Steve Witkoff says Putin is "a humanitarian"

Steve Witkoff, President Trump's special envoy for everything, is a billionaire business friend but he has certainly learned the art of diplomacy as he goes about the world trying to stop wars on behalf of the White Office. Today he has met with Putin in St Petersburg and to his face told the Russian leader he thought he was "a humanitarian". This will have come as a surprise to the Ukrainian people who have died in their hundreds of thousands following the invasion by Russian troops of their sovereign country more than four and a half years ago. To be fair to Witkoff, the remark was in a different context. Putin had agreed, after an appeal from Trump, to free Stephen Hubbard, a 74-year-old American citizen who was jailed after supposedly being detained while fighting the Russians in Ukraine. Witkoff used the word humanitarian to thank Putin for releasing the prisoner who is now on his way home. Nevertheless, most people would hesitate to use such a word when addressing the man who ordered the invasion in February 2022 and is continuing to authorise his military to target Ukrainian cities every night with drones and ballistic missiles. The only hope is that the release of Stephen Hubbard might just possibly be a precursor to a general move to end the war finally. Praising Putin for his humanity, in that wider context, might end up being a clever move to keep Putin sweet and encourage him to look more favourably on a peace settlement.

Could the Three Big Leaders resolve Ukraine?

Putin and Trump and Xi all sitting together round a table to discuss the war in Ukraine, trade, nuclear weapons etc etc. It all sounds like global politics on a stick. But if the leaders of Russia, the US and China try and work out a way of stopping the war in Ukraine, it's not going to be pretty for the Kyiv government. In fact, it makes no sense at all. Ukraine was invaded by its neighbour, Russia, and so Ukraine must be at the negotiating table to end the war. It can't be any other way. But things have moved on in recent months. Trump seems to be sick of Ukraine, especially its leader, Volodymyr Zelensky, and it would suit him to impose a settlement, so that he can cross Ukraine off the list of foreign problems. Bizarrely, Trump has suggested that if he does meet Putin and Xi Zinping - probably in Beijing - he wouldn't need to talk about Ukraine because Russia wasn't doing very much at the moment! Has Trump not seen the news every day? Russia has been relentlessly bombing Ukraine's power plants every night and much of the country is in darkness. I think a trilateral summit between the US, Russia and China is not a bad thing. But if it goes ahead solely to talk about Ukraine, nothing will be achieved. Kyiv and Europe, too, have to be involved.

Be nice to Putin and he will do a deal!

There is a new strategy in the White House for dealing with President Putin. If you are nice to him, he will immediately back away from aggression in Ukraine and agree to a peace deal. That is the only conclusion one can reach following Donald Trump's decision to lift a whole bunch of sanctions against Russia. Trump said it was part of a process to move towards a settlement. In other words, offer a carrot instead of a stick to Putin. Putin's response? He ordered massive targeting of Ukraine's energy plants overnight, turning out the lights and turning off heating for hundreds of thousands of people. No, Mr Trump, giving a juicy carrot to Putin has the opposite effect. He will take the lifting of sanctions, thank you so much, but he has no intention of giving anything in return. Why should he? He's doing fine because he has Trump on his side. Putin only responds to strength. Before the Trump move, fixed without Congress approval, the view held by most experts, military and civilian, was that the only way Ukraine could force Russia to the negotiating table was to achieve such effective results on the battlefield that Putin would have no alternative but to seek a deal before he lost everything he had gained from the invasion of Ukraine. But the lifting of sanctions, even if temporary, gives Putin a new lease of life. He can now hammer away at Ukraine throughout the winter until, as he hopes, Kyiv begs for mercy. This is not going to happen. But it's hardly surprising Zelensky is so angry with his one-time friend in the White House.

Parisienne-style war

There may be no drones or ballistic missiles involved, but Paris today looks like it has been hit by a deadly enemy force. Buildings destroyed, shops on fire and looted, streets littered with the detritus of violent protests. Everyone loves Paris. Just walking on the pavements and stopping for a coffee or baguette and watching people go by. It's a wonderful city. But it is being destroyed by thousands of protestors who are not satisfied with just peaceful demonstrations against their government. They have to destroy and loot and put fear into the city streets. There is a long history of violent protest in Paris and other French cities. But what is going on right now throughout France is a terrible indictment of how governments have failed young people who go to schools that are overcrowded and under-funded, they cannot get jobs and face futures without hope of fulflling dreams. This is the case pretty much here in the UK as well, but so far - and please don't let it happen - there are no riots. But it could happen. Young people need to have hope of a better future. In France, it seems hope has died. But violence of any kind, especially as witnessed in French cities, is never justified or excusable.

