London Police Shoot South Asian at Subway Station [Archive]

View Full Version : London Police Shoot South Asian at Subway Station

nola

07-22-2005, 05:45 AM

London police kill man at subway station

ROBERT BARR

Associated Press

LONDON - Police shot and killed a man wearing a thick coat at a London subway station Friday, a day after the city was hit by its second wave of terrorist attacks in two weeks.

The man died after being shot by officers at the Stockwell subway station in south London, police said.

Passengers said a man, described as South Asian, ran onto a train at Stockwell station in south London. Witnesses said police chased him, he tripped, and police then shot him.

"They pushed him onto the floor and unloaded five shots into him. He's dead," witness Mark Whitby told the British Broadcasting Corp. "He looked like a cornered fox. He looked petrified."

Britain is home to many immigrants from the South Asian countries of Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, among others.

Whitby said the man did not appear to have been carrying anything but said he was wearing a thick coat that looked padded. Temperatures in London on Friday were in the 70s.

Alistair Drummond, of the London Ambulance Service, said paramedics had been called to the station at 10:10 a.m.

Service on the Northern and Victoria Tube lines, which pass through Stockwell, was suspended because of the shooting, British Transport Police said. Stockwell is one station away from the Oval station, which was affected by Thursday's attacks.

Also Friday, police said they were investigating an apparent attempt to set fire to the home of a man identified as one of the July 7 suicide bombers.

Officers went to the home of Jermaine Lindsay in Aylesbury, 40 miles west of London, on Friday morning after reports of a smell of gasoline in the street, Thames Valley Police said. They confirmed the presence of some kind of fuel.

"The substance was found around the family home of the fourth London bomber, which is currently unoccupied," said Superintendent Carole Haveron. Police have identified Lindsay as the bomber who attacked a subway train between Russell Square and King's Cross on July 7.

Elsewhere, police evacuated one of London's largest mosques after a bomb threat before Friday afternoon prayers.

"Someone phoned our director and said there was a bomb inside," said Mohammed Abdul Bari, chairman of the East London Mosque.

The Metropolitan Police lifted the cordon about an hour later, saying no armed officers were involved, and the incident appeared unrelated to the subway shooting.

More than 6,000 people were expected for Friday afternoon prayers but there were only about a dozen people inside at the time the threat was telephoned in.

Investigators, meanwhile, searched for fingerprints, DNA and other forensic evidence connected to Thursday's attacks on three subway trains and a double-decker bus, which were hauntingly reminiscent of suicide bombings only two weeks before.

The devices in Thursday's attacks were either small or faulty, and authorities said the only person who needed medical attention was a person suffering an asthma attack. The July 7 bombings on three Underground trains and a bus killed 56 people, including the four suicide bombers.

A statement posted Friday on an Islamic Web site in the name of an al-Qaida-linked group claimed responsibility for Thursday's attacks. The group, Abu Hafs al Masri Brigade, also claimed responsibility for the July 7 bombings. The statement's authenticity could not immediately be verified.

The attacks targeted trains near the Oval, Warren Street and Shepherd's Bush stations. The double-decker bus had its windows blown out on Hackney Road in east London.

Jittery commuters already facing cutbacks in service from the last attack faced more Underground closures Friday.

"People are worried, but if it's going to happen, it's going to happen, isn't it?" said Chidi O'Hanekwu, 23. Still, he said he found himself being "a bit more paranoid" on the ride in.

Mia Clarkson, 24, defiantly said she refused to change her schedule. "You've got to keep living, don't you?" she said as she exited the Chancery Lane station after a trip from across town.

Newspapers reflected the city's volatile mood - part defiance, part anxiety.

"Britain will not be beaten," vowed a front-page headline in the Daily Express. "Is this how we must now live?" asked the Daily Mirror over pictures of the attacks' aftermath. The Independent had a similar photo montage and the words: "City of Fear."

Police would not comment on the investigation. Witnesses described seeing men fleeing several of the attack scenes.

The nearly simultaneous lunch-hour blasts agitated a jittery capital.

Police appealed for witnesses to give information and set up a Web site to receive amateur video of the attacks and their aftermath.

"Clearly, the intention must have been to kill," Police Commissioner Ian Blair said. "You don't do this with any other intention."

The London transport agency said the three affected subway stations remained closed Friday, and service was suspended on all or part of several lines. Other lines have been disrupted since the attacks two weeks ago.

Authorities said it was too early to determine whether the attacks were carried out by the same organization as the July 7 blasts - or whether they were linked to al-Qaida.

Saudi ambassador Prince Turki al-Faisal said the attacks had "all the hallmarks" of al-Qaida.

"The modus operandi, the sheer cowardice associated with them and the attacks on innocent civilians - these are all part and parcel of al-Qaida," he said in an interview with BBC radio.

Michael Clarke, director of the Center for Defense Studies at King's College, London, said Thursday's attacks looked "very amateurish."

"It looks like determined imitators who perhaps must have planned this a little while ago ... but it doesn't look quite like the same network behind it," Clarke told BBC radio.

robotic

07-22-2005, 06:45 AM

;_; go our safety.

*dies*

Banana

07-22-2005, 07:04 AM

Wonder why they haven't said if the man was carrying anything illegal or if they just shot him because he ran. From what it sounds like, the police pushed him to the floor and shot him in the back.

robotic

07-22-2005, 08:21 AM

U.K. Muslims fear 'Shoot to Kill' policy (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2424&ncid=2424&e=11&u=/afp/20050722/wl_uk_afp/britainattacksshootmuslims_050722144234)

LONDON (AFP) - British Muslims said they feared police were operating under a "shoot to kill" policy after a man was gunned down at an Underground train station following a new wave of bomb attacks.

Muslims said the shooting deepened their anxiety about a violent backlash against their community in the wake of two sets of bomb attacks blamed on Islamist militants, including one that killed 56 people on July 7.

The Muslim Council of Britain demanded police explain why an Asian-looking man, reported as a "suspected suicide bomber" by Sky News, was shot dead at Stockwell station in south London on Friday.

Police have confirmed that officers pursued and shot a man who was pronounced dead at the scene, but have offered no explanation for the shooting.

The incident came a day after another apparent wave of would-be suicide bombers hit London's mass transport system, two weeks after four suspected Islamist suicide bombers on trains and a bus killed 56 people.

No one was injured in Thursday's attacks after the bombs apparently failed to go off. A website statement purportedly from the Al-Qaeda terror network claimed responsibility for the attacks Friday but this has not been confirmed.

A Muslim Council spokesman said Muslims were "jumpy and nervous" and feared reprisal attacks.

"I have just had one phone call saying 'What if I was carrying a rucksack?'," said Inayat Bunglawala, referring to the rucksack bombs used in the London attacks.

"It's vital the police give a statement about what occurred (at Stockwell) and explain why the man was shot dead," Bunglawala said.

"We are getting phone calls from quite a lot of Muslims who are distressed about what may be a shoot-to-kill policy."

Witnesses told Sky News that police shot the man five times at close range after shouting at him to stop. Others described seeing many heavily armed plainclothes officers in unmarked cars at the scene.

"There may well be reasons why the police felt it necessary to unload five shots into the man and shoot him dead, but they need to make those reasons clear," Bunglawala said.

The shooting is the latest in a series of incidents which have threatened to create a rift between Britain's large Muslim community and the rest of the population in the wake of the terrorist attacks here this month.

Some radical British Muslim preachers have blamed the government's Middle East policy and the British-backed invasion of Iraq for the outrages, although the vast majority of British Muslims have condemned the bombings.

"Unless British foreign policy is changed and they withdraw forces from Iraq, I'm afraid there's going to be a lot of attacks, just the way it happened in Madrid and the way it happened in London," radical British Muslim preacher Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed told the New York Times this week.

The government is drafting a range of tough new laws to crack down on Islamic extremism and those who advocate terrorism, including setting up special intelligence units to monitor Muslims nationwide.

Prime Minister Tony Blair called Tuesday on Britain's Muslim community to confront the "evil ideology" behind terrorism following a meeting with leaders from Islamic groups.

In another incident Friday, armed police briefly threw a cordon around a mosque in east London, while the home of a Muslim convert identified as one of the suspected July 7 suicide bombers was sealed off after a suspected arson attack.

Analysts said the officers involved in the Stockwell shooting did not appear to be operating according to normal procedures.

"These guys may have been some sort of plainclothes special forces," said terrorism expert Professor Michael Clarke.

"To have bullets pumped into him like this suggests quite a lot about him and what the authorities, whoever they are, assumed about him."

Professor Paul Rogers of Bradford University said the shooting had parallels with the "very strong" methods used by Israeli security forces and US troops in Iraq.

"The kind of tactics the Met (Metropolitan police) appear to have used this morning are very similar to the very tough tactics that the Israelis use against suspected suicide bombers," he said.

hooligan

07-22-2005, 08:25 AM

Wait, London Police are carrying guns now?

Banana

07-22-2005, 08:48 AM

The normal police don't carry firearms if I recall correctly but only a select few squads and detectives.

Ya know, the British have always prided themselves as level-headed and fair-thinking people but it'll be interesting to see how they deal with the stress of being bombed constantly. Many British have constantly derided our violation of a citizen's civil rights in the wake of 9-11 and I want to see what they would do different now that they're in the crosshairs.

"Death and bomb threats directed toward Muslims?" "Check."

"Xenophobic attitudes?" "Check."

"Racial profiling?" "Sit tight."

Atealtha

07-22-2005, 08:57 AM

Why didn't they give a reason? Or ask him if he's hiding something?

