Now tell me something, how is this guy allowed to walk freely?. A known radical Muslim preacher makes statements like this, in public and he is still allowed to preach? They should drag his ass in and find out what he really knows. The Mosque that he preaches in should be investigated big time. Unbelievable!

Radical muslim preaching translates into Jihad and Terrorism.


Don Cardi

Now the tube drivers a really scared.

I'm sure this will add to the confusion & chaos, but I don't blame these people one bit. It's so easy to say "go on as usual", but these poor people are scared and rightfully so.


web page

TIS

Maybe they were the fashion police.

This whole affair is ridiculous. This country (the UK) is on alert, the capitol especially, and the whole country is united in their hatred of the terrorist threat, and rightly so.

The problem is in the atmosphere of terror and panic that has been created. It produces two reactions: (1) Blind, undevoted trust and loyalty to the state and Police and (2) Blind, unalloyed hatred of the "enemy" whoever that may be.

In this sort of atmosphere, it becomes abhorrent to criticise one's own countrymen, especially the Police force. But the British public are awful reactionaries, never mind all this BS about stiff upper lip. And our Police force is woefull inept. Tragedy cannot mask incompetence. Our Police are rubbish, useless. Sorry if that's disrespectful, but it's a true assessment.

They are paid a lot of money and do an important job. They are VERY good at catching motorists doing 32 mph in a 30 mph zone; they excel at crowd control and moving people along, there's nothing to see here. But actually thwarting a co-ordinated terrorist threat? Rubbish. We need a dedicated counter-terrorist force, peopled by educated, intelligent, sharp and physically fit individuals.

And what is their stock response to attacks? "We ask the public to be vigilant." We've got our own jobs to do, our own lives to lead. Sure, we'll take care of ourselves and look out for suspicious packages and so on. But it's your job to keep us safe, guys. Start doing it and stop congratulating yourselves for being so good at cleaning up messes that wouldn't happen if you were any good.

LONDON - The man shot and killed on a subway car by London police in front of horrified commuters had nothing to do with this month's bombings on the city's transit system, police said Saturday in expressing their regrets.

A day earlier, the police commissioner said the man was "directly linked" to Thursday's attacks, in which bombs on three subway trains and a bus failed to detonate properly. No one was injured.

"For somebody to lose their life in such circumstances is a tragedy and one that the Metropolitan Police Service regrets," a police spokesman said on customary condition of anonymity.

The man, whose identity has not been released, was shot Friday at a subway station in the south London neighborhood of Stockwell. Witnesses said the man appeared to be South Asian and was wearing a heavy padded coat when police chased him into a subway car, pinned him to the ground and shot him in the head and torso.

A police spokesman said on customary condition of anonymity that the man was unconnected to Thursday's incidents, in which bombs placed on three subway cars and a double-decker bus failed to detonate properly.

Later, a Metropolitan Police official said on condition of anonymity that the man was "not believed to be connected in any way to any of the London bombings." The official requested anonymity because no official announcement had been made concerning a link to the July 7 attacks that killed 56 people, including four attackers.

Hours after the man was killed, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Ian Blair said the shooting was "directly linked" to the investigations.

"The man who was shot was under police observation because he had emerged from a house that was itself under observation because it was linked to the investigation of yesterday's incidents," police said Friday.

"He was then followed by surveillance officers to the station. His clothing and his behavior at the station added to their suspicions."

Police investigating Thursday's attacks also said Saturday they had arrested a second man in the same south London neighborhood where the shooting occurred and another person was detained.

Thousands of officers fanned out in a huge manhunt amid hopes the publication of images of four suspected attackers would lead to their capture.

Security alerts kept the city of about 8 million on edge. Police briefly evacuated east London's Mile End subway station in one such incident and one witness reported the smell of something burning. Service was suspended on parts of two subway lines, but police said later the incident "turned out to be nothing."

The mourning continued, with hundreds packing Westminster Cathedral for the funeral Mass of Anthony Fatayi-Williams, a 26-year-old who was among the 52 people killed by four suicide bombers in the first wave of attacks on July 7.

"These present atrocities and Anthony's death have raised great emotions in us," Auxiliary Bishop of Westminster Alan Hopes told mourners. "We are angry, we are appalled and we are grieving. But as Christians we cannot yield to bitterness, we cannot yield to thoughts of revenge."

The Metropolitan Police said the second arrest late Friday was "in connection with our inquiries" into Thursday's attacks. The first suspect, whose identity also has not been released, was being questioned at a high-security London police station.