Katie Zacharia outed by the media

Becoming press secretary to President Donald Trump is hard enough but to accept that job when you know you have skeletons in the cupboard which will get out is like being a matador facing a ferocious bull without his muleta - the red cloak he swings in the raging animal's path to distract him. Katie Zacharia arrived in front of the White House press corps on her first day as Trump's press secretary without any form of protection. In fact, from the moment she opened her mouth, you knew she was going to be in serious trouble with the baying press corps. It was brutal to watch. She claimed to be a lawyer but it turned out she wasn't. She had failed her bar exam - in China - and althougb she has a law degree she has no other credential that allow her to be described as a practising attorney. Attorney, she ain't. That and the fact she couldn't string words together properly and only managed to answer three questions. Then, lto ater, she appeared on Fox News before the arch interrogator, Sean Hannity, and fell into a deep hole. Again, it was brutal. Trump showed he has a kind side to him because he literally invited her to step down if she wasn't happy. So, she did, after just five days in the post. The lesson? Never take on the media unless you are really sure of yourself and totally sure your credentials for the job will stand up to scrutiny.

Trump finds Putin easier than Zelensky

I really do think Volodymyr Zelensky has the most difficult job in the world, bar none. He has to keep Donald Trump sweet while the US president is constantly kicking him in the nether regions. He has now almost criticised Trump for backing Putin after the extraordinary decision to buy Russian diesel to make up for shortages in America. But he can't come out and slam Trump because Ukraine relies on the US to provide intelligence and missile interceptors to stay alive. Now Trump has said that he finds Putin much easier to deal with than Zelensky. But that's hardly surprising. When he deals with Putin he talks to him like a fellow leader on the world stage and asks him for favours - ie the diesel deal. When he talks to Zelensky, he has to deal with a stubborn leader who wants to save his country from extinction and Trump finds that irritating. He wants a clear-cut deal to end the war. Putin gets what he wants, territorially, and Ukraine gets some sort of vague security arrangement with the US. Meanwhile, Trump is outraged that Ukraine has restarted hitting Russian oil installations but says nothing about Putin doing exactly the same to Ukraine's energy plants. All Zelensky can do is rush around Europe to make sure the Europeans are still on side. It's deja vue every month. This war is just not going to end.

Ceasefires come and go or don't even start

The word "ceasefire" has lost its meaning. It used to mean that an agreement had been made between two warring sides to stop shooting and fighting and bring at least some calm to those suffering in the violence. Now, it's a just a catchword which means very little. Donald Trump declared that he had negotiated a sort of ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia by persuading both parties to stop attacking each other's oil and gas facilities. But clearly there was nothing in writing because Russia not only didn't respond, at least publicly, it then carried on launching strikes on Ukraine's energy plants. Ukraine said it would comply with Trump's ceasefire call, but after being hammered by Russian drones and missiles, realised the ceasefire had no substance. Zelensky has now gone back to targeting Russian energy facilities. So much for Trump's intervention. It amounted to nothing. Now I see the Kremlin is complaining that Ukraine is not adhering to the Trump ceasefire. It's beyond belief, the hypocrisy of those in charge in Moscow. Well, Putin, that is. As for the bizarre slowing down of the Starlink satellite system, it seems that is now up and running once more. But it has shown Zelensky that Trump can turn off the tap whenever he wants. Putin will always be the one to benefit.

Why is satellite coverage over Ukraine being cut?

In a war of drones and missiles nothing is more important than having effective satellite coverage to warn of incoming strikes and providing accurate grid references for offensive missions. Ukraine relies on Elon Musk's Starlink satellites to protect the country from Putin's missiles and drones and to strike at Russian targets way over the border. Now, for reasons that can only be assumed are political, this vital service is being cut back. Ukrainian lives are being lost as a result. Is this Washington doing its best to bring down Zelensky and to end the war, in Russia's favour? If so, it is a cruel and vindictive way of trying to force a conclusion to this terrible war. The US-led coalition vowed from the beginning to do all it could to help Ukraine defend itself against Russia's invasion. But now that pledge looks shakier than ever. Without US support, Ukraine will lose. Europe can try to fill the gap left by the US, but it will never be able to provide the sort of satellite intelligence Ukraine needs to survive. This is a shocking development.

