Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
"Police Storm Commuter Plane On MIA Runway"  
User currently offlineeksath From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1295 posts, RR: 25
Posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 15302 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
ARTICLE EDITOR

In the penalty box at MIA.

"Heavily armed police officers stormed a plane on a South Florida runway and took three people into custody after a suspicious package that did not make it on board raised concerns in Tallahassee."

Read more: http://www.wsvn.com/news/articles/lo...plane-on-mia-runway/#ixzz2UMXB8EQs


World Wide Aerospace Photography
30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinecjg225 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 765 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 15272 times:

I wasn't aware that American police are fielding the AK-47...   


Restoring Penn State's transportation heritage...
User currently offlineSXDFC From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 2296 posts, RR: 19
Reply 2, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 15179 times:

Where is Lauren Stover and the Airport 24/7 crew when you need them?


ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinedtwlax From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 788 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 14631 times:

I don't get it. The checked bag did not make it on the plane because it raised an alarm.
Why did the authorities wait for the plane to leave Tallahassee and reach Miami to arrest the owner?
Why did they not get him off the plane at Tallahassee?


User currently onlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 1723 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 14490 times:

I knew I should have stayed in Miami just one more day!


Go coogs! \n//
User currently offlinespacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3604 posts, RR: 12
Reply 5, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 14282 times:

Quoting SXDFC (Reply 2):
Where is Lauren Stover and the Airport 24/7 crew when you need them?

Filming, no doubt, and congratulating themselves for another well-planned season finale.



I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
User currently offlinetrav110 From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 536 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 14185 times:

Quoting dtwlax (Reply 3):
Why did the authorities wait for the plane to leave Tallahassee and reach Miami to arrest the owner?

That's a good question. If the plane landed safely in Miami without the package why was it necessary to storm the plane? It would seem like the passengers were pretty much out of danger at that point. But then the article goes on to mention suspicions of a "suspicious package" on board amongst the passengers once it was in Miami. What the hell is going on- Why wasn't that caught in Tallahassee? Why didn't they just arrest them at the gate instead of swarming a 40 passenger plane?

This is a terribly vague article that creates more questions than it answers.

[Edited 2013-05-26 00:56:23]

[Edited 2013-05-26 01:01:18]

User currently offlineopethfan From Canada, joined Dec 2012, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 13994 times:

Quoting trav110 (Reply 6):
Why wasn't that caught in Tallahassee? Why didn't they just arrest them at the gate instead of swarming a 40 passenger plane?

This is a very valid and significant question - a small, regional jet that doesn't have the 'suspicious' package on board and has already landed at its destination, being raided by SWAT with (more likely) MP5s which have every potential of making a situation very ugly indeed.

If anything was up at that stage in the game, it's better to do something lower-key at the gate rather than put people's lives at risk for what did not apparently seem like an immediate issue?

It's definitely something I would like explained and not just kept quiet for the sake of "security".


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9146 posts, RR: 29
Reply 8, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 13917 times:

So these people have been scared and endangered by a SWAT team wielding weapons in their faces. treated like suspects although completely innocent and not knowing what was going on and why this happened and they "thank the police" after 1 1/2 hour of their time was stolen? No explanation given?

What did they thank them for?



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 13906 times:

Quoting opethfan (Reply 7):
This is a very valid and significant question - a small, regional jet that doesn't have the 'suspicious' package on board and has already landed at its destination, being raided by SWAT with (more likely) MP5s which have every potential of making a situation very ugly indeed.

If anything was up at that stage in the game, it's better to do something lower-key at the gate rather than put people's lives at risk for what did not apparently seem like an immediate issue?

It's definitely something I would like explained and not just kept quiet for the sake of "security".

Our security organizations, namely the TSA and DHS, don't do "subtle". Everybody wants their fifteen minutes, and these guys most of all.
Why wait until everyone is safely on the plane, when you could instead make huge headlines and "save the day" or something.
 


User currently offlineskywaymanaz From United States of America, joined May 2012, 489 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 13592 times:

There could really be a story here that justifies scenes like when federal agents pointed automatic weapons at Elian Gonzalez but I'm not holding my breath. To bad no one on that flight had Google glass to record it . . . yet. DHS would be cringing at the video endlessly looped on the 24 hour news channels.

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 9):
Our security organizations, namely the TSA and DHS, don't do "subtle". Everybody wants their fifteen minutes, and these guys most of all.

