Group Attempts To Hijack Passenger Plane In Northwest China

[News_Editor]

Group attempts to hijack passenger plane in northwest China < br />

2012-07-01 05:19:18 GMT+7 (ICT)

ÜRÜMQI, CHINA (BNO NEWS) -- Six men attempted to hijack a passenger plane in northwestern China on Friday afternoon, injuring eleven passengers and crew members as they fought to subdue the attackers, authorities said. Their motive was not immediately clear.

Tianjin Airlines flight GS7554 was carrying 92 passengers and nine crew members when it took off from Hotan Airport in China's Xinjiang Uygur autonomous region at 12:25 p.m. local time on Friday. The aircraft was en-route to the regional capital of Ürümqi when the attempted hijacking took place.

"At 12:31 p.m., six people attacked the cockpit and attempted to hijack the aircraft," the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) said in a statement. Passengers and crew members intervened and disabled the attackers, resulting in injuries to eleven people, including two security officers, two flight attendants and seven passengers.

The Chinese government praised the security officers, crew members and passengers for their brave acts, saying they played a key role in a time of crisis and made "outstanding contributions" to safeguarding national security. It said it would award those involved in the incident with China's honorary title of civil aviation anti-hijacking hero.

It was unclear whether the attackers were carrying any weapons or what their motive was. But the incident comes just days before the anniversary of violent clashes between Uighur Muslims and Han Chinese in July 2009, leaving at least 197 people killed and more than 1,700 others injured. The riots were the region's worst ethnic clashes in decades and the violence only stopped when a large number of troops were deployed in the remote western region.

Following the riots, China cut all communications from the region to the rest of the world, including international phone calls, text messaging, and the internet. Thousands of additional security forces have since been deployed and thousands of 'riot-proof' closed-circuit television cameras have been set up in public places in an attempt to discourage any violence or unrest.

Over eight million Uighurs live in the Central Asian region of Xinjiang. A large number of Uighur are reportedly unhappy about the large migrant Han Chinese settlers, saying that they are making their interests less important and disregarding their culture.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2012-07-01

[Steely Dan]

Is there nowhere on earth that doesn't benefit from cultural enrichment? Kudos to the Chinese cutting all communications from the 'troubled' region to the outside world, perhaps we should take a leaf out of their book.

[Scott]

Or maybe the people of the area are just fighting multiculturalism.

[coma]

It is at times like this where I simply adore the Chinese security and justice apparatus. These hijackers, if not already, will be swiftly taken out back and dealt with accordingly.

Well done to the crew who are indeed heros.

[folium]

Is there nowhere on earth that doesn't benefit from cultural enrichment? Kudos to the Chinese cutting all communications from the 'troubled' region to the outside world, perhaps we should take a leaf out of their book.

Your commie pals cut off outside links during the major disturbances 4 years ago. The recent hijacking suggests that PLA heavy handedness has not done much to address the underlying problems- plus ca change.

[Steely Dan]

Is there nowhere on earth that doesn't benefit from cultural enrichment? Kudos to the Chinese cutting all communications from the 'troubled' region to the outside world, perhaps we should take a leaf out of their book.

Your commie pals cut off outside links during the major disturbances 4 years ago. The recent hijacking suggests that PLA heavy handedness has not done much to address the underlying problems- plus ca change.

Well maybe, maybe not. With multicultural melting pots it seems extremely difficult and time consuming for democracy to take hold, unless it was there before and not allowed to be weakened by uncontrolled immigration. In lieu of an already established democracy totalitarian rule does seem to at least keep a lid on things, as demonstrated by what happened when the lid was removed in former Yugoslavia.

P.S I see the Uighurs have taken a different mode of protest to the self-immolating Tibetans.

[Steely Dan]

Or maybe the people of the area are just fighting multiculturalism.

Like it. But with near 200 dead in clashes back in 2009 one wonders what the Han Chinese did to bring this on, perhaps the Uighurs watched how they eat.

P.S According to wikipedia The Uighur enrichment of their current homeland took place in 840AD from Mongolia following a famine and civil war.

[folium]

Or maybe the people of the area are just fighting multiculturalism.

Like it. But with near 200 dead in clashes back

in 2009 one wonders what the Han Chinese did

to bring this on, perhaps the Uighurs watched

how they eat.

P.S According to wikipedia The Uighur enrichment of their current homeland took place in 840AD from Mongolia following a famine and civil war.

Strewth, if by your reckoning 1172 years does not make an etnic group indigenous, that dooms most alleged indigenous populations, or is their religion the sticking factor?

[folium]

Is there nowhere on earth that doesn't benefit from cultural enrichment? Kudos to the

Chinese cutting all communications from the

'troubled' region to the outside world, perhaps we

should take a leaf out of their book.

Your commie pals cut off outside links during the

major disturbances 4 years ago. The recent

hijacking suggests that PLA heavy handedness

has not done much to address the underlying

problems- plus ca change.

Well maybe,maybe not. With multicultural melting

pots it seems extremely difficult and time

consuming for democracy to take hold, unless it

was there before and not allowed to be

weakened by uncontrolled immigration. In lieu of

an already established democracy totalitarian

rule does seem to at least keep a lid on things,

as demonstrated by what happened when the lid

was removed in former Yugoslavia.

P.S I see the Uighurs have taken a different

mode of protest to the self-immolating Tibetans.

It's quite a leap from Xinjiang to Yugoslavia and

the former is bi rather than multicultural and is

plagued by centrally controlled injection of Han Chinese.

So you would rather see authoritarian

governments retain control, whether they be

communist mass murderers or perhaps imperialists? Heaven forbid you might allow

people some say in how they are governed as

that is all too messy and the simple souls might

make the "wrong" choice. Interesting you bring

up the case of Yugoslavia as what Tito basically

did was stop the historical clock for 50 years

and all the issues that had been left unresolved

since 1945 came bursting out in a murderous

decade but are now fast disappearing into the

past and all the ex Yugoslav components are

getting onwith normality and enjoying individual

rights and responsibilities to a degree that have

never been previously experienced in the region.

Perfect? Obviously not but a far better situation

now than ever before for the vast majority of ex-

Yugoslavs.

Basically authoritarian regimes are like volcanoes on a long cycle of eruptions, such that the pressure builds up to such an extent that the ultimate eruption can be catastrophic and at best messy and destructive. Better a Mauna Loa type constant minor eruptions, great sound and light show but few downside side effects.

All that Mubarak, Mugabe, Mao etc do is delay the inevitable and the longer the plug is in place the more dangerous the final uncorking!

Edited July 1, 2012 by folium

[Steely Dan]

Or maybe the people of the area are just fighting multiculturalism.

Like it. But with near 200 dead in clashes back

in 2009 one wonders what the Han Chinese did

to bring this on, perhaps the Uighurs watched

how they eat.

P.S According to wikipedia The Uighur enrichment of their current homeland took place in 840AD from Mongolia following a famine and civil war.

Strewth, if by your reckoning 1172 years does not make an etnic group indigenous, that dooms most alleged indigenous populations, or is their religion the sticking factor?

Yep, Still waiting for those usurping Normans to leave Blighty. Of course religion isn't the sticking factor there is a complex mix of politics, cultural and ethnic tensions, indeed every such situation is unique and just because one religion seems to figure disproportionally amongst the trouble spots is nothing more than coincidence.

As an aside the wiki entry for the 2009 flare up notes how open to outside scrutiny the Chinese were, in contrast to Tibet, almost as if for once they had nothing to hide.

http://en.wikipedia...._Ürümqi_riots

P.S Also mentions the contrasting claims of who is indigenous, the Han Chinese one dating back to 200BC.

Edited July 1, 2012 by Steely Dan

[folium]

Or maybe the people of the area are just fighting multiculturalism.

Like it. But with near 200 dead in clashes back

in 2009 one wonders what the Han Chinese did

to bring this on, perhaps the Uighurs watched

how they eat.

P.S According to wikipedia The Uighur enrichment of their current homeland took place in 840AD from Mongolia following a famine and civil war.

Strewth, if by your reckoning 1172 years does not make an etnic group indigenous, that dooms most alleged indigenous populations, or is their religion the sticking factor?

Yep, Still waiting for those usurping Normans to leave Blighty. Of course religion isn't the sticking factor there is a complex mix of politics, cultural and ethnic tensions, indeed every such situation is unique and just because one religion seems to figure disproportionally amongst the trouble spots is nothing more than coincidence.

As an aside the wiki entry for the 2009 flare up notes how open to outside scrutiny the Chinese were, in contrast to Tibet, almost as if for once they had nothing to hide.

http://en.wikipedia...._ýrümqi_riots

Indeed every conflict is a unique complex mix of factors. At present there are 7 major conflicts (>1000 fatalities pa), 5 of which involve Muslims (Afghan, Somalia, Iraq, Sudan, Pakistan), though Mexico and

Colombia are far bloodier.

Minor conflicts (>100 deaths since inception) is 13 involving Muslims, 12 not.

So in terms of proportionality there is an overweight of conflicts involving Muslims, does this therefore make Muslims incapable of living peacefully? Would they be better off under authoritarian regimes? If you look at the 5 major conflict areas listed above involving Muslims all have seen major conflicts while under authoritarian rule (Afghan Soviet war; Somalia Ogaden war; Iraq war with Iran, Kurds, 1991 & 2003; Sudan. 2 civil wars, Darfur; Pakistan wars with India etc

Are Muslims just unruly people prone to warfare? Are the Uighurs in Xinjiang just typical?

Most conflicts represent attempts to address fundamental issues (social, ethnic, economic, political, and religious) that have not been addressed by more peaceful means. Are the Uighurs in conflict with Beijing because of their religion? Would there be no conflict in Xinjiang or any other trouble spots if thet were all transformed into atheists or Buddhists overnight?

So why the over representation of Muslims in conflicts today? Probably largely due to the fact that authoritarian regimes have stifled social and economic development and finally the dam has burst. 30 years ago Latin America, SE Asia, and Southern Africa were riven by conflict (pesky Christians and Buddhists?) Perhaps the recent conflicts in the Muslim world represent their time to address long suppressed issues and obstacles?