Police would not say whether the men arrested were among the four suspected of carrying bombs onto three subway trains and a bus Thursday. The bombs failed to detonate properly and no one was injured in the attacks, which echoed the much deadlier blasts two weeks earlier.

Police said they had a good response to Friday's release of the photos, taken from the British capital's ubiquitous closed-circuit surveillance cameras, which have proved a boon for investigators.

The closed-circuit TV images of the suspects stared from the front pages of British newspapers Saturday.

"Faces of the four bombers," said the Daily Telegraph.

"The Fugitives" said The Times.

The Daily Mail labeled them "Human Bombs."

One image shows a stocky man in a "New York" sweatshirt running through a station. Another depicts a man in a white baseball cap and a T-shirt adorned with palm trees. Two others are in dark clothes, slightly obscured by a poor camera angle.

A statement posted Friday on an Islamic Web site in the name of an al-Qaida-linked group claimed responsibility for Thursday's attacks.

Authorities, however, were skeptical. The group, Abu Hafs al Masri Brigades, has also claimed responsibility for the July 7 bombings - as it did for the 2003 New York City blackout and many other events.

These have been days of high tension, disruption and fear on the London Underground. The union for subway and bus drivers said workers would be justified in staying away from work if the government fails to take more precautions to make the operators safe.

"I think they're going to strike again," commuter Warren West, 27, said of the bombers. "I think they're doing to London what's happening in Iraq."

Heavily armed officers patrolled with clear instructions to stop suicide bombers - if necessary, with a shot to the head.

"If you are dealing with someone who might be a suicide bomber, if they remain conscious, they could trigger plastic explosives or whatever device is on them," Mayor Ken Livingstone. "Therefore, overwhelmingly in these circumstances, it is going to be a shoot-to-kill policy."

That's not fair my friend. What do you want them to tell you to do, stay in your house and never come out again until all the bad people are caught? C'mon, they are right, we all must be vigilant.

And to blame them saying that these things would not happen if they did there jobs and were any good at it is totally infair. You can have the best intelligence in the world, the best police protection in the world. Your authorities may be successful at diverting an attack, they may even thwart some through good investigation as a result of excellent intelligance gathering. They can provide the best security in the world. But if some religious zealot extremist decides to strap bombs to himself and walk into the middle of a train station, into the heart of a market place or onto a bus, and blow himself up, that is almost impossible to stop. You cannot blame anyone in authority for not being able to stop an act like that.

Don Cardi

Agreed.

But the difficulty of defending against this kind of threat is no excuse for incompetence, that was my point. The police falied to prevent the bombings - perhaps understandably - but do we hear an apology or a promise to do better next time? No - all we get are police media spokesmen congratulating themselves for reacting so well. That's a bit rich.

Incidently, the man they shot at Stockwell tube was completely unassociated with the incidents. He was a Brazilian: Jean Charles de Menezes, 27. Did the police apologize for taking him out execution-style? Well, they expressed their "regret" and agreed that it was "unfortunate" :rolleyes: No doubt the cowboys who shot him will get a medal

Let's keep it in context - the man was 1.) already under survelliance 2.) wearing a thick coat in the summer 3.) Ran away when the police attempted to stop him 4.) Dove onto a subway car, and continued until he slipped and fell.

I'm sorry, but after those suicide bombings, I give kudos to the Brits for actually having the balls to detain him permanently. It isn't as if they just randomly went up, knocked him down, and blew him away for suspicion. He deliberately tried to evade the police, and was a person of interest already.

I wonder how the NYC would've reacted. I always hate the fact that our poor cops end up getting sued by families of people who have their relatives killed because they were in a high speed chase, or took people hostage, etc. For instance, that recent incident where police accidentally killed the little girl who was being used as a shield by her father. They didn't hit her on purpose, they were trying to stop the father after a drawn out standoff. And what happens? Never mind the sick fuck used his daughter as a shield, but the family is suing the police. Is that justice? I don't think so.

I remember when this first happened hearing something said that when this man was finally surounded a heated verbal exchange between the authorities and this man took place and the next thing that happened was that the authorities told all of the civilians to get down on the ground and then they shot him. Can anyone from London confirm this report that I originally heard?

Who knows, maybe this guy told them that he was going to blow himself up or something and that is why they shot him.

The Al Shaprtons of the city would be marching and protesting all over the place!