What if he had hypothermia and was late for the train? People with hypothermia can't function right when it's around 60 degrees F. So if it was 70 F outside, the padded coat could've made him feel comfortable.

relus

07-22-2005, 09:03 AM

I found the article bland. For what reason did they shoot him, did they uncover anything? Lame :p

VV o n g B a

07-22-2005, 09:19 AM

london police said the shooting was directly related to the terrorist investigation. and frankly even if it were a mistake, its difficult to place full blame on police b/c they're dealing w/ suicide bombers who could detonate explosives if they're still alive.

not saying that a "shoot to kill policy" is a good thing. just saying its understandable.

haplesshobo

07-22-2005, 09:22 AM

robotic

07-22-2005, 09:35 AM

we need details!

yoMAMA

07-22-2005, 10:12 AM

Why was the guy running?

I think its perfectly reasonable if the police saw somebody in a heavy overcoat in the middle of summer, they would want to at least check him out cause he could be hiding explosives under that coat. And, when the guy starts to run away before the police can question him, of course the police reaction is that this guy has something nefarious planned.

The only thing I find disturbing is the allegation that the police shot him while he was down.

maybe he had diarrehea due to bad fish and chips and had to run to the bathroom?

I mean seriously, do you really think that a arab looking guy running when he saw a cop is SUFFICIENT for the cop to shoot and kill him?

there was a case in U.S where a cop saw a guy and told him to stop. the guy run away and was caught by the cops and they found marijuana in his car.

however the judge overthrew the evidence because he reasoned that the mere fact that the guy was running does not justify searching his car, and whatever search that can't be justified is illegal. And therefore the search was illegal and the evidence has to be tossed out.

there's a thing called dual process (i think it's from common law), and you can't just shot people even if you think they look or act suspicious.

hooligan

07-22-2005, 10:14 AM

For reals. Why shoot to kill? Wouldn't this man be more useful alive than dead?

robotic

07-22-2005, 11:21 AM

i think the 'shoot-to-kill' was initiated esp. for suspected suicide bombers (and that a fatal shot to the head would not detonate the bomb that might be strapped on their body) but then that means, unless a bomb has been sighted, one could easily be killing a man carrying only a gun (or drugs, or any other item/weapon he may feel dodgy about)

the police hasn't issued a statement whether or not he really was carrying a bomb which makes the situation dizzier.

Chad

07-22-2005, 11:21 AM

yoMAMA

07-22-2005, 11:23 AM

kpih

07-22-2005, 01:57 PM

In certain ways this shooting is quite similar to several shootings involving young black male victims and the police here in the US. The victims ran during the confusion and the police open fire because they thought the victims were suspects based on race...

Tragic.

Chester

07-22-2005, 02:04 PM

Ya know, the British have always prided themselves as level-headed and fair-thinking people but it'll be interesting to see how they deal with the stress of being bombed constantly.Just go back to your history books and see how they dealt with the London Blitz during WWII and IRA bombings from the 70s-90s.

hbar00

07-22-2005, 03:58 PM

I also read somewhere that the South Asian guy came out of a house that was under surveillance in connection with the first bombing investigation. Lesson learned: when a cop tells you to stop and answer a few questions, comply!

Martino

07-22-2005, 04:34 PM

it'll be interesting to see how they deal with the stress of being bombed constantly. Many British have constantly derided our violation of a citizen's civil rights in the wake of 9-11 and I want to see what they would do different now that they're in the crosshairs.

"Death and bomb threats directed toward Muslims?" "Check."

"Xenophobic attitudes?" "Check."

"Racial profiling?" "Sit tight."

What if he had hypothermia and was late for the train? People with hypothermia can't function right when it's around 60 degrees F. So if it was 70 F outside, the padded coat could've made him feel comfortable.

I found the article bland. For what reason did they shoot him, did they uncover anything? Lame :p

The only thing I find disturbing is the allegation that the police shot him while he was down.

I mean seriously, do you really think that a arab looking guy running when he saw a cop is SUFFICIENT for the cop to shoot and kill him?

For reals. Why shoot to kill? Wouldn't this man be more useful alive than dead?

Lots and lots of speculation here, lots of questions, some barbed comments. Me, I'm waiting. This is an on-going investigation with at least one terrorist cell still on the loose.

The few facts that are clear: the man was known to the terrorist unit officers; he did emerge from an address under surveillance; he did react extremely suspiciously when police identified themselves; he fled to a tube station, where he was cornered and the police apparently made a judgement call.

We will have to wait and see if the police had compelling evidence that he posed a threat to passengers and police.

Just go back to your history books and see how they dealt with the London Blitz during WWII and IRA bombings from the 70s-90s.

Karma. The last major IRA offensive on London ran from June 2000 to August 2001, and included nothing less than the firing of a rocket propelled grenade at the HQ of MI6 in Vauxhall (the building seen at the start of the James Bond film The World is Not Enough).

The IRA having been bombing England in general for a slightly longer period.

The Germans, of course, dropped a couple of million tons on TNT on London and England. We got our revenge by making lots and lots of war movies ever since.

grimfan

07-22-2005, 04:37 PM

So, was the guy a terrorist or not?

Martino

07-22-2005, 05:09 PM

They probably thought he was carrying a bomb.. that's what I heard anyways.
But keep in mind these were plainclothes policemen, so it may not have been obvious to the guy that they were cops. If five strange men suddenly came after me with guns in plain clothes, my first instinct would probably be to run.

In Britain, it's unlikely that burly men carrying hand guns and yelling 'stop - armed police' at you on a busy London street are trying to mug you.

This account is on the BBC website:

Gillian Breen, 39, was working on the fruit and flower stall outside the station when police chased a man on to the Tube and shot him.

"We saw armed police with guns running into the station, calmly telling everyone to move, not shouting," she said.

"Only a couple of them were in uniform, the rest were in plain clothes. There were a couple of dozen of them. I thought the guns were machine guns - they were quite big."

hooligan

07-22-2005, 05:27 PM

Was he a terrorist or not?

applehead

07-22-2005, 06:36 PM

is it even safe to shoot a guy who you
think is covered in explosives?

i'm confused.

Chu Chi

07-22-2005, 07:13 PM

Was he a terrorist or not?

don't let up hooligan

CC

robotic

07-23-2005, 01:10 AM

is it even safe to shoot a guy who you
think is covered in explosives?

in this case, the man was shot five times (presumably on the body meaning he was fatally wounded at first, unless the police lodged the bullets into a man who had already died while he was down) but in a suspected suicide bomber case like this one, police have been instructed to shoot the person in the head (so if he turns out not to be a suicide bomber, ;-;?) instead of the body, so that no bombs strapped on him are detonated.

ahsingjai

07-23-2005, 01:16 AM

What the hell? Pushed him to the floor and then shot him? WTF?

Grasshopper

07-23-2005, 01:36 AM

...still waiting to hear if the dead guy was an armed terrorist or not.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article301007.ece

Israel: 'We prefer to get their buddies than their bodies'

By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem

23 July 2005

Although it is wholly acceptable - and legal - to shoot to kill those about to perpetrate a suicide bombing in Israel, cases in which it happens are relatively rare. If a would-be or failed suicide bomber can be arrested, Israeli security services much prefer to do so, on the principle, according to a senior Israeli source last night, that "we prefer to get their buddies than their bodies".

One of the most publicised cases - because it was reconstructed by the Army for reporters - was that of Hussam Abdu, a 14-year-old boy wearing an explosives vest who was spotted and detained at the Hawara checkpoint outside Nablus.

But the proliferation of checkpoints in the West Bank, the fact that at least the youngest would-be bombers often do stop when ordered to do so, and the existence of highly sophisticated remote controlled robot equipment to defuse the explosives makes arrests commoner than might be thought.

There have also been cases when shooting has not been an option. In one such incident, in June 2002, an off-duty policeman called Aaron Gozland helped limit the carnage caused by a suicide bombing in the French Hill district of Jerusalem. In an act of stunning bravery, he leapt on the bomber, attempting to smother him, and was paralysed from the waist down.

Interviewed last year by The Independent, he said he calculated he did not have time to draw his gun and that his only alternative was to jump on the man.

There have been several cases of suicide bombers being shot. One wearing an explosive belt detonated himself, despite being shot, at a petrol station near the entrance to the city of Ariel.

The Israeli security services also shot and killed a would-be suicide bomber called Wassim Jalad, who had mysteriously turned back from bombing the Kaffit café in Jerusalem's German Colony last year. And a suicide bomber was shot after being spotted in Jaffa earlier in the intifada.
---------------------
http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1534753,00.html

Seconds to decide if suspect is suicide threat

Special armed squad first to use tactics developed with Israeli aid

Vikram Dodd
Saturday July 23, 2005
The Guardian

The shooting yesterday at Stockwell tube station was the first time police used special tactics developed to tackle the threat of suicide bombers.

Under Operation Kratos a senior officer is on standby 24 hours a day to authorise the deployment of special armed squads, who will track and if needs be, shoot dead suspected suicide bombers.

One of the most senior officers involved in protecting London confirmed there were special teams of armed officers ready to be deployed.

A senior Metropolitan police source with knowledge of firearms procedures said of the shooting at Stockwell: "This was an intelligence led operation, within the parameters of Kratos." Officially the Met will not talk about Kratos, but the tactics have been in place for a year and were developed after British officers learnt from their Israeli counterparts how best to tackle suicide bombers.

A spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers insisted that there had been no change in the law or in firearms policy. The relevant law is section three of the 1967 criminal law act, which reads: "A person may use such force as is reasonable in the prevention of crime."

Acpo's guidance to officers, revised in February this year, says: "You may open fire against a person only when absolutely necessary after traditional methods have tried and failed, or must, by the very nature of the circumstances, be unlikely to succeed if tried.

"To sum up, a police officer should not decide to open fire unless that officer is satisfied that nothing short of opening fire could protect the officer or another person from imminent danger to life or serious injury."

The threat to life must be clear and present, say Acpo guidelines which add that weapons should be used when "police officers need to shoot to stop an imminent threat to life. The imminence of any threat should be judged in respect to the potential loss of life ... and consideration of necessity, reasonableness and proportionality."

