"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
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
(Time Magazine)
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.


And at least dozens of others, including the air marshals, heard him claim
he had a bomb. And dozens of others including the air marshals saw him
reach into a bag while running off the plane towards a terminal filled with
people, never bothering to stop despite demands from the air marshals that
he does.

Bang-bang. Dead man. He got what he deserved.

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 18:25:50 -0500, *JimH* wrote:


Bang-bang. Dead man. He got what he deserved.

Interesting choice of words for this tragedy. The shooting may have been
justified, but there is no way this man "deserved" killing.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
thunder wrote:
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 18:25:50 -0500, *JimH* wrote:


Bang-bang. Dead man. He got what he deserved.

Interesting choice of words for this tragedy. The shooting may have been
justified, but there is no way this man "deserved" killing.



Sure he did. His actions indicated he was intent on killing hundreds.

Bang-bang. Dead man.

*JimH* wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

thunder wrote:

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 18:25:50 -0500, *JimH* wrote:



Bang-bang. Dead man. He got what he deserved.

Interesting choice of words for this tragedy. The shooting may have been
justified, but there is no way this man "deserved" killing.



Sure he did. His actions indicated he was intent on killing hundreds.

Bang-bang. Dead man.


Might be time to forward some of your posts to the Arch Bishop of your
diocese.

On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 09:37:11 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

Don White wrote:
*JimH* wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

thunder wrote:

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 18:25:50 -0500, *JimH* wrote:



Bang-bang. Dead man. He got what he deserved.
Interesting choice of words for this tragedy. The shooting may have been
justified, but there is no way this man "deserved" killing.

Sure he did. His actions indicated he was intent on killing hundreds.

Bang-bang. Dead man.


Might be time to forward some of your posts to the Arch Bishop of your
diocese.


You know, that's a good point. I'm certain several right-wing posters
here who claim to be "Christians" would be mortified if their priests or
spiritual leaders were aware of their anti-social, warmongering,
selfish, self-centered ways.

Tell us about the solemn high mass you're attending on Christmas day, Harry. Is it embarrassing to
have said that?

--
John H

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Wishing you Peace, Fellowship, and Good Humor as we celebrate the birth of OUR Lord, Jesus Christ on the Christmas Holy Day.

Can't help jumping in. If he were really intent on killing anybody,
wouldn't his actions
include having a bomb or some kind of weapon?

Seems to me you could say, his actions indicated he either wanted to
scare people,
or was just basically crazy or troubled (off his meds like the wife
said). Mabye the case
could be made that the killing was justified in the name of pragmatism,
but to say that this
guy "deserved" to die seems like a real stretch.

richforman

wrote in message
oups.com...
Can't help jumping in. If he were really intent on killing anybody,
wouldn't his actions
include having a bomb or some kind of weapon?

Seems to me you could say, his actions indicated he either wanted to
scare people,
or was just basically crazy or troubled (off his meds like the wife
said). Mabye the case
could be made that the killing was justified in the name of pragmatism,
but to say that this
guy "deserved" to die seems like a real stretch.

richforman


He very much could have had a bomb. Just not able to fire it off. Same as
the guy trying to light the fuse on the shoe bomb. Nuts or not, if you make
a statement that you have a bomb, while on an airplane or public area with
lots of people, I would not fault anybody from shooting the guy in the head,
and killing him very quickly. That includes those with Concealed Carry
permits. Just make sure there are witnesses to the bomb statement.

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 07:00:28 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 18:25:50 -0500, *JimH* wrote:


Bang-bang. Dead man. He got what he deserved.

Interesting choice of words for this tragedy. The shooting may have been
justified, but there is no way this man "deserved" killing.

I could think of a few right off hand. :)



Or Left off hand?

On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 08:47:48 -0500, *JimH* wrote:


Sure he did. His actions indicated he was intent on killing hundreds.

No, Jim, his actions were *misinterpreted* as indicating he was intent on
killing hundreds. If that was his intention, he would have needed a way
to accomplish it. He didn't, no bomb, no weapons.

Again, the Air Marshals may have been justified in the use of deadly
force, but this man did not "deserve" to be killed.

Thunder, I agree with this statement completely.

Again, the Air Marshals may have been justified in the use of deadly
force, but this man did not "deserve" to be killed

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 08:47:48 -0500, *JimH* wrote:


Sure he did. His actions indicated he was intent on killing hundreds.

No, Jim, his actions were *misinterpreted* as indicating he was intent on
killing hundreds. If that was his intention, he would have needed a way
to accomplish it. He didn't, no bomb, no weapons.

Again, the Air Marshals may have been justified in the use of deadly
force, but this man did not "deserve" to be killed.