http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1138965,00.html

Quote :

"Eyewitness: "I Never Heard the Word 'Bomb'" A passenger on Flight 924 gives his account of the shooting and says Rigoberto Alpizar never claimed to have a bomb By SIOBHAN MORRISSEY/MIAMI Posted Thursday, Dec. 08, 2005 At least one passenger aboard American Airlines Flight 924 maintains the federal air marshals were a little too quick on the draw when they shot and killed Rigoberto Alpizar as he frantically attempted to run off the airplane shortly before take-off. "I don't think they needed to use deadly force with the guy," says John McAlhany, a 44-year-old construction worker from Sebastian, Fla. "He was getting off the plane." McAlhany also maintains that Alpizar never mentioned having a bomb. "I never heard the word 'bomb' on the plane," McAlhany told TIME in a telephone interview. "I never heard the word bomb until the FBI asked me did you hear the word bomb. That is ridiculous." Even the authorities didn't come out and say bomb, McAlhany says. "They asked, 'Did you hear anything about the b-word?'" he says. "That's what they called it." When the incident began McAlhany was in seat 24C, in the middle of the plane. "[Alpizar] was in the back," McAlhany says, "a few seats from the back bathroom. He sat down." Then, McAlhany says, "I heard an argument with his wife. He was saying 'I have to get off the plane.' She said, 'Calm down.'" Alpizar took off running down the aisle, with his wife close behind him. "She was running behind him saying, 'He's sick. He's sick. He's ill. He's got a disorder," McAlhany recalls. "I don't know if she said bipolar disorder [as one witness has alleged]. She was trying to explain to the marshals that he was ill. He just wanted to get off the plane.""

Sounds like he was just having an argument with his wife.

And here's what the marshals subjected the other passengers to. Guns to their heads, making little girls and women afraid. From the article:

Quote :

""I was on the phone with my brother. Somebody came down the aisle and put a shotgun to the back of my head and said put your hands on the seat in front of you. I got my cell phone karate chopped out of my hand. Then I realized it was an official." In the ensuing events, many of the passengers began crying in fear, he recalls. "They were pointing the guns directly at us instead of pointing them to the ground," he says "One little girl was crying. There was a lady crying all the way to the hotel." McAlhany said he saw Alpizar before the flight and is absolutely stunned by what unfolded on the airplane. He says he saw Alpizar eating a sandwich in the boarding area before getting on the plane. He looked normal at that time, McAlhany says. He thinks the whole thing was a mistake: "I don't believe he should be dead right now." "

So, the passengers were more afraid of the marshals putting guns to their heads, and didn't think Alpizar was a threat, never even heard him mention a bomb, and don't think he should have been killed. And later, it was discovered that Alpizar didn't even have a bomb. Doesn't this all seem highly suspicious?


[Edited on December 9, 2005 at 9:22 AM. Reason : `]

12/9/2005 9:16:52 AM

http://www.brentroad.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=370779

12/9/2005 9:17:28 AM

Quote :

"Somebody came down the aisle and put a shotgun to the back of my head"

BWAHHAHAHHAHAHHA

YEAH BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW AIR MARSHALLS CARRY SHOTGUNS ON PLANES INCONSPICUOUSLY

12/9/2005 9:19:43 AM

if salisburyboy says it , it must be true

12/9/2005 9:23:01 AM

i want to see someone karate chop a cell phone out of a hand

12/9/2005 9:24:58 AM

ok,

They are air marshalls. They have authority. They asked him to stop. He did not. They told him to stop. He did not. They said get down on the ground. He did not. They were following him because they were of the understanding he had a bomb. He reached in his bag.

What the fuck do you do salisburyboy?

Now, if he had had a bomb, and it went off, you would have had some conspiracy theory for that too.

12/9/2005 9:27:03 AM

And they were not pointing their guns at the floor because they were looking for anyone who might b with him if it was a real bomb. SO YOU AIM THEM WHERE YOU LOOK!

12/9/2005 9:27:51 AM

AIRPLANES: THE NEW WILD WEST?

12/9/2005 9:27:59 AM

And they don't carry shotguns you fucking twat. This is not some fucking urban assault tactical mission training zibabwe shit. They have handguns because you can not hide a shotgun in your crotch. You do not know shit about shit.

12/9/2005 9:29:13 AM

Fuck I want soemthing bad to happen to you.

12/9/2005 9:29:42 AM

Quote :

"BWAHHAHAHHAHAHHA YEAH BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW AIR MARSHALLS CARRY SHOTGUNS ON PLANES INCONSPICUOUSLY "

Whatever the gun was, are you disputing that guns were put to the heads of the passengers? You think the guy is lying about that? It has been reported by many other news outlets.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/12/07/gunfire_on_american_airlines_plane_in_miami/

Quote :

"Some passengers told local media they were treated roughly by police. "They put a gun to the back of my head and said, 'Put your hands on the seat,"' the Miami Herald newspaper quoted John McAlhany as saying in a story posted on its Web site. "That was more scary than anything.""