Challenge

The guidance says shots to the upper chest area "are likely to be effective in achieving rapid incapacitation. Shots which strike the other parts of the body cannot be depended upon to achieve this."

Officers from Kratos or following their tactics are reported to be authorised to shoot to kill, and aim for the head to avoid triggering explosive devices attached to the chest or waist. Suicide bombers targeting public transport present a unique challenge. As July 7 showed, if they succeed the result is mass murder.

One senior police source suggested tactics had changed according to the "different scenarios" posed by a suicide bomber suspect. A senior Met source said: "The operation would have been authorised by a senior officer, and the armed officers would be able to self-deploy, open fire if they saw an imminent threat. They can get authority retrospectively. Once the officer decides to shoot, it's shoot to kill."

This is a view shared by another senior Met officer. He explained why shoot to kill is the only option once armed officers are deployed: "If you start debating whether I should shoot him in the leg, the suspect could come back."

................continued.

Martino

07-23-2005, 09:48 AM

A stunning revelation from New Scotland Yard this afternoon:

Shot man not connected to bombing

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4711021.stm

A man shot dead by police hunting the bombers behind Thursday's London attacks was unconnected to the incidents, police have confirmed.

A Scotland Yard statement said the shooting was a "tragedy" which was regretted by the Metropolitan Police.

The man was shot dead after police followed him from a south London flat to Stockwell Tube station on Friday.

Two other men have been arrested and are being questioned after bombers targeted three Tube trains and a bus.

The statement read: "We believe we now know the identity of the man shot at Stockwell Underground station by police on Friday 22nd July 2005, although he is still subject to formal identification.

"We are now satisfied that he was not connected with the incidents of Thursday 21st July 2005.

"For somebody to lose their life in such circumstances is a tragedy and one that the Metropolitan Police Service regrets."

The statement confirmed the man was followed by police from a block of flats that was under surveillance.

The man's death is being investigated by officers from the MPS Directorate of Professional Standards, and will be referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

Chad

07-23-2005, 10:08 AM

I admit I honestly thought he was a terrorist. This is really bad. I guess afterall he was innocent and just ran because he got scared, which is the same thing I would have done. This really sucks. This is sure to hurt the police image and create even more hostility with Britain's Muslim population.

Chu Chi

07-23-2005, 10:21 AM

A friend of mine told me he was on a construction site and all of the sudden the workers just started running, they dropped their tools, jumped out of windows and off roofs...

It was only after he saw the I.N.S agents chasing them that he understood what was occuring.

CC

haplesshobo

07-23-2005, 11:30 AM

And, why would you run away if you haven't done anything wrong? Imagine the insuing chaos if everybody responded like that, and did not respect the authority of the police. A police car flashes its lights to pull a speeding car over, and everybody on the freeway responds by trying to outrun the police, etc..

There's a big difference between somebody running away simply from a minor crime and somebody running away if the police suspect them of being a suicide bomber. In the former, then that does not justify the use of lethal force. But, for the latter, if the police suspect that a potential suicide bomber is running away, then the police have every right to shoot at the suspect before he gets a chance to blow everyone around him up.

In the latter, the police must make that decision within less than a few seconds. Its like if the police tell somebody to put their hands up, and yet the suspect reaches in as if he's going to pull a gun, the police have a right to shoot at the suspect before the suspect can shoot and kill the police.

Its a tragey, but the suspect still must bear some responsibility for not obeying the police and putting them in a situation where they felt they needed to respond with force.

yoMAMA

07-23-2005, 11:58 AM

Chad

07-23-2005, 11:59 AM

People of color, foreigners, and the poor usually have more negative experiences with authority figures like the police. But he may not have even known that they were policemen, since they weren't in uniforms and possibly because of a language barrier. He could have thought they were a gang of robbers, or even worse, terrorist assassins like the Mossad.
Also keep in mind that some people come from countries where the police are brutal extortionists, robbers, rapists, and murderers and are to be feared and evaded whether you are guilty of a crime or not.

robotic

07-23-2005, 11:59 AM

Its a tragey, but the suspect still must bear some responsibility for not obeying the police and putting them in a situation where they felt they needed to respond with force.

unless you can bear responsibility upon a person that is no longer alive, the police has to face up to this situation.

ahsingjai

07-23-2005, 12:31 PM

Passengers said a man, described as South Asian, ran onto a train at Stockwell station in south London. Witnesses said police chased him, he tripped, and police then shot him.

"They pushed him onto the floor and unloaded five shots into him. He's dead," witness Mark Whitby told the British Broadcasting Corp. "He looked like a cornered fox. He looked petrified."

What kind of police pushes you to the ground and then shoots you 5 times? Where is the right to remain silent?

Martino

07-23-2005, 01:02 PM

What kind of police pushes you to the ground and then shoots you 5 times? Where is the right to remain silent?

This incident must be thoroughly - and openly - scrutinised, and it will automatically be investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

There are still a lot of questions to be asked of the officers involved, but if - if - they felt they were dealing with a potential suicide bomber, on a crowded tube train, it's difficult to see how else they could have discharged their duty.

Again, it's a matter of waiting to see what information and evidence presents itself.

hooligan

07-23-2005, 01:29 PM

This incident must be thoroughly - and openly - scrutinised, and it will automatically be investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

There are still a lot of questions to be asked of the officers involved, but if - if - they felt they were dealing with a potential suicide bomber, on a crowded tube train, it's difficult to see how else they could have discharged their duty.

Again, it's a matter of waiting to see what information and evidence presents itself.
Sure, there's a lot of issues here, like why did they shoot this man 5 times after he was on the ground.

relus

07-23-2005, 01:38 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050723/ap_on_re_eu/britain_underground

Nice, they shot and killed an innocent guy. Shoot first, ask questions later, how lame.

Craig

07-23-2005, 01:46 PM

Also keep in mind that some people come from countries where the police are brutal extortionists, robbers, rapists, and murderers and are to be feared and evaded whether you are guilty of a crime or not.Aren't we being presumptious to assume that this guy came from the U.S.A. ?

Chad

07-23-2005, 02:02 PM

This is getting worse and worse. Now they say the guy was actually a Brazilian.
Well, that would explain why he would run from cops since in Brazil the cops are the most feared and dangerous killers. They are known for carrying out street executions (similar to this one) and massacres.

I'm waiting for a photo to be released of the victim. It will be interesting to see how this guy looks, since Brazilians have varied looks. He was previously described as "South Asian", so I guess that means anyone dark-skinned is a suspect.

hooligan

07-23-2005, 02:21 PM

It almost looks as though it's another case of guilt by racism.

Martino

07-23-2005, 02:26 PM

Sure, there's a lot of issues here, like why did they shoot this man 5 times after he was on the ground.

Well, clearly the officers thought he was a suicide bomber. But we need to establish whether they really had grounds to use lethal force on the guy.

Anaestacia

07-23-2005, 02:26 PM

Perhaps the police who did this was just trigger-happy or new? Done by "accident" or instinct? Like the way a dog might chase after someone who runs? They were so sure at the time that the guy was a terrorist, but the killing was still irrational and unjustified (if killings can be justified) up to that point. Slightly different from shooting a man five times in the back but there was that incident where a Canadian accidently dropped a bomb on a Canadian camp in Afghanistan killing four other Canadians earlier this year. Shit happens and people panic.

Even if the victim was used to brutality in Brazil, for eg, it doesn't come anywhere close to demystifying the way in which the guy was killed. First of all it wasn't even as if the police were going to lose him (and if this was the case, why not aim at the legs?). He was pushed onto the ground.

Martino

07-23-2005, 02:37 PM

Perhaps the police who did this was just trigger-happy or new? Done by "accident" or instinct? Like the way a dog might chase after someone who runs?

Building speculation upon speculation without information is pointless - unless we've decided to go on a witch-hunt.

First of all it wasn't even as if the police were going to lose him (and if this was the case, why not aim at the legs?).

Because disabling someone you think is a suicide bomber does not mean you have stopped him detonating himself? How do you arrest someone whose sole intention is to die and take as many victims with him as possible? Let's just let the inquisitors to do their job, hopefully then we will know whether these officers deserve punishment.

hooligan

07-23-2005, 02:37 PM

I'm a little dark, I've got to watch my ass when plainclothe police offers start chasing me.

power puff girl

07-23-2005, 04:01 PM

yes, all asians should be afraid now of going to london.

and, don't bring a backpack because the police will accuse you of carrying a bomb and shoot to kill. or, wear a jacket if you have a cold.

just another case of yellow peril, or should i say brown peril. its typical that a white man would deny the racism in a murderous and barbaric execution by fascist police. they're in plain clothes to hide the brown uniforms underneath. do you think the same thing would have happened if this person was pasty white?

grimfan

07-23-2005, 04:40 PM

It's confusing because in the UK, "Asians" are what we would call "South Asians" here in North America.

WTF were they doing, shooting him when he was down? There better be some harsh sentences for this atrocity. It's one thing to falsely arrest and detain a suspect; it's another to hunt and EXECUTE an innocent dark-skinned man.

Chad

07-23-2005, 04:54 PM

Commuter Anthony Larkin, who was also on the train at Stockwell station, told 5 Live he saw police chasing a man.

"I saw these police officers in uniform and out of uniform shouting 'get down, get down', and I saw this guy who appeared to have a bomb belt and wires coming out and people were panicking and I heard two shots being fired."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706913.stm
So was this witness lying or is it a case of suggestive memory? Seems like whenever there is an incident like this there are people who come forward who are all-too-eager to tell a story and be in the news.

yoMAMA

07-23-2005, 06:18 PM

the victim is actually an innocent Brazilian.....

Man shot in terror hunt was innocent young Brazilian

· Met regrets London shooting 'tragedy'
· Victim's country seeks talks with Straw
Tony Thompson, Gaby Hinsliff and Alexandre Xavier
Sunday July 24, 2005

Observer
A young Brazilian man, living and working in London as an electrician, emerged last night as the innocent victim shot dead by police in their hunt for the suicide bombers targeting the capital.

The dead man, killed at Stockwell tube station on Friday after fleeing from armed police, was named as 27-year-old Jean Charles de Menezes. His body was identified by Alex Pereira, a cousin who lives in London and who afterwards told The Observer: 'I can't believe they shot him, because he was not a terrorist. He was an honest man.

'We [the family] are still too shocked to talk about it. But I am sure [that] he didn't do anything wrong. It was not right for the police to do that.'

Pereira said that the most upsetting part of identifying his cousin was 'to see bullet wounds in his back and his neck when I went to the mortuary in Greenwich.'

The Brazilian government last night voiced 'shock and surprise', saying it had always sought the 'eradication of the misery' of terror 'within international norms and respect for human rights'.

The statement added that Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim, due in London on a previously scheduled visit for a UN reform conference, would be seeking a meeting with Foreign Secretary Jack Straw for 'clarifications about the death'.

Originally from a farm half an hour from the city of Gonzaga in Minas Gerais state in south-east Brazil, Menezes, who was unmarried, had been living in London for three years. He appears to have lived in a house in Scotia Road, Tulse Hill, south London, which had been under surveillance since the four failed bomb attacks on the city's tube and bus system last Thursday.

His grandmother, Dona Zilda, who lives on the farm, said early today: 'He was a lovely, educated young man, a worker. He would never be involved in terrorism.'

Scotland Yard said last night that Menezes 'was not connected to incidents in central London on 21 July in which four explosive devices were partly detonated. An inquest will be opened to acknowledge formal identification and adjourned, while awaiting the outcome of the investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death.'

Soon after being followed from the Tulse Hill house by plainclothes officers watching the address, Menezes lay dead on the platform at Stockwell station from multiple gunshot wounds. He had failed to obey orders from armed officers to stop.

His death will cause controversy over the way Britain confronts suicide bombers, and has prompted calls for a public inquiry. In its first statement yesterday, the Metropolitan Police Service expressed 'regret' over his death.

'We are now satisfied that he was not connected with the incidents of Thursday, 21 July 2005,' it said. 'For somebody to lose their life in such circumstances is a tragedy and one that the Metropolitan Police service regrets.'

Downing Street and Home Office sources last night declined to comment. But Ken Livingstone, London's Mayor, said the 'human tragedy' should be laid at the door of the terrorists.

'All Londoners will wish to offer their condolences to this man's family and friends,' he said. 'The police acted to do what they believed necessary to protect the lives of the public. This tragedy has added another victim to the toll of deaths for which the terrorists bear responsibility.'

The Muslim Council of Great Britain warned last night that the 'terrible, tragic mistake' could have serious consequences. 'We got lots of hostile emails saying: "How dare you criticise the police?" - and now we hear that he is innocent,' said media secretary Inayat Bunglawala.

'We of course understand the police are under a great deal of pressure and it's a race against time to capture these four suspected bombers. But it is absolutely vital that their rules of engagement are very, very stringent and that this terrible mistake does not occur again.'

He said the police needed to encourage public confidence and co-operation from Muslims and others. 'For that co-operation to occur, the police also need to be seen to be making every possible endeavour to ensure they are going after the right people.'

The Independent Police Complaints Commission, which automatically examines fatal police firearms incidents, confirmed it was investigating.

Scotland Yard said last night that an unspecified number of officers had been taken off firearms duties, which is standard practice after a weapon has been discharged. The officers are still at work on normal duties.

Armed officers are instructed to shoot at the head, not the chest, when facing a suspected suicide bomber, to disable them faster. The change follows advice from the Israeli police.

Witnesses to Friday's shooting told of the terror on the man's face. Mark Whitby, a passenger who was sitting just yards away, said the man was 'hotly pursued' on to the train, adding: 'I looked at his face. He looked from left to right, but he basically looked like a cornered rabbit, like a cornered fox. He looked absolutely petrified ... It was a very, very distressing scene to watch, and to hear as well ... I saw them kill a man.'

Whitby last night told The Observer: 'The death of anyone, involved [in terrorism] or not, to me is abhorrent.'

Ken Jones, chief constable of Sussex and chair of the Association of Chief Police Officers' committee on terrorism and allied matters, appealed to the public yesterday to 'put themselves into the shoes' of officers. Dozens of firearms officers have been trained in confronting suicide bombers since 11 September and undercover officers regularly travel on trains. It is not a perfect science,' he said. 'I would ask the public to try to put themselves into the shoes of the officers, often young men and women, and understand how difficult these cases are.

'They have to be prepared to take a life knowing that if they fail to do so, the cost could be hundreds of lives. We have dreaded this day for years, but it is now an operational reality on the streets of Britain.' He said officers had to intervene at an earlier stage when facing 'people intent on mass murder'.

The address in Tulse Hill was identified from materials found inside the bombers' unexploded rucksacks on Thursday and was immediately put under surveillance. When Menezes, dressed in baseball cap, blue fleece and baggy trousers, emerged from it at around 10am on Friday, he was followed. When he headed for the nearby tube station, officers decided to arrest him. An armed unit took over, ordering him to stop. He did not. His unseasonally thick jacket apparently prompted concern that he had explosives strapped beneath.

Witnesses said the man jumped the ticket barriers and was chased into the station, where he half-tripped boarding a train. He was allegedly pushed to the floor by armed police, then, according to eyewitnesses, an officer fired five shots into his head.

Police quickly discovered he did not have a bomb, but it was not until yesterday that he was cleared of any involvement.

Officers are trained to look for 'precursor activities' indicating a suicide bomber about to detonate his explosive, thought to include a look of agitation combined with a sense of disconnection from the world. The Met said Menezes' 'clothing and behaviour' caused concerns.

Massoud Shadjareh, of the Islamic Human Rights Commission, also called for a public inquiry. 'How can you shoot someone on mere suspicion?' he asked. 'You can't even put someone in prison on suspicion.'

Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn said yesterday said the shooting suggested that a 'shoot-to-kill' policy was in operation, and suggested it would increase the threat of further attacks. 'I cannot believe that this degree of violence is going to do anything but encourage more violence.'

Allegations of 'shoot-to-kill' policies are highly emotive following the scandal over tactics used by police in Northern Ireland.

Graham Brodie, a barrister who specialises in criminal law, said there should now be an investigation by another police force into whether criminal charges should be laid against any officer for murder or manslaughter. However, Brodie doubted that any officers would be prosecuted.

Did the police act legally?

The police killing of a man mistakenly thought to be linked to the London terror attacks has prompted a huge political controversy, but legally rests on one crucial question: were police reasonably responding to what they saw as a threat to the public?

The incident, which the Metropolitan Police said yesterday was a 'tragedy' that it regretted, has automatically triggered a probe by the independent Police Complaints Commission and a coroner's inquest.

The leading human rights lawyer, Lord Lester, told The Observer that the issue of whether the police had acted properly was not one of human rights legislation, but would hinge instead on the specific facts of the case.

'The issue rests entirely on the facts - that is, of whether the police were reasonable in thinking that they were acting on a threat to themselves or the public.'

He noted that under existing legislation, police had always had the right to use force to confront such a threat.

He added that the reported change in rules of engagement to deal with the new threat of suspected suicide bombers, by shooting in the head instead of the chest or legs, would also be properly addressed as part of the inquiry.

The shooting at Stockwell Tube Station in south London is the latest in a number of incidents in recent years in which British police personnel's use of fatal force has been questioned in inquiries or the courts.

An inquest last year found a police marksman guilty of 'unlawful killing' when he shot a 46-year-old decorator from Hackney after mistaking a table leg the man was carrying for a gun. But this year, a High Court judge overturned the ruling, saying that there had been insufficient evidence to support the inquest verdict.

Ned Temko
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005

http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1535246,00.html

Craig

07-23-2005, 09:27 PM

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/WORLD/europe/07/23/london.tube/story.menezes.jpg
The picture above is the victim. He doesn't really look remotely South Asian to me. If I saw him I would think he was completely European white, or maybe 1/8 non-white.

yoMAMA

07-23-2005, 10:13 PM

ahsingjai

07-23-2005, 10:15 PM

He was gonna expose a conspiracy and the government had to take him out!

robotic

07-23-2005, 10:17 PM

The picture above is the victim. He doesn't really look remotely South Asian to me. If I saw him I would think he was completely European white, or maybe 1/8 non-white.

would the police have mistook him for being arab?

or because of the coat he was wearing, his face could not be seen while he was chased ._. or the police can't distinguish between features! ;_;!

the shoot-to-kill police has a huge probabability for error, partially the reason why i can't really come to support it.

i mean, the majority of people shot down would be "south asian / arab / turban-wearing" looking, right?

hooligan

07-24-2005, 01:30 AM

Spanish.

Shit, if I were him and there were a bunch of white people in plainclothes chasing my ass, I'd be afraid to be a victim of a hate crime.

Atealtha

07-24-2005, 08:10 AM

They have to be prepared to take a life knowing that if they fail to do so, the cost could be hundreds of lives. We have dreaded this day for years, but it is now an operational reality on the streets of Britain.

Sacrifice a life for the well being of the greater good. How lovely. </sarcasm>

SunWuKong

07-24-2005, 09:17 AM

Spanish.

by the way, Brazilians speak Portuguese, and many of them get pissed at the assumption that they speak Spanish.

anyway, talk about a fucked-up case of Vincent Chin-ism.

power puff girl

07-24-2005, 02:47 PM

would the police have mistook him for being arab?

or because of the coat he was wearing, his face could not be seen while he was chased ._. or the police can't distinguish between features! ;_;!

the shoot-to-kill police has a huge probabability for error, partially the reason why i can't really come to support it.

i mean, the majority of people shot down would be "south asian / arab / turban-wearing" looking, right?

this is the problem when the police decide to single out a specific group, and post information or pictures that it was pakistanis or any other non-white group involved. they never should have done something so racist or inflammatory.

it doesn't accomplish anything, but to further flame racial tensions. the problem is that the police can't distinguish one asian from the next. we all look the same to them, and so we're all potential targets for the fascist terrorism of the london police.

hooligan

07-24-2005, 02:59 PM

by the way, Brazilians speak Portuguese, and many of them get pissed at the assumption that they speak Spanish.

anyway, talk about a fucked-up case of Vincent Chin-ism.

I meant he looked Spanish. Like light skinned with dark features.

Martino

07-24-2005, 03:40 PM

this is the problem when the police decide to single out a specific group, and post information or pictures that it was pakistanis or any other non-white group involved. they never should have done something so racist or inflammatory.

So you think the police shouldn't display the photos of the bombers they're looking for, because of their ethnicity?

Or, to put it another way, you want the terrorists to remain free to plan and commit their next atrocity unhindered?

power puff girl

07-24-2005, 03:43 PM

so you support the brutal execution of an innocent man by facist london police simply because he didn't look european enough for you?

Napoleon Chynamite

07-24-2005, 03:57 PM

^ Nobody's supporting the brutal execution of anyone here, I dunno where the heck you arrived at this conclusion.

Martino

07-24-2005, 03:57 PM

so you support the brutal execution of an innocent man by facist london police simply because he didn't look european enough for you?

Police officers have killed an innocent man. That's wrong, and will be investigated properly.

You are saying the Police should not look for the bombers because of ethnic sensitivities. That's wrong too.

SunWuKong

07-24-2005, 04:05 PM

he held Brazilian citizenship, right? does the Brazilian government have any comment?

Napoleon Chynamite

07-24-2005, 04:06 PM

^ From yomama's post on the previous page:

Man shot in terror hunt was innocent young Brazilian

· Met regrets London shooting 'tragedy'
· Victim's country seeks talks with Straw
Tony Thompson, Gaby Hinsliff and Alexandre Xavier
Sunday July 24, 2005

...

The Brazilian government last night voiced 'shock and surprise', saying it had always sought the 'eradication of the misery' of terror 'within international norms and respect for human rights'.

The statement added that Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim, due in London on a previously scheduled visit for a UN reform conference, would be seeking a meeting with Foreign Secretary Jack Straw for 'clarifications about the death'.

Martino

07-24-2005, 04:15 PM

he held Brazilian citizenship, right? does the Brazilian government have any comment?

Both the Brazillian government and the victims family have a lot of questions for the Metropolitan Police:

Family mourn for Brazilian victim

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4711779.stm

Relatives and friends of Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian man shot by police in London, have expressed their grief, shock and anger at the killing.

His London-based cousin, Alex Pereira, paid tribute to him but sharply criticised authorities for the error.

His grandmother said there was no reason for considering him a terrorist.

The 27-year-old was fatally shot after boarding a train at Stockwell underground station on Friday, a day after failed attacks on the network.

The BBC's Steve Kingstone in Sao Paulo says there has been a lot of sympathy for London in Brazil over the bombings, together with an understanding of the need for tough police action.

But Brazilians are also strongly opposed to the Iraq war and there is still a lot of anger about the US invasion, he says.

They will be also be asking why someone lying on the floor and apparently offering no resistance was shot, according to eyewitnesses, five times in the head.

Our correspondent says the Brazilian government, while obviously sensitive to the broader climate of terror, is under pressure from its people to deliver answers.

It said in a statement it was shocked and perplexed, and expected a full explanation from the UK authorities.

Details have been emerging about Mr Menezes - an apparently law-abiding citizen who was well-liked and as concerned as other Londoners about the bomb attacks.

Mr Pereira said his cousin was the son of a bricklayer and grew up in the city of Gonzaga in Minas Gerais state, a source of many migrants to Europe and the US.

He moved to Sao Paulo to live with his uncle at the age of 14, attended high school and became a qualified electrician.

He had lived and worked in London legally for at least three years and spoke excellent English.

The cousin described him as a "person full of life", adding that he was "a victim of government's mistakes."

"They had to kill someone to show the whole population they are working and make the country safe," he told the BBC.

"He does not have a past that would make him run from police," he added in an interview for Brazilian TV.

But the BBC's Tom Gibb in Brazil said Mr Menezes' experience of Sao Paulo's slum areas meant that he might - on the contrary - have run in reaction to having a gun pulled on him.

His grandmother, Zilda Ambrosia de Figueiredo, offered perhaps the most touching tribute.

She told Globo TV: "He was very easy going and very communicative with everyone."

"He was the grandson that I always carried inside my heart. And I am terribly sad about what happened."

Gésio César D'avila, a friend and colleague, said Mr Menezes had considered alternative transport after the failed attacks on 21 July.

"We were together on Thursday, and when we saw what happened, Jean said he wanted to buy a motorbike to avoid the tube," he said.

On Friday Mr Menezes had come out of his flat in Tulse Hill, south London, which he shared with cousins Vivian and Patricia.

He was thought to be on his way to fit a fire alarm.

The house had been under police surveillance because of a suspected link to Thursday's attempted bombings.

Police followed him as he caught a bus to Stockwell tube station.

They said Mr Menezes' apparently bulky clothing added to their suspicions. Some Brazilians find even summer weather in the UK cold and often dress warmly.

But cousin Patricia Armani said she did not remember him wearing a padded jacket.

"He didn't use to feel cold. In the winter he even walked on the street with T-shirt," she told the BBC Brasil.com

kpih

07-24-2005, 04:48 PM

Here we go

Will police now shoot to kill?

A Muslim group has said it is concerned there is a new police "shoot to kill" policy in the UK following the shooting dead of a man in south London.

The Muslim Council of Britain said it was getting calls from Muslims who were "distressed" about the incident at Stockwell Tube station.

Roy Ramm, former Met Police specialist operations commander, said the rules for confronting potential suicide bombers had recently changed to "shoot to kill".

One terrorism expert said if the shooting was carried out by police - rather than special forces - it would represent a "pretty big departure" for the UK force.

Professor Michael Clarke, professor of defence studies at King's College London, said the officers who carried out the operation in south London were unlikely to be police.

'Head shot'

"These guys may have been some sort of plain clothes special forces," he said.

"To have bullets pumped into him like this suggests quite a lot about him and what the authorities, whoever they are, assumed about him.

"The fact that he was shot in this way strongly suggests that it was someone the authorities knew and suspected he was carrying explosives on him."

He added: "You don't shoot somebody five times if you think you might have made a mistake and may be able to arrest him."

Prof Clarke said police officers were not trained to carry out operations in this way.

"Even Special Branch and SO19 (Scotland Yard's armed unit) are not trained to do this sort of thing.

"It's plausible that they were special forces or elements of special forces."

Mr Ramm said the danger of shooting a suspected suicide bomber in the body was that it could detonate a bomb they were carrying on them.

"The fact is that when you're dealing with suicide bombers they only way you can stop them effectively - and protect yourself - is to try for a head-shot," he said.

Former government intelligence analyst Crispin Black agreed there was no other way of stopping someone who was an "immediate threat to life".

Muslims 'jumpy'

"It implies that the police knew who he was, it also implies that they considered him an immediate threat to life, under which circumstances they must try and kill somebody...you must shoot to kill."

But MCB has urged the police to explain why the man - said to be of Asian appearance - was shot dead.

Spokesman Inayat Bunglawala said Muslims he had spoken to this morning were "jumpy and nervous".

"I have just had one phone call saying, 'what if I was carrying a rucksack?'.

"There may well be reasons why the police felt it necessary to unload five shots into the man and shoot him dead, but they need to make those reasons clear," he said.

"We are getting phone calls from quite a lot of Muslims who are distressed about what may be a shoot to kill policy."

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/uk/4707781.stm

Published: 2005/07/22 14:07:09 GMT

© BBC MMV

VV o n g B a

07-24-2005, 10:06 PM

here's what michelle malkin had to say. and scarily enuf, i can see her point. in the context of protecting ppl from suicide bombs, what do u do to protect the public? u gotta take quick decisive action. fatal action. in this case the decisive action was a mistake, and it will cause the cops to hesitate next time. whether this is good or bad i'm not sure.

the parallels w/ vincent chin are there, but they're not strong. his death was in the context of economics and job loss and was carried out by ignorant out of work car workers over a bar brawl. jean de menezes' death was in the context of suicide bombings and was carried out by tense police who saw him walk out of the bombers' apartment building wearing heavy clothes. they also gave the guy verbal warning. racial stereotypes played into both, but vincent's case is much more indefensible than jean's.

i do still think that racial stereotyping will eventually lead to more and more episodes such as this if it isn't contained... episodes which won't have nearly as many extenuating circumstances.

---------------
SWARM OF THE SECOND-GUESSERS
By Michelle Malkin · July 23, 2005 10:43 PM

You've no doubt read about the case of mistaken identity in Thursday's London tube shooting. It is an awful, awful tragedy--and one which the usual suspects will exploit to further their anti-cop, anti-gun, anti-War on Terror agenda. But London Mayor "Red Ken" Livingstone, of all people, gets it right this time (via BBC):

The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, said: "The police acted to do what they believed necessary to protect the lives of the public.

"This tragedy has added another victim to the toll of deaths for which the terrorists bear responsibility."