Unfortunately there is something to this. TSA and DHS are in desperate need of a major event where they save the day under the blitz of media cameras. Twenty years ago that was exactly why ATF invited the media along to watch them take down the Branch Davidian complex in Waco. They responded with overkill to a crime that could have been handled with less drama and tragically it left 4 agents dead. It got worse from there but most people know that part of that story. I don't think reasonable sane people would wish this on DHS but they indeed do things over the top. Like DHS swarming a private Cirrus SR22 at Iowa City airport May 5th along with local cops and a drug dog urging the long haired hippie type arriving from Colorado with his husband to confess where they had pot hidden on the aircraft. Several hours later after ransacking the plane and their belongings nothing was found. I guess an Orthodox Jewish investment banker and his husband look like stoners to DHS. That was their second encounter with DHS on that trip btw.


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9146 posts, RR: 29
Reply 11, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 13405 times:

The comparison with Waco, which I happened to watch on my hotel room TV in Atlanta does not apply. While in Waco a group belonging to a sect was raided, the passengers in an aircraft are a randomly assembled group of people, most of them having no connection whatsoever.

How can a government agency endanger the lives of 40 odd people by conducting such an action described in the quoted article? Apparantly they knew the people they were looking for. Why should random passengers who have nothing to do with the poetinal "accused of whatever" even be questioned and be kept in custody for anything longer than it takes to check their identity? Which is a minute, not moe.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineJBAirwaysFan From United States of America, joined May 2009, 945 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 12824 times:

What I don't get is if there was a suspicious package on board the plane, why didn't they evacuate the passengers. You know, in case the thing did explode at some point? Then you have 40 dead pax...that's not good.


In Loving Memory of Casey Edward Falconer; May 16, 1992-May 9, 2012
User currently offlinesandyb123 From UK - Scotland, joined Oct 2007, 1069 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 12373 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JBAirwaysFan (Reply 12):

What I don't get is if there was a suspicious package on board the plane, why didn't they evacuate the passengers. You know, in case the thing did explode at some point? Then you have 40 dead pax...that's not good.

Please read the thread and article. The package wasn't loaded onto the flight.

Sandyb123



DC3, 727, 737, 744, 753, 777, A32X, A345, A388, ERJ145, E190, BaE146, D328, ATR72, Q400
User currently offline727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 6380 posts, RR: 17
Reply 14, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12110 times:

The part that caught me was:

Velazquez, who was traveling with 18 family members, was one of 40 passengers on the commuter flight

Half the plane was one family???!!!!  
Sheesh!

Quoting SXDFC (Reply 2):
Where is Lauren Stover and the Airport 24/7 crew when you need them?

Where does this show air?



Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6515 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11743 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 8):
So these people have been scared and endangered by a SWAT team wielding weapons in their faces. treated like suspects although completely innocent and not knowing what was going on and why this happened and they "thank the police" after 1 1/2 hour of their time was stolen? No explanation given?

What did they thank them for?

They thanked them for the money they'll make in the following suit 



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineeksath From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1295 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11611 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
ARTICLE EDITOR

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 14):
Where does this show air?
http://www.travelchannel.com/tv-shows/airport-24-7-miami



World Wide Aerospace Photography
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9146 posts, RR: 29
Reply 17, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10556 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 15):
They thanked them for the money they'll make in the following suit

Logic explanation.  

But really, from my experience with (former) busines partners in the US I know that they have their pants full when they even hear the word DHS.

Actually, I am no longer interested in doing business with the USA because of these issues. I just last week gave the boot to someone I was dealing with for 30 years. Too complicated and risky dealing with a country that has erased common sense from their day to day dealings.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinecopter808 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1052 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8963 times:

Unless I missed something, the article says that:
The package was not loaded
It was "Suspicious."
The contents of the package are "unknown"
Nobody was charged (yet)

Really glad to hear nobody was charged, since according to the article no crime was committed!!! However, I suspect there if far more (or less) to the actual situation.

I would think that the short flight time would play a part in the scenario. They may still have been investigating the package at the time the plane landed. Without knowing the facts, I certainly can't pass judgment on whether this was an overreaction on the part of the police.


User currently offlineskywaymanaz From United States of America, joined May 2012, 489 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8853 times:

PanHAM the Waco reference I made was on how the seige began instead of how it ended 60 odd days later. I may not have been as clear about that as I could have been. Sorry if it that was off topic but as AA737-823 pointed out Federal agencies aren't subtle and want to look like they saved the day. Someone easily could have been seriously injured or killed in this incident by an accidental weapon discharge. It's a tight space and all that had to happen was one of them tripping.

