collateral damage

[Uncle Urchin]

those longer serving users of this forum may well recall that we participated in a lengthy and constructive thread with the same name as this one a while back in the build up the the second gulf war....a wide spectrum of opinion was passed about the rights, wrongs and ramifications of those western allied actions (I have looked for the thread but cannot find it)..

 

my own view was that we shouldn't be there but... as were were... and given that I had a son out there... we should get the job done with the minimum of allied lives at risk and get the fck out real quick... the issue of ciivilian caualties obviously became important within that thread and my view was that collateral damage was part of modern day warfare and could never be avoided...

 

and so to London now.....

 

regardless of the debate as to why these things are happening (which has been much discussed)....the fact that we have participated in warfare in muslem countries (and still have occupation forces in them) and the fact that we are now engaged in defending our own shores from muslem extremists once again brings up the issue of 'collateral damage'...

 

1000's of innocent civilians are dying every year throughout the world from terrorist activity (mainly muslem orientated) many many british people are amongst them...

 

our security forces are on high alert with a shoot to kill policy and inevitably a man is killed whilst fleeing from the security forces who is now deemed by the 'guardianista leftie PC brigade' to be 'innocent' and outrage will surely follow...good law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line to protect us every day will undoubtedly be villified and quite possibly may face criminal charges...

 

the facts are blurry but what we do know is this.....

 

M15 staked out a house in south london as a result of documents found in a bag left on the 2nd bus..they followed this man from the house as he made his way to southwell and alerted armed response units as he neared the tube...the armed response units ordered this man to stop and lay down...he jumped a barrier and fled into the packed station closely pursued by the security forces....he ignored many attempts by the security forces to halt and attempted to board a packed tube train whereupon he was shot several times by the pursuing security forces...

 

collateral damage in londons war against terrorism.?..a guilty man with much to hide but alas not implicated in terrorist activity..?..or an innocent victim of circumstantial evidence found on a bus...?

 

either way the complaints about not understanding english can be dealt with very quickly can they not....a gun pointing at you is an international language and the word 'police'..(and its subtle variations) is recognised (deliberately so) in every country in the world...

 

surely not the last incident of its kind but before we villify these security officers lets not also forget the 'collateral damage' of 54 people on 7/7.. mainly british...all innocent victims as well...

[Martin]

Here's a theory - the guy was seen with "wires" by one eyewitness - he was also described as Asian and turned out to be Brazilian but anyway we will just run with the wire theory - could he have been listening to his I-Pod? So there he is hurrying back to work listening to some music- when a group of plain clothes officer charge at him brandishing a gun. He does not speak English so well and can't hear over his tunes. What is your response to the armed men? Wait and see what they want or run for your life? Evidently he made the wrong decision and we will never know what he was thinking

 

Clearly my outrage at the shooting of an innocent man - the Met have admitted this - makes me a guardianista leftie PC brigade member but what can I say.

 

I think the shoot to kill terrorists policy is a sound one but I certainly won't be getting on the tube wearing a big coat or a rucksack in a hurry.

[Uncle Urchin]

good response martin...but blinkered.....

 

issues you didn't deal with...

 

why wear heavy clothing...(yes its 35 centigrade in brazil but was also 28 over here) and why run from the police.(surely jumping a pay barrier in any country is illegal) and if I did that in madrid (where I have a home) I would expect to be shot....

 

but one thing jumps out at me from your post....

 

what about your 'outrage' at the slaughter of 58 innocent people on 7/7...or the 90 odd yesterday on the red sea...or the 40 odd today in baghdad....

 

or manana in your street perhaps...??????..,... <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

 

collateral damage my friend...

 

but hey...fck that....lets lynch a few security officers....lets get the armed police off the streets and let the terrorists run riot..... <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

[pabird]

I am in total agreement with you Unc and would point out that on 3 seperate occassions I have had a gun pointed in my direction accompanied by the "stand very still instruction"

I promise that if you have nothing to hide you stand very (very) still

To many their opinion is coloured by the question "would I have shot"? to isolate that very personal issue I have posted the question on a seperate posting

[Martin]

Quote:

Uncle Urchin said:
good response martin...but blinkered.....
what about your 'outrage' at the slaughter of 58 innocent people on 7/7...or the 90 odd yesterday on the red sea...or the 40 odd today in baghdad....

Of course I am outraged about that - its so obvious it goes without saying and clearly we have to do everything possible to prevent further outrages.

It has now been revealed on the bbc.co.uk/news that the guy was in the country on an expired visa. Presumably the reason he ran was that he thought he faced deportation. A terrible mistake that cost him his life.

His actions obviously arouse suspicion and I do believe the policy of shoot to kill is right because if it prevents one terrorist attack it has been worthwhile. But that decision needs to be justifiable even when we have the benefit of hindsight.

