Dr. Shane Posted December 8, 2005 Share Posted December 8, 2005 Air Marshal Kills Passenger, Citing Threat I know... don't tell me... it would have never happened if he had blond hair and blue eyes. Or may be the Bush Administration is upset because, since he is dead, he cannot be locked away without a trial for 3 years. The sad thing here is it seems he was bi-polar and off his medication. My mother is bi-polar and would, at times, chase us kids around the house with a knife when she went off her meds. It is a very frustrating illness for those afflicted with it and their families. What I don't understand is, in this case, the wife said he was off his meds. If she knew he was off his meds, why hadn't she done anything about it? I mean, speaking from experience, if I knew my mother was off her meds, we wouldn't be headed to the airport. I know he just got back from Ecuador, but they have doctors and medication there. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cricket Posted December 8, 2005 Share Posted December 8, 2005 There is no way of knowing why the wife didn't do anything about it; likewise, there is no way of knowing if she did try to do something about it. The aspect of this article that I find most frustrating is the fact that the people were required to stay on the plane as this man exited. If there were a bomb either on him, or on the plane, surely the people would have been safer if they could have exited the plane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cricket Posted December 8, 2005 Share Posted December 8, 2005 Quote: I know... don't tell me... it would have never happened if he had blond hair and blue eyes. What is that supposed to mean? To me, it sounds like reverse discrimination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Naomi Posted December 8, 2005 Administrators Share Posted December 8, 2005 </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr /> Christine Wall said: </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr /> I know... don't tell me... it would have never happened if he had blond hair and blue eyes. <hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> What is that supposed to mean? To me, it sounds like reverse discrimination. <hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> Hey Christine .... Sounds like SOP which is so popular today Quote If your dreams are not big enough to scare you, they are not big enough for God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shane Posted December 8, 2005 Author Share Posted December 8, 2005 Quote: Sounds like SOP which is so popular today Spirit of Prophecy? Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Naomi Posted December 8, 2005 Administrators Share Posted December 8, 2005 </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr /> Shane said: </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr /> Sounds like SOP which is so popular today <hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> Spirit of Prophecy? <img src="/ubbtreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> <hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> LOL No "Standard Operating Procedure" Let's forget the reasons and focus on the "rights" of the individual commiting the crime. What if he really had a bomb? Quote If your dreams are not big enough to scare you, they are not big enough for God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Lambert Posted December 8, 2005 Share Posted December 8, 2005 What do you expect the Sky Marshalls to do when a guy claiming to be carrying a bomb refused their orders to stop (at least they did give him an opportunity to stop and not be shot) and kept running at them, reaching into his pack? The Sky Marshalls did exactly what they are trained to do, and if they had done anything else, they would have been guilty of dereliction of duty. It is tragic that the man turned out to be out of his head (bipolar and off his meds). But if he had been carrying a bomb, and Sky Marshalls had not shot him dead when they did, lots of people could have been killed. Some things you just cannot help. You have to do what circumstances dictate. It would not have made any difference what the man looked like--hispanic, nordic, african, whatever. He was running and yelling that he had a bomb, refused to halt when ordered to by Sky Marshalls, and reached into his pack. That is all that mattered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cricket Posted December 8, 2005 Share Posted December 8, 2005 I agree, Ron. All that really mattered at that point was that the man who claimed to have had a bomb (be he hispanic, nordic, african, whatever) needed to be stopped. It bothers me though, that the Air Marshal required the other passengers to stay put. What if there were a bomb on the plane? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil D Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 There seems to be some problems within the Federal Air Marshels....Concider this paragraph from the Christian Science Moniter- [:"blue"] Among flight crews who are regularly in contact with air marshals, some say there's been confusion and mission creep since the FAM service was ramped up. Initially, marshals were clear that their mandate was to protect the cockpit, and they told flight crews they wouldn't respond to problems at the back of the plane, unless they were life-threatening. That was in part to keep their cover from being blown. Indeed, marshals are trained to distinguish between a possible terrorist ruse to draw them out and the bad behavior of a drunken or disturbed passenger.[/] And there seems to be some moral problems as well. Check out the Christian Science Moniter article by clicking on the link...It details some problems. Quote Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.  George Bernard Shaw  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Naomi Posted December 9, 2005 Administrators Share Posted December 9, 2005 </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr /> Christine Wall said: I agree, Ron. All that really mattered at that point was that the man who claimed to have had a bomb (be he hispanic, nordic, african, whatever) needed to be stopped. It bothers me though, that the Air Marshal required the other passengers to stay put. What if there were a bomb on the plane? <hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> Had I been on that plane I would have wanted the marshalls to do whatever it took to stop this person. And, would have agreed with "staying put" No one can know what is really going on in someone's mind ... or what was in his backback. The plane was still attached to the airport. How could they have allowed other's on the plane to deplane? What if he was a decoy and another person on the plane had the "real" bomb and was allowed to go into the airport? The probability of getting far enough away from a bomb to not be killed or seriously injuried would have been slim. ~~~ In the early 80ties after the plane was blown up after having left Germany. Forgot the particular name of the plane. I was flying from Paris to the US. As the plane was on the tarmak we were stopped and boarded from all "exits" by the soldiers. It seems they had a tip that the bommer may be on that plane. For several hours we were all forced to remain in our seats as they questioned and searched everyone on the plane. What if there had been a bomb? It's the price we pay to keep the greatest number safe, for the greater good. Naomi Quote If your dreams are not big enough to scare you, they are not big enough for God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clio Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Not replying directly to Naomi... It's just the next reply button here. Yahoo is carrying a story today from the Newswires, as is