Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Shoot to kill

2»

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Nope. Especially as Charles Clarke has said that much in the Commons.

    Kermit is right, the masses are asses.

    Anyway, I'm off to tell a friend the joke about the Irish Catholic Priest, The Pope and the Rabbi, while I still can...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sir Ian told Sky News: "This is a tragedy. The Metropolitan Police accepts full responsibility. To the family I can only express my deep regrets."

    ...

    He acknowledged "somebody else could be shot" as the hunt continued, but added "everything is done to make it right".

    But he said the "shoot to kill" policy for dealing with suspected suicide bombers would remain in force

    From here

    So, who is next?

    Lord Steven says here that
    Lord Stevens told the News of the World the policy, which he described as a "shoot-to-kill-to-protect", was correct despite the chance "tragically of error".


    And just look at the timeline of events published here

    Notice the comments for 22nd July:
    1319: Labour MP for Vauxhall Kate Hoey says she believes police acted with the best interests of the public in mind when they shot a man dead in Stockwell, which lies within her constituency.
    1531: Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair describes the investigation into the London bombings as "the greatest operational challenge ever faced" by the Met.
    ...

    He confirms the shooting in Stockwell was "directly linked to the ongoing and expanding anti-terrorist operation".
    Italics mine...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    This is just an awful situation. Its gota get worse before it gets better. I mean its like they say "random seaches will be performed". Do ya think they are guna randomly search ne white people? The same time they try to counter act teorrorism they only enforce the discrimination in people that causes terrorism in the first place.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You were in the forces, you should know better. We are being told that this fight is to maintain our freedoms. Yet, our rights are being removed systematically. This week we saw the right to justice disappear in five shots.

    I accept that some blood has to be spilled to make sure that the end goal is achieved. In this case the "many" we should be looking out for is the 55m, not 50 people on a tube train.

    This man has no right to appeal, no right to a trial, no right to argue the evidence against him. Somewhere, someone decided that he was guilty and that his death was acceptable. His guilt was assumed, not proven. Hell we don't even have a death sentence in this country, yet we execute people on what appears to be flimsy evidence.

    We have to accept that bombers will get through, people will die. But that does not excuse our police forces doing the killing of innocents.

    I know it sounds mad, callous even, but the police's job is to arrest. When they choose to kill they must be certain that the person is threatening lives. On Friday morning they gunned down an innocent man because they "thought" he was connected. By Saturday evening they released a statement (thus proving that they had known for a while) admitting that he was innocent.

    One day.

    All the police have proven this week, is how cheap our lives really are to them.

    No, I agree that questions need to be asked in this case. But, that doesn't mean we're heading towards a 'police state'. Were the police reckless? Perhaps or perhaps it was an honest mistake by people under pressure - in which case urgent lessons need to be learnt, but its not cold-blooded murder.

    Did someone panic? If so perhaps there may need to be a prosecution.

    There does seem to be two main sides to this case - either the police are cold-blooded murderers or they did right in shooting him down. At the moment I'm in the middle - police do have to sometimes shoot before they are certain (given that the only certainty you ever get is when the bomb goes off), but I do not have enough evidence on what actually happened and what the police saw or believed they saw to say I wouldn't have done the same if I was in their shoes.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whatever you do NQA, hold true to so many prior generations of willful populist refusal to recognise tyranny as it is establishing itself. Nevermind the repeatedly exposed lies, accept the "establishment's" definitions for events and the excuses they provide those who blindly do its dirty work.

    Don't be surprised in decades to come, should we have the fortune of bringing our own grasping powermongers to a new Nuremberg reckoning, to hear oh so many seeking to excuse their complicity with "I was only following orders".

    Rings as hollow to my ears today as it did to those who heard it repeated from many lips back then.

    Never again? I beg to differ!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    NQA wrote:
    No, I agree that questions need to be asked in this case. But, that doesn't mean we're heading towards a 'police state'.

    If you ignore compulsory ID cards, stop and search, shoot-to-kill...

    I don't think that we are there yet, but we're heading in the right direction.
    Were the police reckless? Perhaps or perhaps it was an honest mistake by people under pressure - in which case urgent lessons need to be learnt, but its not cold-blooded murder.

    Did someone panic? If so perhaps there may need to be a prosecution.

    I don't think it was cold blooded murder. I think it was negligence to the highest degree, a complete lack of recognition of a fundamental basis of our culture. Sanctity of life. It's what marks us out from terrorists.

    It's not just the police I'm angry at either, our intelligence in this case was a joke.

    Hell, this morning we were told that the man had no visa, this evening Jack Straw doesn't think he was here illegally. Which is it? And if they cannot get that right, how the hell do we trust them to finger the right people?
    I do not have enough evidence on what actually happened and what the police saw or believed they saw to say I wouldn't have done the same if I was in their shoes.

    I don't have all the evidence I would like, but based on their own testimony, and that of witnesses, I'd say the Police we woeful in their actions. Callous disregard, doesn't even come close.

    Out of interest, has anyone seen a witness statement which says that the person heard the police identify themselves?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If you ignore compulsory ID cards, stop and search, shoot-to-kill...

    ?
    rigged elections ...no investigation allowed into new york attacks ...the invasion of iraq for wearons of mass deception ...the invasion of afghanistan to chase a turban clad anti hero on a white horse ...the power to lock people up indefinately without trial ...anyone wish to add to the list?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    There not protecting our freedom, they are protecting their power. N thers nowt we can do about it, apart grab our pitch forks and go smash something up. Im sure it will come to that eventually.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    a million cameras watching us ...our very own survielance tracking device and we love 'em ...mobile phones.
    digital money which is tracked and traced ...everyone knows how far from the gutter you are ...quick! lend that man some money ...

    can't kill foxes ...can no longer own hand guns ...

    tracking devices in your car ...
    video phones and survielance ...
    and the thing i find realy funny about it all is ...this kind of world only existed in the comics i read as a kid.
    it was always forced upon the people though.
    rhe reality is ...we are embracing our own imprisonment.
    if people wake up and switch everything off for a week ...everything ...the whole fucking thing collapses!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    An interesting revelation I doubt we'll see splashed on many, if any, mainstream press headlines...

    Original widely publicised cctv still image of the alleged bombers doctored?

    http://www.legitgov.org/cctv_image_of_uk_suspects_240705.html

    Curiouser and curiouser, cried Alice!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    NQA wrote:
    There does seem to be two main sides to this case - either the police are cold-blooded murderers or they did right in shooting him down. At the moment I'm in the middle -

    Okay - lets look at it another way.

    A motorist is driving down a High Road - as he nears the tube station, he sees a police officer aiming his gun at a man in a thick jacket.

    Knowing that a policeman has killed an innocent man in a very similar scenario, and wanting to avoid the tragic ending of another innocent life, the motorist accelerates into the policeman, and kills him.

    The suspect is found not to have a bomb. An innocent life has been saved.

    Can we expect the motorist to walk away from the scene without a charge?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Original widely publicised cctv still image of the alleged bombers doctored?

    http://www.legitgov.org/cctv_image_of_uk_suspects_240705.html

    Curiouser and curiouser, cried Alice!

    Have you actually enlarged that image?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Apparently further enlargement and pixelation analysis was done on the photo. I merely raise the question and leave it to you to decide for yourself. Tired of trying to argue the capabilities and clear intents of those whom I suspect.
    Photo of 'Bombers' has been Doctored

    At Least one person has been superimposed

    Prisonplanet.com | July 25 2005

    250705fake3.jpg

    Originally picked up on by citizens for legitimate Government, we now have further evidence to suggest that the above photo has been doctored.

    CLG reported: "At first, (almost) everything looks fine, but look closer... look at the guy with the white hat... check out his left arm (HIS left arm).... the lower of the rails of the railing is IN FRONT of his left arm... where of course it shouldn't be! I'm NO image specialist, but this sure looks ridiculous. I'd say it´s a fake."

    The CLG has also inspected this image. "The white-hatted man was apparently superimposed onto the photo. Not only is his arm 'behind' a railing that is supposedly several feet behind HIM, but also, upon magnification in Photoshop, part of the bar actually goes into his head. This was 'touched-up,' but pixels of his head mix unmistakably with pixels from the railing." --Michael Rectenwald.

    250705fake.jpg


    Here is an enhancement of the picture. You can clearly see that the railing appears IN FRONT of the supposed bomber's left arm. Not only this but there also seems to be a railing running through the man's head.

    250705fake2.jpg

    A further analysis clearly shows the railing continuously running visible through the man's head. There is also a noticeable outline above the bomber's cap and around his head, indicating the image has been "cut out" and superimposed onto the original.

    Why would the authorities doctor this image? What are they trying to persuade the public into believing? Or is this simply an optical illusion? If anyone has any other explanation for these anomalies, please e-mail the details to us.




    To add to the case though, I submit another recent find...

    Bomb was UNDER train, not in any backpacks, claims one witness
    Excerpt:

    "The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said.

    Again I ask, where is the public demand to see concrete forensic evidence rather than mere assertion and public villification of random citizens splashed all over tabloids and television as if it were fact?

    What are you hiding by refusing to submit to a full public enquiry Mr. Blair??
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Luton-Photoshop-Detail.gif
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Erm... look at it again. The "left arm" is actually the backpack and the rail can be seen underneath it.

    Given the grainy nature of the picture - it's hardly his resolution anywhere, which is about standard for CCTV - it actually appears that the head is turned slightly.

    I may be wrong, but unlike you I haven't taken it on face value just because I want to support the notion that it's bogus. Remember what I said about questioning all argument, again you fail to do so.

    BTW Is it usual for injuries to be sustained on the top of someone's head from a blast which went upwards. Also, the genetleman admit to being confused, how confident are you that his version is correct and others are wrong.

    Again, not dismissing it, I'm questioning it...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Wrong again MoK, I clearly posted it as a question. I take nothing at face value, you of all people should know that all too well.

    The one's taking any of this at face value are those like yourself who adopt the very terminology employed by the populist coverstory instead of joining me and countless others in demanding PROOF before spashing the faces of quite likely victims all over the international press as a conclusive fact of their guilt.

    A bomb blast in a confined space with shrapnel quite likely bouncing off the ceiling could very easily produce any variety of wounds, including those to the head and upper body. Sounds more plausible than a bomb in a bag on the floor exploding downwards producing a head injury now doesn't it?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    terminology

    You mean words?

    Should I get my thesaurus out first then, and check that I don't use the same expressions?
    Sounds more plausible than a bomb in a bag on the floor exploding downwards producing a head injury now doesn't it?

    I don't know, I'm not a "expert" in effects of explosions in such spaces. Are you?

    Personally, I would defer to someone who is...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I asked you about the plausibility of it, since you suggested your willingnness to believe an upwards explosion could not somehow produce a head injury. If you now say you cannot so much as comment on the plausibility of my counter- suggestion because you "are not an expert" then why did you make your negative suggestion in the first place?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    since you suggested your willingnness to believe an upwards explosion could not somehow produce a head injury. If you now say you cannot so much as comment on the plausibility of my counter- suggestion because you "are not an expert" then why did you make your negative suggestion in the first place?

    I didn't make a negative comment, I raised a question.

    You really should have learned by now that I often choose my words very carefully.

    I asked if it was usual, thus pointing out that I didn't know... erm... because I'm not an expert...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Okay - lets look at it another way.

    A motorist is driving down a High Road - as he nears the tube station, he sees a police officer aiming his gun at a man in a thick jacket.

    Knowing that a policeman has killed an innocent man in a very similar scenario, and wanting to avoid the tragic ending of another innocent life, the motorist accelerates into the policeman, and kills him.

    The suspect is found not to have a bomb. An innocent life has been saved.

    Can we expect the motorist to walk away from the scene without a charge?
    very good point. what if it was your brother or your dad or someone that you knew 101% was innocent ...it would make for a very interesting case indeed.
Sign In or Register to comment.