Bottom line there are no simple answers and anything that reduces world conflicts down to a black versus white scenario is sadly lacking in credibility.

[folium]

As an aside the wiki entry for the 2009 flare up notes how open to outside scrutiny the Chinese were, in contrast to Tibet, almost as if for once they had nothing to hide.

http://en.wikipedia...._ýrümqi_riots

You are being a little generous to your Beijing buddies, the official version of events in Xinjiang in 2009 is more than likely well doctored, see below: (the first link is an excellent overview and source for further links)

http://factsanddetails.com/china.php?itemid=1005&catid=5&subcatid=89

http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/new-testimonies-reinforce-call-china-investigate-xinjiang-riots-2010-07-02

http://www.hrw.org/news/2009/10/20/china-detainees-disappeared-after-xinjiang-protests

[Steely Dan]

Indeed every conflict is a unique complex mix of factors. At present there are 7 major conflicts (>1000 fatalities pa), 5 of which involve Muslims (Afghan, Somalia, Iraq, Sudan, Pakistan), though Mexico and

Colombia are far bloodier.

Minor conflicts (>100 deaths since inception) is 13 involving Muslims, 12 not.

So in terms of proportionality there is an overweight of conflicts involving Muslims, does this therefore make Muslims incapable of living peacefully? Would they be better off under authoritarian regimes? If you look at the 5 major conflict areas listed above involving Muslims all have seen major conflicts while under authoritarian rule (Afghan Soviet war; Somalia Ogaden war; Iraq war with Iran, Kurds, 1991 & 2003; Sudan. 2 civil wars, Darfur; Pakistan wars with India etc

Are Muslims just unruly people prone to warfare? Are the Uighurs in Xinjiang just typical?

Most conflicts represent attempts to address fundamental issues (social, ethnic, economic, political, and religious) that have not been addressed by more peaceful means. Are the Uighurs in conflict with Beijing because of their religion? Would there be no conflict in Xinjiang or any other trouble spots if thet were all transformed into atheists or Buddhists overnight?

So why the over representation of Muslims in conflicts today? Probably largely due to the fact that authoritarian regimes have stifled social and economic development and finally the dam has burst. 30 years ago Latin America, SE Asia, and Southern Africa were riven by conflict (pesky Christians and Buddhists?) Perhaps the recent conflicts in the Muslim world represent their time to address long suppressed issues and obstacles?

Bottom line there are no simple answers and anything that reduces world conflicts down to a black versus white scenario is sadly lacking in credibility.

Hmm, A lot of questions here. First of all lets distinguish between Muslims as individuals and Islam, specifically as a political ideology.

Of course all humans are born equal with equal potential and should ideally have equal rights to freedom of expression, security etc etc. As a side note any genetic differences between mankind are far less of a factor at determining success than cultural factors; that's to say our memes mutate and develop far quicker than our genes.

Now as you pointed out there is an over representation of Muslims in areas of violent conflict and the question is why? I don't think this has a genetic cause and cultures are diverse even within the Muslim world, so I suspect the smoking gun is something coming from within Islam, the common thread uniting all Muslims.

You are right in a way, each situation is unique. In the case of the Uighurs we have the familiar factor of turf war, that's to say who is indigenous. There are other factors too, the Han Chinese due largely to their culture tend to out-compete other groups. This is the case in Malaysia too and in Malaysia so called positive discrimination is used to try and bring the ethnic Malays to similar levels of development. The Uighurs are given preferential access to education and a dispensation regarding China's one child per family rule, so at least some attempt is being made to follow suit. That said, positive discrimination doesn't always work as intended and it can cause resentment amongst the rest of the population.

Whatever actually did spark the 2009 riots the wiki entry claimed near 200 deaths, mainly Han Chinese, which does support their claims to a degree of premeditation and is in marked contrast to how other groups have dealt with grievances, such as the peaceful resistance lead by Gandhi.

Finally we come to the problem of conflict escalation. Turf wars break out all over the world and are often localized, but the radical Islamist ideology leads to outsiders becoming involved based specifically on the premise of jihad. 16 were murdered in a church in Kenya in an echo of the Nigerian church attacks and there is evidence that Boko Haram and AQIM may be cooperating with each other. I suspect this is exactly the sort of thing the Chinese authorities feared might happen on their own turf and thus imposed a communications blackout. So to sum up democracy and autonomy are an ideal, but with places with high Muslim populations this is very often problematic due to the interpretation of Islam by some, not necessarily those native to the area either. No wonder Turkey developed so successfully under Ataturk with a secular constitution.

Edited July 2, 2012 by Steely Dan

[bendejo]

Is there nowhere on earth that doesn't benefit from cultural enrichment? Kudos to the Chinese cutting all communications from the 'troubled' region to the outside world, perhaps we should take a leaf out of their book.

Are you the president of Syria?

[bangkokrick]

The amusing pert to this Hijack was that the hijackers were unaware that there were up to 20 Policemen sat behind them on the plane. They had been to a seminar and were in civilian clothing. As soon as the hijackers made a move they were Knocked to the ground by the old bill. Great planning hey! I am in China right now.