THE BRAZILIAN GOVERNMENT >>>>

[Guest tv tanned]

t really fucking pisses me off that the police make one mistake and now they're being villainised by the media and every joe-public that feels like it. I see exactly where people are coming from. an innocent man is dead' date=' that is terrible news in any country no matter what the circumstances. But at the same time it just seems completely wrong to me that the police are not allowed any margin for error. what would you rather? that the police do fuck all while many more innocent people are at risk from bombings and terrorist attacks? If he had turned out to be a bomber and the police had done nothing then the media and the public would be moaning about that so the police can't win. [/quote']

Perhaps you have missed the recent leak of the IPCC evidence. That's OK, those who hold ignorant opinions tend not to bother with the facts.

This margin for error presumably includes:

- The surveillance officer in charge of the camera taking a piss and being unable to get a clear view, or footage of de Menezes

- The police failing to get any kind of positive ID other than he 'might be the guy' which inexplicably became positive ID without any real justification

- Allowing him to walk into the tube station, use his travel card to open the barrier, pick up a free newspaper and descend slowly to the platform

- Allowing him to sit down on the train before grabbing him, pinning him down and unloading eight bullets into him, in spite of there being no indication whatsoever that he was either a suspect or a bomber, given that he was wearing a denim jacket, not the padded one reported at the time.

You're right. If we allowed the police this 'margin of error' then perhaps you would condone them shooting you because you happened to walk out of a block of flats while a surveillance officer was taking a piss?

I understand what people are saying when they call for the chief of police to resign but just think about it for a second... A: if he does resign then what diffrence will it make? that man will still be dead. B: public contempt for the police and government must be making the those terrorist cunts feel even better about the sick acts they have carried out. Now not only have they terrified our nations capital but they've started a massive nation-wide disagreement.

Firstly, if a head of any organisation is incompetent they must be removed, it is clear that Sir Ian Blair is incompetent. If you want the Met to have respect, then he has to go.

Secondly, are you seriously suggesting that we should give unconditional support to incompetent police practice, simply because to behave otherwise would be a victory for the terrorists? That is how it reads to me.

As for all the nonsense about his skin colour or what he looked like etc... You people need to listen to yourselves. He wasn't shot for any other reason than they thought he was a terrorist.

Based on no evidence other than he left a building under surveillance at the time, with no evidence that he was the suspect.

There were six apartments in that block, and only one contained a suspect.

Does it not seem a little strange that a man who's Visa for this country had run out 2 years ago was shot for attempting to evade arrest? I doh't know if he ran away from them or not and quite frankly neither do any of you because we weren't there but I do find it odd.

We do know that he did not run away. The IPCC evidence, leaked to the media, confirms it.

Question also the need for his Visa status to be known, is it somehow supposed to justify his assassination?

Question also, the fact that the Home Office started by saying his Visa had expired, then said it had not, then said it had. Why?

Question also how someone with a Visa that expired two years ago, could re-enter the country only a few months prior to his death, according to his relatives.

I know if I was feeling a bit shifty about the fact I wasn't legally allowed to stay in the country then I might be prone to do some stupid things when faced by the police...

Getting a train is not doing something stupid. According to witness accounts, it seems that de Menezes never was challenged.

I'm not having a go or saying anyone's wrong but I just think people need to step back, calm down and think about what they are actually saying. It's not a case of simple black and white here, mistakes happen in every line of work and sadly that goes for the police as well.

This is not just a mistake, though. It is incompetence of epic proportion, leading to the death of a completely innocent man.

Furthermore, it is clear that Sir Ian Blair attempted to delay the independent investigation, despite the fact that he would have known fairly early on that the man who had been shot was not linked to the investigations.

Given the rather dubious record of the Met at being open and honest about such incidents, I think it is fair game to have these concerns.

Particularly following the IPCC evidence.

So we can make these claims, on the other hand you seem to be sticking to the accounts which were relayed a couple of days after the event.

You should keep up with the news.

[Guest tv tanned]

On another note' date=' where do people think, if at all, that terrorists might strike next?[/quote']

Iran probably, it'll be next on their list after Afghanistan and Iraq...

[framheim]

Iran probably' date=' it'll be next on their list after Afghanistan and Iraq...[/quote']

arf!

what people need to remember when using the line about "would you rather they did nothing and terrorists were roaming the streets?" is that mr de menezes was NOT a terrorist, he was a sparky. he did nothing more suspicious than going to work according to the evidence already released. the more evidence that comes out the harder it is becoming to defend the actions of those involved on the day. don't get me wrong the police as i've already said in previous threads have an extremely tough job and deserve and need our support but they have to be right. sorry, but they do. you just can't go round shooting people dead on a hunch.

[Emilio Largo]

Put down the News of the World' date=' you disgusting right-wing animal.[/quote']

1) I don't read the News of the World

2) I'm not a 'disgusting right-wing animal.'

3) Just because I think people should put in their fair share to the country, why does this make me right wing? Maybe I just think this is fair. There are exceptions to the rule naturally.

[Sue Denim..]

If he wasn't here illegally he'd be at home in Brazil alive right now.

Not dead in London.

Fact.

[Guest tv tanned]

If he wasn't here illegally he'd be at home in Brazil alive right now.

Not dead in London.

Fact.

and let us suppose he wasn't here illegally, given that it has never been categorically cleared up as dave said.

mind you, given your post on the 'if you were going to die' thread, i think you have made your views on foreigners perfectly clear

[Sue Denim..]

and let us suppose he wasn't here illegally' date=' given that it has never been categorically cleared up as dave said.

mind you, given your post on the 'if you were going to die' thread, i think you have made your views on foreigners perfectly clear[/quote']

What views would they be then? I only said I would get on a bus full of muslims. You assumed the rest.

Can't you people realise when you are being played for a fool?

[Guest tv tanned]

oh my, how mirthful.

[Sue Denim..]

oh my' date=' how mirthful.[/quote']

It's an art. You should try it sometime.

[Mr.Mike]

well I do apologise for having my say on the issue. by the way, do you have your facts any more straight than I do? I'm fairly sure you weren't there on the day in question so basically you're going on the 'facts' you've heard through media sources just like the rest of us. Regardless, I'm not in the habit of arguing with people who generally don't want to listen to anyone else's opinions so if you're happy to spend your life bitching and moaning about what a state this country is in then why don't you leave. in fact that's a great idea, if you leave you could go live somewhere like brazil or columbia where the police are so corrupt that it doesn't really matter if you're innocent or not.

oh and an opinion shouldn't really be described as ignorant because the whole point of an opinion is that it applies to one single person and how they feel on a given subject but I'll give you that one because I think I have a vague idea of the type of person you might be...

[Guest tv tanned]

well I do apologise for having my say on the issue. by the way' date=' do you have your facts any more straight than I do? I'm fairly sure you weren't there on the day in question so basically you're going on the 'facts' you've heard through media sources just like the rest of us. Regardless, I'm not in the habit of arguing with people who generally don't want to listen to anyone else's opinions so if you're happy to spend your life bitching and moaning about what a state this country is in then why don't you leave. in fact that's a great idea, if you leave you could go live somewhere like brazil or columbia where the police are so corrupt that it doesn't really matter if you're innocent or not. [/quote']

Oh put the dummy back in for fucks sake.

I'll take the information that has been gathered by the IPCC over any source from the immediate aftermath of the incident anyday.

I do love how I am supposed to fuck off and live in Brazil, simply because I think the Met have seriously fucked up and that Ian Blair should resign.

Compulsory deportation for those who do not support the right wing view, eh? Call the thought police...

oh and an opinion shouldn't really be described as ignorant because the whole point of an opinion is that it applies to one single person and how they feel on a given subject but I'll give you that one because I think I have a vague idea of the type of person you might be...

It was ignorant, because it ignored all the recent evidence that has come to light.

If that is too nasty for ickle you, then how about misguided?

[Mr.Mike]

You've hurt my feelings now...

care to meet in person and discuss this one or would that be too daunting? it's much easier to sit and rip into people's opinions to make yourself look intelligent on the internet isn't it?

also calling someone right wing for not subscribing to your ridiculously overly-PC viewpoints is a pretty foolish thing to do and is making you look a little bit immature...

[Guest tv tanned]

having done debating at uni, and won plenty tournaments, i have no need to sit on a PC and make myself look intelligent over the internet.

I'm always happy to discuss and debate stuff face to face.

[Mr.Mike]

i have no need to sit on a PC and make myself look intelligent over the internet.

then why are you doing it? I could higlight the many ways in which you've done it in order to try and 'talk me down' (not literally) during this thread but to be honest I feel that might bring me down to your level...

and that's somewhere I don't particularly won't to ever have to be.

discussion over.

[Guest tv tanned]

in the first post I addressed the points that you made.

The only area where you could legitimately have a problem is with me using the term "ignorant"

you then spat the dummy and are now drawing conclusions about my character.

I note that having declared I have no problem meeting face to face to discuss matters you have decided that the discussion is now over. Empty threat perhaps?

The fact I disagreed entirely with your analysis is not me trying to look intelligent, I know I'm intelligent I don't need to try, simply me choosing to disagree.

If you can't find an argument to respond to my rebuttal, then it's not really my fault.

[Chris]

I could higlight the many ways in which you've done it in order to try and 'talk me down' (not literally) during this thread but to be honest I feel that might bring me down to your level...

Having read the thread I don't think he's done anything particularly objectionable. all tanned has done is state his opinions and some widely reported facts about the killing. The only thing close to an insult was calling your post ignorant. Which, if you assume that you ignored the recently reported facts regarding the shooting because you didn't know about them, it was.

I also don't believe that wanting the police force of the UK to not go around executing people without trial, or even evidence is an "overly PC" view as you seem to.

[Mr.Mike]

Having read the thread I don't think he's done anything particularly objectionable. all tanned has done is state his opinions and some widely reported facts about the killing. The only thing close to an insult was calling your post ignorant. Which' date=' if you assume that you ignored the recently reported facts regarding the shooting because you didn't know about them, it was.

I also don't believe that wanting the police force of the UK to not go around executing people without trial, or even evidence is an "overly PC" view as you seem to.[/quote']

before this descends into madness as before I'll make things as clear for you as I can. we've spoken about it off the message board and agreed to disagree. He's made his apologies and I've made mine. I don't wanna have to go and quote all the parts of his posts that i thought were objectionable but I will if you'd really really really like me to? would you? would it make you any happier? I somewhat doubt it so if you don't mind I'll just exit quietly through the back door on this one...

[Chris]

if you like.