Now its two witnesses: "he didn't mention a bomb"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051209/ap_on_re_us/airplane_shooting;_ylt=AhOIZA.2Ot.BBsIi_NElvkJvzwcF;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--


""He was belligerent. He threatened that he had a bomb in his backpack," said Brian Doyle, spokesman for the U.S. Homeland Security Department. "The officers clearly identified themselves and yelled at him to 'get down, get down.' Instead, he made a move toward the backpack."

Two passengers, however, said they did not hear Alpizar mention a bomb."

How many of the passengers will have to come forward with their neutral observations of the lack of a bomb threat before our Defenders Of The State here on DU are willing to admit that this has played out, once again, in the same dreary and predictable fashion? That officials instantly put forth bullshit disinformation to justify the shooting, and that as usual the truth is starkly different than the initial reports?

I withheld judgment the first day or two, noting my deep reservations over our eagerness to use summary executions and our willingness to accept the use of summary executions in some misguided belief that we are thus safer by doing so. I withheld judgment despite the plain fact that this man was no threat: he had no bomb. I think it is time for all of us to admit the obvious: this was a gross mistake. A man had a panic attack on an airplane and the air marshals who shot him also had a panic attack.

The accounts of the treatment of the remaining passengers on the airplane are chilling. We live in a police state.

The proper reaction of the authorities would have been to apologize to the family of the victim and announce that there would be a review of air marshall training and tactics to make sure that another incident like this does not happen.

'The first time I heard the word bomb was when I was interviewed by the FBI,'' McAlhany said. ''They kept asking if I heard him say the B-word. And I said, 'What is the B-word?' And they were like, 'Bomb.' I said no. They said, 'Are you sure?' And I am.''

'This was wrong,'' McAlhany added. ''This man should be with his family for Christmas. Now he's dead.''


Mary Gardner, another passenger, also said Thursday she not hear Alpizar mention a bomb.

..from http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Airplane-Shooting.html

TWO with names, so far ..

And there was this

Alpizar and his wife, Anne, arrived at Miami International Airport on Wednesday just past noon aboard a daily flight from Quito, Ecuador, where they had gone to do church missionary work. Their connecting flight, American Airlines Flight 924, arrived Wednesday from Medellín, Colombia.
..cut..

from http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/13365357.htm

But what gets me from the first source

Both marshals fired their weapons, authorities said, although it's unclear how many bullets hit him. Passengers interviewed by The Herald said at least five shots were fired.

TWO Marshals opened up on a Jetway with deadly force, HOW MANY OTHER PASSENGERS were around...

Taking a tragedy and spinning it with propoganda, and creating believers. On Keith Olberman last night, the construction worker said an air marshall put a gun to the back of his head and karate chopped his cell phone out of his hand. He said one woman cried all the way to wherever the bus took them, and it was because of how all the passengers were threatened by the marshalls, not because of that poor sick man who panicked and probably threatened no one.

I think the shooting was just a mistake done in a moment of panic. But the treatment of the surviving passengers: they were essentially deemed terrorists until proved otherwise - is beyond that. That was deliberate policy not the panicked actions of individual.

And you, or I, or any of us can expect the same treatment depending on circumstances. Because of the hysteria whipped up by BushCo ove 9/11 to further their own aims. We are supposed to live in fear the rest of our lives. What kind of leadership is that? Living in fear? And living in danger from doing things once taken for granted, like sitting on an airplane. I'm surprised they didn't shoot the wife, too.

until the government is there to create the comfort and security of a form of martial law. The Bush admin. can create the problem, then create the solution. It's all so easy. The most chilling thing to me is the popular reaction - people, even progressives, will apparantly support summary executions if it makes them feel a little safer.

:wtf: is this about?
Why were the other passengers being harrassed.

I'm sorry you got sucked into the bullshit. Perhaps you will start to notice the patterns of deception that they use in the future. Lots of us warned our fellow DUers to wait for more information, that the official story was all too convenient. Once again we have been proven correct.

I supported the actions based upon what I knew and the seriousness of the situation. Please do not lump me in with "that crowd". I refrained from posting anything at that time becuase I wanted more information.

I said I was sorry that you got sucked into the bullshit: that you believed the official spin. If you misunderstood what I meant I apologize.

Thank you.

In the absence of facts, assuming the man said he had a bomb, the marshals did the right thing even though it ended up killing an innocent person. If it turns out the official story was a lie, someone has some 'splainin' to do.

If so, the culture of fear has claimed an innocent life.

