Shooting the Mentally ill, Better than treatment?

international | rights, freedoms and repression | news report

Saturday December 10, 2005 23:30

by Cindy

Forty-four year old Rigoberto Alpizar, an American citizen was Murdered by federal air marshals on Wednesday as he fled an American Airlines jet at Miami International Airport. Federal officials lied about him saying he had a bomb.

According to passengers he NEVER said he had a bomb. Passengers said they heard him say "I have to get off this plane" and he bolted from his seat, followed by his frantic wife, who was screaming that he was bipolar and off his medication. As he fled toward the terminal, undercover agents shot him in cold blood on the jet bridge. Passengers say he was shot four or five times.

Alpizar, a citizen of Maitland, Florida who worked in the paint department of Home Depot, was on his way home from Quito Ecuador, where he and his wife were on a church mission. Family, friends, and neighbors describe a well-liked man completely different from the one portrayed in news accounts - smiling, talkative, proud to be a citizen.

The air marshals claim that Alpizar was acting aggressively even when he boarded.

If so, why was he allowed to board and not just escorted away immediately?

They found Mr. Alpizar no bomb or nothing that could be remotely considered a weapon, not even a house key.

A SWAT team surrounded the jet, passengers had guns put to their heads the terrorist facsist authorities had the bombs and used them blow up two bags.

Alpizar was found to have no tie to terrorism.

The authorities are the ones who terrorized the passengers.

We have only the two undercover marshals' word that Alpizar ever said he had a bomb. Passenger Alan Tirpak, one of several who heard Alpizar's wife talk about his illness, said Alpizar did not say anything about a bomb. He is corroborated by other passengers.

A pilot who sat next to Mrs. Alpizar and reassured her was aware of the real situation.

Federal air marshals are trained to kill, like a rabid dog, once they have the taste of blood they hunger for the kill, their training is the cause of this insanity.

Amnesty International has long noted the problem of police using extreme force, deadly force, against mentally ill or disturbed people who could have been subdued easily with out their insane measures.

In 2000, Chicago police shot and killed a deranged Arthur Hutchinson, who was menacing an officer with just a spoon. In 2002, they shot and killed a deranged Tim Crotty who was menacing an officer with a ink pen.

Even in cases of more serious threat, much less force could usually have been used.

In August 1999, Gidone Busch, a mentally ill man wielding a bath towel, died after NYPD officers shot at him 12 times. The case led to community protests over why the six officers at the scene could not have subdued him less violently.

The same could be asked of the May 1999 LAPD shooting of Margaret Laverne Mitchell, a frail, mentally ill, homeless 55-year-old woman who lunged at an officer with a candy bar while he and another officer were questioning her about a shopping cart she was pushing.

The White House stands behind the shooting because they are insane lunatics.

It was the White House which after orchestrating the 9-11 government operation, thee fascists expanded the air marshal program from only 33 once to over six thousand. Armed them with guns impunity to murder and terrorize, they travel on planes ready to terrorize if anyone gets slightest bit out of line. The Aviation and Transportation Security Act signed by Bush two months after 9-11 authorizes them to travel on domestic passenger flights, which is how Rigoberto Alpizar came to their notice.

Officials claim the shooting was justified by the fabricated threat.

But how is it then that on December 3, 2001, pilots and crew, without any marshals present, were able to subdue Richard Reid who really did have a bomb?

Is this what happens when civilian functions increasingly become penetrated by fascist military tactics and agendas; to suppress and keep the citizens in line; when police and military functions blur; when personnel from all branches of military act as terrorists and executioners on foreign and domestic soil and conversely, when police - local, state and federal - act more as fascist military units, sometimes with black Ninja suits and torture devises, and automatic weapons.

The real reason why some one in need of medical help ended up Murdered is an active policy to exterminate a class of unwanted citizens.

save preference

Comments (12 of 12)

Your full of bullshit

by Righteous Pragmatist

Sun Dec 11, 2005 12:23

Do you remember 9/11?
Terrorists hijacked four jet airliners packed with passengers and smashed them into buildings killing 3,000 people.

The message to anybody who boards a plane in the United States - make trouble and you may face the ultimate price.

This case is an obvious tragedy.

But what if this man was an Islamic terrorist actually had a bomb and there were no air marshalls to put him down?

Are you suggesting it is somehow wrong to protect innocent people from the threat of terrorism?

This guy and his wife were idiots - if he was bipolar they should have made sure he take his medication - other wise don't travel on aircraft.

America is a country at war - there is no scope to take chances with peoples lives.

by pat c

Sun Dec 11, 2005 12:48

people who are mentally ill forget to take their pills or believe that they have done so. its likely that his wife was unsutre of this up to the time he started to act oddly. the air marshalls left him take a lot of actions, they could possibly have intervened earlier in a non-lethal manner.

i realise that AMs have a difficult job, no rational person would defend the hijacking of civilian flights or the holding of civilians on such flights as hostages or using them as a human bomb.

