London Calling - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Xazy · 07-25-2005, 05:44 AM

Wow, I have a lot to say, but I would instead pose the following question. If it was in NYC and a black man, that was 'shot' would we all say the same thing.

Or on a better parallel since we might say NYC has not had recent suicide attacks, what if it was in Israel, and a Palestinian was killed.

I do think it was an unfortuniate mistake, not exactly the same as murder.

This is what I would call more grey then either black or white (murder / justified), and leaves open a lot of legal / moral questions. Like what if a citizens saw a guy like that, and tried stopping someone and the person died (not neccesarily by a weapon)?

This is a sad reality we live in.

Charlatan · 07-25-2005, 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highthief

So let's never discuss newsworthy incidents until 2 years after the fact and we've had a full public enquiry?

We can discuss it BUT we have to continually understand that we don't know shit about the circumstances.

We don't know:

a) did they idnetify themselves as cops?
b) did he understand them?
c) why did he run?
d) did he see that there was more than one cop?

the list goes on...

We simply don't know. We can easily sympathize with the cops... high stakes. Recent bombings... tensions high. I get that.

BUT we should also not be so quick to condemn the victim of the shooting.

We really know nothing about him or his circumstances. Calling him a coward is just not justified.

roachboy · 07-25-2005, 06:08 AM

hysteria is a dangerous phenomenon.
the cops are not immune.
someone wearing the wrong style of jacket in the tube at the wrong time would not have been immune either.

i think that the american "war on terror" is systematized hysteria--so judgements fashioned from here would be colored very deeply by that political choice/climate---what i get from the many of the previous posts is that in the united states, right now, a significant segment of the population would be able to rationalise such an act on the part of the police.
maybe this is partly a function of living in bushworld.
maybe it is partly a function of a decade of shows like "cops" the primary function of which is to provide an ongoing justification for any and all police actions.

so what i learned by reading through this thread is that in the states, with its context of rationalized hysteria, apparently many would see something parallel as understandable: that the cops would shoot five times at close range someone who happened to be brown, wearing the wrong type of jacket and who reacted in the wrong way--based on a fleeting logic, a circumstantially driven decision, it seems some folk would be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the cops....
the rationale itself seems to rely on the conservative-particular assumption that the law is drawn to the guilty.

Charlatan · 07-25-2005, 06:21 AM

roachboy... I think one BIG difference is that there *could* have been explosives under the jacket.

Though I think it is safe to say that if you have tackled someone you could feel if he had explosives strapped to his chest... again more speculation...

roachboy · 07-25-2005, 06:40 AM

charlatan: well yes. of course. but had that happened, everything would have transpired otherwise.
i am not pretending that i have some procedure in mind that would prevent such things from occurring, if it was followed--some checklist of features that would justify shooting someone at point blank range 5 times. the shooting itself seemed to me a very very complex situation unfolding very quickly in which very quick decisions were made with tragic and politically complex outcomes. and i cannot pretend that i know what kind of decision i would have made had i been in mr. menezes's place. i do not think anyone nows how they would have reacted. but getting killed is a pretty stiff penalty for making what apparently was the wrong choice in an instant---plainclothes cops shouting that they were cops while waving a gun around---i dont know. do you?

what i was focussing on is the willingness of folk from the states (referring to the posts above exclusively) to rationalize such an act in favor of the cops--who are in a crappy situation, btw---and i focussed on this because of the extraordinary distance that seperates these responses from everything i have been reading in the british press as to reactions, official and otherwise. i explain the divergence to myself with reference to the american ideological climate.

highthief · 07-25-2005, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

We can discuss it BUT we have to continually understand that we don't know shit about the circumstances.

We don't know:

a) did they idnetify themselves as cops?
b) did he understand them?
c) why did he run?
d) did he see that there was more than one cop?

the list goes on...

We simply don't know. We can easily sympathize with the cops... high stakes. Recent bombings... tensions high. I get that.

BUT we should also not be so quick to condemn the victim of the shooting.

We really know nothing about him or his circumstances. Calling him a coward is just not justified.

And you didn't blame the cops or insinuate they were overzealous?

Pot, meet kettle.

jwoody · 07-25-2005, 06:48 AM

1: Jean Charles de Menezes leaves a house under surveillance and arrives at Stockwell station

2: Witnesses say he vaults the automatic ticket barriers and heads for the platforms

3: He then ran down an escalator after being approached by up to 20 plain-clothed police officers and tried to board a train

4: He apparently refuses to obey police instructions and after running onto a northbound Northern line train, he is shot dead - 7 shots to the head and one in the shoulder.

___________

Quote:

The Brazilian man shot dead by police who mistook him for a suicide bomber in south London had been in Britain on an out-of-date visa, officials say.

BBC home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw said the type of visa Mr Menezes had been given would normally be valid for one-and-a-half to two years.

He said Mr Menezes had not renewed the visa, adding: "That wouldn't explain why he was shot, but it might provide an explanation as to why he ran away if - that is indeed what he did do."

Menezes had been in London for more than three years.

Quote:

I saw Tube man shot - eyewitness

A passenger has told how he saw armed police officers shoot a man dead on a Tube train at Stockwell.
Mark Whitby said: "I was sitting on the train... I heard a load of noise, people saying, 'Get out, get down'.

"I saw an Asian guy. He ran on to the train, he was hotly pursued by three plain clothes officers, one of them was wielding a black handgun.

"He half tripped... they pushed him to the floor and basically unloaded five shots into him," he told BBC News 24.

