choice

Fighter jets intercept Wizz Air plane after ‘passenger’s sick choice of WiFi name’

There was choas on board a Wizz Air flight from Luton to Tel Aviv when a passenger started messaging someone else on board having changed their WiFi name to ‘terrorist’

Fighter jets were forced to to intercept a flight from the UK after being alerted that a passenger on board changed their WiFi name.

The planes arrived after a person reported ‘threatening messages’ were being sent to people on the Wizz Air flight from Luton, which was due to land at Ben-Gurion airport in Tel Aviv, Israel. The ‘security incident’ unfolded when crew notified security officials in Israel of a potential threat.

Authorities believe a traveller changed their WiFi account name to ‘terrorist’ and started directly messaging fellow passengers. They raised the alarm and the fighter jets were given the order to circle the skies before the plane eventually landed safely in Israel.

READ MORE: Bermuda triangle of the sky where satellites mysteriously die in growing weak spot in earth’s magnetic fieldREAD MORE: Boeing 737 declares mid-air emergency after ‘serious passenger interference’

The Airports Authority said: “Due to suspicion of suspicious behaviour on the plane, security forces acted according to the procedures for such a case. The incident ended. The plane landed and it was found that there was no actual incident.”

N12 News reports that this isn’t the first time those in charge at the airport have been forced to act. Three years ago, during a flight of the Turkish airline Anadolu Jet, passengers were airdropped pictures and videos of planes crashing on their mobile phones.

There is no blame on the airline, but analysis of the latest data from the Authority shows that Wizz Air had the highest number of complaints per million passengers flown, beating Ryanair to the bottom spot. In fact, the Hungarian airline romped home with the prize.

It received 10,548 customer complaints from mid-2024 to March 2025, or 918 complaints per one million passengers. That means for every customer who flew, just under 1,000 registered a complaint during that period.

In Wizz Air’s favour is the relatively low ‘complaint upheld’ rate during that time, at 47%. It paid out £1,482,183 as a consequence, or £651 per customer on average.

The airline said: “At Wizz Air, every minute matters and customers are at the heart of everything we do. Since 2024, we have made significant investments across every part of our operations, including our Customer First Compass initiative – a £12 billion framework launched in 2025 to ensure we deliver the best possible service for our customers.

“This investment is already delivering results. In 2025, our UK flight completion rate was 99.8% – one of the best in the entire industry, while our on-time performance also improved by 14.23% compared to 2024. As a result, in 2025 customer satisfaction ratio already increased by 7% point year-on-year.

“We recognise that disruption does occasionally occur, on many occasions due to factors outside of our control. We are focused on responding quickly and effectively when it does. Our automated Chatbot, Amelia AI, is available 24/7 to address most customers’ enquiries and needs.”

Meanwhile, British Airways had a far lower complaints rate (192/one million customers), but 83% were upheld. BA paid out £6,238,378 in total, or £837 per customer.

Ryanair’s complaints-per-million-customers rate was 188, with a low complaints upheld rate of 28% and an average award of £694.

Source link

Fix potholes? Fight Trump? Choice faces next California governor

You may have missed it, what with President Trump’s endless pyrotechnics, but California voters will decide in November who succeeds Gavin Newsom, the highest-profile governor since the Terminator returned to Hollywood.

Unfortunately for those attempting to civically engage, the current crop of contenders is, shall we say, less than enthralling.

In alphabetical order (because there is seriously no prohibitive front-runner), the major candidates are Xavier Becerra, Chad Bianco, Ian Calderon, Steve Hilton, Matt Mahan, Katie Porter, John Slavet, Tom Steyer, Eric Swalwell, Tony Thurmond, Antonio Villaraigosa and Betty Yee.

Whew! (Pause to catch breath.)

Armed with that knowledge, you can now go out and win yourself a few bar bets by asking someone to name, say, even two of those running.

Meantime, fear not. Your friendly columnists Mark Z. Barabak and Anita Chabria have surveyed the field, weighed the odds, pondered California’s long history and concluded … they have absolutely no clue what will happen in the June 2 primary, much less who’ll take the oath of office come next January.

Here, they discuss the race that has Californians sitting on neither pins nor needles.

Chabria: Mark, I do this for a living and I’m having trouble summoning up any interest in this race — yet, anyway.

Part of my problem is that national events are so all-consuming and fast-moving that it’s hard to worry about potholes. I admit, I appreciate that our White House-contending governor is fighting the big fight. But remind me again, what’s a governor supposed to do?

Barabak: End homelessness. Elevate our public schools to first-class rank. Make housing and college tuition affordable. Eliminate crime. End disease and poverty. Put a chicken in every pot. Make pigs fly and celestial angels sing. And then, in their second year …

Seriously, there’s a pretty large gap between what voters would like to see happen and what a governor — any governor — can plausibly deliver. That said, if our next chief executive can help bring about meaningful improvement in just a few of those areas, pigs and angels excepted, I’d venture to say a goodly number of Californians would be pleased.