The facts are that the marshals did the wrong thing: they killed somebody who was not a threat to anyone. This wrong thing that they did might have been justified by the circumstances in which it happened as 'the only reasonable course', however as more and more information comes out that appears to be a less than convincing argument.

But they talked about it on Countdown....and said it was told to Time magazine.

So what's the deal? Why were they terrorising the attendents? :\

Why is there always a need to modify the story rather than just admit that it was a bad situation and bad things happened.

My mom's bi-polar (recently diagnosed, though), and when she was in the worst of her last manic swing, it was scary. She talked so fast that I wasn't always sure what she was even saying (partial words and incoherent thoughts), so when I read that he was bi-polar and off his meds (easy to have happen, as they often don't give my mom enough for in between appointments if the appointment is rescheduled, and he was coming home from a long trip), I wondered if he had mumbled something sounding like "bomb" and that was enough.

I understand why lots of people watching their tvs accept the official version: they have been well trained. I am vastly disappointed, again, in the people here on DU. How many times do they have to get fooled by the same trick before they wise up?

the Government. And like you I feel unnerved that so many DU'ers eagerly defend the Government story. It makes me think the GOP propaganda must be working if even people here are willing to suck it up without question.

the government story without waiting for more details. I was talking to a friend on the phone yesterday and she said "Isn't it wonderful about the airplane" in a very upbeat, happy voice. When I asked what she meant she said it was great they shot the man and saved all the people on the plane from a potential disaster and they will all be around for Christmas. I was so shocked I was at a loss for words. There was not one bit of concern for the dead man and his family. I am now wondering if she is changing her tune a little, but I doubt it. I find this whole tragedy so sad and I am concerned about this country and what it is becoming. I don't recognize it anymore.

that exists in the US. Not that Americans are all violent, or like guns. But we see so many police shows, Westerns, & action movies where the good guys blast away at the bad guys and save the world that we automatically apply that image to situations like this, even when it isn't correct. It's comforting to us, somehow.

I rather suspect that the air marshal training steers the marshals to eliminate the suspect rather than incapacitate the suspect. Once they start shooting my guess is that they are trained to continue shooting until their guns are empty and that the target is to be killed, not hurt. The theory is probably that they have to use a worse case scenario. Lots of folks here at DU buy into that, I think it is massively dangerous. This case illustrates exactly why 'blow the crap out of him' is not always the right response.

I agree - they probably had a "shoot to kill" order for possible terrorists. The "worst case scenario" explains why the Marshalls felt like they had to do it; I think the culture helps explain why so many of us are willing to accept it.

yes

why do people some people automatically take the non-civilian side?
I find that rather disturbing in light of the PATRIOT Act etc.

numerous versions of the same story. Four years ago in a town near mine a young man with apparent mental problems appeared in a church during a service and produced a knife. Three police officers responded and the guy ended up dead. Part of the congregation said they never felt threatened, part said he was threatening, some said he had a small knife, others said he had a large knife, some said he pointed it at himself, others said he pointed it at them. The cops were cleared and many - including me - still wonder about that. This was a case (in my mind) where the person could clearly have been disabled rather than killed, but I wasn't there and can only speculate. I don't know how you could disable without killing if you believed a person was reaching into a bag to detonate a bomb that would kill dozens of people. I resent being called a "defender of the state." I think judgement should be reserved until the investigation is complete.

All I want out of DUers is healthy scepticism of the initial media reports. However I think that the chance that we will have a honest investigation, if the report of witness prompting by the FBI is accurate, is pretty slim. Instead I think that most likely we will get a whitewash. Then again my scepticism filter is way high.

If we weren't governed by a bunch of liars, who are so damn good at coordinating their lies.

How many times was that guy shot? He was described by all who knew him as a gentle man. Deadly force not needed IMO.

that would be expected. Perhaps Vinca can confirm this, but officers are trained to fire two shots in rapid succession. If three officers fired (I don't know the specifics) that's the minimum from each officer.

is the reactions of some DUers to this situation. There was one whole thread devoted to beating up the dead guys wife. Nice folks around here. I used to think DEMS were supposed to be better then that.

I was wondering for a while yesterday if DU'ers are really that much different from Freepers. Very depressing reading some of those comments.:(

seem to be gone now. I am afraid of what will happen if more of us leave, though I'm sure some would be thrilled. :-(

Though if that's true I can't say I am surprised. I considered it myself yesterday. I come here because I want a haven from all the right wing propaganda and thinking not to have it reinforced by people who claim to be enlightened and compassionate. Some of the comments yesterday were downright Freeperish. Good god. If we lose this board what is there left? I am so worried that GOp propaganda is working. :scared:

or at least this is my perception. And I don't think it is necessarily over single issues, just a general swing. Though the issue of Democrats and the war has certainly created some serious divisions. I think a few folks have been sent packing over this. But I don't think they are all gone either, just visiting or posting less often.

it does get very "dreary and predictable" and that is not the DU I remember.
Sometimes lately I feel pretty lame for hanging around. This place seems to be steadily losing it's edge. It seems there is a critical mass thing happening.

