The NY Times covers the air terminal shooting in Miami:
MIAMI, Dec. 7 - Federal air marshals shot and killed a passenger at Miami International Airport on Wednesday after the man claimed he had a bomb in his backpack and ran from an aircraft, officials said.
...But the man, Rigoberto Alpizar, an American citizen from Maitland, Fla., was found to have no bomb. One passenger on the flight told a local television station that Mr. Alpizar's wife had tried to follow her husband as he ran off the plane, saying he was mentally ill and had not taken his medication.
...Mr. Alpizar and his wife, Anne Buechner, had boarded American Airlines Flight 924 to Orlando around 2 p.m. and the plane was waiting to taxi when Mr. Alpizar, 44, "uttered threatening words that included a sentence to the effect that he had a bomb," [James Bauer, the special agent in charge of federal air marshals in Miami] said.
Two air marshals aboard the flight confronted Mr. Alpizar, who then ran from the Boeing 757 and onto the jetway connecting it to the airport concourse. The marshals followed and ordered him to the ground, said Brian Doyle, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security.
"He then appeared to be reaching into a carry-on bag, and the air marshals proceeded consistent with their training," Mr. Doyle said. "Shots were fired as the team attempted to subdue the individual."
...One passenger on the flight, Mary Gardner, told a local television station that Mr. Alpizar's wife had said he was bipolar and had not taken his medication. Ms. Gardner told WTVJ-TV in Miami that Mr. Alpizar had suddenly run down the aisle from the back of the plane toward first class and that his wife had followed.
"She ran after him, and all of a sudden there were four or five shots," Ms. Gardner said. She added that the police boarded the plane afterward and told the passengers to put their hands on their heads.
I presume that comparisons will be drawn to the Underground shooting by police in London. However, there is a key difference - in the London debacle, the shooting incident occurred two weeks after four coordinated bombings, and one day after four failed bombings. One might expect that the London police forces were on a hair-trigger, and more prone to over-reaction.
In Miami, on the other hand, there is currently no reason to suspect that the air marshalls were on any kind of a special alert. That would reinforce the notion that Mr. Alpizar had engaged in threatening behavior.
Mark in Mexico goes barrel-fishing at TalkLeft.
You spoke too soon.
Federal law enforcement sources tell ABC News they had been on the alert for a possible shoe bomber when a federal air marshal opened fire at the Miami International Airport today.
Posted by: Geek, Esq. | December 08, 2005 at 09:46 AM
Why didn't they shoot at his shoes?
====================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 10:00 AM
Mental illness is simply a deadly disease. It's just very sad that this man is dead, in the same way that it is terribly sad if someone dies of cancer or diabetes or heart failure.
cathy :-)
Posted by: cathyf | December 08, 2005 at 10:02 AM
Nothing to see folks, keep moing.
Posted by: dorf | December 08, 2005 at 10:05 AM
A little mystery on the back story: Back story Mystery
Posted by: clarice | December 08, 2005 at 10:17 AM
I wouldn't put it past the TSA to be that stupid. They are babies, yet. Do the Kenyan police have shoes, and real people from a real place in Ethiopia, or not. That should be verifiable.
========================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 10:27 AM
Apparently they do and the article says more arrests are forthcoming there.
Posted by: clarice | December 08, 2005 at 10:42 AM
The real question here is why the man whose shoes tested positve FIVE Fing TIMES
on the inside of his shoes was released. He was Egyptian by birth. Lets see: Arab Male check, trace of explosives check, on an airline check OK LETS RELEASE HIM!
Someone should be fired and if its more than one person they all need to go.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | December 08, 2005 at 12:05 PM
I'll bet they put a transmitter in his shoe and are following him. Has anyone checked the shoe for a telephone? WiFi?
Thanks, C. Sounds like the lions are roaring in Ethiopia(is it Eritrea?) and it's echoing off Kilimanjaro.