Broadly speaking, my sense when talking to voters is they want our next governor to push back on Trump and his most egregious excesses. But not as a means of raising their national profile or positioning themselves for a run at the White House. And not to the exclusion of bettering their lives by paying attention to the nitty and the gritty, like making housing and higher education more readily available and, yes, fixing potholes.

Chabria: All that is fair enough. As the mom of two teens, I’d especially like to see our university system be more affordable and accessible, so we all have our personal priorities. Let’s agree to this starting point: The new governor can’t just chew gum and walk. She or he must be able to eat a full lunch while running.

But so far, candidates haven’t had their policy positions break through to a big audience, state-focused or not — and many of them share broadly similar positions. Let’s look at the bits of daylight that separate them because, Republicans aside, there aren’t canyon-size differences among the many candidates.

San José Mayor Matt Mahan, the newest entry in the race, is attempting to position himself as a “can’t-we-all-just-get-along” centrist. How do you think that will go over with voters?

Barabak: You’re having me tiptoe uncomfortably close to the Make A Prediction Zone, which I assiduously avoid. As I’ve said before, I’m smart enough to know what I don’t know. (Many readers will doubtless question the underlying premise of the former if not the latter part of that statement.)

I think there is at least a potential for Mahan to tap into a desire among voters to lower the hostilities just a bit and ease up on our constant partisan war-footing.

You might not know it if you marinate in social media, or watch the political shout-fest shows where, as in nature, the loudest voices carry. But there are a great many people working two or even three jobs, ferrying their kids to soccer practice, worrying about paying their utility and doctor bills, caring for elderly parents or struggling in other ways to keep their heads above water. And they’re less captivated by the latest snappy clap-back on TikTok than looking for help dealing with the many challenges they face.

I was struck by something Katie Porter said when we recently sat down for a conversation in San Francisco. The former Orange County congresswoman can denigrate Trump with the best of ‘em. But she said, “I am very leery of anyone who does not acknowledge that we had problems and policy challenges long before Donald Trump ever raised his orange head on the political horizon.”

California’s homelessness and affordability crises were years in the making, she noted, and need to be addressed as such.

I heard Antonio Villaraigosa suggest something similar in last week‘s gubernatorial debate, when the former Los Angeles mayor noted the state has spent billions of dollars in recent years trying to drastically reduce homelessness with, at best, middling results. “We cannot be afraid to look in the mirror,” he said.

That suggests to me Mahan is not the only candidate who appreciates that simply saying “Trump = Bad” over and over is not what voters want to hear.

Chabria: Certainly potholes and high electricity bills existed before Trump. But if the midterms don’t favor Democrats, the next governor will probably face a generational challenge to protect the civil rights of residents of this diverse state. It’s not about liking or disliking Trump, but ensuring that our governor has a plan if attacks on immigrants, the LBGTQ+ community and citizens in general grow worse.

I do think this will matter to voters — but I agree with you that candidates can’t simply rage against Trump. They have to offer some substance.

Porter, Swalwell and Becerra, who have the most national experience and could be expected to articulate that sort of vision, haven’t done much other than to commit to the fight. Steyer and Thurmond want to abolish ICE, which a governor couldn’t do. Mahan has said focusing on state policy is the best offense.

I don’t think this has to be a charisma-driven vision, which is what Newsom has so effectively offered. But it needs to bring resoluteness in a time of fear, which none of the candidates to my mind have been able to project so far.

But this all depends on election results in November. If Democrats take Congress and are able to exert a check to this terrible imbalance, then bring on the asphalt and fix the roads. I think a lot of what voters want from a governor won’t fully be known until after November.

Barabak: The criticism of this collective field is that it’s terminally boring, as if we’re looking to elect a stand-up comic, a chanteuse or a juggler. I mean, this is the home of Hollywood! Isn’t it the birthright of every California citizen to be endlessly entertained?

At least that’s what the pundits and political know-it-alls, stifling yawns as they constantly refresh their feeds on Bluesky or X, would have you believe.

Voters elected Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger as governor — that’s two movie stars in the state’s 175-year history — and, from the way the state is often perceived, you’d think celebrity megawattage is one of the main prerequisites for a chief executive.

But if you look back, California has seen a lot more George Deukmejian, Pete Wilson and Gray Davis types, which is to say bland-persona governors whom no one would mistake for box-office gold.

It seems to me no coincidence that Schwarzenegger, who arrived as a political novelty, was replaced by Jerry Brown, who was as politically tried-and-true as they come. That political pendulum never stops swinging.

Which suggests voters will be looking for someone less like our gallivanting, movie matinee governor and someone more inclined to keep their head down in Sacramento and focus on the state and its needs.

Who will that be? I wouldn’t wage a nickel trying to guess. Would you care to?

Chabria: I certainly don’t care to predict, but I’ll say this: We may not need or get another Terminator. But one of these candidates needs to put some pepper flakes in the paste if they want to break out of the pack.

Source link