Verboten topics of discussion. Forbidden sources. Anonymous moderators with heavy hands. A general lack of civilty and an upswing in general mean-ness. Personal insults are de rigeour. Too much GroupThink. Many of the best thinkers have left because there is a dearth of rational discussion.

I've never been one of the popular posters, but I have been here since 2002, and this place is becoming increasingly depressing and worthless. Even the LBN section has gone downhill.

it gets a little tiresome for passionate progressives to walk on eggs.
:shrug:

I think like any other large community, we certainly have our ups and downs. I think some of the 'censorship' especially of anything that has to do with 9-11 or Israel is doing more harm then good. It like have a giant elephant in the room that no one is allowed to talk about. Unfortunately, I do not see how we can make any real progress without dealing with these elephants.

To be honest, lately I have been thinking more about finding other ways to try to affect change? You are right, DU is not as cutting edge as we used to be and that brings with it a certain amount of frustration.

I could not believe the type of crap that was being thrown around here.
I had to come in and defend the side of justice.

over, and I will withhold judgment. Having 2-4 witnesses out of 100 say they didn't hear him say he had a bomb is hardly overwhelming evidence that he didn't say it. Additionally, Spanish was this man's native language, and one of the air marshalls was bilingual. Is it possible that he said it in Spanish? Whatever the case may be, this is a very tragic situation, and my heart is breaking for his wife.



As for the treatment of the passengers on the plane, chilling indeed.

The investigation is far from over. This is why many of us are bothered that supposedly progressive thinking DU'ers immediately jumped on the pro Gov. bandwagon.

where those who have staked out their position based on the initial reports are presenting new improved theories for what really happened and why it was all good.

The initial official story promoted by our compliant media was something to the effect of "the man was running down the aisle of the plane screaming that he had a bomb". Your new revised version is that perhaps he was doing so in spanish. Hmmppphhh. You are in good company however (or perhaps not so good).

The New Improved Nameless Official Cover Story:

"Federal officials say Rigoberto Alpizar made the threat in the jetway, after running up the plane's aisle from his seat at the back of the jetliner."
http://news.yahoo.com/fc/business/aviation_security

Where have we seen this pattern before? Think. Think.

Smell the bullshit. They are revising the cover story as the facts come out.

That when confronted w/evidence that conflicts with their opinion, people will simply come up with other reasons to justify that opinion, rather than changing it. It reminds me a little of what's going on here. Opinion seems to carry more weight than facts.

if it turned out that he did not say he had a bomb. On the other hand, I'm not willing to convict the FAM before the investigation is complete. I'm not revising anything by saying that PERHAPS he was speaking in Spanish, only stating a possibility, and there is absolutely NOTHING about this that is "all good". As for what really happened, I guess you have that all figured out.

He was always "reaching into his bag," or "turned around and pointed a gun at me." This for guys shot in back while running.

We are living in a police state created by George Bush and his Pub goons in Washington. The reason these guys can come in and put shotguns to the heads of citizens is because Bush sets the tone. He's the one who taught them THEY are the power, not the people.

When we get him out of office, there will have to be a purge of all these rightwing, goose-stepping law enforcement types who have run amok with their power.

I remember when I was in San Fransisco in the 90's and there was a Food
not Bombs ralley outside the UN building. Riot police showed up and were
ripping food out of peoples hands and putting them in plastic cuffs. About
a half dozen motorcycle cops were there to support, and then suddenly
decided to leave. One of them whipped around his bike without looking
and ran into a cyclist who was just passing by, was not involved in the
ralley at all. I was close enough to see the face of the cop who hit the cyclist,
he knew he was at fault as the cyclist lay stunned and likely injured on the
pavement. A younger bike cop came up beside him and started yelling at
the cyclist, and saying it was the cyclists fault, the cyclist rode in front of
them and he looked into the guilty cops face and said, "It was the cyclist's
fault, he rode right in front of you" and the story was constructed before
everyone's eyes. The guilty cop said, "It was his fault", and apparently their
word was law.


How do we root this out? Like torture in our overseas prisons, it seems to
be endemic. I wonder whether it's going to be enough to change a few
heads on top.

from under the thick coat of the suspect, which turned out to be untrue - no thick coat and no wires.