Europe despairs over Trump-Putin diesel deal

Before Donald Trump arrived back in the White House, President Joe Biden could be relied on to support Ukraine all the way, with money, intelligence and weapons - and heavy sanctions agains Russia, in particular banning purchases of Russian oil and natural gas. Biden was too cautious in helping Kyiv with weapons, delaying decisions over sending longer-range missiles and failing to uspply enough anti-missile interceptors. But Biden and the coalition he put together could never be described as kowtowing to Putin. President Zelensky begged for quicker supplies of weapons from the US and coalition countries, but, basically, he always knew everyone in the west backed him. Now, that has all changed. Donald Trump has, bizarrely, done a deal with Putin, lifting sanctions to allow for the US to buy Russian diesel, to the tune of about $4 billion, because of the worldwide shortage of diesel, caused, not by Russia as such but by the US war against Iran. Putin must think he has won the lottery. Four billion dollars will go into the Russian economy, thank you very much, all or most of which will no doubt be spent on building more weapons to hit Ukraine. No wonder European leaders are grinding their teeth. Trump is the leader of the western alliance but is acting against everyone's interests, except Putin's. There is nothing Europe can do but wail and moan, and. as for poor old Zelensky, he has been stabbed in the back by what used to be his main ally.

Why Trump is hesitating over returning to bombing Iran

Ever since the bombing phase of Operation Epic Fury ended, President Trump has been threatening to launch a new round of strikes to “annihilate” Iran. His secretary of war has assembled an even bigger armada in the region, including three carrier strike groups, ready to carry out his commander-in-chief’s orders. However, it seems the president is struggling to make up his mind whether a return to bombing would be counter-productive. He has already stated that a second phase of bombing, if he gives the go ahead, will not be until after the congressional midterm elections on November 3. The reasons for his hesitancy are obvious: Iranian retaliatory action caused billions of dollars of damage to US bases in the region and to Gulf state energy plants, destroyed more than 80 American warplanes, forced the US military to use up large stocks of anti-missile interceptors, and persuaded the Pentagon to withdraw 12 long-range B-1 Lancer bombers from RAF Fairford, for fear they were vulnerable to a suspected Iranian plot to attack the base with a swarm of drones. The 81 US aircraft damaged or destroyed, many of them targeted by the IRGC with the assistance of pinpoint satellite intelligence from China and Russia, included 12 F-15 Strike Eagles, nine of them as a result of Iranian fire, two A-10 Thunderbolt ground-attack planes, both hit by IRGC strikes, seven HC-135 Stratotanker air-refuelers, five of them struck in an Iranian attack on an airbase in Saudi Arabia, one E-3 Sentry airborne early-warning aircraft, destroyed on the ground by a direct hit, and 45 MQ-9 Reaper surveillance drones, each costing about $34 million. With the war against Iran having already cost the US more than $43 billion - $1 billion a day at the height of Operation Epic Fury launched on February 28 – Trump and Pete Hegseth, his “warrior” war secretary, are having to calculate whether a return to bombing will have a better chance of dragging the Iranian top brass to the negotiating table for a settlement which the White House could claim as a victory. The omens are not favourable. Despite a total US naval blockade of Iran’s oil exporting ports, crippling the country’s economy, much of the damage caused to Iranian missile and drone launchers and production plants during five months of bombing has been repaired. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has said it is ready to strike back if US bombing is resumed. Meanwhile, the IRGC has not stopped targeting shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, demonstrating its determination to threaten the safe passage of oil tankers through the chokepoint, whether Trump bombs again or not. The cost of repairing the targeted bases and replacing the destroyed aircraft will run into billions of dollars, although the Pentagon has not given estimates. In new revised casualty figures, the Pentagon has said 21 service members have so far been killed and 865 wounded. “The damage to bases, munitions shortfalls, especially air and missile defence interceptors, as well as the aircraft losses, are all weighing on the decision-makers, although those concerns would not necessarily be dispositive [the deciding factor],” a former senior US defence official said. “Much will depend on how far the current Iranian escalation in the Gulf and Strait of Hormuz extends - if for instance a US ship was hit with significant casualties - but these factors as well as political calculations will weigh heavily. “The war is extremely unpopular. It started with a low-level of support and Trump has never really made the case for it publicly,” the former official said. The other crucial factor relates to the future of RAF Fairford and other US bases in Europe. The Pentagon is currently engaged in a “Europe force posture” review. The conclusions, expected in December, are likely to result in an expanded reduction in the US military footprint throughout Europe. The aim of the review is for Europe to shoulder the burden of conventional military capabilities, leaving the US to provide the nuclear umbrella. The 12 B-1 bombers were withdrawn from RAF Fairford because the aircraft were sitting ducks at the base, parked out in the open. The US Air Force has estimated it would cost $4.2 billion to upgrade Fairford and the two other bases used by the US in the UK – RAF Lakenheath and RAF Mildenhall – including protecting aircraft from drone and missile attack, and building storage facilities for air-launched nuclear bombs. Will the posture review cast doubt on the merits of restructuring RAF Fairford? Will the B-1, B-52 and B-2 bombers, regular visitors, return to the UK? “We will not discuss specific force protection measures but the department will continue to assess the threat environment surrounding our installations and take appropriate actions to protect our people, our platforms and the bases where our forces operate from,” a US war department official told The Times. A US defence source said the bombers might return to RAF Fairford if the security needs demanded it. But the source acknowledged that much would depend on the force posture review’s findings.The former senior US defence official, however, said the withdrawal of the B-1s served a variety of purposes:“a vote of no confidence in force protection there, and raising the possibility of pulling back from the traditional US forward presence in Europe”. “The destruction of bases in the Middle East, terrorist threats, and the refusal by some Nato allies for overflight permission are serving the interests of those in the administration who favour an ‘America First’ emphasis on western hemispheric defence at the expense of maintaining a strong conventional deterrent as part of America's commitments to treaty allies,” the former official said. “They are all too happy to say – ‘we won't rebuild those bases in the Gulf and our aircraft aren't safe in Europe’,” he said.