==========================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 12:29 PM
That psycho dude should not have been on the plane in the first place. What was the wife thinking by allowing him on? What if during the flight the pilot comes out to hit on a stewardess and the guy goes psycho then, runs into the cockpit and f's with the controls?
If some guy yells he has a bomb in his bag, starts running and when told to stop reaches in that bag...I'd want the air marshalls to fill the bastard full of lead then pump a couple in his head to make sure. Special alert my *ss. 9/11 was the only special alert I need.
However, I would give the wife a free drink ticket and call it a day.
Posted by: Friend Lee Skyes | December 08, 2005 at 12:35 PM
Psychotic breaks are unpredictable, increased with stress, and sometimes end suddenly and violently. I am sorry for her.
===============================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 12:48 PM
Kim: I hear he's podcasting Limbaugh.
Posted by: dorf | December 08, 2005 at 01:00 PM
And the second guessing by the MSM begins as they look at ways in which to criticize those given the responsibility to protect us all. One gets the feeling that the media would have been ecstatic if a bomb had really exploded killing dozens of people.
The Air Marshall acted with professionalism and skill. What the passenger did was akin to taking a stroll on the freeway during rush hour. It happens. As dorf said earlier in these comments, "Nothing to see folks, keep moving."
Posted by: arrowhead | December 08, 2005 at 01:01 PM
Horf,horf,dorf.
What else could the Marshall do? He deserves a medal but won't get one.
==================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 01:17 PM
He'd really deserve a medal if he'd trusted the wife and simply wrestled the guy down. Would you take that chance?
=============================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 01:18 PM
Of course, he'd be subject to discipline for violating procedure.
====================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 01:19 PM
It's a really unfortunate incident and I feel bad for everybody involved, including the air marshall who has to live with this.
The only spot in the story where I can see someone acting identifiably wrong is the victim for not taking his meds. That shouldn't be a fatal mistake, but sometimes it is. He took the risk of having an episode in a dangerous situation.
Posted by: tim maguire | December 08, 2005 at 01:20 PM
Probably hadn't the money for the meds.
=======================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 01:28 PM
The marshall should be given a medal and promoted. Kim, re podcast, I was referring to the shoe dude from our ally Egypt.
Posted by: dorf | December 08, 2005 at 01:29 PM
Or as likely, preferred not to.
================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 01:30 PM
Gary, the news I heard was that after testing positive for explosives five times, this Egyptian was held overnight then released. THEN the JFK airport authority called the FBI. Talk about clueless. The FBI is now apparently looking for the shoe guy.
I wonder ... was it the JFK airport authority or the TSA that made the decision to let this guy go? Of course now that we're safe, we're letting scissors and 7" screwdrivers back on planes. ????
Posted by: Harry Arthur | December 08, 2005 at 01:34 PM
Has anybody noticed that these ancient valley civilizations all seem to have it in for us to one degree or another and are Islamic? The Ganges and the Congo and the Chinese rivers are more and less and less neutral, and the Amazon and the Missourissippi aren't so ancient.
===============================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 01:41 PM
OK, now I read Geek's link and find out that I didn't know all I thought I knew about the Egyptian gentleman. The FBI has apparently located him and his story checks out after all. Fair enough. Maybe he's not really a threat or maybe he just has a great cover story, hopefully the FBI knows.
Of course I'm still wondering why JFK security let him go. After all they didn't know anything more about him then either and it is just slightly suspicious to test positive for explosives. It seems to me that at the very least their procedures are flawed.
And of course there's still that screwdriver and scissors thing.
Posted by: Harry Arthur | December 08, 2005 at 01:41 PM
yes this is one of those facts of life...accidents happen.
In a strange way it reminds me of the little old man that plowed through the farmers market in LA. Just tragic for all involved.
I do have to admit, while I do not want innocent crazies shot down, I do find a bit of comfort that Air Marshals are active and doing their job and future terrorist found that out.
