The journey from there to here

Well, we had to all know it was coming. As much as many of us dreaded it, the MSM has now turned on the federal air marshalls who shot a man who allegedly claimed to have a bomb. Am I the only one who finds it interesting that the attack came not MINUTES after the attack, but more than 24 hours after, after certain journalists had the chance to vette every passenger on the plane to find one whose viewpoint agreed with theirs. Now the entire air marshall program would be scrutinized.

I can't have dreamed the final 3 weeks of September, 2001 when liberals and conservatives alike demanded greater security for our air travel. I can't have dreamed the number of talking heads DEMANDING that President Bush fund air marshalls and place them strategically on international flights. No, I can't have dreamed it because my memory is longer than the doublespeak that predominates our media.

Let's look at the facts, shall we (even absent the use of the word "bomb"!) Man grabs sack, reaches towards it, air marshalls give chase. While his wife was explaining the situation, it's hard to imagine an air marshall whose single focus is protecting the lives of the passengers on the plane and inside the terminal having time to stop, interview, and question the situation. They order the man to drop. He does not. Somehow, it seems to me that even a bipolar individual can understand a one syllable, single word command. And that that individual would be even more willing to comply when drawn guns were focused on him.

What is going on in the MSM is an attempt to make the skies safer for terrorists. We are questioning airport security when they pull over certain individuals and not others, we are questioning the "no fly" list, and we are questioning the request to provide identification when boarding a flight, especially a cross country flight. Even a hardened Libertarian such as myself can see that there are times when we must think about the security of the many over the rights of the one. Even when it comes to flying, we have options. We can still drive.

What happened on the tarmac with this individual was a tragedy, no doubt. It is a shame that his own inner demons eventually cost him his life. But the air marshalls acted responsibly and in an attempt to prevent what could have been a GREATER tragedy. I, for one, am appalled at the way the media has turned against them.


Comments
on Dec 09, 2005
The MSM doesn't want our skies safe from terrorism, they want the by-line, and they don't care what has to happen for them to get it.
on Dec 09, 2005
I know that conservatives don't like "what ifs"...but...

What if he DID have a bomb and what if his wife was his partner in the scheme, trying to divert attention from him to her and give excuses to stall the air marshalls so that he had time to set off his bomb?

I don't think any action beyond what they chose to do would have been prudent in that situation. I think they did the right thing, and it's sad that they are being vilified.
on Dec 09, 2005
I know that conservatives don't like "what ifs"...but...

What if he DID have a bomb and what if his wife was his partner in the scheme, trying to divert attention from him to her and give excuses to stall the air marshalls so that he had time to set off his bomb?


The problem is, Tex...it's not the CONSERVATIVES that are doing the second guessing, for the most part! The ACLU, for one, has been a MAJOR impediment to security measures that the government has tried to implement, and the ACLU is, by no stretch of ANYONE's imagination, a conservative organization.
on Dec 09, 2005
The problem is, Tex...it's not the CONSERVATIVES that are doing the second guessing, for the most part!


In this case, no. Of course it's the evil liberals and their mind-control media. "What ifs" are only barred when they undermine a conservative's opinion.
on Dec 09, 2005

Tex,

I have to disagree with you. If the air marshalls had singled this man out because he looked arabic and given chase then shot him dead, they would have acted wrongly. But the fact that they believe him to have TOLD them he had a bomb (whether he did or not, I have to believe they believed he did), and refused to listen to their arguments for him to drop down makes their actions totally justified.

on Dec 09, 2005
Gideon: Did you read my first reply?

I think they did the right thing, 100%.
on Dec 09, 2005

Note that only 2 Passengers are saying that.   The plane had over 100 passengers and crew.  I suspect some others are going to come forward who will contradict these 2.  ONe clearly said he was many rows away and only noticed the man running forward when he was bumped.  IN Row 21.  So it is doubtful he heard what the man said at the front of the plane.

And Tex, I dont think this is a left right issue at all.  It is like Ted Said.  It is a byline issue.

on Dec 09, 2005

The last comment was directed towards this:

Of course it's the evil liberals and their mind-control media. "What ifs" are only barred when they undermine a conservative's opinion.