Confronted with a furtive individual who reportedly refused to obey orders, dressed suspiciously, and fled over a turnstile towards the subway train, London authorities made a fateful split-second decision in a moment of great danger. I have a feeling that no one who works in law enforcement--here or around the world--will blame the police for the actions they took, and I doubt the majority of Britons will either.
(http://www.michellemalkin.com/)

hooligan

07-24-2005, 10:08 PM

Next time any dark-skinned person gets shot, we'll say that it's understandable since all of us dark-skinned people are suspect! Perfect reasoning Malkin.

thaite

07-24-2005, 10:12 PM

I think Michelle Malkin is fuck all wrong on this one, and so is the mayr of london.

The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, said: "The police acted to do what they believed necessary to protect the lives of the public.

Yeah, and what they believed was wrong, and how they acted was wrong. A member of the public they sought to protect is now dead as a direct result of their wrong action.

"This tragedy has added another victim to the toll of deaths for which the terrorists bear responsibility."

The right and Malkn have repeatedly criticized the left for not assigning the correct blame and responsibility upon terrorists for their actions, refusing to allow arguments and reasons grounded in history into the debate. And now the right wants to say "The terrorists made us do it" -- Fuck those hypocrits.

You can make any argument you want but these facts remains the same: An innocent man is dead. And the police murdered him.

Craig

07-24-2005, 11:32 PM

Next time any dark-skinned person gets shot, we'll say that it's understandable since all of us dark-skinned people are suspect! Perfect reasoning Malkin.Isn't that bitch Malkin dark-skinned ? Somebody needs to start by killing her.

Martino

07-25-2005, 12:40 AM

Next time any dark-skinned person gets shot, we'll say that it's understandable since all of us dark-skinned people are suspect! Perfect reasoning Malkin.

And the next time a pale-skinned man gets shot, you'll say what?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3762922.stm

The questions still remain to be answered, but a lot of people here have already made judgement.

ahsingjai

07-25-2005, 12:49 AM

And the next time a pale-skinned man gets shot, you'll say what?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3762922.stm

The questions still remain to be answered, but a lot of people here have already made judgement.

If everyone was made public already by now, maybe people wouldn't be judging so quickly. A white innocent man got killed and his name is still not released.

Martino

07-25-2005, 12:59 AM

If everyone was made public already by now, maybe people wouldn't be judging so quickly. A white innocent man got killed and his name is still not released.

You might want to edit that so that it makes some sense.

ahsingjai

07-25-2005, 01:11 AM

Sorry, I'm buzzed right now.

hbar00

07-25-2005, 02:24 AM

---------------
SWARM OF THE SECOND-GUESSERS
By Michelle Malkin · July 23, 2005 10:43 PM

Michelle Malkin is fucking insane. The police made a judgement call that was massively wrong. There may be a time when use of deadly force is authorized in situations like this, but I seriously doubt that such policy has been set in London yet. At the very least, the involved officers should be removed from duty until the incident investigation is complete.

Martino

07-25-2005, 06:02 AM

Michelle Malkin is fucking insane. The police made a judgement call that was massively wrong. There may be a time when use of deadly force is authorized in situations like this, but I seriously doubt that such policy has been set in London yet. At the very least, the involved officers should be removed from duty until the incident investigation is complete.

It's called Operation Kratos - a shoot to kill policy in the event of a policeman being confronted by a suspect suicide bomber. The guidelines advise officers to shoot at the head to instantly incapacitate the suspect (ie kill him), to both avoid him manually detonating himself, and avoid hitting the explosive device itself.

With four, possibly five bombers still free, Kratos is not likely to be rescinded. According to todays Evening Standard, there are 3000 armed police now stationed in London

>:^|

07-25-2005, 06:06 AM

And the next time a pale-skinned man gets shot, you'll say what?

The questions still remain to be answered, but a lot of people here have already made judgement.

Dude, I think many of us bring with us an experience of being the suspect. Since September 11, I've really noticed an upswing in being stopped for living while yellow.

AliBabaIncorporated

07-25-2005, 06:07 AM

The guidelines advise officers to shoot at the head to instantly incapacitate the suspect (ie kill him), to both avoid him manually detonating himself, and avoid hitting the explosive device itself.
Eh, I'm just an amateur, but wouldn't any reasonably competent suicide bomber use a "dead man's grip"? (e.g. a push button detonator that goes off when it's no longer being pushed, for example if the guy holding the detonator gets shot, knocked over, etc.)

Chu Chi

07-25-2005, 06:09 AM

I keep hearing the police who murdered this man described as wearing "plainclothes",

what does that look like?

CC

Martino

07-25-2005, 06:41 AM

Eh, I'm just an amateur, but wouldn't any reasonably competent suicide bomber use a "dead man's grip"? (e.g. a push button detonator that goes off when it's no longer being pushed, for example if the guy holding the detonator gets shot, knocked over, etc.)

An amateur what? Are you training to be a bomber??

I would imagine that would be impractical for the bomber; you can't maintain continous pressure on a trigger in that manner. One distraction and you'd go off prematurely at a place not of your choosing.

Also, wouldn't that in itself be conspicuous? The trigger would have to be in your hand the whole time.

I keep hearing the police who murdered this man described as wearing "plainclothes",

what does that look like?

CC

Clothes that are plain.

Banana

07-25-2005, 08:12 AM

Thank god I'm not dark skinned during times like this.

Why would anyone listen to Michelle Malkin anyway? All she does is say how it's ok for minorities to get wronged by the white population anyway.

Mushi

07-25-2005, 11:45 AM

I keep hearing the police who murdered this man described as wearing "plainclothes",

what does that look like?

CC

plainclothes means police not in uniform

hooligan

07-25-2005, 11:48 AM

I keep hearing the police who murdered this man described as wearing "plainclothes",

what does that look like?

CC

Chu Chi was asking a rhetorical question. The correct answer would be, just another normal white man shooting a dark man.

Mushi

07-25-2005, 12:11 PM

Chu Chi was asking a rhetorical question. The correct answer would be, just another normal white man shooting a dark man.

Ah. Now I see it.
Stupid me!

Chad

07-25-2005, 12:26 PM

kpih

07-25-2005, 12:47 PM

"we don't really know what's going on but we might have to shoot some foreigners in order to stop the suicide bombers so if you're a foreigner just have patience with us and don't scream too much when we're about to kill you, kthx"

^And just in case you were shot in the head multiple times, we deeply regret the inconvenience caused to you and your family. Thank you for your consideration.

So the best way to distinguish yourself from real bombers is to pull a Michael Jackson?

Seriously though, there are quite a few critical issues that are still unclear. Did the police officers identify themselves unequivocally? Did the victim acknowledge the police officers before fleeing? Was he competent with his English? Did he have an expired visa or other reasons to be afraid?

Remember several years ago in North Carolina? A black woman was pulled over by an unmarked state trooper cruiser. She thought it was a disguise and a trap and did not stop for seven miles. When finally stopped, the officer drew his weapon and dragged her from the car brutally on to the ground...

My point is, when people are in a fight or flight situation, they might not be able to stay calm and just surrender. In this case, we do not know the exact scenario. But try to imagine a foreigner in London during these times gets chased by a bunch of white men not in uniform holding large black pistols in their hands.

I can understand the logic of the policy, but the implementation is hugely problematic.

I do not have a good alternate tactics either.

Unfortunately, I really think this is a no win scenario...

Martino

07-25-2005, 12:55 PM

Dude, I think many of us bring with us an experience of being the suspect. Since September 11, I've really noticed an upswing in being stopped for living while yellow.

Which is perhaps the point of the outpourings on this thread, but: this isn't America; 9/11 didn't happen here; the Muslim community here isn't the suspect; it isn't being stopped.

>:^|, you know my political values. You know (I hope) I'm not going to stand-up by these policemen blindly. But this needs to be resolved through a public enquiry, not messageboard witchhunts and rhetoric about white fascism.

yoMAMA

07-25-2005, 01:48 PM

many people in spain and portugal have middle eastern blood, so it's not suprising that their descendants in the new world (brazil) got mistaken as "middle eastern" and "possible terrorist".

Chu Chi

07-25-2005, 04:14 PM

Chu Chi was asking a rhetorical question. The correct answer would be, just another normal white man shooting a dark man.

Close, but not quite.

Heres what I was getting at: Ive heard that in certain parts of England there are groups of White males who go out looking for "muds" (non whites) to beat up.

If you are walking down a street and you notice a "group" of White males (in plain clothes) following you; you speed up...they speed up...you turn right...they turn right...you start running...they start chasing you...

do you stop to find out what they want?

CC

many people in spain and portugal have middle eastern blood, so it's not suprising that their descendants in the new world (brazil) got mistaken as "middle eastern" and "possible terrorist".

what is the difference between "middle" eastern, and "far" eastern?

CC

yoMAMA

07-25-2005, 04:23 PM

what is the difference between "middle" eastern, and "far" eastern?

CC

middle eastern=west asian

far eastern=east asian

:biggrin:

Martino

07-25-2005, 05:32 PM

what is the difference between "middle" eastern, and "far" eastern?

What's the difference between an intelligent question and someone playing stupid just for the sake of it?

s1eve

07-25-2005, 05:39 PM

WTF! So Menezes was shot 8 times, 7 to the head. That' just f*ckin' ridiculous. 7 to the head.

yoMAMA

07-25-2005, 05:43 PM

WTF! So Menezes was shot 8 times, 7 to the head. That' just f*ckin' ridiculous. 7 to the head.

Jesus Christ. (like one or two gunshot to the head won't kill him).

if that's not excessive force, I don't know what is.

:eek:

Chu Chi

07-25-2005, 06:04 PM

middle eastern=west asian

:biggrin:

So are White people north Asian?

CC

What's the difference between an intelligent question and someone playing stupid just for the sake of it?

Martino, its ok to admit you lack the language to answer a question...no need to attack me personally.

