorists would go elsewhere to try to do their dirty work.

Most Americans think my opinion here is crazy, but it is the way our country did things for its first two centuries, and things were actually no more dangerous but we all had much greater freedom.

Share

16 comments

  • Your argument appears to be, “You can’t prevent bad guys from getting on a plane, so you shouldn’t try to prevent people from carrying guns and bombs on a plane.”

    Bob Clark

  • Cotour

    That is the Archie Bunker system of anti terrorism, hand out the guns to all the passengers at the beginning of the flight and collect them at the end of the flight. I think that as a general practical rule its best to keep fire arms in this kind of instance in the hands of specifically trained, clandestinely operating individuals carrying weapons with special loads in order keep the peace but not take the plane down.

    As for the TSA I see that for the most part as a works program for the federal government which creates further obligation to pay on the backs of the public indentured slaves and as another loyal voting base for the Democrats.

    As for anyone flying in America who gets on a plane and starts causing a disturbance or chooses to begin yelling Alah what ever prepare to get duct taped, tied up and or have the crap kicked out of you or worse if you do not stop. After 911 people have little tolerance for such BS.

  • Richard

    Yes, I remember that episode of “All in the Family”. “Boy, the week that Miller played. . .

  • Cotour

    And here is a stellar new corporate policy.

    http://fortune.com/2015/03/16/starbucks-baristas-race-talk/

    Why don’t the airlines adapt the same policy when someone starts yelling Alah Akbar? Have a political discussion to quiet things down. (I tend to like just kicking the SOB’s ass, tying him to his seat and turning him over to the law when you land)

    Is this the direction that activist corporate America sees itself going in the future? This is one bad business decision, let the fire works begin. I could imagine, soon you may have to be “acceptable” to do business with certain large company’s based on a test before you enter or an alert may go off upon entering the establishment based on your cell phone down loading to their system? This is corporate activism and “community organizing” and apparently where some large corporations see themselves going.

  • D.K. Williams

    No hijacked planes since 9-11 in the U.S. that I am aware of. The TSA has it’s faults, particularly since Obama took over, but I would not fly without them. If anything, I would require tighter screening procedures, such as performed in Israel.

  • Publius 2

    With respect, Richard, it was “Boy, the way Glenn Miller played…”

  • Publius 2

    The truly effective change would be to employ the methods of El Al security, in which would-be passenger behavior is profiled. Your comment is technically true, D.K., that no American airliner has been hijacked since 9/11. But remember there have been quite a few attempts (Richard Reid, the so-called Shoe Bomber; Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the so-called Underwear Bomber; and this guy, to name a few). There have also been dozens of incidents of in-flight trouble from passengers whom TSA had screened and allowed to board. In addition, there have been hundreds if not thousands of incidents where TSA has harassed, or treated badly, innocent people who only wanted to get from one airport to another. What’s most troubling about the TSA is the paucity of reports of dangerous people they have indeed intercepted. Billions and billions of dollars spent on this system so far. Perhaps it is time to take a close, honest look at it and see if there is a more efficient and more effective way to provide airline security. My guess is that method exists; but it would require abandoning political correctness and replacing it with cold-hearted reality.

  • Cotour

    Cold-hearted reality, what a concept.

    Our ability to knowingly and willfully ignore reality can only go on for so long, even America has its limits.

  • pzatchok

    How many hijackings have been stopped by TSA agents .vs the passengers on the plane?

    And Israel does not have tighter screenings they have and use profiling and actual background checking of passengers when they buy their tickets before the day of the flight.

    The don’t do stupid “random” inspections of passengers inline. And NEVER seem to inspect those Arab guys but do inspect the 90 year old great grandmother and the 4 year old.