12/9/2005 9:30:31 AM

I heard they carry snakes

[Edited on December 9, 2005 at 9:31 AM. Reason : with mind control electr0des!@]

12/9/2005 9:30:51 AM

That is what you tell people to do. You want to see their hands...

They would be more pissed if they blew up!

12/9/2005 9:34:44 AM

would you rather them be rough and scary like that?

or all nice offering milk and cookies to anyone who needs it ...

give me a damn break. they are air marshalls.. not the icecream man

i hope there is 1 on every flight i take. i'd feel much safer knowing i have that kind of protection

and if one of them told me to jump, i'd ask how high...


[Edited on December 9, 2005 at 9:40 AM. Reason : yes]

12/9/2005 9:39:16 AM

me too!

I would rather be roughed up knowing that if i WAS a terrorist, they woulda fucked me up!

it is not a fucking tickling contest. they thought that there was a bomb on the plane.

12/9/2005 9:40:27 AM

Quote :

"they thought that there was a bomb on the plane. "

That's what they say now. No passengers heard the guy even mention a bomb. And they later found out that he didn't have a bomb. The passengers report that he was just having an argument with his wife and wanted to get off the plane.

It is very disturbing, based on these facts, that anyone would be ok with police killing this man and putting guns to the heads of the passengers and scaring the hell out of everyone. And for no reason at all. They guy wasn't a threat, and never even mentioned a bomb.

12/9/2005 9:44:34 AM

WHOT HE FUCK LET HIM OUT OF THE SOAPBOX??

12/9/2005 9:44:42 AM

I was confined to the soap box?

12/9/2005 9:45:48 AM

Quote :

"imagine if this scenario had gone the liberal way. "weeeeeeeeeeeellllllllllll, his wife said he was bipolar, so we didnt think he could reeeeeeeally have a bomb. we didnt want to risk harming a mentally ill person. we are sorry to the families of everyone killed during the explosion in the airport, and they will all receive a voucher good for one round trip flight in the continental US.""

12/9/2005 9:47:30 AM

Quote :

"I heard they carry snakes"

SNAKES ON A PLANE!!!!!!!!!

12/9/2005 9:51:57 AM

^ WIN

12/9/2005 10:01:15 AM

just cause one dude didn't hear the word bomb doesn't mean it wasn't said. that guy could have been in the back of the plane (or whatever the opposite end would have been). some other guy on the news slept through the whole thing.

i'm really sick of the coverage of this. an air marshall shot a guy who wouldn't do what they said. that's their job. end of story.



and it's pretty damn hard to confuse a SHOTGUN with a PISTOL.
shotgun:

pistol:

that person either has an IQ under 70 or is completely blind.

12/9/2005 10:07:19 AM

i cant imagine that in a situation such as this, federal agents would actually put their weapon to the head of a civillian. im sure there were guns pointed and instructions yelled, but i think the quotes and story are being blown way out of proportion in an effort to embarrass the agents and program, as often happens in the media. im sure there were little girls crying, because, well, little girls cry. it doesnt take a gun to do that. the whole thing is a conspiracy and itll end up being blamed on W.

12/9/2005 10:17:52 AM

Quote :

"that person either has an IQ under 70 or is completely blind."

blind?
how many eyes do you have on the back of your head?

if someone puts a gun barrell to my head

i don't think i'm gonna be thinking to myself "is this a Glock or an H&K?"

12/9/2005 10:23:54 AM

Quote :

""I never heard the word 'bomb' on the plane," McAlhany told TIME in a telephone interview. "I never heard the word bomb until the FBI asked me did you hear the word bomb. That is ridiculous.""

So this guy can hear everything that goes on in all parts of the plane? Someone has already pointed this out. Maybe all the bomb talk happened somehwere other than where the guy that didn't hear it was standing. Duh. This isn't entirely salisburyboy's fault. I hear this kind of crap on the news also. They are so quick to create controversy/sensationalism so they can get viewers/ratings.

This one is pretty transparent. Someone with common sense should automatically think "duh, just because one guy didn't hear bomb doesn't mean it wasn't said". Notice how the wife's defense isn't "He never said bomb!!1!!!11" it is "He's bipolar". Makes you think.

Quote :

"Now, if he had had a bomb, and it went off, [salisburyboy] would have had some conspiracy theory for that too."

Really. At least there won't be 5 threads on how the government purposely blew up some plane near the holidays for <insert crazy theory here>.

12/9/2005 10:24:22 AM

^^i didn't say that they should have known the difference in manufacturers of handguns.