"As [the suspect] got onto the train I looked at his face, he looked sort of left and right, but he basically looked like a cornered rabbit, a cornered fox.

"He looked absolutely petrified and then he sort of tripped, but they were hotly pursuing him, [they] couldn't have been any more than two or three feet behind him at this time and he half tripped and was half pushed to the floor and the policeman nearest to me had the black automatic pistol in his left hand.

"He held it down to the guy and unloaded five shots into him.

"He [the suspect] had a baseball cap on and quite a sort of thickish coat - it was a coat you'd wear in winter, sort of like a padded jacket.

I was distraught, totally distraught. It was no less than five yards away from where I was sitting

Quote:

Another eyewitness:

"He might have had something concealed under there, I don't know. But it looked sort of out of place with the sort of weather we've been having, the sort of hot humid weather.

"He was largely built, he was quite a chubby sort of guy.

"I didn't see any guns or anything like that - I didn't see him carrying anything. I didn't even see a bag to be quite honest.

"I got into the ticket hall. I was approached by a policeman and London Underground staff asking me if I needed counselling.

"I was just basically saying I've just seen a man shot dead. I've seen a man shot dead. I was distraught, totally distraught. It was no less than five yards away from where I was sitting. I actually saw it with my own eyes."

"I heard all these popping sounds, it sounded like gunshots, but quite quiet ones.

"I could hear shouting, 'get down' and people going 'run, run'. I thought there was just someone shooting randomly.

"So I lay on the floor of the carriage and then I decided to get up and have a look out.

"[I] could see someone lying on the floor and police all standing around.

"But it was all quite panicky so I then ran up the platform and out of the Tube."

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."

Charlatan · 07-25-2005, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highthief

And you didn't blame the cops or insinuate they were overzealous?

Pot, meet kettle.

I don't believe I did blame the cops... I was a bit sarcastic about puffy coats out of season.

In the end, it sucks, what happened but I think my reaction is similar to roach's... The jump to rationalize the cop's actions was just a little too quick and pat. I'd rather sympatize with a cop who accidentally shot someone than normalize what occured here...

highthief · 07-25-2005, 08:35 AM

Uh huh. You made the crack about 5 shots too.

The implication given who and what you were responding to, was blame the cops.

At the end of the day, if the guy hadn't run, he likely wouldn't have been shot, don't you think?

Charlatan · 07-25-2005, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highthief

Uh huh. You made the crack about 5 shots too.

The implication given who and what you were responding to, was blame the cops.

At the end of the day, if the guy hadn't run, he likely wouldn't have been shot, don't you think?

Five shots on a tackled guy is excessive.

I am willing to grant that this was under extraordinary circumstances.

I am willing to place *some* of the blame for this on *both* parties.

Yes, he probably wouldn't have been shot if he hadn't run. However, under normal circumstances, would police actually shoot someone for running?

If, as it has been suggested, he was running because he hadn't renewed his visa do you think he thought he was going to be shot?

Do you think if something like this occured three weeks ago, that he would have just been arrested, or would they have blown his head off for running?

Lebell · 07-25-2005, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

Yes, he probably wouldn't have been shot if he hadn't run. However, under normal circumstances, would police actually shoot someone for running?

But there's the rub; it wasn't normal circumstances and they will never be.

Sure, it's excessive to shoot a guy running away if you are trying to ticket him for jaywalking.

Ditto to shoot a guy running away for shoplifting.

But again, this guy was a suspected suicide bomber running into a subway.

Context is everything here.

And again, why was he suspected?

1) Left a house that was under surveillence for ties to a bombing.
2) Was wearing a heavy coat in warm weather like many suicide bombers have done.
3) Ran from cops into a subway which has been a recent target of suicide bombers.

So at the end of this, he was shot to stop a threat that [i]was not real, but was reasonable to suspect[/b], given the circumstances.

And there is the key, the cops had a reasonable suspicion that this man was a lethal threat to them and the innocent people around them.

It is a tragedy, but not murder or even unreasonable force.

roachboy · 07-26-2005, 06:40 AM

so what you are saying is that in the above scenario, lebell, it is tragic but understandable that the police would have shot this guy 7 times in the head and once in the shoulder?

i would agree with you if the outcome had been, say, that menezes been wounded--the cops were looking to stop him, he was fleeing, there was doubt. etc....
i would agree with you had the cops been in uniform and menez had been wounded.

but 7 times in the head?

that seems well beyond excessive, perhaps tipping into the pathological--that many shots in the head? for wearing the wrong jacket, jumping a turnstyle and not stopping when guys in regular clothes identifying as/claiming to be cops said stop? there is something really quite creepy about this.

i know that it is reassuring to imagine that the police etc. are somehow above the political fray, that they are not swayed in the performance of their duties by waves of hysteria that impact on others...but that is naieve. they are human beings and memebrs of the same communities as they folk they are to protect. they are affected by the same climate. i have to say i have a really difficult time not seeing in the excessive character of this killing a reflection of the wider environment. and that is really not good.

Charlatan · 07-26-2005, 06:57 AM

Lebell... I don't neccessarily disagree with what you say. I am just trying to add some balance to the discussion that was leaning towards villifying the vicitim of this tragedy.

I am suggesting that...
none of this went through his head as he chose his outerware for the day.
None of this went through his head as he chose to take public transit.
None of this went through his head as he chose to run.

It is easy to sit back and make a judgement as some have done, hind sight is 20/20 and all that. But none of us were in his shoes or knew what he was thinking. The leap to normalize what happened and shake our heads that this, while terrible, was just what happens when someone does, "X" is a little too clean and tidy.