My point was that, when some (not all) conservatives bar "what if" opinions, it's usually because those "what ifs" require egregious violations (for instance "what if you might have bomb making material in your house" being used as a basis for a warrant with no other exigent circumstances present).

In this case, exigent circumstances WERE present, as you realize. And, as you also recognized, the proper decisions were made with the knowledge the air marshalls had.

on Dec 09, 2005

Note that only 2 Passengers are saying that. The plane had over 100 passengers and crew. I suspect some others are going to come forward who will contradict these 2.

And that's why I think it took so long for the media to turn against the air marshalls. They asked everyone onboard until they found someone willing to go on record with an opposing view.

on Dec 10, 2005
Well, it is MSM. You want a fair, hypeless report? What on earth are you expecting? =P

I think it is unfair to blame the air marshall for this difficult situation. And at the same time, I also think it is unfair to blame the deceased because I feel his certain medical condition affected him to do this erratic behaviour.

But I do regret something. I feel that this guy is just extremely unlucky. He might forgot to take his medication and it was too late to go back home to take it. The events leading to this unfortunate situation could have been avoided. I guess it serves as a reminder for all of us to take things more seriously. Similar incident might happen to anyone. Simple forgetfulness could lead to life-threatening situation.

I have never personally taken a flight in US. But I don't think air marshalls program should be abandoned just because of this event. However, I do hope the respective air marshalls would go and have private apology to dead guy's family. They did not chose a wrong action. This action is part of the guidelines to protect the passengers.

But they should apologize just simply for the fact that they killed an unfortunate, innocent person. For me, apology is not always about admitting that you made mistakes, but also to show sympathy and willingness to do better next time.
on Dec 10, 2005
As I said in my own article, the marshals were 100% justified in detaining and using lethal force in the death of this guy.
"When Air Marshals Attack!"

He acted up.
He shouted he had a bomb.
He barged through the crowd.
He refused to follow instructions from the marshals who had already pulled their weapons.
He reached into his bag, having already told the marshals there was a bomb on him.
His actions, not the marshals, endangered hundreds of people both in the plane and the terminal.

I would have pulled the trigger, too.

on Dec 10, 2005
You filthy, sorry, deginerate piece of pond scum!!!! How dare you accuse the Air Marshalls of doing anything but the utmost of jobs!!!! You should be...
Oh wait, I just actually read the article.
Never mind.
on Dec 10, 2005
For your information:

When training Air Marshalls to shoot, they are trained to kill. The only way to surely stop a threat of bodliy harm or death.

They use very special rounds that are devestating to the person struck., called the air freedom round, I use them and have seen them in use. They do the job well.

You can not wait until after the bomb goes off or its to late. We are teaching our police nowadays to shoot anyone who presents themselves as a bomber, and to aim for the head if possible as not to try and set of any body explosives.

If a person is foolish enough, or mentally un-sound enough to make any claims to a bomb and then act in a threatening manner, I have no sympthy for them. What if my wife and child had been on that plane? I would be sending those Air Marshalls a Christmas Bonus of a few thousand bucks, a hearty thanks, and job well done.

Now what do you think any terrorist is thinking who may have been thinking of doing this very thing for real? I think they will think twice. And only die once.



on Dec 10, 2005
J
I think it is unfair to blame the air marshall for this difficult situation. And at the same time, I also think it is unfair to blame the deceased because I feel his certain medical condition affected him to do this erratic behaviour.


Agreed, in fact, no one is to "blame" for this tragedy. Just like the jet that went off the runway at Midway Air Port, it was a sad series of events that led to the death of a person.

An investigation is warranted (since as far as I know, all law enforcement agencies require an investigation anytime a shot is fired by an officer), but only as a matter of policy, not as a "we have to blame someone, and the air marshalls are the only ones left alive to blame" witch hunt... or worse yet, a press inspired "trial by public opinion" farce.
on Dec 12, 2005

Yes, para, the investigation is definitely warranted. But the fact that this is the first such incident since 9/11 would indicate that these air marshalls are anything but trigger happy.