[Edited on December 9, 2005 at 12:41 PM. Reason : ]

12/9/2005 12:41:07 PM

^^^and logic would dictate that he walked past him after this happened toward the front of the plane. he would have seen a shotgun because of how you are required to hold it to use it. was different from the posture used to hold a handgun.

not to mention you would see the fucking barrel of the shotgun.

12/9/2005 12:47:42 PM

well yes

but for the average person, telling the type of gun PRESSED AGAINST THE BACK OF THEIR HEAD would probably be as easy as telling the brand of gun

of course, i've never had any kind of gun pressed into the back of my head, so perhaps its quite easy

of course i'm the idiot who got shot and when i saw the blood thought a tree must have done it...

but then again, who is really rational after getting shot?

[Edited on December 9, 2005 at 12:48 PM. Reason : `]

12/9/2005 12:47:56 PM

Quote :

"not to mention you would see the fucking barrel of the shotgun."

Quote :

"how many eyes do you have on the back of your head?"

12/9/2005 12:49:17 PM

what they should do is just let people blow up planes

12/9/2005 12:54:34 PM

12/9/2005 12:56:14 PM

Quote :

"if someone puts a gun barrell to my head i don't think i'm gonna be thinking to myself "is this a Glock or an H&K?""

Quote :

"Walther PPK, 7.65 mm, only three men I know use such a gun...I believe I’ve killed two of them... "

12/9/2005 1:11:42 PM

Waa! The police are scary!

12/9/2005 1:14:08 PM

woodfoot,

Quote :

"Quote : "not to mention you would see the fucking barrel of the shotgun." Quote : "how many eyes do you have on the back of your head?" "

from my post,

Quote :

"and logic would dictate that he walked past him after this happened toward the front of the plane."

that is when you would see the gun.... when he walked past....

12/9/2005 1:16:32 PM

OMFG THE MARSHALLS CALLED BUSH AND THE GREAT EVIL SATAN TOLD THEM TO SHOOT THE GUY THEN CAVITY SEARCH HIS WIFE OMFG!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111

12/9/2005 1:20:46 PM

Quote :

"I got my cell phone karate chopped out of my hand."

that air marshal should have put a shot gun shell in him for fucking up the flight instruments

12/9/2005 1:28:04 PM

I sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for this to be blamed on Talmudic Zionism.

12/9/2005 1:28:56 PM

salsbury is seething at the fresh pool of troll feeders in the lounge. watch as they place their hands inside his cage to hold out freshly bought vending machine food pellets.





[Edited on December 9, 2005 at 1:35 PM. Reason : 0]

12/9/2005 1:33:37 PM

Quote :

"what they should do is just let people blow up planes"

1. The guy didn't have a bomb
2. The passengers didn't hear him saying he had a bomb. Apparantly, he was just upset with his wife and was trying to get off the plane.
3. The cops kill this guy and then claim the guy was saying he had a bomb.
4. The MSM repeats the cops story over and over and therefore the public falsely believes the guy either had a bomb or even claimed to have a bomb and that the cops acted in a justified manner.

12/9/2005 1:44:26 PM

Quote :

"At least there won't be 5 threads on how the government purposely blew up some plane near the holidays for <insert crazy theory here>."

12/9/2005 1:49:46 PM

Quote :

"The marshals say Alpizar announced he was carrying a bomb before being killed. However, no other witness has publicly concurred with that account. Only one passenger recalled Alpizar saying, "I've got to get off, I've got to get off," CNN's Kathleen Koch reported. "

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


So far, no one has corroborated the story of the guy saying he had a bomb, according to CNN. If the guy was really saying he had a bomb, it's sad, but you can't blame the AMs for shooting him. I do think they were a little trigger happy though, and were more looking for a reason to shoot someone, than not shoot them.

What I don't get about the whole story though is where the wife was the entire time. Why wasn't she detained by the marshals? Why didn't she chase her husband, or tell the marshals not to shoot him?

And if they guy was running OFF of a plane with a bomb (and the marshals should have known the guy PROBABLY didn't have a bomb), why shoot him 3 or 4 times to kill him, rather than once to disable him?

In that situation though, if the guy said he had a bomb, and started running (which is a dumb thing for anyone to do), I probably would have shot him too. At this point, it's not completely clear if he actually said that or not.