The media was just stenographing the bullshit stream coming from PR at Scotland Yard. They hardly bothered to run a spell checker on it.

the disgusting spectacle we just saw on DU.

Next time, I'm going to start a thread where LBN posting rules apply to every post. Maybe we can avoid the blame the dead guy, blame the widow, slander all mentally ill folks, let's hear it for our homocidal government cr@P!

/typo

but was waiting for information to come in. This whole heightened terror terror crap of bushco has led to more violence and more death. I thought there was a shortage of air marshalls and here we have a whole gaggle of them.
The best air marshall would be out of sight and out of mind and only pull out a weapon when there was imminent danger. In this case it doesn't seem like there was. :shrug: My question is how would his gun or bomb make it through the screeners? Also, wouldn't his nutty behavior before the incident provide a clue to another solution.

There was an incident in MPLS a year or so ago where a man wielding a sword was shot dead. The officers didn't wait for the crisis intervention team to show up. Quick outcomes seem to be desired by the force. When we don't have time and compassion for those around us that are losing their marbles, it sends a bad signal.
:freak:

Why the media so quick to proliferate the "bomb" tale? Well we know why as that was the official story from the uh well oh-fishels. But tell me why so many here, a progressive discussion board, were quick to swallow the official line. And I'm also curious as to why so many are for gassing Tookie Williams. That's not remotely progressive.

Now one thing I find disturbing is that the two individuals involved were less than perfect in the required style of the technocracy and so to have them offed seems more readily justified. Many of the comments were downright vulgar and brutal as we would expect from Lord of the Flies.

Now I'm not arguing guilt or innocence in either case I'm pointing to the seeming need to stand behind acts of State violence. This display is an example of why it is so easy for this country to head off to war year after year. The internalization of this violent culture seeps out in these small cases.

...instead of going directly to the people who actually witnessed the incident.

In short, our media has either become very lazy, or too willing to accept the official line, or both.

"Witnesses heard no talk of bomb"
Some passengers dispute the account of a Maitland man's airport shooting.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orange/orl-planefolo0905dec09,0,3421926.story?coll=orl-home-headlines

Very different from some of the misinformation that was being disseminated here on DU yesterday. Some people were claiming that this guy was running up and down the aisle of the plane screaming that he had a bomb.

had the guy, seperated him from coach and put him in first class to question him, then neglected to take the bag from him. The guy then grabbed the bag and ran. If this is true then there is no excuse for the shooting. This whole thing reeks of incompetence. Couldn't they have tasered the guy? I mean really, how many terrorists scream I have a bomb, then run around for awhile before setting it off. Gimme a break.

order that they don't know how to use?

Just like the militarization of New Orleans where every black person became a looter.

We are all terrorists now -- especially if we are brown skinned men.

I would think this is so obvious it would go without saying.

It actually FREAKS ME OUT that there are so many on DU that quickly jump on a story coming from an official, broadcast by the corporate media, as if it is true when there are often many reasons to be skeptical. I'm thinking about all the stories coming out during Kitrina about helicopters being shot at, for example, as justification for certain official actions. Much, if not all, of that turned out to be bogus. I can remember people here on DU assuming these reports must be true because they'd heard them on TV.

COME ON PEOPLE, WAKE UP! Yes, sometimes they tell the truth but in instances where government agents are responsible for the death of citizens, it is best to remain skeptical in the face of initial reports until more information and other perspectives are heard. They have lied to us about everything. TRUST THEM AT YOUR PERIL.

A flight attendant heard the bomb statement also - so we can't trust them either now..

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-12-08-marshals-defense_x.htm

B: A Flight Attendant would *never* distort the facts to protect her/his employer, right?

When this goes before a judge and jury and people present their points of view under oath, then, perhaps, we'll gain a clearer picture of what happened.

I learn something new every day.

on how to handle the press during these events? The airlines are only still in business because of government bailouts: they are in no position to embarrass their benefactors.

And I have no doubt that whatever other eye-witnesses comes forward they'll be Homeland Security plants, KGB, CIA, or something of that sort.

your sacred anonymous flight attendent's account is now at odds with the Official Story Rev2.0.

Hmmmm... I think 'it' needs to get with the program.

It is kind of like being a commie back in the 30's, you had to pay very close attention to the official party line to know what you deeply believed to be true, as it was likely to be the opposite of what you deeply believed to be true just yesterday.

the government will be sure to let you know what to believe next as soon as they put the story together though.
In the meantime, just sit tight and think nothing.

be held accountable in some way. In any case, what is important is under-oath, cross-examined testimony--not hearsay--from any witness. All you find in a news article is 'hearsay' (unless reporting testemony), even if the reporter is accurately reporting what was said.