Like cops, they are going to make mistakes and like the real world, people are not always going to behave in such a way that will alert an Air Marshall "this guy MUST HAVE forgotten his ritalin" or some such and ignore it no matter how threatening it is.
Oh I am sure the MSM et al will make a big dang deal out of this, but will some one remind them that unfortunate things JUST HAPPEN! Or do we resort to the usual uncreative lazy narrative that America is evil and then go to a Christmas party!
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 08, 2005 at 02:02 PM
oops I'm sorry, don't want to offend anyone...SHOULD have said "Holiday Party". My Bad.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 08, 2005 at 02:04 PM
Loved the link to Mark in Mexico's rendering of rejectionist v. rational combattants over at Talk Left! We know which crowd Howard Dean represents, don't we?
Posted by: JM Hanes | December 08, 2005 at 02:48 PM
The Egyptian probably got his shoes shined in Cairo right behind a couple of guys on their way to Addis Ababa.
==========================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 03:02 PM
"...people are not always going to behave in such a way that will alert an Air Marshall "this guy MUST HAVE forgotten his ritalin" or some such and ignore it no matter how threatening it is."
I can see this making its way into the Al Queda Manual of Terrorist Tips. Just act a little crazy and have a companion claim that you haven't taken your meds today.
Someone from El Al Airlines was interviewed about the incident and stated that the Air Marshalls did exactly what they should have done. He stated that El Al is sensitive to passengers with special needs (e.g., medicated, psychological problems) and checks these things before the passengers board. After the passengers are on board, however, anyone who behaves in a threatening manner is dealt with in the same way that the Air Marshalls handled the person yesterday. There just isn't time for error, questionning or second guessing.
Posted by: arrowhead | December 08, 2005 at 03:23 PM
Topsecret:
The drug for bi-polar disorder is Lithium not Ritalin.
Posted by: maryrose | December 08, 2005 at 03:43 PM
thanks maryrose
that's why i wrote "or some such"
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 08, 2005 at 04:15 PM
I confess I haven't read all that much on this but I have been having problem with this
"One passenger on the flight, Mary Gardner, told a local television station that Mr. Alpizar's wife had said he was bipolar and had not taken his medication."
Question. Did Mrs. Alpizar just realize this? I mean would not she have known and told an attendant "the reason my husband is acting peculiar is he is bi-polar and he did not take his meds?"
I happen to know that attendants DO know who the Air Marshals are (even if not told) and I also know that a spouse of a mentally ill person has a pretty good indication of behavior and outbursts.
It just seems odd to me that the fellow was not having a little trouble during the flight as well.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 08, 2005 at 04:23 PM
Did you see the interview Katie Couric did with former air marshal Tony Kuklinski on Today this morning. It was the typical light-headed questions Katie has been famous for. She kept asking the marshal why they just didn't shoot to wound - like in the arm or hand or knee. It was incredibly funny. NewsBusters has a lot of the quotes at http://newsbusters.org/node/3123.
Posted by: Specter | December 08, 2005 at 04:36 PM
One question. Would the procedure in the air have been to shoot to kill? Probably not.
==================================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 04:48 PM
What do you think they would have done? Risk a big target by taking careful aim for a finger or a knee - a shot that may have hit another passenger?
Posted by: Specter | December 08, 2005 at 04:49 PM
Personally Iam sick and tired of people second-guessing our air marshalls, police and other protection professionals who are following protocol and doing their job. The wife knew it was risky taking him on a flight without his medication. Move on, nothing to see here except an unfortunate tragedy.
Posted by: maryrose | December 08, 2005 at 04:56 PM
Air marshalls were 100% correct in their action. Wife should have notified flight staff of special needs.
Lithium is not "instant acting." Must be taken for weeks or months to reach theraputic levels and repress the bipolar symptoms.
THUS, not taking medication for 1 or 2 days will not cause an immediate relapse of the bipolar disorder.
SOMEONE needs to explain HOW LONG this guy was off his meds, and why. SOMEONE needs to explain why flight staff wasn't notified. SOMEONE needs to explain why wife was not with at all times.