I'm sorry to hear you are having to complicated a time conducting business with our country to continue. I can't say I blame you though. We really are cutting off our nose to spite our face  


User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2240 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8802 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17):
Too complicated and risky dealing with a country that has erased common sense from their day to day dealings.

I wish more of my countrymen would realize this. We seem to be willing to do anything the government wants anymore, with no logical thought processes or explanation. The lessons learned in your country, and others, over th last 80 years seem lost. Aviation became the testing place for idiocy tolerance. Seems the tolerance is pretty high.

Excellent questions posed above, as to why this had to be handled in "Storm Trooper" mode.



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
User currently offlinemd80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 8149 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 8):
So these people have been scared and endangered by a SWAT team wielding weapons in their faces. treated like suspects although completely innocent and not knowing what was going on and why this happened and they "thank the police" after 1 1/2 hour of their time was stolen? No explanation given?

What did they thank them for?

Sounds like Stockholm Syndrome, very common in modern day America.


User currently offlineATCtower From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 538 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 7156 times:

I too wonder why people who would cause a plane to be raided like this would even be allowed to leave TLH. Probably headlines.

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 14):
The part that caught me was:

Velazquez, who was traveling with 18 family members, was one of 40 passengers on the commuter flight

Half the plane was one family???!!!!  
Sheesh!

You obviously are not very well versed about Latin people in South Florida. 19 is a very small family  



By reading the above post you waive all rights to be offended. If you do not like what you read, forget it.
User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13029 posts, RR: 12
Reply 23, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 6986 times:

Quoting copter808 (Reply 18):
I would think that the short flight time would play a part in the scenario. They may still have been investigating the package at the time the plane landed. Without knowing the facts, I certainly can't pass judgment on whether this was an overreaction on the part of the police

I hope there is an investigation and public as best as possible disclosure as to why the heavy security forces actions, but the quoted scenario makes the most sense. I would also note that apparently someone at TSA failed to do their job so this may be a butt covering for that failure.


User currently offlineJBAirwaysFan From United States of America, joined May 2009, 945 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4139 times:

Quoting sandyb123 (Reply 13):
Please read the thread and article. The package wasn't loaded onto the flight.

I did read the article. My post came from this: "Word of a possible suspicious package ON BOARD spread through the cabin of the small jet. "We asked the stewardess what was happening, and she said she thought there might be a device on our plane," said Velazquez."

Despite the fact that officials said this: "Officials said a checked bag alarmed during screening at the Tallahassee Airport Saturday morning, which didn't make the flight, caused the big concern on the tarmac at MIA."

The two statements conflict. If that is what the stewardess said, then they could very well have been looking for more, which is what lead to my post.



In Loving Memory of Casey Edward Falconer; May 16, 1992-May 9, 2012
User currently offlinetrav110 From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 536 posts, RR: 3
Reply 25, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3167 times:

Quoting JBAirwaysFan (Reply 24):
The two statements conflict. If that is what the stewardess said, then they could very well have been looking for more, which is what lead to my post.

The way this information is included is the article is just perplexing. The entire article leads up to them raiding the plane for an unknown reason, after a package that was held at the origin looked suspicious, arrests were made, and no known threat was discovered. And then they throw in the bit about a rumoured suspicious package on board with no evidence or followup on that whatsoever.

My guess is that the flight attendant speculated there to be a suspicious package onboard (since she was no doubt out of the loop on the developing situation) causing the delays, and her speculation was accepted as fact by a passenger and included in the article- even though it wasn't necessarily true. It would explain why there is no mention of anything being on the plane before or after that particular line. A poorly written article if you ask me.

Hopefully we'll know more soon.


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4114 posts, RR: 1
Reply 26, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2859 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17):
Actually, I am no longer interested in doing business with the USA because of these issues. I just last week gave the boot to someone I was dealing with for 30 years. Too complicated and risky dealing with a country that has erased common sense from their day to day dealings.

I agree, the days of me doing business with Americans is over, I only have clients in England, Korea and Canada. Yes I know where I live, but all my business dealings are outside of the country, I am even having thoughts of leaving and returning to Canada...but for the weather in the winter I would.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlinewinstonlegthigh From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 119 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2561 times:

Quoting skywaymanaz (Reply 10):
Too bad no one on that flight had Google glass to record it . . .

The article mentions they had just touched down. Everyone knows that portable electronics are strictly prohibited until an announcement is made saying otherwise. Surely no one would dare break a rule like that.  

