> In news:48cee410$0$28215$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au,
> B J Foster yahoo.com> typed:

>

>> What if a rogue pilot takes over the plane. Would not a
>> reasonable person attempt to make contact with people outside the
>> plane? Would that person be arrested for endangering to plane?
>> Clearly not.

>
> Another poor example. Since 9/11, it is now clear that passengers in a
> high-jacked plane have only three choices about how they will die. They
> can be shot down, which is the least desirable, because the passengers
> are then only chickens waiting to be slaughtered. They can do nothing,
> and allow the high-jackers to crash the plane for terrorist purposes,
> which is not good, and makes the passengers accomplices by inertia.
> They can act to ensure that the high-jackers' plans go wrong. That
> still means they all die, but it makes an excellent point to wanna-be
> high-jackers.
>
> It's a poor example, because everyone on the plane is dead.

>

>> Mobile phones use UHF frequencies and do *not* interfere with aircraft
>> navigation systems. The issue is that whilst the interference is
>> infinitesmally small it cannot be entirely dismissed - so the rule
>> remains. In practice it is ridiculous.

>
> If this is so, it calls for massive civil disobedience in protest. We
> are being lied to by governments and airlines. How shocking!
>
>