Bomb Threat Prompts Plane Evacuation At US Airport, No Explosives Found
Last Updated:
The incident took place on the Allegiant Airways Flight 2006, heading from the St Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport to Cincinnati, Ohio.
A bomb threat note found on Friday on a plane at a Florida airport prompted the evacuation of the aircraft and a temporary closure but no explosives were found, officials said.
A flight attendant on Allegiant Airways Flight 2006, heading from the St Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport to Cincinnati, Ohio, found the note about a bomb threat on a bathroom door, Pinellas County Sheriff's Office officials said. The pilot then stopped the plane and evacuated passengers on the tarmac.
Deputies were investigating the bomb threat, and no injuries were reported, officials said.
The threat came as recent polling by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows that fewer Americans report feeling safe about flying this year.
First Published:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
5 days ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Breaking the Engagement' Review: The China-U.S. Divorce
'There is no realistic prospect or false nirvana of returning to an amicable and cooperative bilateral relationship,' David Shambaugh writes in 'Breaking the Engagement: How China Won and Lost America.' Few American scholars have a better understanding of China than Mr. Shambaugh. So when the George Washington University professor tells us that the official U.S. strategy of engagement with Beijing is dead—'D-E-A-D'—we had better pay attention. This isn't only a question of state policy. The American people have had enough of China, too. Mr. Shambaugh points to a recent Pew survey, which found that eight out of 10 Americans hold 'unfavorable' views of China, with 42% describing it as an 'enemy.' Only 6% see it as a 'partner.' Certainly, Secretary of State Marco Rubio's announcement that the U.S. would revoke the visas of many Chinese students who are already in this country—and make it much harder for future Chinese students to enroll at American universities—lays bare the fact that the U.S.-China relationship is at a nadir. It would not be overly shrill to say that in many of these cases we're educating the enemy. Mr. Shambaugh, who describes himself as a 'disillusioned former engager,' would agree. (His disillusion, it should be noted, began when the Chinese government banned him from Beijing's many universities and think tanks after he published a long essay in this newspaper in 2015, titled 'The Coming Chinese Crackup.' It took a personal slight to make the scales fall from his eyes, but fall they did.) A China-hawk ever since, Mr. Shambaugh sets out to explain how Washington and Beijing have reached the lowest ebb in their relations since Richard Nixon's 'breakthrough' in 1972. The Sino-American relationship, while always demanding vigilance, has rarely been so nakedly hostile. Mr. Shambaugh's book covers a 75-year period, from 1949—when the Chinese Communists took control of the country—to the second election of Donald Trump in 2024. Although the relationship fluctuated during that time between 'amity' and 'enmity,' as the author puts it, the American desire for engagement was not merely constant but 'axiomatic.' This policy of nonhostility was bipartisan in the U.S. Congress, even as some Democrats chafed at a glossing over by Washington of Chinese human-rights abuses and some Republicans 'questioned the long-term wisdom' of strengthening China through trade and transfers of technology. The roots of America's decadeslong policy of engagement with China lie, says Mr. Shambaugh, in its two-centuries-old 'missionary complex' to change China. America not only sought to trade with China starting in the late 18th century but to 'mold and shape it' in other ways: 'religiously, intellectually, socially, economically, and politically.' The fluctuations in bilateral relations have resulted from the dialectic between 'American paternalism vs. Chinese nationalism.' To put matters at their plainest: We like the Chinese when they're inclined to be more like us, 'conforming to American expectations of liberal development.' But one man can make a tectonic difference. American paternalism prevailed—whether genuinely or as a result of the Chinese faking conformity to extract material advantage—until 2012-13 and the ascent to power of Xi Jinping, the most hardline nationalist leader China has had since Mao Zedong. Until then, China had needed America in what was still a unipolar world, so Beijing was largely vested in playing down discord. The 1989 Tiananmen massacre and the 2008-09 financial crisis—which sparked Chinese disillusion with American economic management—were rare blips in the pre-Xi age, when China was led by less Manichean men: Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao. Mr. Trump, too, has played a decisive role in altering the course of this relationship. His election in 2016 saw growing American hostility toward China grafted atop Mr. Xi's mercantilist, irredentist jingoism. This hard line on China, Mr. Shambaugh observes, was continued by the Biden administration, albeit with differences in nuance and rhetoric. With the second Trump administration, we have Mr. Rubio driving important elements of America's China policy. 'He may be,' writes Mr. Shambaugh—whose book went to press before Mr. Rubio's elevation at State in January—'the single most knowledgeable Member of Congress about China,' who has been 'outspoken and unafraid to take the Xi Jinping regime to task for a variety of its malign actions.' Given our loss of global predominance and primacy—as well as Mr. Xi's drive to make China the global hegemon—the best we can hope for, Mr. Shambaugh concludes, is 'competitive coexistence' with China. The U.S. should expose China to the world at every opportunity. 'The Chinese government's own negative behavior is one of America's greatest assets in its contest with China, and it must be taken advantage of.' We must also retain our global strut and confidence, Mr. Shambaugh says, and not overestimate China, a country with 'multiple systemic weaknesses.' These include an aging population, a stark gender imbalance, a rigid one-party system, widespread repression, massive income inequality, capital flight, a nonconvertible currency, industrial overcapacity and a vindictive control-freak at the helm. No one has the slightest idea what will happen when Mr. Xi dies. Mr. Shambaugh's most radical suggestion is his call to 'consider resurrecting and applying the 'Trading With the Enemy Act,' ' which would take American companies to task for conducting business with China in ways that harm our 'national interest.' The American corporate sector needs to 'understand that some—much—of what it does in China is strengthening an existing rival and a potential adversary.' This is a controversial idea. It's also audacious. We may not stop the Chinese juggernaut in its tracks. But there's no reason to actively help it run us over. Mr. Varadarajan, a Journal contributor, is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and at NYU Law School's Classical Liberal Institute. Get 360° coverage—from daily headlines to 100 year archives.