CC

VV o n g B a

07-25-2005, 06:19 PM

if not w/ a shoot to kill policy, how do u stop suicide bombers from killing civilians and police?

yoMAMA

07-25-2005, 06:22 PM

if not w/ a shoot to kill policy, how do u stop suicide bombers from killing civilians and police?

investigate, arrest, prosecute terrorists?

but do you really think "shoot to kill" potential innocent citizens are gonna deter those terrorist?

they are, after all, not affraid of death.

Arex

07-25-2005, 06:41 PM

This is a horribly fucked up situation. I guess one's take on it largely depends on whether one feels it's okay to take a person's life on mere suspicion that such killing will save the lives of other innocent people. I think it's unwise to grant police officers that kind of authority.

If you think about America's and, I assume, the UK's justice systems, our systems are designed in such a way that we obviously feel it's better to let criminals walk free than it is to convict innocent people. Otherwise, we'd lower the burden of proof for criminal convictions to something less than beyond a reasonable doubt. As that one guy in the article said, if we aren't able to incarcerate someone for less than that, then we certainly shouldn't be able to take his or her life at an even lower threshold of proof, even if it may save other lives.

While some, like Malkin, may argue that exigent circumstances require swift and decisive action, personally I'd rather leave the killing of innocent people to the terrorists. Just as we theoretically let murderers walk free if we have not met our burden of proof at trial, even if we have a hunch that the murderer will kill again, the cops should not be able to kill someone on the street just because they are acting suspiciously. It's bad enough having to worry about whether a suicide bomber is going to blow himself up next to me. It's even worse if I have to worry about being mistaken for a suicide bomber in addition to worrying about the suicide bomber himself.

RX

yoMAMA

07-25-2005, 06:53 PM

VV o n g B a

07-25-2005, 07:31 PM

Craig

07-25-2005, 09:26 PM

Martino

07-26-2005, 01:16 AM

investigate, arrest, prosecute terrorists?

but do you really think "shoot to kill" potential innocent citizens are gonna deter those terrorist?

they are, after all, not affraid of death.

Alas, this isn't about deterence. The police are now in a more difficult situation than they were before, but the policy isn't going to change.

As I argued against HaplessHobo after the 7 July bombings, the police are going to find the bombers through investigation, not by harrassing the entire Muslim population (as he advocated), and that is exactly what they are doing.

The police still have a lot of questions to answer. The enquiry is under way. But the police investigation must also continue apace, the counter-terrorism measures will continue as before.

I sincerely hope the terrorists are captured alive, and feel full weight of the law - but if the police encounter a potential suicide bomber in a situation where attempted arrest may result in dozens of deaths, how is the suicide bomber to be intercepted and disarmed safely? We are talking about this with the benefit of twenty-twenty hindsight, without being there, when someone was forced to make a split second decision that might result in the loss of his, and others, lives.

Would you have stopped and cautioned someone you thought was going to literally blow up in your face?

hbar00

07-26-2005, 02:11 AM

It's called Operation Kratos - a shoot to kill policy in the event of a policeman being confronted by a suspect suicide bomber. The guidelines advise officers to shoot at the head to instantly incapacitate the suspect (ie kill him), to both avoid him manually detonating himself, and avoid hitting the explosive device itself.

Hopefully the police are required to observe some evidence that a person is a suicide bomber. Doesn't seem that the victim in this case presented any evidence that he was such a person.

Martino

07-26-2005, 04:16 AM

Hopefully the police are required to observe some evidence that a person is a suicide bomber. Doesn't seem that the victim in this case presented any evidence that he was such a person.

Well, that is what the enquiry will try to establish.

'No impunity' for shoot-to-kill

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4716645.stm

The police "shoot-to-kill" strategy will not be used indiscriminately, a key architect of the policy has said.
Tactics are constantly reviewed and any decision to allow police to kill must come from a senior officer, South Wales Chief Constable Barbara Wilding said.

But the threat of suicide attacks meant that shooting a suspect in the head was sometimes the "proportionate" response.

Ms Wilding spoke following criticism of the death of innocent Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell Tube.

Relatives and friends of Mr de Menezes, 27, who was shot in the head seven times after officers wrongly suspected him of being a suicide bomber, have marched in his home town in Brazil demanding that arrests be made.

Tony Blair said he was "desperately sorry" for the death, but insisted that the police must be supported as they carry out anti-terror operations "in very difficult circumstances".

The shoot-to-kill policy, codenamed Operation Kratos, was put in place six months after 9/11.

Ms Wilding denied suggestions that it was an Israeli tactic and insisted that it was put together following extensive research in countries which had already suffered suicide bombings.

It also draws on extensive tests of different bullets and explosives, concluding that the most effective way of stopping a suspected suicide attacker from setting off a device is to fire at the head.

This is partly because acetone peroxide - the explosive used in the past by suicide bombers and linked to the attacks in London - is so volatile.

A strategy for tackling suicide vehicle bombers is still being worked on and will eventually be adopted by every force in England and Wales, said BBC crime correspondent Neil Bennett.

UK police are usually instructed to shoot at the body, but that is not always appropriate when someone is carrying a bomb, Ms Wilder said.

"If you go for the body mass, what is going to happen to those explosives? It's likely to go off," she told BBC News.

But she said the police response had to be proportionate, because "we always have to be able to answer, have we used reasonable force in the light of the intelligence of the situation and the risk?".

The dedicated senior officer, working with those at the scene, has to decide what the best course of action is according to the particular circumstances.

The policy is constantly reviewed in the light of information from other attacks, including the recent bombings in Egypt and those in Iraq, she said.

Debate over the police "shoot-to-kill" policy intensified following the death of Mr de Menezes, who ran from police when challenged.

Human rights lawyer Imran Khan called for a radical change in policy.

"There's been a mistake, mistakes have been made; my fear is the commissioner of the Metropolitan Police is saying that this could potentially happen again," he said.

"Now what does that do to the community, the community is not going to be confident in a police force that admits it can make mistakes."

Labour peer Lord Ahmed warned that illegal immigrants would try to run away if challenged by police.

"And whilst we need to catch those illegal immigrants or asylum seekers, nevertheless we can't shoot them because they're not terrorists," he said.

>:^|

07-26-2005, 07:59 AM

You know (I hope) I'm not going to stand-up by these policemen blindly. But this needs to be resolved through a public enquiry, not messageboard witchhunts and rhetoric about white fascism.

You do realize what you've been doing throughout this thread, don't you? And you do realize what it means specifically to be a White person taking this position?

Martino

07-26-2005, 08:40 AM

You do realize what you've been doing throughout this thread, don't you? And you do realize what it means specifically to be a White person taking this position?

What I've been saying is wait for the results of the enquiry. Then villify to your hearts content.

>:^|

07-26-2005, 08:50 AM

Hmm, guess you don't.

Martino

07-26-2005, 09:08 AM

Hmm, guess you don't.

I'm not jumping on the bandwagon on this one. The tragic killing of Jean Charles de Menezes came about through a series of events still being investigated. Until all details are made public, I'm not going to subscribe to the idea that he was 'executed' because of his colour just because everyone here says so.

haplesshobo

07-26-2005, 10:29 AM

As I argued against HaplessHobo after the 7 July bombings, the police are going to find the bombers through investigation, not by harrassing the entire Muslim population (as he advocated), and that is exactly what they are doing.

Hmm, you called me a 'half-wit racist' for saying that AQ was probably involved, and that's where the police should concentrate their resources instead of going after National Front. My argument was that the attack bore the hallmarks of an AQ attack, not NF, and that's where the police should focus in on.

I however, never advocated or defended, as a white person, white police forces executing a non-white simply because he wasn't white. According to eyewitnesses, the suspect was pinned down by two other officers while a third one unloaded 5 shots into the base of his skull.

Here's the source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1707480,00.html

"By far the most controversial claim comes from a number of witnesses who have cast doubt on police statements that they shouted a warning or identified themselves to the suspect before opening fire.

Lee Ruston, 32, who was on the platform, said that he did not hear any of the three shout “police” or anything like it. Mr Ruston, a construction company director, said that he saw two of the officers put on their blue baseball caps marked “police” but that the frightened electrician could not have seen that happen because he had his back to the officers and was running with his head down.

Mr Ruston remembers one of the Scotland Yard team screaming into a radio as they were running. Mr Ruston thought the man that they were chasing “looked Asian” as he tumbled on to a waiting Northern Line train.

Less than a minute later Mr Menezes was pinned to the floor of the carriage by two men while a third officer fired five shots into the base of his skull.

Again, Mr Ruston says that no verbal warning was given."

Arex

07-26-2005, 10:30 AM

i like ur reasoning. i'm not comfortable w/ giving police that power either. it really goes to the chances of me dying. if chances are greater that i'd die of a bombing than of police mistakes, then i'd want police to have that policy. but if it were the reverse, i wouldn't want it. very little idealism in there, just plain practicality.I'm guessing that's how it is for most people. Those in favor of the policy probably aren't the ones likely to be ever mistaken for terrorists and shot seven times in the head. Those against it have probably felt the cold eye of racial profiling before. While I doubt I'd ever personally be mistaken for a suicide bomber, the fact that other people might be is reason enough for me to be against the policy. That's my idealism there.=)

I suppose one argument in favor of retaining the "shoot to kill" policy is that, if you're truly "innocent," you won't run from the cops, thus provoking that kind of deadly reaction. Still, I don't like how the penalty for being a serial killer might be life in prison, or capital punishment after your appeals are used up, while the penalty for being a minority and running from the cops, while wearing a poofy jacket, is death. It's definitely a tough call to make though.

hooligan

07-26-2005, 10:34 AM

I'm not jumping on the bandwagon on this one. The tragic killing of Jean Charles de Menezes came about through a series of events still being investigated. Until all details are made public, I'm not going to subscribe to the idea that he was 'executed' because of his colour just because everyone here says so.