Should Trump bomb the Houthis?

The Houthis represent a major major threat to the security of Saudi Arabia. The massive attack on the main Saudi international airport in Riyadh, killing 12 and wounding more than 300, and the follow-up strike today, is evidence enough that the Houthis have decided to escalate the conflict with the royal kingdom. Should Donald Trump join with his friend, Mohammed bin Salman, and offer to bomb the Houthis? If at all possible he should refrain from joining in, if only because it would amount to a huge expansion of the war the US is already dealing with in Iran. The Houthis have shown in the past that they are quite clever in handling Trump. When the US bombed Houthi targets last year, the Houthis and the White House agreed to a ceasefire and when bin Salman pleaded with Trump to return to bombing the Houthis a few weeks ago, Trump said no. But now, after the huge attack on the airport, it might be trickier for Trump to put off his Saudi pal. It would be far better, however, if Trump put his top national security team players to work to get a peace settlement. The Houthis are currently effectively at war with Saudi Arabia and are stopping Saudi oil tankers from going down the Red Sea. The combination of this "war" and the war against Iran has been a total disaster for the energy market and for every single man, woman and child on the planet. Get diplomacy going!

Should the execution of Fort Hood gunman be livestreamed?

Executions of criminals rarely receive such publicity. But two recent cases have raised new issues over the use of capital punishment in the US justice system. Christa Pike, aged 50, had been on death row for thirty years for killing a 17-year-old girl in 1995 and she should have been executed by lethal injection on September 30 at a prison in the state of Tennessee. However, after two attempts, she was still alive and is now in hospital recovering. Her lawyers are saying that since the state failed to end her life, she should be spared and kept in prison instead of facing yet another attempt at executing her. For those who support capital punishment – I am not one of them – there may well be a case for completing the punishment approved by the courts, trying a different method of execution. No doubt, the family of the girl she murdered would like to see the death penalty efficiently carried out. However, there must also be an argument that says: the state had its chance to carry out the death sentence and failed, and that it would be inhumane to have a third attempt at some time in the future. What if it failed again? It’s an issue that may have to be resolved by the courts. But it should also raise questions in the state of Tennessee and in other states where the death penalty is part of the legal system, about whether capital punishment is a right and proper form of justice in a modern democracy. The other case raises issues of a different kind. Pete Hegseth, the war secretary, has announced that he plans to livestream the execution by firing squad of the former army major, Nidal Hasan ,who was convicted of shooting dead thirteen unarmed soldiers at the Fort Hood military base in 2009. ”People need to understand that there are serious consequences for these types of things,” Hegseth said. Hasan is due to face a firing squad on December 3. It would be the first public execution in the US for about a hundred years. The announcement has provoked strong opposition from both Republicans and Democrats. It is easy to see why. The idea of livestreaming an execution so that members of the public can watch a man being shot dead is both gruesome and repulsive. There is enough violence on television without having a state-sponsored video of a death by shooting carried out on behalf of the Department of War (or Defence as it used to be called). The public livestreaming has apparently been supported by the president. But in the seven weeks before the execution is due to take place, one hopes that the decision made by the secretary of war will be overturned. It would be a public spectacle no one in their right mind would want to watch.

The message for Iran after the withdrawal of bombers from RAF Fairford

Whichever way you look at it, the decision by the Pentagon to pull out every B1 bomber from RAF Fairford was extraordinary. It sent a message of panic all the way to Tehran. However good the intelligence was that led to the decision, it smacks of retreat, and Tehran will want to exploit the apparent vulnerability of US aircraft stationed overseas. Perhaps the most extraordinary thing is that these hugely expensive long-range bombers were just sitting out in the open at Fairford. Why on earth are there not bomb-hardened shelters for every bomber? It's the same for the mighty B-52s and the B-2 stealth bombers when they fly into Fairford. They sit there like come-and-get-me targets. Hardened shelters are very expensive to build, but rather than spend the money to keep them safe, the bombers are flown home to the safety of the United States. Donald Trump has made little of it, saying it was better to be cautious. But to Tehran it will have been seen as a victory. The mighty superpower withdrawing its bombers for fear of an Iranian plot to launch drones at them. Having already suffered billions of dollars of damage at multiple bases in the Middle East as a result of Iranian attacks by ballistic and cruise missiles and drones, the overal picture is not good vis a vis Washington's confrontation with Iran. Ok, the B1 bombers will be in the safety of the US to fight another day but the empty spaces at RAF Fairford are a lasting reminder that Tehran made America look frightened.

Will Trump be impeached if Democrats win the House?

I think it's almost inevitable that if the Democrats win the House of Representatives in the midterm elections in November, Donald Trump will be facing impeachment. There is already a lot of chit-chat about it in Washington. That doesn't mean Trumnp will be ousted because the Senate is likely to remain in Republican majority hands and will overrule all attempts to get rid of the president. We've been here before. But it does mean that the Democrats will give Trump a really hard time, and there will be headlines which even he won't be able to claim are fake news. With impeachment procedures underway, in the event of a Democratic win in November, it will also electrify the atmosphere in Washington. Trump will be under constant media pressure, even more than he is at the moment. On the other hand, if the Democrats go around telling everyone they are going to try and impeach the president if they win the House, then it might just dissuade some doubting voters amongst Republicans to stick with Trump after all. No one really enjoys impeachment proceedings. They disrupt normal life and make the US look bad in the eyes of the rest of the world. It will also make Trump steeming mad and he would try and take revenge somehow on leading Democrats pushing for his downfall. If the Democrats fail to win the House, it might just be because too many of them have been talking too much about impeaching Trump rather than offering new legislation to help people cope with the rising cost of living.

A plague on all these dangerous virus laboratories

How unsurprising that now it's Russia which has let loose a potentially mass-killing virus to alarm the world yet again. First, it was a lab in Wuhan in China which appears to have released, in error, the Covid-19 virus in 2019 which spread around the world, killing millions of people, ruining countless lives and giving millions of others life-changing illnesses. China has always denied it was the Wuhan laboratory which leaked Covid but everyone else believes otherwise. Now Russia is trying to deny any problem after a woman died after inhaling pneumonic plague which poured out of a glass test tube she dropped on a laboratory floor in Siberia. Are we about to face another pandemic with everyone wearing masks? It's deja vue all over again! The US which has offered to help Russia, is trying to calm things by saying there is no evidence yet pf mass spreading of the virus, and as Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, said, there are very few flights between Russia and the US or to Europe for that matter. But here's a thing. The worst scenario would be if the plague virus spreads in Russia, Russian troops serving in Ukraine get it and spread it, and then Europeans and Americans who constantly go in and out of Ukraine helping the Kyiv government, get infected and when they return home they apread it, and so on. This is alarmist. But this is what happened with Covid, when tens of thousands of Chinese, including from Wuhan, visited friends and relations in Europe to celebrate the Chinese New Year, and Covid-19 took hold everywhere. With the Covid pandemic in mind, let us hope the Russian authorities are sufficiently astute to clamp everything down and stop the plague from spreading anywhere. The omens are not good.