Hindustan Times
5 days ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Sindoor ka badla khoon': Shashi Tharoor lauds ‘brilliantly chosen name' for operation
Shashi Tharoor of the Congress on Wednesday said India's code name for the military response to Pakistan, 'Operation Sindoor', was 'brilliantly chosen', while adding that the vermilion's colour was not very far from blood. In an interaction at the National Press Club in Washington DC, Shashi Tharoor used the popular Indian phrase 'khoon ka badla khoon', while saying that this time it was 'sindoor ka badla khoon'. While explaining the meaning of sindoor, Tharoor said, 'Sindoor, in case some Americans obviously don't know about this, is a vermilion mark that is applied to the centre of the forehead of married women in the Hindu tradition. It's widely practised." 'Some non-Hindus do it too, but more for decorative purposes, but strictly speaking, the Sindoor is applied at the time of the marriage ceremony and is worn every day thereafter by married women,' he added, according to Mint. Tharoor is leading an all-party delegation to the US after hostilities between India and Pakistan following the Pahalgam terror attack on April 22, which claimed the lives of 26 people. India responded to the attack by launching 'Operation Sindoor' on May 7, striking terror bases in Pakistan. Tharoor said while naming the military action on Pakistan, India had been conscious of the 'brutal' terrorists who had killed men in front of their wives and children. 'When one wife screamed out, Kill me too, she was told, no, you go back and tell them what we've done,' the Congress MP said. He said that it was no accident that the colour of sindoor is bright red like vermilion, which is not far from the colour of blood. "That sindoor had essentially been wiped off the foreheads of 26 Indian women, 26 I was gonna say Hindu women, but one of them actually was a Christian, but the sindoor had been wiped off the rest by these terrorist actions, and so we wanted first of all, to avenge that act of wiping off the sindoor,' Tharoor said. In response to the Pakistani delegation's claim that Islamabad was also a 'victim of terrorism', Tharoor questioned who the blame should lie with. 'This (Pakistan) delegation is going around saying we are also victims of terrorism, we have lost more lives to terrorism than India has. We turn around and say—whose fault is that?" Tharoor asked. He quoted Hillary Clinton, saying, 'You can't breed vipers in your backyard and expect them to bite only your neighbours.' This comes after the Pakistani delegation led by Bilwala Bhutto, which is also in the US, said that Pakistan had been a victim of terrorism more than India. The multi-party delegation led by Tharoor has returned to interact with the members of the US Congress, politicians and thinktanks. The delegation will provide a brief on India's new approach to combat cross-border terrorism, and the military strikes carried out in terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. The delegation is meeting members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, House Foreign Affairs Committee and the India Caucus, along with Washington's leading think tanks.
Mint
5 days ago
- Mint
Karine Jean-Pierre, ex-White House press secretary, leaves Democratic party, to slam Biden betrayal in new book
Former White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has left the Democratic Party, citing its "betrayal" of former President Joe Biden, and registered as an Independent, according to an announcement by her publisher, Hachette Book Group, on Wednesday (June 4). Jean-Pierre, who served under Biden from 2022 to early 2025, will detail her decision in an upcoming book titled "Independent: A Look Inside a Broken White House, Outside the Party Lines", slated for release on October 21. In a statement accompanying the book announcement, Jean-Pierre said: 'Until January 20, I was responsible for speaking on behalf of the President of the United States. At noon on that day, I became a private citizen who, like all Americans and many of our allies around the world, had to contend with what was to come next for our country.' She added: 'I determined that the danger we face as a country requires freeing ourselves of boxes. We need to be willing to exercise the ability to think creatively and plan strategically.' According to the publisher, the book will offer an insider's view of 'the three weeks that led to Biden's abandoning his bid for a second term and the betrayal by the Democratic Party that led to his decision.' Jean-Pierre had strongly defended Biden following his poor debate performance against Donald Trump, which triggered calls from top Democrats for him to withdraw from the race. Biden, then 81, ultimately dropped out, citing concerns over his health and electability. Legacy Lit said Jean-Pierre's book will not only recount her White House experience but also advocate for a broader political shift: 'She presents clear arguments and provocative evidence as an insider about the importance of dismantling the torrent of disinformation and misinformation that has been rampant in recent elections.' The publisher said she would urge Americans to move beyond 'blind loyalty' to the two-party system and 'embrace life as Independents.' Jean-Pierre, 50, previously worked as deputy press secretary and served as a senior adviser to Biden's 2020 campaign. She was also a regional political director during President Barack Obama's first term. The publisher emphasised: 'Jean-Pierre didn't come to her decision to be an Independent lightly.' Her departure and forthcoming book come amid renewed scrutiny of the Biden administration, as former aides face criticism over whether they downplayed the president's cognitive decline — an issue raised in the recent exposé "Original Sin" by two journalists. (With inputs from AFP, AP)