Don't trust her - she'd be lying if she did give her name!!!!! THEY'RE ALL LIARS!!!!!!!!

"unnamed sources" no longer cut it.

The quote is:

Rigoberto Alpizar, 44, made the bomb threat after a flight attendant blocked him from exiting Flight 924 just minutes before the plane was scheduled to leave for Orlando, said Lonny Glover, national safety coordinator for the Association of Professional Flight Attendants.

"As the man came forward it was obvious that he was upset," Glover said. "That's when one of our attendants at the front of plane told him, 'Sir, you can't leave the plane.' His response, she said, was 'I have a bomb.' It was at that point that the air marshals gave up their cover and pursued him out the door and up the jetbridge."

Besides, this version is contradictory to this version:

"Dave Adams, a spokesman for the Federal Air Marshal Service, said Alpizar had run up and down the plane's aisle yelling, "I have a bomb in my bag."

Adams said Alpizar then fled the aircraft and marshals confronted him on the boarding bridge."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/08/airplane.gunshot/index.html

Hmmm.

Besides, now the story apparently is that he said he had a bomb in the gangway, out of earshot of the passengers.

She must work for SPECTRE

And accepted version of events.

I ask myself - why not?

isn't from the flight attendent, but from another senior official - Lonny Glover, national safety coordinator for the Association of Professional Flight Attendants. So it's second-hand information, from an organization that has an interest in avoiding liability in this case. Which isn't to say it can't be true. Maybe he simply ran up the aisle to get out, & when the flight attendent blocked him, he quietly said he had a bomb so they'd let him off. That would explain why none of the passengers would have heard anything. But it still wouldn't explain why they originally said he was running up & down the aisle, screaming he had a bomb. That version's clearly false. And if we know they've already lied to us, we should probably take what they have to say w/a grain of salt. I'm sure the truth will come out eventually.

Rather than it being a KGB plant, could this be a CYA attempt by the airline?

Note that the official story has now officially backed off the 'running down the aisle screaming bomb' meme. So that leaves us with an anonymous flight attendant who has stated she heard something that didn't happen. Hmmmmm....

There was no judgement to be withheld once you saw the pictures of the passengers being taken off the airplane holding their hands on their heads as if they were all criminals.

We live in a police state.

People would rather make up far-fetched blame-the-victim stories than recognize that.

more of those passengers aren't speaking up -- yet, any way. :(

I'm not saying he did say it and I'm not saying he didn't - because just because two or four people on a plane that large didn't hear him say it doesn't prove anything. We don't have enough facts to know for sure and we probably never will.

"Federal officials say Rigoberto Alpizar made the threat in the jetway at Miami International Airport, after running up the plane's aisle from his seat at the back of the jetliner. Authorities say he ignored their orders to stop, reached into his backpack and said he had a bomb. That's when he was shot. No bomb was found."

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/news.aspx?storyid=22431

Yet the unnamed stewardess heard him!!

when he was blocked by the flight attendent on the plane? It seems like they might have a little trouble keeping their stories straight. Also, the "flight attendents" story is that he first stated he had a bomb on the plane, which notified the marshalls to act. But this "air marshalls" version doesn't mention that at all - just says he refused to stop in the plane, so they chased him to the jetway. If he had really made the threat inside the plane, why wouldn't they mention that? That would seem to completely justify the marshall's actions in chasing him better than saying only that he "refused to stop."

with the report up above that some nameless flight attendent heard him say he had a bomb. Hmmm... seems like the bullshit is once again piling higher.

They should really try harder to get their stories straight.

cable channels. Monkey Boy would have made a speech in praise of the air marshalls. And Senate Republicans would have used it to pass whatever new POS legislation they're working on to line their pockets.

edit out the 'running down the aisle screaming bomb' part? What is it going to take for you to understand that you were lied to?

news this morning. The story changed to the one that he had a bomb. So now it seems the victim never said he had a bomb, but words that would lead one to believe he had a bomb.

Could this be why they gave him his backpack back after interviewing him, the fact that there was no bomb in the backpack? This story is getting stranger as more information comes out.

'dats da bomb' and bang bang his brains are all over your lap.

Or the accountant says "dammit where the heck is that Bill Of Materials" only it comes out "BOM" and he gets a massive but very brief headache.

We've just gone and accepted that we should surrender our remaining freedom to the state. Apparently they will keep it in trust for us until the bullshit warnterra is over, which will be never.