Mystery deepens as Trump orders all bombers home from UK base

The sudden departure of all 12 of the US Air Force's B1-B bombers based at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire is the latest development in one of the most bizarre mysteries of recent times. While the police are still investigating six men, one Iranian-born, allegedly connected to a bomb plot against RAF Fairford, the US has taken fright and ordered every bomber to fly home. Can there really be intelligence that Iran was planning to hit the base and destroy the bombers? What with? Drones? It all seems far-fetched but there has to be something the spooks have uncovered to make the US act in such an extraordinary way. RAF Fairford is already heavily guarded and protected. It's a pretty humiliating admission if the US military and British police cannot keep this base safe from terrorists. No one is telling us what this is about, so it has given rise to mass speculation. The arrested "plotters" were all bailed. So were they just doing a dry run? The exit of the 12 bombers, all of which had previously been used to launch strikes on targets in Iran - so much cheaper and quicker than having to fly all the way from bases in the US - suggests that a real terrorist attack was imminent. I can understand the US wanting to make sure none of the B1s are damaged in any way but flying them all off back to America seems extreme to say the least. It doesn't say much for America's confidence in the British authorities to keep these vital warmaking assets safe.

How can the Iranian economy survive?

Even the top security official in Iran has now admitted that times are tough. The continuing US naval blockade which stops all oil exports, and the heavy sanctions are taking their toll on the Iranian economy. Life for the Iranian people is really bad. The New York Times reports that many people in important jobs like nursing and teaching are giving up because they earn so little or are not paid at all. I assume they mean they are taking more menial jobs which pay netter. But how long can Iran carry on without imploding? This is what Donald Trump is counting on. He wants Iran to die economically, so he can then dictate the terms of surrender.So far, the regime in Tehran has hung on, hoping that the midterm elections in the US will be so bad for Trump and the Republican party that it will give Iran leverage to dictate their own terms for a settlement. The reality is that the "war" - for xhe moment without actual bombing - will just grind on with neither side winning or losing. But if the economy in Iran is really that bad, then there may come a time when the whole population cries out and street protests return. Would the regime dare to kill the protesters again like they did before the US launched its war? I fear for the poor Iranian people.

Sacked Royal Navy chief loses his knighthood. Oh come on!

I can't write Admiral Sir Ben Key anymore because the former head of the Royal Navy who was sacked last year for having an affair with a subordinate, has had his knighthood removed. Plus his CBE and all his medals. Are we really in the 21st century? By all accounts the former admiral served as the First Sea Lord with distinction, vision and commitment. He was also liked and was fair. But he had an affair with a woman of lesser rank - well, obviously every woman in the Royal Navy is of lesser rank because he was the top admiral - and he gets punished not once but three times. Loss of job, loss of medals and honours, loss of knighthood. This seems to me to be cruel and way over the top, especially when you see other public figures who have not served the nation with distinction retaining their knighthoods. I will name no names. Of course, the armed services have rigid conduct standards, and this is right and proper, but not only have the powers-that-be kicked Mr Key out of the Navy, they have then kicked him again and again, removing all the honours and medals which for very good reasons were awarded to reflect his achievements in the service of his country. Had he shoplifted or robbed a bank, the removal of his knighthood would be seen as fully justified. In his case, he made a personal mistake. The treatment he has received has been brutal, although a little mercy was shown because he has been allowed to keep his pension.

Incredible bravery displayed on the Tel Aviv-bound plane

If the Indian pilot, wounded and losing consciousness, had not managed to flip the key to open the cockpit door to the passenger plane hurtling towards the ground, the story would have been very different. This amazing guy must have been in pain and was bleeding profusely, yet he knew he had to get that door open. Under strict rules, all cockpit doors on every commercial airliner have to be locked to prevent any passenger with murder intent or terrorism or suicide in mind from gaining entry and attacking the pilot and co-pilot. But, in this case, the door had to be unlocked to stop a total disaster. The Indian pilot is, without question, a hero, and the passengers who overwhelmed the co-pilot who had attacked his colleague are also heroes, brave beyond comprehension. It is yet another example of the extraordinary courage that lies dormant in human beings which blasts out when required to resolve a crisis of unprecedented proportions. Nothing can be worse than being stuck in a plane which is hurtling to the ground while the pilots are incapacitated. Also it nwas amazing that there were two other pilots on board who were due to take the plane back after it had landed in Tel Aviv. So they stepped forward and took over the controls. It was truly a miracle for everyone on board. Such a change from all the misery around the world.