the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper, that the passenger's stories conflict with the official version. At least one passenger is coming forward and saying throughout the ordeal, he never heard the word "bomb". Oh dear. I'm starting to wonder just how worth flying it is to travel to see loved ones. I'd like to be certain I'd get there... and I'm feeling much less certain of that these days. And conflicting stories with doubts for both sides doesn't make me feel much better. Clio Quote A heart where He alone has first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Lambert Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Experiments have shown repeatedly, that when you have a large group of witnesses, there will always be variations in what they describe, and a few will conflict with what others say. This almost always happens. So you have to go by the testimony of trained witnesses, and by the description that is confirmed by most witnesses. Some people will not be paying full attention, and will miss some things that others paying closer attention will notice. And sometimes some people's minds will engage in a form of denial and automatically edit out things that are too traumatic, like the shouted word, "Bomb." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clio Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Read the article. There's lots of room for doubt. Other witnesses are saying the wife was frantically trying to tell them he didn't have a bomb, was bi-polar and needed his meds. Quote A heart where He alone has first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shane Posted December 10, 2005 Author Share Posted December 10, 2005 FOXNews put out a statistic that said a mentally ill person is four times more likely to be killed by a law enforcement officer than the average American Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cricket Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 That statistic is probably correct. Contrariwise, is it probable that a police officer might be four times as likely to be killed by a mentally unstable individual? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cricket Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 Naomi, Points well taken. Chrys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Lambert Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 In the emergency of the moment, how could the air marshalls assess the credibility of the wife, if they even heard and understood what she was saying over the shouts of her husband? Even if they understood her, it could be a terrorist plot, and she could be part of it. The bottom line is that air marshalls must take decisive action when a man running at them and claiming to have a bomb refuses to obey their command for him to stop, and especially when it looks like he is reaching for the detonator. Since they are not mind readers, this is what they have to go by, and their decision must be made in a split second. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cricket Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 [:"blue"]In this situation, the plane was evacuated. [/] 'Bomb on board' note forces plane evacuation Threat found in KLM plane's in-flight magazine at Swedish airport The Associated Press Updated: 4:39 a.m. ET Dec. 10, 2005 STOCKHOLM, Sweden - A KLM plane with 144 passengers was evacuated at a Swedish airport early Saturday because of a bomb threat found scribbled in a magazine on board the aircraft, police and aviation officials said. KLM flight 1152 was scheduled to fly from Goteborg, southwestern Sweden, to Amsterdam, Netherlands, but had not left the gate when a passenger found the bomb threat in the in-flight magazine, police spokeswoman Glenn Sjoberg said. "We are not sure whether it was a note inside the magazine or whether it was written directly in the magazine, but it said 'there is a bomb on board,"' Sjoberg said. The passenger notified the flight crew, who told all passengers to disembark the Boeing 738, Sjoberg said, adding it was not clear when the bomb threat had been written. "It could have been two weeks ago," he said, noting that the same in-flight magazines are used for several weeks. Police bomb-disposal experts were searching the plane with dogs, he said. The passengers evacuated the aircraft calmly, and no one was injured, air rescue spokeswoman Katarina Ahlberg said. © 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. © 2005 MSNBC.com URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10407416/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clio Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 Well, the several articles I've read either stated or heavily implied the guy was running FROM the plane when they killed him. He was no longer on board the plane. He was shot and killed in the jetway. And if I'd been the wife, I'd have been hanging on arms, getting in front of them, screaming in their faces... Kinda hard to miss. That would have been me. But maybe she sat quietly while they drew their guns and and just spoke loudly.... This death was preventable in a number of ways. I'm sure there are meds in Colombia, I'm sure the wife could have informed the cabin crew before it became a problem, I'm sure the air marshals could have taken the time to wound the guy rather than kill him, since he was off the plane. I'm sure since there were TWO air marshalls who BOTH shot him, that he could have been overpowered instead of killed, especially if someone had just said something to the crew or the marshalls prior to his getting out of hand. Trigger happy thugs. Plausible deniability. "We HAD to kill him to keep you safe" Yeah, right. One more step on the road to martial law. And we're defending them. This was WRONG. No matter how you look at this, it was wrong. Clio P.S. I fly. I fly quite a bit. But this was still wrong. Quote A heart where He alone has first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Lambert Posted December 11, 2005 Share Posted December 11, 2005 The news reports I read and heard indicated that the man was running in the embarkation tunnel that temporarily connects the plane to the terminal. He was running from the plane toward the terminal. His wife was chasing after him, so was behind him, and could not get ahead of him. Obviously, the man did not tell his wife he had not taken his meds, until it was obvious from his behavior, and by then it was too late to stop him. If you have reason to believe someone is carrying a bomb, and appears to be reaching for a detonator, you are not required to risk your own life by merely tackling him or wounding him. The only reasonable tactic is to make the quickest kill possible, likely a head shot. The sky marshalls did order him to stop, and gave him a chance. But when he reached into his pack, that was it. They had to figure they were in a race against time to kill him before he could flip the switch. Maybe in the future airlines should be required to inquire if someone is bipolar, or is taking any prescribed psychoactive drug, and when was the last time he took it. But then there is yet a further intrusion into our private business, in the interests of security. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators lazarus Posted December 11, 2005 Moderators Share Posted December 11, 2005 This sounds familiar to the story where the Brazillain was shot dead in London. Initial reports from the Police said he had a big padded jacket, he ran from police, he had wires hanging from the jacket. Video showed he walked to the train, ran to the train when he though he was going to miss it. The man had a denim jacket with no wires. Officers are now facing criminal charges. The marshalls may have acted properly, they may not. Its too early to tell what really a happened. Quote Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.