Don Cardi

I was watching one of the nightly news programs (maybe either NBC or CNN) and it showed a little CGI diagram of how he ran away from the British police and ran onto the train, running through the car until he tripped, thereafter when police shot him.

Now tell me something, how is this guy allowed to walk freely?. A known radical Muslim preacher makes statements like this, in public and he is still allowed to preach? They should drag his ass in and find out what he really knows. The Mosque that he preaches in should be investigated big time. Unbelievable!

Radical muslim preaching translates into Jihad and Terrorism.[/b][/quote]For no ther reason than because I'm in the mood to be argumentative here....

1)What this guy is saying may very well be true, and
2)His statement could be regarded as a prediction and does not necessarily mean that he is advocating that position.

As I say, though, I'm just in the mood to be argumentative.

Well I'm not!


Don Cardi

Awww, you're no fun

And I undertand, of course, that the two points I made above are really unarguable since they're correct. :p

He's a terrorist. End of story. So there is actually nothing to argue or debate about.

Have a great day!



Don Cardi

WRONG! He happened to live in a multi-tenement apartment block that also housed some people who were under surveillance. He DID NOT KNOW the terrorists. Do you deserve to get shot if your nextdoor neighbour is a killer :rolleyes:

WRONG! He wasn't!! Even if he was .... think about what you're saying, man. It's not illegal to wear a thick coat, and it is not effective counter-terrorist policy to shoot everyone who is overdressed :rolleyes:

WRONG! They were plain clothes detective (ie didn't LOOK like police) brandishing guns and shouting and running after some poor bugger. This took place in Stockwell (London's equivalent of ... whatever part of downtown New York is renowned for random shootings and gang violence). Plus he was BRAZILIAN, maybe his English was not great, especially in a panic situation.

WRONG! What is this work of fiction! "Until he slipped and fell"- how does that add weight! He ran, slipped and fell because he was an innocent, terrified civilian being persued by three guys, shouting at him.

Do you maybe want to read that sentence again :rolleyes:
THE POLICE KILLED A LITTLE GIRL!!

Maybe my earier post wasn't clear, so let me lay it on the line for you: THE POLICE SHOT DEAD AN INNOCENT MAN. They screwed up, they got the wrong guy, and they executed him. "poor cops" getting sued by families of innocent people they execute!! Double-J I'm disappointed, you always seemed fairly sensible in your politics on other posts, now it seems your mind's turned to mush with all that comedy you've been playing.

The Police are human; they make mistakes; I DON'T WANT MISTAKES MADE WITH GUNS on a "shoot-to-kill" policy.

===================================================

TERRORISTS v WESTERN WORLD
21 July 2005, 2nd TEST, the OVAL

---INNOCENT PEOPLE---
-----------------INJURED-----------KILLED
Terrorists --------1-----------------0
Police-------------0-----------------1

Another win for the Terrorists, I'd say.

WRONG! He wasn't!! Even if he was .... think about what you're saying, man. It's not illegal to wear a thick coat, and it is not effective counter-terrorist policy to shoot everyone who is overdressed :rolleyes: [/b][/quote]You're right it's not illegal to wear a thick coat in the summer time but it DOES draw attention to yourself. How many people do you know wearing long coats in 90 degree weather!? Even if I wasn't a cop, I'd be suspicious[/qb][/QUOTE]

You can't shoot everyone who acts suspiciously. You would kill dozens of people per day: mentally ill, those unable to understand the language, or just those with innocent but odd habits.

Look at it from the terrorists point of view: if he can kill with a bomb, he's happy ... but if he can get the infidel westerners to kill his own kind, then he's very happy indeed. You want to make these people very happy? I don't.

I understand what you're saying. I wouldn't kill everyone who draws suspicsion. But you would think that 2+ weeks after a terrorists attack occured in London that you WOULDN'T want to draw attention to yourself. I know that after 9/11 that's exactly what people were trying to avoid, foreigner or non.

Agreed, but that's a no-brainer. People don't intend to draw suspicion. Some people just look a bit odd or act suspiciously without even realizing it, and the police shoot first and "apologize" afterward.

Do you agree with the "advice" that I have heard some express elsewhere, apparently without irony, that "anyone of Asian appearence should avoid carrying backpacks for the next few weeks". I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Just a reminder: the guy who was shot was BRAZILIAN!! I'm no expert, but I think I could tell as South-Am'er from an Asian. They look, erm, how can I put this... entirely sodding different.