Question:

If the trailing police thought he was such a threat to public safety, why did they wait until he got to the tube before stopping him? Why not surround him on the street where there was less chance a chase in a crowded tube station?

There were "fuck ups" on BOTH sides of the equation.

Dragonlich · 07-26-2005, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

Question:

If the trailing police thought he was such a threat to public safety, why did they wait until he got to the tube before stopping him? Why not surround him on the street where there was less chance a chase in a crowded tube station?

Well, how about this scenario:

there were a couple of undercover (plain clothes) cops following him, because he was being watched. No problem at all - they won't move in until he does something weird.

But then the guy boards the bus, and the police is getting nervous (remembering the bus bombings). They call in backup. After leaving the bus, the guy goes to the subway station... The police is getting *really* nervous now, and decide to stop him, just in case.

There's now about a dozen plain clothes police officers following the guy (who is probably walking rather fast now, feeling threatened by those guys). They identify themselves as police officers by shouting: "Police! Stop right there!" (FYI, given their training, it would be highly unlikely that they would NOT have identified themselves.)

But instead of stopping, the guy jumps across the barriers, and runs to the stairs. The police officers, fearing that another suicide bomber is about to strike, run after him. And we all know how it ended: a load of bullets through the head, just to be absolutely sure that he won't blow himself up.

=========

Now, I have no way of knowing whether this scenario would be real or not. But it would certainly explain why they hadn't stopped him before (why would they?). It would also explain the actions of the police, and (to an extend) the actions of the brazilian guy. I also find it much more believable than the stories about him being shot *just* because he was a foreigner and/or wearing bulky clothing.

Lebell · 07-26-2005, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

so what you are saying is that in the above scenario, lebell, it is tragic but understandable that the police would have shot this guy 7 times in the head and once in the shoulder?

i would agree with you if the outcome had been, say, that menezes been wounded--the cops were looking to stop him, he was fleeing, there was doubt. etc....
i would agree with you had the cops been in uniform and menez had been wounded.

but 7 times in the head?

that seems well beyond excessive, perhaps tipping into the pathological--that many shots in the head? for wearing the wrong jacket, jumping a turnstyle and not stopping when guys in regular clothes identifying as/claiming to be cops said stop? there is something really quite creepy about this.

i know that it is reassuring to imagine that the police etc. are somehow above the political fray, that they are not swayed in the performance of their duties by waves of hysteria that impact on others...but that is naieve. they are human beings and memebrs of the same communities as they folk they are to protect. they are affected by the same climate. i have to say i have a really difficult time not seeing in the excessive character of this killing a reflection of the wider environment. and that is really not good.

Please, let me be clear: This has nothing to do with feeling "reassured" that the cops are "protecting" me, nor does it have anything to do with hysteria.

It has everything to do with the situation the cops were in.

I would hazard a guess that you have never shot a handgun in a life and death situation (Fortunately, neither have I). But I do know from my own experience that I can pop off five shots in one to two seconds (certainly the time it would take a suicide bomber to trigger his load). And I also know that cops are trained to take out threats until they are not threats any longer. This frequently means emptying their guns into suspects that they feel are imminent threats to their lives. One or two shots to the chest frequently do not instantly kill or even incapacitate. A determined attacker will still have seconds (which are a long time in combat) to do what they want to do. The only thing that instantly stops all determined action are shots to the central nervous system, which for all practical purposes, means the head. And then, there are times when even a head shot isn't fatal.

The cops actually showed some restraint because frequently the adrenaline does make them empty their guns. In the case of a SIG-SAUR P226 9mm or a Berretta, that would mean roughly 15 bullets per magazine.

No, they acted exactly as their training told them to. STOP the threat, no ifs ands ors or buts.

The only question left is was the the decision that this person was a threat reasonable, and I've already given my view on that above.

Edit to add:

I want to be clear that I am addressing the idea that "hysteria" somehow affected the police in this situation.

If there had been NO bombings, then I might agree that they had been unreasonable.

But the fact of the matter is that there were subway bombings and that there were additional attacks.

This is not hysteria speaking, these are the facts of the matter.

And as I've said above, there was sufficient reasonably believe that this person might be engaged in another attack. He was not a random individual in a big coat on a street who was just shot out of the blue. If he were, now THAT would be hysteria.

roachboy · 07-26-2005, 08:43 AM

i dont think there is a real disagreement across this, lebell--more a dispositional thing which leads to somewhat different takes at the level of detail.
perhaps you're right about the speed of the gun and that having played a role on its own in all this--i doubt that this information would have registered with me, so yes. thanks.
i think i imagined an old school revolver and from there figured that 7 head shots would require a fair amount of deliberation. so point conceded on that.
and the others drift a bit once i concede that.

a shitty situation all the way around.

djtestudo · 07-26-2005, 11:18 AM

One question based on a point I've seen brought up several times.

How many officers fired?

If several fired at once, isn't it LIKELY that he ended up with seven shots in the head, or whatever ended up happening?

roachboy · 07-26-2005, 11:40 AM

here is a more detailed account of what happened.
no doubt the official version will differ.
i make no claim about the contents of this (i simply do not have enough information sitting in philadelphia to be able to say much about questions of detail) but here it is.

Quote:

News & Analysis
The killing of Jean Charles de Menezes

Ali Abunimah, Electronic Iraq

24 July 2005

Since news broke that London police cornered a young man on the floor of an Underground train, and, in full view of other passengers, pumped five bullets into his head as he lay on the ground, I have been following the reports with increasing anger and sadness. The four bomb attacks on London on July 7 caused enormous carnage and fear. The attempted follow-up attacks the day before the subway shooting only added to the tension.

