Man shot on London tube NOT connected to terrorist
PEK
735 Posts
Watchin' BBC World right now and Scotland Yard has issued a statement that the man killed on the tube on Friday was not associated in any way to the failed terrorist bombings of Thursday and is considered a 'tragedy' w/ a pendin'/subsequent investigation to follow...Trigger happy... Jumpy nerves... Kill first, ask questions later... Oh, he's dead - can't query him...
Comments
Peace
T.N.
Oh please. I'm not gonna defend what the officer did -- ultimately he'll have to live with that -- but the victim in this should have known better, all things considered.
For the sake of argument though, what if the victim was -
a) mentally disturbed w/o clear control of his faculties
Or
b) strung out w/o clear control of his faculties - maybe that sense of paranoia that accompanies the use of some hallucinogens?
Or
c) an immigrant from a locale such as Afghanistan where previous experience may have influenced him to steer clear from people trailin' him, includin' authority figures
Or
d) someone who's in a not-too-safe area of London (as a former commissioner @ Scotland Yard conceded) and then confronted by a group of men in plain clothes (who b/c you're Asian, may be lookin' to pick on you b/c they're potentially members of the National Front) - do you run or do you stick around for a beatdown/muggin'/etc. ('Hi, here's a formal invitation for you to pummel the sh*t out of me')?
From your vantage point, the victim is ENTIRELY responsible for the fact that he's dead even in the circumstances indicated... That he should've been wasted regardless... That the frayed and disrupted sense of collective calm in London and the UK at present justifies takin' anyone out includin' you and me if we act in a suspicious manner that derives from motives completely unrelated to terrorist actions at hand...
You'd be surprised how likely this is. As someone who had lived and worked in that area of London for several years until recently, I can say that there are plenty of people in Stockwell that fit that criteria. I lived for about a year near Vauxhall Station (up the road from Stockwell) and would regularly seen homeless folk openly dealing heroin etc... In fact the stretch of road between Vauxhall and Stockwell has several hostels for the homeless and is one of the centres for the homeless people of London. Mental illness is one of the primary causes of homelessness in the UK.
Also, for as long as I can remember, Stockwell Station had clearly mentally unwell people hanging around outside the flower/fruit stall by the entrance.
The area is also a favourite area for the government to house asylum seekers, and has refugee counselling services to boot.
Stockwell also has a pretty large Portuguese community, and I can't help but wonder if the "asian" description given by some eyewitness is just another of many assumptions that seem to be linked with brown skin.
NLT - my familiarity w/ London neighborhoods is still somewhat superficial - was last in the city in November just down the road from Shepherd's Bush in Hammersmith, but was under the impression that Stockwell boasted its fair share of immigrants or non-caucasions...
Just not so sure that this seemingly brazen shoot-to-kill policy serves anyone in the long run is all...
Bear in mind though that the place is on a high alert, the police are under orders to shoot to kill if they have to and this man was acting extemely suspiciously in a tube station:
Wearing a heavy thick padded coat - on a very warm day
Ran when questioned by plain clothed police officers
Vaulted the barrier at the tube station
Ran onto a train
So you've got police in that place at that time, trying to protect the general public from yet another highly likely suicide bombing, and he's acting like that. What were they supposed to do?
I'm not saying it was right, but I think they did what they had to do.
The plain clothed police CHASED him into the subway though after confrontin' him on the street - they were trailin' him after monitorin' an apartment block; if eyewitness accounts are correct and he was already on the ground in the subway car and immobile, why unload 5 shots into him at that point other than pure adrenaline rush? Are you willin' to forfeit everyone who acts suspiciously w/o any concrete evidence? 'Tis a slippery slope...
PEK, I think you misunderstood me. I totally agree with you[/b]. I just posted to highlight the point that your "what-ifs" could be pretty likely from what I've seen in Stockwell. I for one am not looking forward to travelling around London in the near future.
But some in this thread are doing a bit of armchair quarterbacking. I really don't have anything to say about it. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
NLT - sorry if I wasn't clear - just was concurrin' w/ you in my last reply...
JP - no doubt, but I'm subscribin' to the old Ignatian paradigm of action AND contemplation - you err on either in excess and it may produce results of the like you didn't intend... What separates man from other creatures is the reflexive act of thought, by which he's supposed to dictate his actions...
what would you have done?
I just don't see how this could have gone any differently. I think you put anyone in that officer's shoes, they're gonna do the same thing. I know I would have. There is no time to "contemplate" as you put it.
Uh, maybe cuff the guy (shackle both his hands and feet) while he was bein' held down? 'Cause he didn't get shot until he'd been tackled and held immobile... It was @ least 3 officers against him so it wasn't a sole cop here...
As for action and contemplation, I'm talkin' policy and not peons such as the officer in question... The ramifications of this incident are -
- if the individual in question was Muslim, do you think that the Islamic community in the UK are goin' to be more forthcomin' to the authorities about nefarious activities in their midst...
- fuel anti-Occidental sentiment by militant imams in Britain...
If former personnel (includin' brass) @ Scotland Yard are voicin' their doubts (publicly on outlets such as the BBC) on the manner in which this was executed, then?
In neither country, but interestin' to see the divide b/w UK and US posters on this one... Just an observation, not a judgment...
That said, I don't disagree that there might have been a better way, but put yourself in the officer's shoes - you think the guy has a bomb. They are trained to shoot rather than detain because he may be able to set off the bomb, in which case you have failed and you are dead.
I don't want to argue about this because there is no right, but I do think you're being a tad unrealistic about it...
In discussin' imams and the like, there are better means @ disablin' their message than addin' to the evidence that they can cite to further their cause... Places like Birmingham house @ least a 50 % South Asian population, many of whom are of Pakistani background - what do you do then, waste the entire group just so the rest of the UK remains unfettered by these events? 'Cause I'll guarantee you that there are @ least a good number of people in that city alone that are anti-Occidental in orientation... And others that are ripe to be swayed by what some of these imams are extollin'...
We'll agree to disagree here - but look around JP - examine the number of events that transpire owin' to impulse versus actual thought invested... Not everythin' gets solved by brute force and not everythin' gets solved by just talkin' and reflectin'... - I'm not a pacifist JP, far from it, but this do first, ask questions later aesthetic doesn't seem to be very effective from a historical vantage point (not strictly applied to this instance or to terrorism either)...
i read this...
and you know what? that is true as phuck, as a man of color i would run the phuck away from plain clothes people of another race if they were chasing me too...this comes from experience. the uk is notorious for their national front and bombings of asian homes and gatherings. read up on saptal ram in the uk if u need an evidence...a man who was imprisoned for defending himself against racist scum. if i had 5 people chasing me, i'd be paranoid as phuck never mind if i saw cops after the fact.
so what im saying is i understand both sides, i dont see how that's hard to do? by the way this reminds me of those phucked cops that unleashed on a black gentleman who they suspected carried a godamn grenade? i swear though, i wouldnt want to be a cop.
um this is a image of the "asian dude in a jacket to heavy to wear in the summer running" off cnn
i'm hoping this "heavy jacket" he was wearing was discarded before this image was taken, cause there'd be a lot of suspected shootings in north america right now if that was considered something to heavy to sport in the summer
Guardian (UK) newspaper -
And temperature in London on Friday -
Like it's unheard of to rock a fleece under those conditions? In NYC let alone London?
Why did the story change so dramatically in 24 hours? Who was the source for every major media outlet to call him in a "suicide bomber" in the first news cycle? For whom did the guys who shot Menezes work? What part of the bureaucracy?, are we sure they are undercover London municipal police? Was their presence in the city a result of contingency plans for terror attacks? If so, when were they drafted?, what did they say?, did the House of Commons approve?
Those are my questions. I don't know enough right now to have an informed opinion. As for PEK's ancillary argument regarding the reaction of anti-occidenalists, I think it's the wrong question for now. This is not to say America or the UK or Europe should not try to enlist the majority of Muslims in a war against the terrorists in their midst, this is vital. But rather to say that those who approve of, plan or encourage operations like 7/7 have been anti-occidental for some time. I doubt reason alone will persuade them to stop plotting the murder of civilians. Should the terrorists be allowed to distribute cassette tapes of their sermons, raise money in the name of charity for future operations, receive government subsidies, not be surveilled by the government. I don't have answers, but they are the right questions.
If you're suggesting that's the dude who got shot, I'm afraid you're wrong. That's one of the guys wanted in connection with the explosions on the tube network the previous day.*[/b]
I have mixed feelings about this episode; on one hand, the thought of armed plainclothes police ready and willing to shoot anyone who looks as if they might be a "suicide bomber" doesn't make me feel a whole lot safer about using public transport than the thought that four failed bombers are still running around London somewhere. On the other, I understand why and how shit like this can happen. Times are a little stressful in London right now and, for all the specialist training they may have had, the coppers over here who do carry guns may not be too used to dealing with the possibility of discharging them. The likelihood of tragic accidents/errors of judgement such as this becomes a lot higher and more shocking as a result. The reason I use phrases like "tragic accidents" or "errors of judgement" is that I don't believe that there are armed police roaming London looking for dark-skinned people to shoot. Some of you living in other parts of the world may have a different view.
*[/b] - OK, I read the rest of the thread and saw that you corrected yourself a couple of posts later. My bad.
SHOOT-TO-KILL-TO-PROTECT??
London Police Chief Defends Deadly Force in Terror Probe
Citizens Say the Mistaken Killing Makes Them More Fearful
By MICHAEL McDONOUGH, AP
Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, was shot and killed by police at the Stockwell subway station.
LONDON (July 24) - London's police commissioner expressed regret Sunday for the slaying of a Brazilian electrician by officers who mistook him for a suspect in the recent terror bombings, but he defended a police shoot-to-kill policy as "the only way'' to stop would-be suicide bombers.
Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair also said there were similarities between the explosives used in Thursday's failed bomb attacks and those detonated July 7. But he said investigators still had no proof the two strikes were linked.
"The equipment in the bombs had all the elements that it should have but it didn't work,'' Blair told Sky News TV, referring to the explosives that failed to detonate properly Thursday on three subway cars and a double-decker bus.
"It had some similarities'' to the devices used in the July 7 bombings on three subway trains and a double-decker bus, killing 56 people, including four suicide attackers.
When asked if Thursday's attacks were connected to those of July 7, Blair replied, ``We have no proof that they are linked but clearly there is a pattern here.''
Two of the suspected July 7 bombers, Mohammad Sidique Khan and Shahzad Tanweer, went whitewater rafting in Wales three days before the attacks, according to the National Whitewater Centre.
"There was no reason to think he was a terrorist."
-Zilda Ambrosia de Figueiredo, grandmother of Jean Charles de Menezes
Police refused to comment on a British Broadcasting Corp. report, attributed to unidentified officials, that said authorities were examining whether those involved in Thursday's attacks were on the same trip.
Police have made two arrests after Thursday's botched attacks. Officers have not released the identities of those detained.
But Blair added that officers were ``still anxious for any sighting of the four individuals'' who carried out Thursday's strikes. Closed-circuit TV stills of the suspects were made public last week.
Police carried out several controlled explosions to dispose of a suspect package found in northwest London, which they said may have been linked to devices used in the botched July 21 attacks. They refused to elaborate.
The man shot Friday at the Stockwell subway station was identified as Jean Charles de Menezes, 27. Witnesses said he was wearing a heavy, padded coat when plainclothes police chased him into a subway car, pinned him to the ground and shot him five times in the head and torso in front of horrified passengers.
Blair initially said Menezes was "directly linked'' to the investigation of Thursday's attacks, but police then said Saturday he had no connection to the bomb attempts.
"This is a tragedy,'' Blair said Sunday of the shooting. "The Metropolitan Police accepts full responsibility for this. To the family I can only express my deep regrets.''
He also defended the shoot-to-kill policy, saying such action only applied when lives were believed to be at risk.
"I am very aware that minority communities are talking about a shoot-to-kill policy,'' he said. "It's only a shoot-to-kill-in-order-to-protect policy.''
Blair said British police have drawn from the experiences of other countries, including Sri Lanka, that have dealt with suicide attackers.
"The only way to deal with this is to shoot to the head,'' Blair said. "There is no point in shooting at someone's chest because that is where the bomb is likely to be.''
Blair spoke of the problem his officers faced.
"What we have got to recognize is that people are taking incredibly difficult fast-time decisions in life-threatening situations,'' he said. "What's most important to recognize is that it's still happening out there. There are still officers out there having to make those calls as we speak.''
Police said Menezes attracted police attention because he left a building that was under surveillance after Thursday's attacks. They said he was then followed by surveillance officers to the station, and his clothing and behavior at the station added to their suspicions. Menezes was wearing a heavy coat while temperatures were in the 70s.
Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim, who was visiting London, said his government and people were ``shocked'' by the killing, and he demanded a thorough investigation.
"We cannot recover the life of the Brazilian citizen who died but it is very important to know all the details,'' Amorim said after meeting with a British official.
He said Foreign Secretary Jack Straw expressed his deepest regrets in a telephone conversation.
Amorim told Straw that Brazil was in total solidarity with Britain in the fight against terrorism, "but of course even in the fight against terrorism we should also be cautious to avoid the loss of innocent life.''
Menezes was originally from the small city of Gonzaga, some 500 miles northeast of Sao Paulo. Local authorities said he was Catholic.
Menezes was an electrician who had worked in Britain for three years, said his cousin, Alex Pereira, who also lives in London.
"He was a 100 percent good guy who never did anything wrong and had no reason to run,'' Pereira said. "I don't think he ran from police. I don't think he would do that. They can't show anything that shows that he had.''
The shooting was an indication of the anxiety in the city of about 8 million people. A police watchdog organization, the Independent Police Complaints Commission, said it would investigate the shooting but make sure not to hinder the bombings probe.
Shami Chakrabarti, director of the civil rights group Liberty, said such an investigation was critical for reassuring the public.
"It's incredibly important that society remains united at such a tense time, it's very important that young Asian men don't feel that there is some kind of trigger-happy culture out there,'' Chakrabarti said.
Sir Iqbal Sacranie, secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said, ``It's absolutely vital that the utmost care is taken to ensure that innocent people are not killed due to overzealousness.''
07/24/05 11:26 EDT
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press