It's not that Martino, your position as a person who isn't of color, is interpreted by a lot of us here as someone who's making excuses about the status quo. Saying that the policie had to do what they had to do. To people like us, people of color, we see an innocent man dead because he ran from plainclothes police. Then executed for running away from them. While, I see what your point is, I don't think you understand the impacts that it has on people like us. Frankly, when you run from the police, they'll give you the benefit of the doubt, while us people who are a little darker, they'll treat us as guilty (even though we may not be Muslim, even). It means that a justified street execution by the police is justified because this man not only came out of the suspects building, but was someone who looked brown.

Napoleon Chynamite

07-26-2005, 12:25 PM

You guys have got to be kidding if you're implying that Martino is too ignorant regarding the racial dynamics of this matter, or acting as some type of apologist for white people. Any quick glance into his past post history will tell you that he's friggin more critical of the white power structure than many of us here (myself included), who aren't white in the first place and openly accept the existence of white privilege and the lasting legacy of white imperialism on a global scale. People can use the "you just don't understand us colored people" reason to justify virtually anything they want, whether it be simply illogical reactions or active reverse racism.

>:^|

07-26-2005, 12:41 PM

I think most people are ignorant of racial dynamics.

Martino

07-26-2005, 12:52 PM

Hmm, you called me a 'half-wit racist' for saying that AQ was probably involved, and that's where the police should concentrate their resources instead of going after National Front.

I called you a half-wit racist for saying things like:

I know you'll call me racist for saying this, but if a Muslim person gets on a plane, I don't think its wrong if the security gives him extra attention.

And I beleive I said the police should investigate the bombings, not target specific groups, like the Muslim community. Unless you'd care to provide a quote otherwise?

No?

Thought not.

What I did say - to you - was things like:

You want them to focus on young Muslim men. You don't explain how randomly stopping Muslims would find the killer. Unless they happen to conduct their day to day lives armed to the teeth.

and:

Great. Forensic science and intelligence gathering triumphing without treating the entire Muslim community as suspects.

Racist scum that I am. :O(

deez nuts

07-26-2005, 01:10 PM

psssssst, hey racist scum. ask >:^| what his/her race/ethnicity is.

haplesshobo

07-26-2005, 01:11 PM

And I beleive I said the police should investigate the bombings, not target specific groups, like the Muslim community. Unless you'd care to provide a quote otherwise?

I believe that you said the polics should investigate National Front and that the reasons for the bombing was entirely unrelated to radical islam.

Call me you will, I'm not the white person here who advocated and defended the police killing a non white suspect while they had him pinned down simply because he was not white like you.

Martino

07-26-2005, 01:29 PM

I believe that you said the polics should investigate National Front and that the reasons for the bombing was entirely unrelated to radical islam.

There is a search facility above. Post the quote.

nola

07-26-2005, 01:34 PM

From her posts over the years I am quite sure visage is an Asian female. Just my woman's intuition.

Arex

07-26-2005, 01:38 PM

I believe that you said the polics should investigate National Front and that the reasons for the bombing was entirely unrelated to radical islam.

Call me you will, I'm not the white person here who advocated and defended the police killing a non white suspect while they had him pinned down simply because he was not white like you.I think you're grossly misrepresenting/misinterpreting the substance of what Martino said in the other thread. I believe he basically took the same position as he's taking here: let them complete their investigation before jumping to any conclusions.

Martino

07-26-2005, 01:48 PM

I think you're grossly misrepresenting/misinterpreting the substance of what Martino said in the other thread. I believe he basically took the same position as he's taking here: let them complete their investigation before jumping to any conclusions.

I really want to see him produce this quote. No, really, don't say another word to me until you produce it, Hapless.

Chu Chi

07-26-2005, 01:50 PM

Everyone should remember that the victim: Jean Charles de Menezes, is not able to speak for himself because he is dead.

He may not have run away at all.

Does anyone remember that scene in "Training Day" when they shot "Roger"?

CC

Martino

07-26-2005, 01:57 PM

He may not have run away at all.

CCTV, CC.

EDIT: That stands for Closed Circuit Television, before you ask. And you would.

haplesshobo

07-26-2005, 01:58 PM

Martino

07-26-2005, 01:59 PM

remember, martino, you were explaining to everybody here that 7/7 was unrelated to radical islam or AQ because the attacks also killed muslims even though we tried pointing out that AQ has also carried out attacks where muslims also died in turkey, iraq, egypt, etc...

Just post the quote. There is an excellent Advanced Search Facility above.

Do Advance Search, search posts by Username (Martino), enter a key word (National Front, Muslim, investigate, whatever you 'remember'), click on 'Results by Post'.

deez nuts

07-26-2005, 02:03 PM

From her posts over the years I am quite sure visage is an Asian female. Just my woman's intuition.

is your woman's intuition as well honed as your reading comprehension skills? lol j/k.

Chu Chi

07-26-2005, 04:05 PM

CCTV, CC.

EDIT: That stands for Closed Circuit Television, before you ask. And you would.

What do you do when you are late for work?

CC

Martino

07-26-2005, 04:09 PM

What do you do when you are late for work?

CC

My days of athletically leaping over ticket barriers are long gone.

Chu Chi

07-26-2005, 04:13 PM

My days of athletically leaping over ticket barriers are long gone.

Even if some "Black guys" are chasing you?

CC

Martino

07-26-2005, 04:20 PM

Even if some "Black guys" are chasing you?

CC

"Black guys" who say they are policemen? In a busy Tube station, with CCTV and customers and London Underground staff all around me? With a city so high on alert, every station has a uniformed policeman nearby?

If men with guns tell me to stop, I'll stop. My back isn't bulletproof.

Chu Chi

07-26-2005, 04:28 PM

"Black guys" who say they are policemen? In a busy Tube station, with CCTV and customers and London Underground staff all around me? With a city so high on alert, every station has a uniformed policeman nearby?

.

NO,

The question is; *if at any time*, some "Black guys" are chasing you,

will you always stop?

CC

Martino

07-26-2005, 04:38 PM

NO,

The question is; *if at any time*, some "Black guys" are chasing you,

will you always stop?

CC

Why "Black guys"? Is "Black" supposed to equal "Bad" for me?

If they are policeman and order me to stop, I stop. I do not do an impression of a gazelle.

Originally Posted by haplesshobo
remember, martino, you were explaining to everybody here that 7/7 was unrelated to radical islam or AQ because the attacks also killed muslims even though we tried pointing out that AQ has also carried out attacks where muslims also died in turkey, iraq, egypt, etc...

Just post the quote. There is an excellent Advanced Search Facility above.

Do Advance Search, search posts by Username (Martino), enter a key word (National Front, Muslim, investigate, whatever you 'remember'), click on 'Results by Post'.

Nothing to say, HaplessHobo?

hkRT

07-26-2005, 05:59 PM

The whole thing was just so tragic. I never like cops, except for a few that are really brave and intelligent enough to be cops. Many are either incompetent, unfit, lazy, or bullies and have no business being cops.

I can't believe this poor innocent guy was shot 5+ times in the head. :frown:

At first, I thought it was an Arab-looking person. I know this is not the case here as the victim turned out to be European-looking with some dark (dark hair?, tanned?, mediterranean?) features. It's tragic nonetheless. I feel bad for him and his family. I think that this tragedy is so much different than a friendly fire type of tragedy. The excessively deadly and intentional shots on a man already pinned to the ground just don't seem excusable. The actions seem more of personal paranoia and hypocrisy than of protecting the general public.

Anyways, turning away from this case to a broader topic of identifying terrorists.... I'm so against racial profiling because it takes more substance than superficial guessing to get real work done. Racial profiling to me is a sloppy tool, often compounded with underlying racism. Sure we need descriptions of suspects, but they should be individual, in-depth descriptions. If there's insufficient description, that's just too bad. That's why good work can't usually be done over night. Also, targetting by race seems to imply that the lives of some races are more valuable than others.

Chu Chi

07-26-2005, 06:08 PM

Why "Black guys"? Is "Black" supposed to equal "Bad" for me?

If they are policeman and order me to stop, I stop.

No Martino, Im just trying to walk you through your own logic tree so you can see how an innocent person can react from a position of fear and make a poor decision.

As members of a protected valued class, many White people have a problem doing this.

Are you one of those people?

CC

thaite

07-26-2005, 06:24 PM

Martino, what the weather like in london that day?

Martino

07-27-2005, 02:56 AM

No Martino, Im just trying to walk you through your own logic tree so you can see how an innocent person can react from a position of fear and make a poor decision.

As members of a protected valued class, many White people have a problem doing this.

Are you one of those people?

CC

Blair Peach. Harry Stanley. David Ewin. Three examples of members of the protected valued class unlawfully shot dead by British police.

Your 'logic tree' doesn't work. It isn't even a logic tree, you are stringing together 'either/or' assumptions that could go either way, with no reference to circumstance or the people involved.

All of which is magnificently irrelevant. If you really were as robotic and computer-minded as you like to act, you might want to wait until the publication of the inquests findings, or the findings of the independent review. This fatal shooting needs to be investigated thoroughly. We know why he was under surveillance, we need to know why he was thought to be of sufficient threat to the public for his life to be taken away from him.

Chu Chi

07-27-2005, 06:29 AM

This fatal shooting needs to be investigated thoroughly. We know why he was under surveillance, we need to know why he was thought to be of sufficient threat to the public for his life to be taken away from him.

You sound like the trigger man.

CC

deez nuts

07-27-2005, 06:40 AM

i can't wait till the torches are lit and chanting of "die whitey die" are chanted in this thread.

Pookie_gal

07-27-2005, 07:02 AM

Martino, what the weather like in london that day?

I'm not Martino - but it was a hot day that day, in the mid 20s. The fact that he was wearing a thick quilted jacket was slightly suspicious.

It