It really is the captains decision... It goes without saying that you divert immediately if there might be a direct thread (as seems to have been the case here), both to avoid any danger and also in order to calm down other passengers.

Fun fact - in my experience this happens way more often in C and F than in Y, probably due to the free booze...

With me, it was booze (not me of course :) ). One was in C and one was in Y, but they were both a few years ago, so I don't recall which one landed in EWR and which one landed at the first airport. When we landed, someone wanted to get off (was continuing to YYZ). Besides for the fact that it wasn't allowed and would be really annoying for everyone (including her), the FAs (and then others, including me,) tried explaining that it would be harder to get to YYZ from who-know's-where-airport than from EWR. She never believed us and was cursing all the way at customs in EWR. I smiled on my way to Global Entry :)

A German paper, C'mon, you don't have an English or Israeli sourced paper?

That's according to this one and only article. The plethora of articles I read in the Hebrew and English press never mention the guy claiming to have those things and never mentioned skymarshalls restraining the guy.

I don't believe EL AL is a safe airline anymore and I am not the only one who believes that based on strong circumstantial evidence. Obviously, you believe otherwise and seem to have a personal agenda in proving that what's going on with EL AL is normal. Do you work for the company? Where did you get your purported security expertise you touted earlier?

If you had actually read the article I linked to, you would have seen that it is the only source that bothered to contact the Austrian foreign ministry a few days after the incident , as the guy was an Austrian citizen, and to report the follow-up story that is a bit more complex than simply repeating what all news agencies published about the incident.

Nope.
http://mobile.mako.co.il/news-israel...48a6641004.htm

Its even in the headline, bro. ;)

Nope.

elal767, the Mako article doesn't mention a bomb (unless I missed it). But it does say that there was security on board, and that the pilot felt he had no choice but to land to hand the passenger over to the police. Sounds like a reasonable decision

Then that begs the question, if there was adequate security on board, why couldn't the plane just fly another hour or so to MUC with the passenger restrained rather than make a costly and inconvenient unscheduled landing?

Given EL AL's unique security situation and needs, making an unscheduled landing can pose its own additional security risks.

Yep, the point I was trying to make is,that is says מאבטח השתלט עליו in the headline, and that it is therefore nonsense to try and claim there was no security on board.

Thank You for providing an article which expressly stated (in the headline) there was security on board this flight. The initial articles I read of this incident never mentioned that.

In any event, for the record, I never made an affirmative statement of fact whether there was or was not security on board this flight. If you review the posting history of this thread, I asked, pondered, and gave my opinion on the topic (which is different than making an affirmative statement of fact) based on the news articles I read and this unusual situation of an EL AL plane making an unscheduled landing over a unruly passenger, something I believe is a first for this airline in several decades.

Understood. At that point, it's obviously pilot's call (as has been evidenced above) to that. Again, I'm not sure why on UA one pilot landed immediately (really 45 minutes later or so) and one continued on to EWR, but the pilot is obviously aware of more than we are. I'm just glad that I'm safe and got to my destination. Attacking LY for this but refusing to attack every other airline in the world that follows the same protocols smells quite fishy

The term "attacking" EL AL for this is too harsh. I was simply pondering whether they had security on board, and if so, why couldn't security have handled the situation so that the plane could have flown an extra hour or so to its final destination without making a costly and inconvenient diversion.

What's fishy is when a company touts its reputation as the safest airline in the world and yet, reality is different. There is no airline in the world that has the mystique of security EL AL does and which uses it for product differentiation so pervasively. Consequently, if EL AL is no different than anyone else in handling unruly passengers, then the mystique of security is quite frankly just that.

And to what should really close this topic, all this argument has been pointless (shocker). If you read the initial article posted by the OP, you'll see a few important points:

1. The pilot chose to land based on aviation protocol (implying his hands were tied)
2. The passenger was screaming "Terrorists" and "We're all going to die"

Based on that last comment, I see 2 reasons to land immediately. One is that you don't joke around with terrorist threats. Two is that he was actively scaring other pax, so it's important that you get him away to calm down the rest of the flight.

(BTW, article claims he has German citizenship. A German paper posting the article makes complete sense. Besides for the fact that the flight was headed towards Germany...)

Thats fine. You can see things that way. However, I see things differently. I believe EL AL security should have restrained this unarmed drunken passenger and the flight should have continued to MUC uninterrupted. I am confident this is not the first time EL AL had unruly pax causing disturbances of this sort however, I believe, this is the first time in decades that an EL AL flight diverted for such a purpose even though the final destination was a mere hour or so away.

More than any airline in the world, EL AL has experience in dealing with security threats. When taking into account the range of security threats EL AL is faced with, this incident of a drunken unarmed passenger causing a commotion in the cabin is one which should not have caused a flight to make an unscheduled landing given the alleged security expertise of this airline.

Agreed, however an article written in the German language in a predominantly English and Hebrew speaking forum offered as proof of an assertion when its safe to presume most aren't fluent in German is not.

Nope.
http://www.iol.co.za/news/world/el-a...9#.U5gj0svfqAg

Took about 5 seconds to search for "El Al unruly" on Google and pull this up. But feel free to keep on making an argument based on false assumptions.
Agreed, however, that's why I summed it up in a few words, and Google Translate is your friend :)

The first page of that search only showed one incident, back in 2000, and another one linked to another thread on this forum about those unruly children breaking an a/c door a few weeks ago while the a/c was still on the ground.

Google translate, quite frankly, is very much unreliable as I found it does a poor job translating syntax, amongst other things.

This thread is locked pending moderator review.