The only SOMEONE left is the wife?
Posted by: some one | December 08, 2005 at 05:41 PM
People go off their meds all the time because their meds often make them feel terrible. It's totally understandable that he went off his, and this is the unfortunate consequence. I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often.
Posted by: byrd | December 08, 2005 at 06:01 PM
Update on the shoe bomber:
http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel05/egytiandetention120805.htm
Press Release
December 8, 2005
Washington D.C.
FBI National Press Office
(202) 324-3691
On December 2, 2005, an Egyptian male was detained by Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officials while passing through a security checkpoint at JFK Airport in New York City. Preliminary field testing of the individual's shoes showed a positive hit for explosive materials being contained in the shoes. The shoes were confiscated by TSA officials and turned over to the FBI for further analysis.
Analysis of the shoes was performed at the FBI Laboratory and it was determined that no explosive materials were present in the passenger's shoes. This individual was also interviewed by Special Agents of the FBI and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Waterloo, Iowa, and it was determined that he poses no security threat.
Posted by: clarice | December 08, 2005 at 06:09 PM
Yes, I see, Specter, but I meant they wouldn't shoot at all in the air. They'd have probably preferred to take him down by brute force. Why couldn't they have done that on the ground? Well, different circumstances. I can't fault the marshalls. They kept the risk on the one who caused it.
=========================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 06:30 PM
Kim - I think the approach has to do more with the threat. Whether the guy was in a plane in flight or in the jetway, after he said he had a bomb, reaching into his backpack could have been his move to detonate the device. If that had been the case, an explosion, either way, would have been catastrophic.
Now, if the suspect was someone holding a knife, a box cutter, or something like that, then brute force is much more of an option. In that type of case, maybe (could be a big maybe depending on the circumstances) deadly force would not be necessary.
I think that in this case, as sad as it turns out to be, the marshals made the right choice.
Posted by: Specter | December 08, 2005 at 07:14 PM
He's a tragic and nearly innocent victim of the jumpiness caused by shoebomber suspects in Africa and here.
==================================
Posted by: kim | December 08, 2005 at 07:27 PM
Kim -- they damn well would shoot in the air. There's a whole industry built around manufacturing frangible bullets for a situation like that.
Posted by: richard mcenroe | December 08, 2005 at 08:20 PM
You know, this is the first time a mentally ill person has been shot, but not IIRC the first time a mentally ill person has caused some panic in the air. I recall something a few years ago when a man stormed the cockpit.
I hope what will come of this is the Airlines or TSA will issue some helpful guidelines for people traveling with mentally unstable people. Perhaps if there is some procedure- someone they know to discuss it with in advance- the pilots, flight attendants, and marshalls won't have to try to sort things out on the fly, when tensions have already risen.
Posted by: MayBee | December 08, 2005 at 11:55 PM
I'm surprised no one (at least that I've seen)has made much of the fact that this leg of the flight originated in COLUMBIA, the planet's first narco/terrorist state. Wasn't there talk that Al Queda was teaming up with FARC? This had to have been a red flag for the air marshalls.
Posted by: PT | December 09, 2005 at 08:55 AM
...but I meant they wouldn't shoot at all in the air.
The story about the London shooting mentioned that the shooter had a special low-velocity load.
I am not a gun expert by anymeans, but if I were an Air Marshall, maybe I would have low velocity bulets with high spread - soft dum dums that would not penetrate the plane.
Also, a bullet hole in a plane is not the dramatic disaster most folks think (I have read). The air loss through one small hole is negligible. Of course, hit a fuel line, and who knows?
this leg of the flight originated in COLUMBIA?
Interesting.
Thanks for the Update on the shoe bomber, Clarice.