Non-violence

by irwin

Sun Dec 11, 2005 15:24

Of course this situation could have be resolved non-violently - but that outcome was dependent of the air marshalls ignoring their belief that the man perhaps actually had bomb on his person - they could have grappled him held him down and cuffed him - but they would have been mindful that this would taken the precious fraction of a second necessary for the suspected bomber to activate the explosive to defeat them before they could defeat him.
Hypothetically if the man was unarmed but skilled in martial arts or armed with a knife or a gun at close quarters it may have been possible to subdue him with out shooting him 9such a situation is potential less lethal than a suicide bomb attack)- however this man had run from the plane and was out of their reach with the potential they believed to detonate himself on the apron near the plane or perhaps he was going to flee into the terminal and blow himself up there.
Fists, knives and bullets can be tackeld or dodged but not the shrapnel heat and shockwave of an explosion - therefore it is imperative to shoot to kill a potential suicide bomber or you die along with your attacker.

In such a situation you have no scope to use non-violent means but rather overwhelming violence - even lethal violence to diffuse the situation.

The behaviour of this unfortunate man like the behaviour the Brazilian killed in London could justifiably be construed as the behaviour of a suicide bomber fleeing law enforcement officers. They could take no chances and acted accordingly to protect themselves and others.

irwin

Sun Dec 11, 2005 22:56

"like the behaviour the Brazilian killed in London could justifiably be construed as the behaviour of a suicide bomber fleeing law enforcement officers. "

it has been shown that the Brazilian took no suspicious actions. the police lied in this case. you should keep up to date.

Thanks Cindy for a humane assessment

by Justin Morahan - Peace People

Sun Dec 11, 2005 23:04

For the person who glories in the nom-de-plume of "Righteous Pragmatist", all history must have begun on 9 September 2001. It alone can justify all those atrocities (sanctioned by RP, George W, and their friends) that have happened since.

Irwin, you have not answered Cindy's question: "But how is it then that on December 3, 2001, pilots and crew, without any marshals present, were able to subdue Richard Reid who really did have a bomb?"

I'll answer you by posing some questions

Mon Dec 12, 2005 14:57

Why was there no air marshall on the plane who was trained to tackle terrorists which left the passengers and crew themselves to tackle Richard Reid to safeguard their own safety?
What if Richard Reid was able to fight them off (by the way Reid is an enormous giant of a man) and detonate the bomb?
Surely if there were an armed persence on the aircraft then the prolonged struggle in which Reid nearly triumphed and killed himself and passengers would not have occured - rather the danger would have eliminated immediately with a well aimed 9mm bullet to his cranium.
Since air marshalls were introduced on american airliners there has not been one -not one - instance of hijacking.
Please explain?

This is not an answer

Mon Dec 12, 2005 15:02

It's just obfuscation

What do you mean?

by righteous pragmatist

Mon Dec 12, 2005 16:48

Your not seriously suggesting there should be no armed air marshalls on flights?

Do you think that it should be left to pilots and crew and passengers to subdue to hijackers just because one time Richard Reid was stopped in his tracks?

The only other time that passengers and crew managed to overpower hijackers was on board Flight 93 and they ended up in the bottom of a smoking hole in the ground.

Do you think a 1/2 chance of survival is acceptable?

If there is an armed marshall on a plane there is better chance that the hijacker will fail or perhaps never even attempt it.
There has not been a single hijacking or terrorist attack using an airliner on American soil since 9/11. Thats due to the presence of air marshalls.

I mean

Mon Dec 12, 2005 20:10

You are not answering Cindy's question by asking a range of questions of your own

Well done Justin

by .

Mon Dec 12, 2005 20:19

with very few words you've blown RP's troll-line of BS-mines clean out of the water.

The ungrateful pup won't thank you for the lesson though - too dumb.

BS?

Tue Dec 13, 2005 14:32

Who's dumb?

The passengers and crew only subdued Richard Reid because they got lucky that one time - we would never have heard about it if their plane had been blown out of the sky into the mid Atlantic Ocean.

Do you think that passengers and crew should depend on luck?

Air Marshalls on planes have clearly worked.

RP=BS

by klux

Tue Dec 13, 2005 19:56

Your idicy is outragous, Rigoberto Alpizar, was an inocent man !

who did not break any laws!

the fascists shot him because the enjoy killing and terrorizing people, note the fact that after murdering this poor man in cold blood these lunatics came on board the plane and held guns to the passengers heads and terrorized them . . .

RP you are full of BS, reed got stopped by a fellow passenger because he was breaking the law,

NO MARSHAL HAS EVER PREVENTED A HIJACKING OR INJURY TO A PASSENGER

IN FACT THE MARSHALS ARE THE ONLY ONES EVER TO HAVE MURDERED AN INOCENT PASSENGER ON A PLANE

not a good record, we dont need them on the planes . . they are a unaceptable hazard

the best poicy is to CHECK the passengers and bags for weapons before being allowed to board it works . . .unlike the marshals who have only managed to MURDER and terrorize inocent passengers... .

did you know airport security dont even screen the checked bags ? anyone who wanted to could pack a bomb in the checked luggage and it would be loaded on the plane . . . we are just lucky that more people with half a brain dont want to blow up planes cause anyone could any time they wanted. . . and no marshal is going to stop that.....

the marshals cannot stop terrorist attacks . . . they can just murder and terrorize the passengers . . . that is what a fascist state is about keeping the slaves inline . . .getting them used to knowing how to behave with a gun at their head making them do as they are told regardless of being right or wrong just do as you are ordered or DIE . . .. .

you deserve to have one of your "marshal-heros" puts a few rounds into your head for unautharized sleeping on a plane or someting. . maybe then you will wake up . . .

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Human Rights in Ireland

Shooting the Mentally ill, Better than treatment?

Comments (12 of 12)