In this context, reactions to the killing were muted even after it became known that the dead man was a 27-year-old Brazilian immigrant named Jean Charles de Menezes totally unconnected with any terrorist plot. This caution then seems understandable, and that is prescisely the problem. The fact is that in Western societies, collective guilt for brown people is second-nature. We hardly notice it. There are always plenty of people ready to justify, to understand the "difficult" position of the police. But I just can't believe that all things being equal, de Menezes would be dead if he had blond hair and blue eyes. Perhaps if he had emerged from his house looking like David Beckham, one of the officers would have said, "hang on, are we sure we are watching the right house?" Someone might have asked one additional question that would have stopped the chain of events that ended with five bullets in a young man's head.

As soon as de Menezes' identity had been revealed, various British officials expressed sorrow and regret. But within hours the main theme turned to self-justification and rationalization. The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Ian Blair, expressed "regret," but said that such a shooting could happen again.

The director of the human rights group Liberty called for a "comprehensive" investigation into the killing, but even she urged the public to remember that police had to "make split second decisions" with "life-long consequences." Jack Straw, the UK Foreign Secretary, said on BBC Radio: "It is obviously deeply regrettable but what we have to appreciate is the very intense pressure under which the police officers have to work." Straw added, "We have to ensure that clear rules are operated but we also, tragically, have to ensure that the police do have effective discretion to deal with what could be terrorist suicide outrages about to take place. That's the dilemma."

The prevailing "split-second decision" thesis, which has dominated UK press reaction, might be more reasonable if the police had received serious, credible information that de Menezes was a suicide bomber a short time before and really believed they were in hot pursuit of him on his way to carry out an attack. But the claim that the police officers only had a split second to act is contradicted by what is already known. The Observer reported on 24 July that de Menezes' "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."

What is already known, therefore, is that almost 24 hours before they saw de Menezes emerge from his house, police had put it under surveillance based on information they found at the scene of one of the attempted bombings at lunchtime the day before. If the overriding goal of the police is to prevent further attacks, why did they not raid the house right away? They might have discovered sooner what they found out too late -- that de Menezes was totally uninvolved in any terrorist plot. The police clearly had more than a "split-second" to act and they need to explain why they did not act.

Yet, something made the police suspicious between the time de Menezes left his home on Friday morning and the time he ran from an armed squad drawing their guns on him. What was it? Surely de Menezes can't have been the only Londoner to leave his house on Friday morning heading for a Tube stop. We are told that it was his fleece jacket that was "unseasonably thick." Here in Chicago, a thick jacket in July would almost surely be unseasonable, although I often take one out at this time of year because I find the airconditioning in most buildings excessive. But in London? I have frozen through many northern European summers in my life, but perhaps the weather has been hot lately. So far as we have been told, all previous bomb attempts in London, like those in Madrid, were carried out with rucksacks, not suicide belts. Did the police have any reason other than de Menezes' appearance that morning to suspect a change in tactics? Had they searched his house when they had the chance, they might have satisfied themselves that he owned a fleece, but no explosives, without needing to kill him.

There is one crucial fact that has been stunningly absent from all the analysis. De Menezes was a brown man. He could have passed for an Arab or perhaps a Pakistani. To those who pursued and killed him, he must have looked the part of a suicide terrorist. After all, it doesn't appear the police knew anything else about him, even though they had almost 24 hours to find out.

In the United States we have many examples of the police making "split-second decisions" to protect the public. There was Amadou Diallo, shot 41 times by four New York City police officers in 1999, while standing at the door of his house. The officers, who were acquitted of any wrongdoing in Diallo's killing, claimed they thought he had pulled out a gun. Amadou had in fact pulled out a wallet. LaTanya Haggerty, a 26-year old Chicago woman, was shot dead during a routine traffic stop the same year because the officer who killed her said she saw her grabbing a gun. What the officer -- who was also black -- thought was a gun, was a cell phone. Chicago has a long, sad history of such "split-second decisions" and what they all seem to have in common is that the victim was not white. Somehow a wallet, a cell phone or a bunch of keys looks more like a gun in the hands of a black person, and a thick jacket looks more like a suicide belt on a brown man.

The police, in any country at any time, whatever strain they must be under, cannot simply be given a blank check. In London, this is the same police force that was famously called "institutionally racist" by the Macpherson Inquiry carried out after the force's incompetence and negligence meant that the perpetrators of the racially-motivated murder of black British teenager Stephen Lawrence got off scot-free. The 1999 report which found widespread racism at every level of the police, was seen as a turning point in inter-ethnic relations in Britain. While acknowledging some progress, one of the inquiry's advisors, Dr. Richard Stone said in 2004, "In some areas things have got a lot worse, random stops of young black men are now twice as likely as they were five years ago. Today a black man is eight times more likely to be stopped and searched by the police, this is definitely not progress." This is the same police force that shot Jean Charles de Menezes.

As the authorities fighting the "war on terror" claim more and more leeway, Muslim communities feel greater pressure. It is now de rigeur to demand that Muslims living in the west "do more" to root out extremism. Yes, we must all do our part. But it is not clear to me why a British Muslim, who works as a nurse, a bus driver or an accountant, has a greater responsibility or ability to fight Muslim extremists than an ordinary white British youth has to fight the rising tide of racism from groups like the British National Party. The responsibility ought to be the same, and yet it isn't. Muslims are increasingly held collectively responsible for whatever any other Muslim says or does, while members of the dominant society are always allowed their individuality and autonomy. White youths who get involved in anti-racism campaigns are sometimes lauded, but the vast majority who don't are certainly not condemned.