Posted by: TM | December 09, 2005 at 09:29 AM
Does anyone remember the movie Copy Cat? Sigourney Weaver, Holly Hunter and Harry Conic, Jr.? Anyway, the opening scene is Holly Hunter and her partner at a practice shoot. Her partner shoots the target dead center, Holly Hunter shoots to disarm (i.e., arm, leg, shooting hand). Small talk between them about the necessity of shooting to kill or disarm. Middle of movie, Hunter's partner is taken hostage in the police station. Hunter comes in and shoots to disarm the suspect. Their eyes meet, they smile (the implication being she was correct, he wasn't) and the disarmed suspect turns over and shoots her partner, killing him. End of movie, Hunter has the opportunity to shoot to disarm or shoot to kill. She chooses the dead center shot.
Shooting to disarm is for Hollywood. Police officers, et al, are not trained to shoot to disarm. When they pull their gun and fire, they are shooting to kill.
Posted by: Sue | December 09, 2005 at 09:49 AM
Daddy, what did you do in the war?
I was frangibly downrange, Son.
=================================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2005 at 10:45 AM
Alpizar and Saddam
Alpizar had no bomb and Saddam had no WMD. Both failed to comply in situations where compliance was necessary and fair warning was given. Compliance would have allowed proper determination of guilt. Mr Alpizar was off his meds and Saddam trusted his bribes but both fell victim to situations they created. The perceptions of the men with weapons drawn was that Saddam had WMDs and Mr Alpizar said he had a bomb.
Posted by: boris | December 09, 2005 at 11:01 AM
Interesting way to put it, boris.
Posted by: JM Hanes | December 09, 2005 at 11:36 PM
I don't know about the rest of you who have responded to this tragic event, but all I have to say is that those of you who don't have a family member suffering from bipolar problems simply don't know what the hell you're talking about.
My nephew suffers from the same affliction as Alpizar, and I can easily see my nephew in this same situation when he hasn't gulped down the pills. I've been there guys! Have you?
The air marshalls had a job to do. Given the circumstances in this case, they probably had less than 30 seconds to act.
At this point, all I can do is grieve for both the air marshalls and for Alpizar and his family. Thank you Howard Dean, you rotten SOB, for making such circumstances a common every day occurrence.
Posted by: Mescalero | December 09, 2005 at 11:52 PM
Mescalero
What are you talking about? How in the hell is Howard Dean responsible for anything in this matter? There is plenty of stupid stuff coming out of Howie but an Air Marshall following protocol with a passenger who regretfully is shot does not seem to have his fingerprints, to me.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | December 10, 2005 at 09:14 AM
I couldn't make that connection either.
Posted by: boris | December 10, 2005 at 09:28 AM
Maybe he meant Ted Kennedy.
============================
Posted by: kim | December 10, 2005 at 09:37 AM
안녕하세요 농수산물 직거래 사이트 오마이몰입니다.
저희 오마이몰은 생산자와 소비자가 중간유통구조를 없애고 신선하고
저렴한 상품을 직거래할수 있도록 만들어진 사이트입니다.
오마이몰은 비영리 무료사이트로서 상품등록비나 기타 수수료가 전혀없습니다.
누구나 등록하셔서 상품을 판매하실수 있습니다.
많은 등록 부탁드립니다 .
상품등록을 해주시면 판매는 저희 오마이몰에서 책임져드리겟습니다.
http://5mymall.com
p.s 오마이몰은 상품등록비/판매수수료가 없습니다.
*본게시글은 영리성 목적의 광고글이 아닙니다*
정보통신부의
" 정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률 (법 제50조의7)" 에 의거한
합법적 게시글임을 밝혀드리며 주소의 출처는 웹검색을통해얻은 주소이며
다른어떤 정보도 가지고있지않습니다 "수신거부" 를 원하시면
아래의멜주소로 게시판의 주소를 보내주시기바랍니다.
(수신거부:[email protected] )
삭제비밀번호: 1234
Posted by: 오마이몰 | November 19, 2008 at 09:58 AM
OK, maybe he didn't mean Ted Kennedy.
==========================
Posted by: kim | November 19, 2008 at 10:22 AM