But our exchage of words means nothing compared to the pain and frustation that Mr de Menezes's family is feeling right now. Our "brave boys" plugged five bullets into the back of his innocent head.

I'm not sure if this individual intended to draw attention but again, some need to use common sense. Whether or not he's a person who gets cold very easily or just enjoys wearing a coat daily, wearing any type of coat in the summer time (unless it's bitterly cold), is going to draw suspicsion, intended or not.

No I think that's total bullcrap and I wouldn't do it. However, they probably know full well that they'll mostly be the ones who are searched.

Not wanting to get personal, or to launch into a separate debate, but I do find this attitude quite disappointing from one who bears your username. I don't know if you are Irish or have Irish family history (apologies for my ignorance), but assuming that you do, I find it difficult to believe that you place so much trust and enthusiastic devotion in the British police.

The shameful Bloody Sunday episode resulted in the death of innocent irishmen who were acting in a far more culpable way than Mr de Menezes. They were protesting, but non-violently and rightfully, and were shot down dead. The current situation is different, but it raises one allied issue: how much discretion or allowence should the police / home forces be allowed to shoot to kill? Should they really be allowed to kill on the basis that a dark-skinned man was wearing a coat that looked a bit too heavy for the weather? That's very shaky grounds indeed, and I am not happy with that as a reason for shooting to kill.

Not wanting to get personal, or to launch into a separate debate, but I do find this attitude quite disappointing from one who bears your username. I don't know if you are Irish or have Irish family history (apologies for my ignorance), but assuming that you do, I find it difficult to believe that you place so much trust and enthusiastic devotion in the British police. [/b][/quote]Yes I am Irish (at least 3/4) and VERY proud of it. I don't know what the situation is like in England but I see where you're coming from with them being suspicoius of the Irish. I've only been to England once when I was like 13 or 14 and I remember hearing that you weren't allowed to sit down in stores or something for fear of Irish attacks or something along those lines. The comments that I posted about the Muslims must likely being the ones searched was directed towards the people in America (as again I don't know what the situation is in England since I'm not there). But now that I think of it, yes I'm sure they're targeting Irish and Muslim

Rightly so: Ireland is a beautiful country and I have found the Irish and the Northern Irish to be the most pleasant and genial people.

I pray to go someday to Ireland

I am just wondering. If you were on that train and you saw all this coming down, What would you be thinking. Would you have run from that train thinking that ths could have been a bomber and you life was about to come to an end?

I for one sit here and thank the lord that we have people who would put their life on the line and chase that suspect even if he was about to take his own life and anyone around him when he could be a walking bomb.

I am just wondering also: If it was your son, or brother, or father that had been shot - plugged with five bullets to the back of the head, exectued as a criminal - What would you be thinkng?

Still "thanking the lord" for those heroes who gunned down your loved one, fatherson? Why don't you contact Mr Menezes's parents and inform them that you "thank the lord" that SO19 were brave enough to shoot their son five times in the back of the head :rolleyes:

I'm just waiting for the time when some fellow is running late for work. He's running so he doesn't miss his train or bus; he has a walkman on, so he can't hear anything. A cop sees him running and tells him to stop. This gentleman is trying to make his train, so he can go to work, pay his taxes, and be a productive citizen. Of course, he can't hear the cops, so that gives this brave man in blue the right to put 5 bullets in the back of his head, because he looked suspicious and didn't obey a cop. I just hope that person wouldn't be a friend or relative of anyone here, and they would expect us to feel sorry for them. After all, these are troubled times and the police should do whatever they want to protect us.

Let's see....if you don't obey the government, give up your civil liberties and let the police do whatever they want you are a rebel to your country and can be shot.

No need to get angry.

I know if I was on that train at that time, I would be scared and if there was the slimmest chance of him being a bomber then by all means it should be him rather then hundreds of us.

His mistake was not stopping, plain and simple. If he would have been by family memeber I would be asking Why? Why didn't he stop, why didn't he listen. I heard about crime in that area, but come on there are tons of people around here and what? three gunmen going after you in a crowded rail station to rob you out of hundreds of commuters? This doesn't make sense to me. That city and its people knew that police where looking for other possible bombers.

During 9-11 when there were planes in the air and we didn't know how many other flights were flying and going to take down more targets it was also very simple. LAND THE PLANE OR BE SHOT DOWN!