On June 28, an Israeli soldier was convicted in the killing of Tom Hurndall, an unarmed 23-year-old British peace activist, shot while he was assisting Palestinian children in the Gaza Strip in April 2003. Hurndall's death was only a rare example of hundreds of such killings by the Israeli army to lead to a trial and conviction. Initially, Israel lied that Hurndall had been armed. "It took months and months and a lot of pushing by the Hurndall family and the British military attaché before [the investigation] got going," said Jessica Montell director of the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem. The problem is that Israel is a country where the tactics of the army are widely justified and rationalized as being the necessary actions of hard-pressed soldiers loyally protecting the country against ruthless terrorists. And the army is allowed to investigate itself. When the victim of these actions is a young westerner like Tom Hurndall, rather than a faceless, nameless Arab, the balloon of impunity can be briefly punctured.

Over the weekend, the Brazlian foreign minister Celso Amorim arrived in London to add his government's full weight to the demands for an independent investigation of de Menezes' killing. It remains to be seen whether the British government will demonstrate the same accountability they demanded of Israel, or whether the attitude that a state defending its citizens against terrorism is entitled do anything it wants with impunity has already sunk in too deeply.

Ali Abunimah is a co-founder of Electronic Iraq

source: http://electroniciraq.net/news/2074.shtml

dylanmarsh · 07-26-2005, 11:56 AM

From today's Arizona Republic Opinion section:

Quote:

Did terrorists play psychological card?

Jul. 26, 2005 12:00 AM

Today we mourn the shooting death of an innocent Brazilian, thought to be a terrorist, by the London police.

After the police shouted at the suspicious man to stop, he bolted and ran into a subway. The police gave chase, caught the man and shot him to death. What a tragedy.

Or was it? If we have suicide bombers, why not suicide decoys?

One must remember that terrorism is not just of a physical nature - death, mayhem and destruction - but a psychological game. What better to create a lack of confidence, judgment, confusion, hesitation and slow reaction time throughout an enforcement agency than to seemingly have an innocent man slain?

What will the enforcement officers, anywhere in the world and of any kind, do if they confront a real terrorist, now that this psychological card may have been played?

So, why did this man really run? Did he intend to have the police kill him?

- Larry Short, Peoria

Charlatan · 07-26-2005, 12:31 PM

nevermind....................

samcol · 07-26-2005, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dylanmarsh

From today's Arizona Republic Opinion section:

That guy's theory seems the most unlikely out of all the of the ones I've read. Suicide decoys

Ustwo · 07-26-2005, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by samcol

That guy's theory seems the most unlikely out of all the of the ones I've read. Suicide decoys

I thought of the possibility myself. By doing this you get a bunch of liberals in a huff that someone acting like a terrorist was treated like one. Not only may it make future bombings easier, but it puts more pressure on the exisiting government.

Charlatan · 07-26-2005, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I thought of the possibility myself. By doing this you get a bunch of liberals in a huff that someone acting like a terrorist was treated like one. Not only may it make future bombings easier, but it puts more pressure on the exisiting government.

Better yet, let's stick our heads in the sand and accept anything that is done without raising questions...

If innocent people are killed they probably deserved it anyway. I wonder how many of us "act like terrorists" every day and are completely unaware of it...

Yes, this was a tragedy that took place under an extraordinary situation. That doesn't mean the police get carte blanche it means we should examine the events thoroughly to make sure a) they didn't make a mistake that could have been prevented this time and b) that they shoot the right people from here on in...

Oh and thanks for the lead in to, "let's blame the liberals for the next bombing because the authorities can't do their job correctly". Nice.

Elphaba · 07-26-2005, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I thought of the possibility myself. By doing this you get a bunch of liberals in a huff that someone acting like a terrorist was treated like one. Not only may it make future bombings easier, but it puts more pressure on the exisiting government.

That seems a rather broad generalization. Not a single conservative was in a "huff?"

The head of police has already stated that something like this is likely to happen again. Why would future bombings be made easier in your opinion?

host · 07-26-2005, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I thought of the possibility myself. By doing this you get a bunch of liberals in a huff that someone acting like a terrorist was treated like one. Not only may it make future bombings easier, but it puts more pressure on the exisiting government.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...9&postcount=17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I forgot history began in 2001.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...8&postcount=10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I'm sorry Labell but I don't see it that way.

While undoubtedly the mind makes excuses for evil, and as you said I am sure Hitler thought he as a great guy, but that doesn't change the fact they are in fact evil. If you are willing to do evil such as this your goals will be inflexable. Someone willing to strap a bomb on his back and blow up a area full of adults/children etc is not going to be swayed by compromise.

The solution is to remove the institutions that educate people in such a way as to make suicide bombing an acceptable course of action, and kill those already infected. Harsh, brutal and simple, but we are dealing with a harsh, brutal, and simple philosophy.

In our attempts to be diplomatic and more understanding we have only made things worse.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...06&postcount=5

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

The motivation for evil is irrelivant.

Islmofacists will murder innocents as their very philosophy makes no room for innocents, and if the motivation for Egypts attacks are due to local politics, while Britians are due to its forigen policy, it makes no difference.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...5&postcount=16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Meh, I think it depends on age and if your side is 'in power'.