[Edited on December 9, 2005 at 1:53 PM. Reason : d]

12/9/2005 1:50:10 PM

1. The guy didn't have a bomb
How do they know that? Ohh, they searched his body after they blew him away because they thought he had one.
2. The passengers didn't hear him saying he had a bomb. Apparantly, he was just upset with his wife and was trying to get off the plane.
The passengers were not the ones who shot him. Trained air marshalls did.
3. The cops kill this guy and then claim the guy was saying he had a bomb.
Not like this has EVER happened before. I personally believe them. All he had to do was drop down to his knees and not reach in his bag. Not that hard to not get shot if you ask me. I have never been shot by air marshalls.
4. The MSM repeats the cops story over and over and therefore the public falsely believes the guy either had a bomb or even claimed to have a bomb and that the cops acted in a justified manner.
Your story is in the MSM also now being falsely reported. He deserved to die for not listening to the marshalls when they gave him instructions. Plain and simple, if he has listened, they would have seen he did not have one, and it would have all been sorted out.

12/9/2005 1:50:16 PM

He had his bag strapped to his chest, and the shooting happened on the boarding bridge, not the plane. So even if he didn't say he had a bomb on the plane(which is still debatable), the marshals said he said that on the bridge. If he did say it on the bridge, doubtful anyone would have heard him.

Also the marshals say he was going towards them when they shot...and that he had put his hands in his bag.



[Edited on December 9, 2005 at 1:58 PM. Reason : .]

12/9/2005 1:56:56 PM

Quote :

"He deserved to die for not listening to the marshalls when they gave him instructions. Plain and simple, if he has listened, they would have seen he did not have one, and it would have all been sorted out. "

Cops are only authorized to use deadly force in certain situations, and mere disobedience on the part of a person is not one of those. It has to be something like when the officer's safety is in danger. And that's the issue. This guy didn't have a bomb, and the passengers say he wasn't even claiming to have a bomb. He apparantly was acting strange, and he may have been "uncooperative", but he wasn't a threat to the marshals/cops. He was a guy who had some mental problems and just wanted to get off the plane.

The marshals/cops went overboard in their response to this "situation", killing a man who was not a threat and then threatening and putting guns to the rest of the passengers.

[Edited on December 9, 2005 at 2:17 PM. Reason : `]

12/9/2005 2:08:51 PM

if he has a bomb the officers life is in danger. at the time, whether he did or not was immaterial, they thought he did and he has to listen to them.

they did exactly what they were supposed to do.

12/9/2005 2:15:44 PM

he was a threat, they thought he had a bomb.

12/9/2005 2:16:11 PM

Quote :

"that air marshal should have put a shot gun shell in him for ****ing up the flight instruments"

I heard that cell phones don't mess up flight instruments as much as you might think. I've even heard that pilots use them. I think the main reason they don't let you use them is:

1) They annoy some people
2) What I feel is the main reason, if you could use the cell phone then you would no longer be forced into using the phone that is built into the seat and charges $5/minute. They want a phone monopoly.

[Edited on December 9, 2005 at 2:17 PM. Reason : -]

12/9/2005 2:16:52 PM

Quote :

"he was a threat, they thought he had a bomb."

You're taking their word for it. Think about it. Maybe at the time they really didn't think the guy had a bomb. Maybe they just decided to "take action" against a guy who was acting strange, and when he wasn't totally cooperative and maybe made a "wrong move", the cops overreacted and shot and killed the guy. Then they fabricated the story about him claiming to have a bomb to create the justification for their action.

That is completely possible, especially now that passengers are coming forward saying that the guy was NOT claiming to have a bomb, and that he didn't deserve to be killed.

12/9/2005 2:21:06 PM

Two things could have happened if he really did have a mental disorder:

1) He has argument with his wife. He's a little mentally unstable so at this point he does something impulsive and runs out of the plane because he doesn't want to fly anymore. Air marshals shoot in the heat of the moment.

I've known people who have pretty heavy depression problems and if they aren't in control of it, or haven't taken their anti-depression pills, sometimes their mind totally blocks out everything that's going on around them. For the most part, they aren't out to hurt anyone when their mind is in this state, they are actually more apt to hurt themselves.

(Oh wait, this part did happen :p )

2) He and his wife are in a huge conspiracy to bomb an airplane, but failed miserably when his depression problems kicked in

[Edited on December 9, 2005 at 2:25 PM. Reason : blah blah blah]

12/9/2005 2:22:14 PM

Quote :

"And if they guy was running OFF of a plane with a bomb (and the marshals should have known the guy PROBABLY didn't have a bomb), why shoot him 3 or 4 times to kill him, rather than once to disable him?"

If a law officer is going to shoot a person who is a moving target, they're going to shoot at the biggest part of the target (the chest, or back, depending on which direction) and they're going to be damn sure the target is disabled (multiple shots), especially in a situation where a bomb might be involved. From what I heard, he was on an empty jetway at the time, not in a crowded airplane or a crowded terminal, so priority one was to stop him from going ANYWHERE other than where he was. Did they shoot based on flimsy evidence? I don't know, and won't venture an opinion. Did they err in shooting to kill, rather than "disable"? No. They reacted the way they were trained to.

12/9/2005 2:24:31 PM