Now in New York it is simple, If you want to take our transit system you must allow us to check your bags if we want. If you don't agree, find another way to get where you are going. Those are the new rules, right or wrong. You know them now, so live with them or walk.

Beth it is like taking a plane now, If you fly you now know what to do and not do. You don't stand in line and joke to your friends about hiding drugs or talk about bombs do you?
If so they will pull you out and strip you down before they let you go. Who's fault is that? yours and yours alone!

Smart people who travel in NY subways know better then not pay attention to their surroundings and the people near them at all times.

If I owned a store and a person came in with a large winter coat on in the middle of July with the temp hitting 90 plus, would I watch him as he when about my store. Damn Stright and I would watch to see if he was stealing too.

Prejudice? no smart enough that something dosen't smell right. and I down mean body odor from wearing that coat!

No, but if the house he is living in is under suspicion, and being surveilled, doesn't it make sense to tail the habitants of the house when they leave? And even more, when they head for the subway, after two huge bombings over a two week span?

Here is a link from witnesses...source: Foxnews

No, it's not illegal to wear a thick coat. But it is rather unusual, isn't it? Especially in the hot summer? So, let's check our sheet so far...

1.) He leaves a house already under surveillance
2.) Wears a thick coat; it's summer time. Could potentially be hiding bombs or some other article under his coat.

Let's continue?

It makes sense to me that plainclothes cops would follow him, because they were trying to tail him without him knowing. So when he darts for the subway, I can understand why he was afraid. However, he could've just as well stopped a real cop in the subway, rather than dart for a train. Personally, I don't think the cops acted in the wrong, at least in this case - because he darted on the train, how are they supposed to know he isn't a suicide bomber? Do they wait until he's detonated his load before stopping him? I don't think they can afford to take that risk. And keep in mind, they didn't shoot him until he'd darted onto the subway car.

So, continuing...

3.) He did not stop when police tried to detain him.
4.) He ran into a subway car, rather than trying to find a real police office, or stop when originally told to. I can't imagine it would be that hard, if he thought he was being chased by a "gang," to find a cop in the now occupied London mass transit system.

How is this a work of fiction...he was run down by the police, he tripped, and they forced him to the ground. At that point, how are they supposed to know he isn't going to "press the button" and kill everyone on the train? Do they wait, and try to restrain him, potentially threatening the lives of innocents on the train? Or do they take him out, preferring to save the lives of those on board?

So, let's see...it means nothing that the father pushes his daughter in front of a rash of bullets?

Here's the story from the AP. You can decide for yourself.

The police shot dead one man, whom, if he was a suicide bomber, would've killed hundreds, including the police.

The LA cops didn't "execute" a little girl. They held their fire until the last possible moment, and, rather than leave an innocent life out of it, her sick fuck of a father puts his daughter in the line of fire. So it's the police's fault?

Yeah...for the innocents column of those killed by the terrorists, knock it up by the thousands, with the WTC, Pentagon, Pennsylvania, the Madrid bombings, London, etc... :rolleyes:

As I've already pointed out, if he was a terrorist, what then? Should they have let him go, to accomplish his mission, killing hundreds and injuring more?

But you're taking it out of context. We're not talking about your ordinary "weirdo" ( :p ). This is someone who ran from police and dove onto a subway car, not less than a week after two of the most deadly terrorist incidents in Britains history.

What if he is a terrorist wearing a walkman, to blend into the regular community? Hmm? Who do we blame then?

Why not just open all the subways then, no searches, no security measures?

This isn't some black-and-white issue that liberals would like to paint it as - a slippery slope where big government is stealing our rights. It's the government taking action to prevent more attacks, to prevent another 9/11. I guarantee that the libs would be the first out to pounce of the gov't if another attack hit.

You can't have it both ways. In this day and age, you cannot expect to prevent another 9/11 while living in the carefree pre-9/11 world. Yes, we have to stop these bastards, and it means utilizing more controversial methods. I would much rather wait in line at an airport to be searched (my father was searched on his last business trip, he also ran into an old professor of his, who was an Indian-American, also searched on another business trip) than find out once I'm on board that there are passengers onboard with a bomb or are planning on hijacking the plane.

Originally posted by Double J:

"The police shot dead one man, whom, if he was a suicide bomber, would've killed hundreds, including the police."

This I cannot believe, on this basis we're all potential suicide bombers. Pretty BIG "if" eh Double J??

Nice to know in the home of the brave and the land of the free wearing a heavy coat in summertime is now a capital offence.