That said, it's really unfortunate that we've devolved into such a frightened society.



Never has gravity been so uplifting.
User currently offlineeksath From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1295 posts, RR: 25
Reply 28, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2343 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
ARTICLE EDITOR

Quoting trav110 (Reply 25):
The way this information is included is the article is just perplexing. The entire article leads up to them raiding the plane for an unknown reason, after a package that was held at the origin looked suspicious, arrests were made, and no known threat was discovered. And then they throw in the bit about a rumoured suspicious package on board with no evidence or followup on that whatsoever.

Paragraph # 1: "Heavily armed police officers stormed a plane on a South Florida runway and took three people into custody after a suspicious package that did not make it on board raised concerns in Tallahassee."

and the 4th line from the bottom: "Officials said a checked bag alarmed during screening at the Tallahassee Airport Saturday morning, which didn't make the flight, caused the big concern on the tarmac at MIA."

I take it that the three individuals made it on the flight but their "suspicious" luggage did not. Once the TSA decided the luggage was noteworthy, the plane was on the way to MIA. Rather than get them at the gate coming off the plane, they decided to get them in the penalty box.

I guess it is an operational decision from a tactical standpoint at which point to move in. Do you wait for them at the gate and the 'really really bad people" do something on the plane/airport or do you attempt to neutralize them far away from the airport building? i.e. disrupt one flight schedule as opposed to 100 when they evacuate the whole terminal?



World Wide Aerospace Photography
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9146 posts, RR: 29
Reply 29, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2240 times:

Quoting eksath (Reply 28):
I guess it is an operational decision from a tactical standpoint at which point to move in.

When at war, the best tactical decision would be to stop commercial flights altogether. We are, however not at war. Not in Europe and not in North America and most other parts of the world.

The logical way is, when a piece of luggage is suspicious, ask the owner to open, security hand checks the luggage. If there are items inside which are not allowed in checked luggage, the owner has the choice to remove these items or stay behind. In case there are weapons or explosives inside it is a case for police.

Letting a suspicious piece of luggage behind but the owner of the luggage plus 2 more persons fly to destination does not make any sense. If there really was a breach of secruity, TSA has endangered the lives of 40 passengers plus crew.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineeksath From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1295 posts, RR: 25
Reply 30, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1881 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
ARTICLE EDITOR

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 29):
When at war, the best tactical decision would be to stop commercial flights altogether. We are, however not at war. Not in Europe and not in North America and most other parts of the world.

The term "tactical" is not reserved for war situations. It is also appropriate when one is dealing with such things as SWAT operations or anti hijack operations. That is the purpose of my usage.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 29):
The logical way is, when a piece of luggage is suspicious, ask the owner to open, security hand checks the luggage. If there are items inside which are not allowed in checked luggage, the owner has the choice to remove these items or stay behind. In case there are weapons or explosives inside it is a case for police.

Often the screening of the checked in luggage happens without the passenger present. One of the checks and balances in the system would be to get the passenger(s) with the suspicious baggage before takeoff. Apparently, they did not hence the appropriateness of what you say below.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 29):
Letting a suspicious piece of luggage behind but the owner of the luggage plus 2 more persons fly to destination does not make any sense. If there really was a breach of secruity, TSA has endangered the lives of 40 passengers plus crew.

I agree.



World Wide Aerospace Photography
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Tarom Plane Hits Pig On The Runway. posted Sat Oct 1 2011 18:54:39 by klm77
Arctic IL-76TD Makes 180 Degree Spin On Ice Runway posted Sun Mar 31 2013 04:16:37 by factsonly
MIA Runway Closed Due To Lamborghini Stunt posted Mon Jan 28 2013 12:32:12 by mcogator
AR Plane Hits AF Plane At MIA, No Injuries posted Thu Jan 17 2013 17:23:14 by Gonzalo
Runway Excusion On Ice Runway With Gusty Winds posted Sun Dec 23 2012 05:59:10 by zeke
SAS Plane Off The Runway At CPH posted Wed Nov 21 2012 01:15:19 by SKAirbus
AA ATR Withdrawal On MIA-NAS Complete Nov 15th posted Tue Oct 2 2012 20:07:31 by N62NA
Walk And Run At ORD On The Runway posted Sat Sep 29 2012 13:14:13 by boeingkid
Crack On The Runway At BKK? posted Thu Jul 5 2012 23:23:07 by Baldwin471
Update On MIA-SVO Flights? posted Tue Jun 12 2012 15:49:46 by miaintl