  • PeterF

    Are you advocating that we allow the airlines to become like the wild wild west? That would be terrible! (if the wild wild west ever existed other than in a Hollywood script). Personally, I feel much safer if I and all my neighbors are armed. and people tend to be much more polite when conversing with an armed individual.
    Allowing licensed gun owners to protect themselves by carrying legal weapons on board an aircraft would be a much more effective security method than what we have now.
    I always felt that uniformed, openly armed TSA agents should be placed on every flight. There are enough TSA employees that if they were to remove the agents from the gates and put them on the planes they should be able to cover most flights. (If they can pass a background check and aren’t on the no-fly list)
    I would also like to see the airline flight crews deputized and armed. Possibly also trained in the IDF contact fighting techniques of Krav Maga.
    Americans need to be made aware that a small caliber handgun is unlikely to bring down an airliner. We have been taught to believe that all the air (and people) can be sucked out of a bullet hole, but they don’t realize that all aircraft already have multiple air leaks and a couple more holes won’t make any difference. It is also extremely unlikely that a bullet would damage any critical flight controls (probably more likely to get hit by lightning while holding a winning lottery ticket)

  • Don’t forget that the Times Square bomber was prevented from killing hundreds only because his fuse didn’t work. That means the claim of “No terrorist attacks since 9-11” a lie and the lack of dead a matter of luck rather than good work.

  • “Our ability to knowingly and willfully ignore reality can only go on for so long, even America has its limits”

    You assume that most people are exposed to the information that you are aware of. That is not the case if they rely upon the “Mainstream Media” for information.

    I have had numerous conversations with people who consider themselves to be well-informed (NPR listeners) where I have been astounded by their ignorance. The agenda indoctrination is so pervasive that when you offer facts that clash with the (often sloppily) crafted narrative you are immediately challenged and the facts are discounted if they have not been disseminated through an “approved” news source.

    As a test, the next time you have a conversation with a “well informed” colleague about the Affordable Care Act, ask them “Who is Jonathan Gruber?”.

    If they can’t tell you that, They can probably tell you “what common food in your refrigerator can kill you in the next two minutes, details at eleven”…

  • Edward

    Pzatchok has it right. The TSA has yet to stop a single terrorist, but they have stopped a large number of fingernail clippers and baby bottles. Yet at least two active terrorists (and possibly more, as Publius 2 points out, below) *did* get through their screening techniques.

    On the other hand, there are other agencies that *have* stopped various terrorist attacks, but they didn’t use random searches, porn-o-vision and nipple-squeeze techniques, or require that everyone take off their shoes, belts, or otherwise disrobe.

    The TSA’s techniques are not the successful techniques.

    Not every other technique is better, though. Our defenders were too busy collecting and analyzing innocent people’s telephone metadata to listen to the Russians’ warnings that a couple of brothers in Boston were an actual threat. So, how many terrorists did telephone metadata find? Not those Bostonian brothers.

  • Cotour

    I routinely have that conversation with people from PHD’s on down who consider themselves informed and I sadly have come to understand that they know little of what they are talking about. Either about science and absolutely not about politics, what the Constitution is, where it comes from, the sanctity of their rights and how it structures their very existence.

    I hear many people parrot “facts” the media tells them without question. Reality can be a function of perception but only to a certain point, after which your narrow perspective becomes the agent of your demise. As long as everyone is comfortable and gets to eat and exists in their fantasy they are allowed to be as uninformed as they wish.

  • PeterF

    Hear! Hear!

  • Edward

    It seems that a colorblind society is not yet upon us. The US news media thought that we would get there, if only the right color president were elected, but what a foolish thought that turned out to be. It seems that now, more than ever, we must become color-conscious:
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/21/starbucks-ceo-howard-schultz-imposes-his-racial-hang-ups-on-america/

    Does this help us all get along? Should we really be choosing who to associate with based upon race (isn’t that the basis of racism?) rather than based upon who we get along with? Just how important is diversity, anyway? Should I be choosing to associate with criminals, in order to diversify away from my law abiding ways (and what does that do to my security clearance)?

    The Starbucks questionnaire asks, “What is America’s greatest race challenge?” Apparently, after half a century, it *still* is getting to King’s dream of not being judged by the color of our skins, but by the content of our characters.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *