Man Shot Down Was Innocent.

[lepeep]

aye, like "this Brazzilian, he's using wires and pliars and stuff, I think he's making a bomb, go check his house"

err...he was an electrician.

I'd just wait till the police report comes out. I wonder how mr Police man is feeling...(the one who shot him). he's probably asking a lot of questions about himself right now.

one thig this story has proved so far, don't believe anything you see on the news. (untill someone has all the facts).

as seems to be the point a lot of us have been making.

[Tav]

so perhaps this guy may be linked to some other pre planned or previous terrorist event' date=' but they may wish, for one reason or another, to not to say at this point in time.

Hopefully the enquiry will find out the why's and whats.[/quote']

I too heard that he had been watched before the event...we might never find out who he was...there is probably a lot of going ons in this country that the public have never known about and never will.

[Guest Zeenat Aman]

aye' date=' like "this Brazzilian, he's using wires and pliars and stuff, I think he's making a bomb, go check his house"

err...he was an electrician.

I'd just wait till the police report comes out. I wonder how mr Police man is feeling...(the one who shot him). he's probably asking a lot of questions about himself right now.

one thig this story has proved so far, don't believe anything you see on the news. (untill someone has all the facts).

as seems to be the point a lot of us have been making.[/quote']

I'm fully aware that things are never as they seem viewed through our unbiased and 'informative' news people, speculation becomes 'fact' far too quickly.

The police themselves are to blame also i think, going on tv and saying that the shooting was directly linked to the bombings was BIG mistake No.2, let's take a fucked up situation and make it worse!

But! Just as people were quick to deem him guilty, this does not mean he is innocent of any terrorist links either... not all the facts are there for us to come to that conclusion yet.

I wonder what will happen now should a similar situation occur!?

[Stripey]

I too heard that he had been watched before the event...we might never find out who he was...there is probably a lot of going ons in this country that the public have never known about and never will.

They were watching the house, presumably a block of flats, not him in particular.

Anyway, the whole thing is an inexcusable tragedy.

[TR!ΔNGL€ T€€TH]

Any muslim electricians must be shitting themselves. And you can't beat the SAS at shooting people when their down/in the back when they are unarmed. Best specail forces in the world apparently.

[Hog]

Possibly not the right thread to bring this up.

Tony Blair and Jack Straw were furious about an influential think-tanks report which explained that the London Bombings were because the UK were involved in Iraq.

It turns out that the people who housed one of the London bombers explained that he was very pissed off about Iraq and Afghanistan. Its a shame that Blair cant accept this.

[Stripey]

Any muslim electricians must be shitting themselves. And you can't beat the SAS at shooting people when their down/in the back when they are unarmed. Best specail forces in the world apparently.

The SAS don't do plainclothes stuff like that, most likely the operation was being handled by MI5 as they are responsible for domestic surveillance and anti-terrorist operations.

[Guest Zeenat Aman]

speculation becomes 'fact' far too quickly.

........

Any muslim electricians must be shitting themselves. And you can't beat the SAS at shooting people when their down/in the back when they are unarmed. Best specail forces in the world apparently.

[TR!ΔNGL€ T€€TH]

The SAS don't do plainclothes stuff like that' date=' most likely the operation was being handled by MI5 as they are responsible for domestic surveillance and anti-terrorist operations.[/quote']

The SAS don't do things like that? I think they do, they've been doing it in Ireland for 30 odd years.

[Guest pop-notmyface]

that sounds like a good plan: shoot everyone with coloured skin and a beard (!)

[Penny]

do you think he was maybe shot in the head because the policeman/SAS thought he was wearin a bomb-belt, and if they shot him in the belt it would explode, and therefore kill everyone in the vicinity?

[Guest pop-notmyface]

doesnt sound like a wrong reason...

[Stripey]

The SAS don't do things like that? I think they do' date=' they've been doing it in Ireland for 30 odd years.[/quote']

Yeah obviously it must have been the SAS because terrorists would never notice their flat being watched and being tailed in the street by people dressed like this

[Skull Commander]

The SAS don't do plainclothes stuff like that' date=' most likely the operation was being handled by MI5 as they are responsible for domestic surveillance and anti-terrorist operations.[/quote']

Yes the british intellegence share all their info with you.

[Guest Zeenat Aman]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050724/ap_on_re_eu/britain_bombings

Was he challenged by uniformed police or just the plain clothes guys? Is there an alternative to the shoot to kill policy?

[TR!ΔNGL€ T€€TH]

Yeah obviously it must have been the SAS because terrorists would never notice their flat being watched and being tailed in the street by people dressed like this

I don't think the SAS always dress in gear like that now.

[Stripey]

Yes the british intellegence share all their info with you.

The MI5 website explains a bit about what they do...

http://www.mi5.gov.uk/output/Page7.html

[Skull Commander]

The MI5 website explains a bit about what they do...

http://www.mi5.gov.uk/output/Page7.html

Aye, but my point is the government, special forces, police etc, will only tell you what they want to. We don't need to know, and guessing and theorising is not going to get to the bottom of it.

[Stuart]

Don't take this personally....but stfu.

STFU!

...All there is to be said.

[Flash@TMB]

The SAS don't do plainclothes stuff like that' date=' most likely the operation was being handled by MI5 as they are responsible for domestic surveillance and anti-terrorist operations.[/quote']

IMO:

If it was the SAS then they would have more than likely got the right man. They have a track record to support this.

MI5 do kill people but they usually disguise their direct involvement so it would be seen as either an accident, suicide, or "drug related murder".

The police have a long record of shooting innocent people. That is when their not crashing intoi innocent people during highspeed pursuits, or locking innocent people away in prison because they don't have a clue who the real criminal was.

For instance... The gunman David Martin was on the loose in the early 1980s. He was seen driving a green mini. And armed police response unit saw a man driving a green mini. They shot him 12 times in the head. Several times at point blank range where a blind monkey with a marble up it's arse could see he looked nothing like David Martin. Amazingly the guy survived.

And then more recently... a furniture repair guy stops off in the pub on his way home from work. He has a Tescos carrier bag with a table leg in it. The landlord of the pub who just happens to be on Prozac "thinks" it's a sawn off shotgun and calls the police. A plainclothes armed response unit show up and stake out the pub. When the guy leaves to catch his bus they shout "Armed police, stop or we'll shoot". The guy shits himself and starts looking round for a gunman/criminal robbing a bank or whatever, and instincively clutches the bag closer to his body (probably in case some maniac with a gun goes running past). The police shoot and kill him.

And sadly there are many, many, more. I strongly suspect that the police firearms training programme fails to take a few things into account, like their poor detection record for instance. It appears that some of the armed police are too eager to put their training into practise. This form of execution does not involve a trial.

Also it's likely that the police who identify the "terrorist" or whatever and call for the armed unit are not the ones that actually have to pull the trigger, otherwise a little more thought might go into the consequences. Likewise the one that pulls the trigger is doing so "because he was told too". Comforting isn't it? In other words some numpty constable that's only been on the force for a week calls and armed response unit because you resemble someone dangerous, and a bunch off plainclothes guys with guns run up the street BEHIND YOU shout "ARMED POLICE - STOP OR WE'LL SHOOT", and what do you do...

...well you know that if you were a criminal then you'd stop and "DROP YOUR WEAPON", but since you're not a criminal you would probably assume that there's some nutter on the loose with a gun, and that you are stuck between this fruitloop and the ARMED POLICE. So naturally you'd try and get the fuck out of the way. And without a moments hesitation they would shoot you. And shoot to kill. And make sure that they finished you off with a couple of bullets in the brain when you are lying bleeding all over the steet wondering who the fuck shot you.

But that's the sort of world we live in.

[Flash@TMB]

Is there an alternative to the shoot to kill policy?

Yes it's called the Guildford and Birmingham system. They lock you up for 25 years, in spite of the evidence you are innocent, alongside any family members who might work to free you.

[lepeep]

Possibly not the right thread to bring this up.

Tony Blair and Jack Straw were furious about an influential think-tanks report which explained that the London Bombings were because the UK were involved in Iraq.

It turns out that the people who housed one of the London bombers explained that he was very pissed off about Iraq and Afghanistan. Its a shame that Blair cant accept this.

peter haine was on TV this morning saying that the bombings were in NO WAY linked to the UK being involved in Iraq.

He quoted the usual "9/11 was before the war on Iraq and Afghanistan" (so, only the west is allowed to retaliate at an atack on them ? as that's what both of those "wars" were about)...Anyway, 9/11 was an attack on the US, because of it's piss poor forign policy and general attitude towards muslim countries.

We joined in on the (in my view) unjust wars....and since then...we've been attacked.

how can they say that these attacks had NOTHING TO DO with a policy we adopted ? "there is no reason to their indiscriminate killing" (?!) so why have "al qaeda" never attacked eskimos in Canada ? cubans ? etc...

I think you'll find that any country that has had an attack on thier soil, has in some way through foreign policy or military action effected some "muslim country".

we all lose in the end.

as long as "the powers that be (both sides)" can keep making guns and bombs, that'll keep their economy turning over, and we can do fuck all about it.

[2 minutes of hate]

The SAS would have nothing to do with it i wouldnt of thought. Plus if they did kill this guy A. they would of got the right guy and B. They would of drilled him more than 5 times.

I think they guy had plenty of reasons to run, he probably paniced like anyone would do if your faced by a bunch of guys with guns, people do stupid things when they panic.

what a tragic mess this government has got us into, every person of all races and religions living in harmonous fear.

[The Milner]

well thats what i wondered why did it take 5 shots to take him down?

Surely these people can shoot better than that.

[2 minutes of hate]

maybe they threw the bullets at him