However, I still believe that questions have to be asked in this case. The report I read of the incident suggest that the police were following him for around 45 minutes from his home to the tube station. This included him taking a bus - if the officers believed he was a potential bomber why did they not apprehend him sooner or take him out before he got on the bus? Were the bus passengers not at risk?

I don't believe the officer in question should be villified but certainly the incident requires investigation and perhaps the policy needs to be reviewed slightly. Chasing him into a packed tube hardly seems to be the best plan in the world.

I have much admiration for all our security forces and am just thankful that I am not faced with life and death decisions during the course of my working life.

[Uncle Urchin]

yes I agree with that point...one does wonder why the delay in confronting the suspect...

 

the nearest explanation seems to be that the flats where this man lived where under surveillance by M15 agents who initially followed him...as he got towards the tube station they apparently called in the armed response unit who got to the scene almost at the same time as the 'suspect' did...

[Big J R]

I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever for him, or his family.

 

1. His knowledge of the English language has now been established as 'GOOD'

 

2. He was in this country illegaly on an EXPIRED STUDENTS visa. A visa, incidently, which limited him to a FEW hours work per week.

 

3. He was working, FULL-TIME, as an electrician. (very interesting, that ! Don't electricians wire things up ??)

 

4. Don't Brazilians stop when ordered to do so by their own police force ?

 

All these pinko leftists who are bleating about human rights are getting right up my nose.

 

We are at WAR, for f'cks sake !

 

These terrorists don't wear uniforms or abide by the Geneva Convention, or any other convention. So why should we ?

 

Would I travel through London by public transport ? Too bl00dy right I would. Would I assist in holding a potential terrorist down whilst he was being dealt with, with 'extreme prejudice' ?

 

Where do I join ??

[Martin]

Quote:

Big J R said:
I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever for him, or his family.

Well that says a lot. I would rather be considered a "pinko leftist" rather than a heartless [****!!****].

[Big J R]

Quote:

Martin said:

Quote:

Big J R said:
I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever for him, or his family.

Well that says a lot. I would rather be considered a "pinko leftist" rather than a heartless [****!!****].

I'll bear that in mind when one of your relatives suffers at these extremists hands !

[Martin]

He was not an extremist - he was an electrician with an out of date visa who panicked and as a consequence was shot. He is effectively a victim of the terrorists as their actions have resulted in a change to policing methods. And you have no sympathy for him or his family?

[Big J R]

NOPE !

 

As I asked: "Why did he run ?"

 

Hopefully, this will send a clear message to the fanatics; anybody who fancies trying a 'copy-cat' stunt; all the fanatics supporters and harbourers.

 

BRITAIN MEANS BUSINESS !

 

Go soft now, and we might just as well totally give in and p1ss off to Iran.

 

(Would the last person to leave, please turn off the lights !!)

[lanceyboyuk]

Big JR I agree with you. I dont think the police should be punished maybe MI5 for inaccurate info but anyway. I feel sorry for the families. I hope it does send out a message as i think we are seen as a very liberal country in many respects. I think there should be a report into this. I many ways it is his own fought as the reasons suggest he understood english.

[pabird]

And I take it we all believe Mr Bliar when he states that the war did not generate more terrorist activity

 

 

 

Iraq bomb attack kills 14 marines

 

Fourteen marines and their civilian translator have been killed in a roadside bombing in north-western Iraq, the US military says.

It is one of the deadliest attacks on US forces since the 2003 invasion.

[Big J R]

I see exactly where you are coming from, pabird, butI honestly believe that even if we HADN'T gone into Iraq with our American allies, the fanatical section of the Muslim world would still have targeted us because, they CANNOT accept our freedom and democracy, such that it is.

 

Thy see all the free Western World as 'Infidels'

[Martin]

It now transpires that the Brazilian was not wearing a winter jacket. Police have confirmed he was wearing a lightweight denim jacket.

 

The chap did not vault the ticket barrier. A witness did see a man in a white t-shirt vault the barrier - the police have now confirmed that this was one of the following officers.

 

He did not break into a run until he reached the bottom of the escalators by which time he was being persued by 19 officers.

 

None of the witnesses report hearing any of the officers identify themselves as policeman.

 

The big question as to why he was allowed to get on the bus remains unanswered.

 

The police have indicated that they did identify themselves which is in direct contravention of the guidelines set out in Operation Kratos (the one that lets them shoot suicide bombers). Police are told not to identify themselves as this could trigger a detonation.

 

The original reports were spun in such a way as to make the shooting justifiable. I could understand why the decision was taken on the basis of that information but now these reports are proving inaccurate and now there has to be serious doubts as to whether the officers concerned did the right thing.

[jkmaskell]

I would have thought the easiest way to sort out the whole mess of what happened is to check the CCTV. It'd put me at ease. I know sound wouldnt be available but it would confirm what he was wearing and his physical risk.

[Martin]

I think this is why the police have had to back track from their original statements as they have now reviewed the CCTV.