[soccermom]

Yes, but they also said they had a bomb. History tells us that hijackings usually end without mass loss of life. They had no way of knowing the agenda here was any different -- until they heard about the WTC crashes and then they acted. Why piss off terrorists who have a bomb, when they are telling you that they're turning the plane around to land? Once they realized that this was a suicide mission, they did indeed act.

[habs4ever]

The bomb threat on board only confirms that, armed only with knives, these jerks will detonate the bombs. The bomb will go off.If they planned to escape, they would have needed guns.To have a "normal" hijacking inplies landing and negotiation and using hostages to shield themselves.It is the prospect of a firefight on the ground that turns the hostages into valuable pawns for the terrorists.Without the guns, there is no landing, no firefight, , no need to worry about a long trip in the air.What they were armed with determined the outcome, at least from my point of view.With guns, there was a chance for a peaceful resolution;without them, it was a suicide mission.Do you follow my reasoning here?

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

Yes, but they also said they had a bomb. History tells us that hijackings usually end without mass loss of life. They had no way of knowing the agenda here was any different.

Exactly. Before 9/11 had I been on a hijacked flight I would have sit tight. This suicide flight is absolutely unheard of. I don't think it will occur again. I think if I got on a plane tomorrow and it was hijacked, I'd assume the hijackers were going to crash it. I don't know of anyone who would have assumed this before today.