I have a business to run, a family, I work out every other day, and an active social life. That leaves very little time for heckling and rabble rousing. Also both of my senators are of the opposite party of mine, and one of which is a total duchebag (Durbin) so emailing would be beyond pointless. Likewise my house representative is a republican so again, unless I want to say 'good job!' there isn't much point. So I vote, I tease my liberal friends, but unless Hillary gets elected in 2008 or the like, don't expect to see me chanting in the streets.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...1&postcount=14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

WTF has been my reaction as a whole to the politics board lately

Had this guy in fact been a terrorist, acted exactly the same way, and the bobbies did not shoot him, I'm sure we would have some of the same people complaining about the futile and ineffective 'war on terror'.

This doesn't belong in the poltics board, but should be in nonsense for a Darwin award.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...4&postcount=22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

What our little raiders fan said is basically hate speech. I think you know what I want to say to the [explicative deleted] and know that I used great restraint.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...7&postcount=15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Please become active in democrat politics.

We need another Republican in 2008.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...3&postcount=31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

roachboy what I find most amusing is while you knock the National Review, you then cite the NYT's and Washington Post. I can almost smell the irony.

Pot, meet kettle, kettle, pot.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...73&postcount=5

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Woot, I was quoted twice

JinnKai, you might try posting in the politics forum a bit to get the feel for it before you worry about how we do things there. Perhaps you could try raising the level of discourse to the level you deem appropriate.

There are times when a 'one liner' is enough, and prevents you from going into a multiline rant.

Ustwo, do you have any interest in sharing with the rest of us how you come by the opinions that you post? To me, what you post is not compelling or obvious enough just to accept, or to refute at face value. Please add some references to draw attention to "main stream", "source based" reports that I can use as a starting point to counter...or to agree with your all too brief points and arguments. Or.....are my suggestions too removed from your motivation to participate here ?

I've included the bulk of your recent posts here in the last ten days to provide you with a visual aid to further your understanding of my motivation for the questions and comments that I am directing to you. My opinion is that your are intelligent and politcally aware, and that you have much more to offer the rest of us if you choose to. How about it?

Ustwo · 07-27-2005, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

Ustwo, do you have any interest in sharing with the rest of us how you come by the opinions that you post? To me, what you post is not compelling or obvious enough just to accept, or to refute at face value. Please add some references to draw attention to "main stream", "source based" reports that I can use as a starting point to counter...or to agree with your all too brief points and arguments. Or.....are my suggestions too removed from your motivation to participate here ?

I've included the bulk of your recent posts here in the last ten days to provide you with a visual aid to further your understanding of my motivation for the questions and comments that I am directing to you. My opinion is that your are intelligent and politcally aware, and that you have much more to offer the rest of us if you choose to. How about it?

If it makes you feel better host, I gave up on the hope for rational discourse on the politics board longer than 10 days ago.

If you expect me to provide some sort of links or explanation to each and every statement I make, I will have to disappoint you. I would hope some would be most obvious to you at least. In the past I have done so, but the net effect is the same, the effort is wasted, and the unwashed are still unclean. So if you will excuse this simple man, I have kin folk coming over tonight and pieces of meat to roast on the fire.

roachboy · 07-27-2005, 02:06 PM

trust me, ustwo, you are not smart enough to dash off little quips and pass them off as constructive.
no-one is.

but i understand from your post above that it must be frustrating for you in your guise as moses descending from reactionary mountain with the day's tablet of talking points to encounter a population that actually wants you to argue for your positions rather than accept them as the mystical insights you no doubt understand them to be.

and if you are jamming your role as prophet into an already busy schedule, i can see how this would get on your nerves. it must be exasperating to feel as dame edna does, that you give and give and give.

but if you really are delivering messages that would help us lesser beings up from the mire in which you imagine us to be trapped--far far from the elysian fields you obviously occupy----then maybe you owe it to the mystic source of your Science to actually make arguments for us, the unwashed...

unless you take us, the unwashed, a little seriously, what is the point of descending from reactionary mountain with the tablets--why not just stay up there and commune with the source of rightwing truth and wisdom, in a space where facile little quips can be understood as the multifaceted jewels of argumentative technique that you no doubt confuse them with and no-one is bothered by the occasional slide into "kill them all and let god sort them out" type pronouncements? that lovely place where everyone agrees with you and nothing ever has to be spelled out.

Elphaba · 07-27-2005, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

If it makes you feel better host, I gave up on the hope for rational discourse on the politics board longer than 10 days ago.

I have a question and no sarcasm is intended. Why do you continue to post in Politics when you have given up on the hope that any rational discourse can occur? Why would you wish to waste any of your time here?

Charlatan · 07-27-2005, 03:42 PM

roachboy... I don't think you are being entirely fair... nor is host.

Ustwo is hardly, like some on this board, just regurgitating the latest talking points. As much as I disagree with him, I have found a lot of what he has to say interesting and relevant (yes, even some of the quips).

As someone who doesn't always post a book in support of his ideas, I can appreciate that sometimes a quip is just what you have to offer.

roachboy · 07-27-2005, 04:42 PM

let me be clear then--i do not doubt at all that ustwo has interesting things to say--i sometimes find myself wondering what they would be if he found the population here worth the time to engage with.

second: i would not have reacted as i did had the crack about the unwashed not been in his post. seriously.

Gilda · 07-27-2005, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OFKU0

I know it's not a popular topic, but really. Just another forgotten person blown away because why,... he looked like a terrorist? What does a terrorist look like?

Like this:

Ustwo · 07-27-2005, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elphaba

I have a question and no sarcasm is intended. Why do you continue to post in Politics when you have given up on the hope that any rational discourse can occur? Why would you wish to waste any of your time here?

