Russian Law Allows Downing Hijacked Planes

Breitbart ^ | 3-6-06

[Babu]

President Vladimir Putin signed a measure into law Monday that allows the Russian military to shoot down hijacked planes, the latest in a series of bills passed following terrorist attacks.

The bill, which was approved earlier by both houses of Russia's parliament, authorizes the shooting down of hijacked planes if it appears possible that terrorists may intend to attack key facilities or populated areas.

The bill also allows the military to attack ships being used in a terrorist act. Shooting the planes or ships would be permitted even if hostages were on board.

The legislation is the latest legal measure to be passed in response to terrorist attacks in Russia in recent years. One of the most sweeping measures pushed by the Kremlin in the wake of the 2004 Beslan school hostage seizure radically changed how local legislative elections are held across the country.

Militants demanding that Russian troops withdraw from the nearby republic of Chechnya seized the school in Beslan, and more than half of the 331 people killed were children. Most died in the climactic conclusion to the siege, when explosions tore through the school and security forces stormed the building.

The anti-terrorism law passed Monday also permits negotiations with terrorists who have taken hostages but bars consideration of their political demands, and calls for armed forces to use Russia-based weaponry against terrorists operating outside its borders.

The bill also permits law-enforcement officials to monitor telephone calls and take control of electronic communications in the area of a terrorist attack.

[edpc]

Apparently, you don't even need to be a hijacked plane. Anyone recall KAL 007?

[Izzy Dunne]

allows the Russian military to shoot down hijacked planes,

I wonder if they have to be Russian planes, or above Russian soil, or is this a freelance gun-for-hire scheme?

[Babu]

Apparently, you don't even need to be a hijacked plane. Anyone recall KAL 007?

Yes, I remember that now. If I recall, they explained that as a "Wups, it sure looked like a military plane!", didn't they?

[vabeachrepub]

I recall that flight. I also recall getting sickened almost as much by the Left's reaction to it as much as the event itself - "well Reagan must have had some sort of surveillance or spying going on from that plane - why would the Russians just shoot down an innocent plane". Their inability to call evil evil was disgusting and their attempt to turn the tables and claim that it was in fact the defenders of freedom who were responsible was reprehensible.

[edpc]

They mistook it for an RC-135 that had been monitoring their eastern bases. Even at night, it's hard not to tell the difference between a KC/RC-135 and the unmistakeable 747 silloutte.

[Brilliant]

Our law allows that too.

[ops33]

There are 135 aircraft that have a "hump" on the top of them that makes them look like a B-747.

[edpc]

Maybe. However, the RC-135 is not one of them.

[Babu]

Aviation Ping?

[Paleo Conservative]

If you want on or off my aerospace ping list, please contact me by Freep mail.

[lizol]

Well, this Mig 29 is a German one.

Today probably is flying with Polish insignia (as Germans gave their Mig 29's to Polish Air Forces).

[COEXERJ145]

I prefer the SU-37 to the MIG-29. :-)

[Little Ray]

Only morons (like the Germans) would allow this be governed by "law." It is an issue for the military command authority to decide on an incident by incident basis, not the lawyers and the courts.

We need to shoot any and all lawyers that get involved in the military operation - they are apparently NOT on our side.

[dogger]

As someone who has over 2500 hours of flight time on the RC-135, much of it on the area in question, I can tell you unequivocally that you are wrong.

If you bother to review the transcripts of cockpit communications made available to the United Nations and quoted extensively in open sources like Aviation Week you'll find that the shoot down was deliberate, premeditated, and that there was no confusion by either the pilot or the ground controller over what type of aircraft it was.

Do the research, the facts are the facts despite being spun later by the Soviets and the U.S. media.

It was cold blooded murder of innocent civilians and the Soviets knew it at the time they pulled the trigger.

[Babu]

It was cold blooded murder of innocent civilians and the Soviets knew it at the time they pulled the trigger.

Then what was their likely motive?

[edpc]

What, exactly am I wrong about? I said that even at night, it's hard to mistake the two aircraft. I have no question they knew the plane they were shooting was not the survelliance aircraft.

[dogger]

You're right. It's something that I was close too and psssionate about but I was wrong to leap on you. Sorry

[dogger]

Motive? You are thinking that the Soviets acted in the same manner as U.S. armed forces - not so!

The motive appears to have been the simple idea of the commanding officer of the air defense zone wanting to keep his warm cushy job instead of going to the gulag. Once the order was passed the regiment couldn't disobey. If everything I've seen & read is correct the job of actually pulling the trigger was passed to the regimental political officer - someone who could be absolutely relied on and NOT a line pilot.

[edpc]

That's fine. In post 9, I disputed what ops33 had said one post earlier. If anything, you may have a beef with the SMSgt.