Federal Air Marshals-How they Came to Be...How They Function Today
The United States Air Marshal Program was begun in 1970 to protect the flying public from terrorists who regularly hijacked airplanes. Prior to and just after 911 there were only a dozen US Air Marshals traveling the friendly skies. In 1970 a dozen or so air marshals were sufficient to give the illusion of security. Some thirty-odd years later there are now thousands of these unidentified flying armed law enforcement officers, (UFALEOs) with orders to shoot to kill. The price of providing the illusion of security has increased in thirty years. These aero-cowboys are armed, as they have always been, with the federally mandated legislation, to give the verbal order to the suspect to halt. No warning shots. They are mandated by federal law to shoot to kill if the suspect does not conform to their orders.
There had been a substantial decrease in the number of US airplanes involved in hijackings-known at the time as "skyjackings". (I believe we had gone for nearly 20 years, at least 10 years, without an incident involving a U.S. commercial airplane.) Since there have been no other "skyjackings" of American commercial flights after September 11, 2001, there is an obvious government imperative to justify the employment of these aero-cowboys with a terrorist apprehension. Perhaps this is why the air marshals are so trigger-happy in 2005. Could it be they feel they have to justify their existence, in the face of no tangible threats, by the killing of a would be bomber on a commercial flight during the Christmas holiday season?
Good job fellas we all feel a lot safer now. This is just what I need to feel secure. Trigger happy gun toting officials shooting innocent people. This is especially telling when one considers the fact Mr. Alpizar had already cleared the security screening measures in place at Miami International Airport. (This is an example of the "illusion of security".) That will show the terrorists!
Here’s a statistic from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security:
Now that makes us all feel a lot safer. The acute and oh so keen perception of potential infant terrorists. As we all know there’s no terrorists like infant terrorists! They will not do what you tell them to. Talk about non compliant!
There had been a substantial decrease in the number of US airplanes involved in hijackings-known at the time as "skyjackings". (I believe we had gone for nearly 20 years, at least 10 years, without an incident involving a U.S. commercial airplane.) Since there have been no other "skyjackings" of American commercial flights after September 11, 2001, there is an obvious government imperative to justify the employment of these aero-cowboys with a terrorist apprehension. Perhaps this is why the air marshals are so trigger-happy in 2005. Could it be they feel they have to justify their existence, in the face of no tangible threats, by the killing of a would be bomber on a commercial flight during the Christmas holiday season?
Good job fellas we all feel a lot safer now. This is just what I need to feel secure. Trigger happy gun toting officials shooting innocent people. This is especially telling when one considers the fact Mr. Alpizar had already cleared the security screening measures in place at Miami International Airport. (This is an example of the "illusion of security".) That will show the terrorists!
Here’s a statistic from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security:
- “Minimum number of infants impeded from boarding airplanes because their names were on the U.S. No-fly list: 14”.
Now that makes us all feel a lot safer. The acute and oh so keen perception of potential infant terrorists. As we all know there’s no terrorists like infant terrorists! They will not do what you tell them to. Talk about non compliant!
2 Comments:
As a fairly frequent flyer, I can tell you that if some passenger with a backpack goes running down the aisle of MY plane, flailing his arms, shouting, and acting like a crazy man, I would hope there would be an air marshal or two to stop the guy...by whatever means it takes. Period.
4:47 PM
Semp
So now our security forces are shooting people because in their opinion the person is "flailing his arms, shouting, and acting like a crazy man"? Do we permit security in the supermarket to shoot someone because they're acting strange? How about erratic drivers on the freeway? Should they be shot, too?
10:16 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home