If you will notice my posting on the politics board is far lower now then it has been in the past, but if you will indulge me I may post from time to time, or even more often provided some of the rational left, or libertarians return.

Locobot · 08-03-2005, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gilda

Like this:

Don't forget the most prolific terrorist in U.S. history:

Pacifier · 08-17-2005, 05:45 AM

so much for "wearing weather inappropriate clothing (heavy, bulky coat on a day when the temp. was 71F)"
It is a denim Jacket.

The documents, seemingly from the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) investigation into the shooting, contradict first reports which suggested Mr de Menezes did not hurdle the barrier at Stockwell tube station and was not wearing a padded jacket that could have concealed a bomb.

They also suggest Mr de Menezes had walked into Stockwell Tube station, picked up a free newspaper, walked through ticket barriers, had started to run when he saw a train arriving and was sitting down in a train when he was shot.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4159310.stm

Charlatan · 08-17-2005, 08:28 AM

If this new information is accurate someone really fucked up.

1) He was wearing a denim jacket
2) He was not hailed by the Police
3) He was running to catch the train
4) He was held down and *then* shot

Paints a *very* different picture than the original story.

Paq · 08-17-2005, 10:14 AM

wow...remind me not to go to london as i'm always wearing an overshirt or something 'bulky' and jeans on supremely hot days...

honestly, though, i can't imagine the police/scotland yard fabricating a story so far from reality, especially an incident with witnesses that can be verified. It just seems very odd to me.

Charlatan · 08-17-2005, 12:33 PM

People make mistakes and try to cover their ass all that time... I don't see why the cops would be exempt from this.

07-25-2005, 06:08 AM	#43 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	hysteria is a dangerous phenomenon. the cops are not immune. someone wearing the wrong style of jacket in the tube at the wrong time would not have been immune either. i think that the american "war on terror" is systematized hysteria--so judgements fashioned from here would be colored very deeply by that political choice/climate---what i get from the many of the previous posts is that in the united states, right now, a significant segment of the population would be able to rationalise such an act on the part of the police. maybe this is partly a function of living in bushworld. maybe it is partly a function of a decade of shows like "cops" the primary function of which is to provide an ongoing justification for any and all police actions. so what i learned by reading through this thread is that in the states, with its context of rationalized hysteria, apparently many would see something parallel as understandable: that the cops would shoot five times at close range someone who happened to be brown, wearing the wrong type of jacket and who reacted in the wrong way--based on a fleeting logic, a circumstantially driven decision, it seems some folk would be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the cops.... the rationale itself seems to rely on the conservative-particular assumption that the law is drawn to the guilty. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 07-25-2005 at 06:10 AM..

07-25-2005, 06:21 AM	#44 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	roachboy... I think one BIG difference is that there could have been explosives under the jacket. Though I think it is safe to say that if you have tackled someone you could feel if he had explosives strapped to his chest... again more speculation... __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

07-25-2005, 06:40 AM	#45 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	charlatan: well yes. of course. but had that happened, everything would have transpired otherwise. i am not pretending that i have some procedure in mind that would prevent such things from occurring, if it was followed--some checklist of features that would justify shooting someone at point blank range 5 times. the shooting itself seemed to me a very very complex situation unfolding very quickly in which very quick decisions were made with tragic and politically complex outcomes. and i cannot pretend that i know what kind of decision i would have made had i been in mr. menezes's place. i do not think anyone nows how they would have reacted. but getting killed is a pretty stiff penalty for making what apparently was the wrong choice in an instant---plainclothes cops shouting that they were cops while waving a gun around---i dont know. do you? what i was focussing on is the willingness of folk from the states (referring to the posts above exclusively) to rationalize such an act in favor of the cops--who are in a crappy situation, btw---and i focussed on this because of the extraordinary distance that seperates these responses from everything i have been reading in the british press as to reactions, official and otherwise. i explain the divergence to myself with reference to the american ideological climate. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

07-25-2005, 08:35 AM	#49 (permalink)
highthief Junkie Location: Ontario, Canada	Uh huh. You made the crack about 5 shots too. The implication given who and what you were responding to, was blame the cops. At the end of the day, if the guy hadn't run, he likely wouldn't have been shot, don't you think? __________________ Si vis pacem parabellum.

07-26-2005, 06:40 AM	#52 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	so what you are saying is that in the above scenario, lebell, it is tragic but understandable that the police would have shot this guy 7 times in the head and once in the shoulder? i would agree with you if the outcome had been, say, that menezes been wounded--the cops were looking to stop him, he was fleeing, there was doubt. etc.... i would agree with you had the cops been in uniform and menez had been wounded. but 7 times in the head? that seems well beyond excessive, perhaps tipping into the pathological--that many shots in the head? for wearing the wrong jacket, jumping a turnstyle and not stopping when guys in regular clothes identifying as/claiming to be cops said stop? there is something really quite creepy about this. i know that it is reassuring to imagine that the police etc. are somehow above the political fray, that they are not swayed in the performance of their duties by waves of hysteria that impact on others...but that is naieve. they are human beings and memebrs of the same communities as they folk they are to protect. they are affected by the same climate. i have to say i have a really difficult time not seeing in the excessive character of this killing a reflection of the wider environment. and that is really not good. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 07-26-2005 at 08:11 AM..

07-25-2005, 05:44 AM	#41 (permalink)
Xazy People in masks cannot be trusted Location: NYC	Wow, I have a lot to say, but I would instead pose the following question. If it was in NYC and a black man, that was 'shot' would we all say the same thing. Or on a better parallel since we might say NYC has not had recent suicide attacks, what if it was in Israel, and a Palestinian was killed. I do think it was an unfortuniate mistake, not exactly the same as murder. This is what I would call more grey then either black or white (murder / justified), and leaves open a lot of legal / moral questions. Like what if a citizens saw a guy like that, and tried stopping someone and the person died (not neccesarily by a weapon)? This is a sad reality we live in.

07-26-2005, 06:57 AM	#53 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	Lebell... I don't neccessarily disagree with what you say. I am just trying to add some balance to the discussion that was leaning towards villifying the vicitim of this tragedy. I am suggesting that... none of this went through his head as he chose his outerware for the day. None of this went through his head as he chose to take public transit. None of this went through his head as he chose to run. It is easy to sit back and make a judgement as some have done, hind sight is 20/20 and all that. But none of us were in his shoes or knew what he was thinking. The leap to normalize what happened and shake our heads that this, while terrible, was just what happens when someone does, "X" is a little too clean and tidy. Question: If the trailing police thought he was such a threat to public safety, why did they wait until he got to the tube before stopping him? Why not surround him on the street where there was less chance a chase in a crowded tube station? There were "fuck ups" on BOTH sides of the equation. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

07-26-2005, 08:43 AM	#56 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i dont think there is a real disagreement across this, lebell--more a dispositional thing which leads to somewhat different takes at the level of detail. perhaps you're right about the speed of the gun and that having played a role on its own in all this--i doubt that this information would have registered with me, so yes. thanks. i think i imagined an old school revolver and from there figured that 7 head shots would require a fair amount of deliberation. so point conceded on that. and the others drift a bit once i concede that. a shitty situation all the way around. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

07-26-2005, 11:18 AM	#57 (permalink)
djtestudo Baltimoron Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD	One question based on a point I've seen brought up several times. How many officers fired? If several fired at once, isn't it LIKELY that he ended up with seven shots in the head, or whatever ended up happening? __________________ "Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen." --Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

07-26-2005, 12:31 PM	#60 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	nevermind.................... __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke Last edited by Charlatan; 07-26-2005 at 12:33 PM..

07-27-2005, 02:06 PM	#67 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	trust me, ustwo, you are not smart enough to dash off little quips and pass them off as constructive. no-one is. but i understand from your post above that it must be frustrating for you in your guise as moses descending from reactionary mountain with the day's tablet of talking points to encounter a population that actually wants you to argue for your positions rather than accept them as the mystical insights you no doubt understand them to be. and if you are jamming your role as prophet into an already busy schedule, i can see how this would get on your nerves. it must be exasperating to feel as dame edna does, that you give and give and give. but if you really are delivering messages that would help us lesser beings up from the mire in which you imagine us to be trapped--far far from the elysian fields you obviously occupy----then maybe you owe it to the mystic source of your Science to actually make arguments for us, the unwashed... unless you take us, the unwashed, a little seriously, what is the point of descending from reactionary mountain with the tablets--why not just stay up there and commune with the source of rightwing truth and wisdom, in a space where facile little quips can be understood as the multifaceted jewels of argumentative technique that you no doubt confuse them with and no-one is bothered by the occasional slide into "kill them all and let god sort them out" type pronouncements? that lovely place where everyone agrees with you and nothing ever has to be spelled out. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 07-27-2005 at 02:09 PM..

07-27-2005, 03:42 PM	#69 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	roachboy... I don't think you are being entirely fair... nor is host. Ustwo is hardly, like some on this board, just regurgitating the latest talking points. As much as I disagree with him, I have found a lot of what he has to say interesting and relevant (yes, even some of the quips). As someone who doesn't always post a book in support of his ideas, I can appreciate that sometimes a quip is just what you have to offer. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

07-27-2005, 04:42 PM	#70 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	let me be clear then--i do not doubt at all that ustwo has interesting things to say--i sometimes find myself wondering what they would be if he found the population here worth the time to engage with. second: i would not have reacted as i did had the crack about the unwashed not been in his post. seriously. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

08-17-2005, 05:45 AM	#74 (permalink)
Pacifier undead Location: Duisburg, Germany	so much for "wearing weather inappropriate clothing (heavy, bulky coat on a day when the temp. was 71F)" It is a denim Jacket. The documents, seemingly from the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) investigation into the shooting, contradict first reports which suggested Mr de Menezes did not hurdle the barrier at Stockwell tube station and was not wearing a padded jacket that could have concealed a bomb. They also suggest Mr de Menezes had walked into Stockwell Tube station, picked up a free newspaper, walked through ticket barriers, had started to run when he saw a train arriving and was sitting down in a train when he was shot. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4159310.stm __________________ "It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death — Albert Einstein

08-17-2005, 08:28 AM	#75 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	If this new information is accurate someone really fucked up. 1) He was wearing a denim jacket 2) He was not hailed by the Police 3) He was running to catch the train 4) He was held down and then shot Paints a very different picture than the original story. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

08-17-2005, 10:14 AM	#76 (permalink)
Paq Junkie Location: South Carolina	wow...remind me not to go to london as i'm always wearing an overshirt or something 'bulky' and jeans on supremely hot days... honestly, though, i can't imagine the police/scotland yard fabricating a story so far from reality, especially an incident with witnesses that can be verified. It just seems very odd to me. __________________ Live. Chris

08-17-2005, 12:33 PM	#77 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	People make mistakes and try to cover their ass all that time... I don't see why the cops would be exempt from this. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke